Politics Thread 5

[OrangeRKN]

I'm convinced PETA are actually run by meat-loving oil barons and big game hunters. It's the only way to explain their actions that seem so obviously counter-productive to convincing people to support their causes.

[Preezy]

In this particular protest, some idiot glued himself to a train. How is that helping their cause?

Not only that, but the train in question was an electric DLR unit which doesn't even emit any pollutants.

[Knoyleo]

Seems a bit silly that they've chosen a week that Parliament isn't in session to protest outside...Parliament.

Disrupting public transport during half-term is not going to win them any supporters, regardless of how right their movement is, it just doesn't work like that in the real world.

Protests like this aren't about winning supporters, though. They're about causing disruption. It's like arguing against a strike by telling people their boss won't like it if they do.

Yeah but they need support to gain any influence. Parliament and big business will go where the votes and money is when deciding policy. If you don't get the public on side, you won't get any traction.

You can't really compare it to a strike as a strike is based on withdrawing labour. Although generally with strikes they do ultimately fail when the knock on disruption loses them public support.

Yes, you need support, but that's ultimately not the aim of direct actions like this, especially if your aims go directly against the interests of Parliament and big business, and I just felt the need to respond to Preezy's post, as it's a bogus argument that is always used against most kind of protest. The idea that all actions you take should be informed purely by how much it will make people like you, ultimately leads to maintaining the status quo and achieving nothing.

I agree that disrupting public transport services seems weird to me, what with them being less environmentally harmful than private transport, but these guys are pushing for net 0 emissions by 2025, which is a mad goal, but hey, if they genuinely think we should abandon all transport but foot or pedal to get there, then fine, protest that gooseberry fool.

[Preezy]

I just felt the need to respond to Preezy's post, as it's a bogus argument that is always used against most kind of protest. The idea that all actions you take should be informed purely by how much it will make people like you, ultimately leads to maintaining the status quo and achieving nothing.

I wouldn't say it was a bogus argument (more radical and bodacious IMO), it's pretty logical to assume that if you want to gain public support you have to get that public onside, something rarely achieved by actively disrupting peoples' lives and jobs. Especially during the half-term holidays when adults around the country are stressed out of their mind at the thought of keeping their kids entertained for 2 weeks without having to worry about some dreadlocked twat gluing himself to a train

[KK]

The cause always changes but it's the everyday worker that has to continually bear the brunt of it. For some it's just an inconvenience, whereas for others it just compounds what may have already been a bullshit day at work and a loss of 1 or 2 hours with their families in the evening.

I mean look at that moron who Gorilla glued himself to the DLR, there must surely be something missing from his life somewhere. So often these people are also revealed to be the son/daughter of some multimillionaire.

[That]

Thank goodness no-one was ever disruptive during the French revolution, the campaign for women's suffrage, the civil rights movement, or in advocacy for LGBT equality. Those mass movements succeeded because they asked so politely that the establishment in its infinite wisdom smiled upon them.

[Moggy]

I just felt the need to respond to Preezy's post, as it's a bogus argument that is always used against most kind of protest. The idea that all actions you take should be informed purely by how much it will make people like you, ultimately leads to maintaining the status quo and achieving nothing.

I wouldn't say it was a bogus argument (more radical and bodacious IMO), it's pretty logical to assume that if you want to gain public support you have to get that public onside, something rarely achieved by actively disrupting peoples' lives and jobs. Especially during the half-term holidays when adults around the country are stressed out of their mind at the thought of keeping their kids entertained for 2 weeks without having to worry about some dreadlocked twat gluing himself to a train

I think you are wrong. Some of the biggest changes that were ever made to society came about through direct action and even outright violence.

The women’s suffrage movement used violence and disruption in order to make their case.

The Civil Rights movement in America involved disrupting people’s lives.

Whereas the calm and orderly Iraq War and Brexit protests achieved strawberry float all.

[That]

I think the biggest sign that direct action is effective is that liberals constantly insist direct action isn't effective

[KK]

I bought unbagged organic bananas today, what more do you want.

[Moggy]

some dreadlocked twat gluing himself to a train

So often these people are also revealed to be the son/daughter of some multimillionaire.

People with dreadlocks and/or are the children of millionaires should never be allowed to speak.

If you are rich, then shut up you damn champagne socialist!

If you are poor, then shut up with your politics of envy!

And for gods sake make sure you protest with a haircut that is approved by decent society.

[Preezy]

I think you are wrong. Some of the biggest changes that were ever made to society came about through direct action and even outright violence.

The women’s suffrage movement used violence and disruption in order to make their case.

The Civil Rights movement in America involved disrupting people’s lives.

Whereas the calm and orderly Iraq War and Brexit protests achieved strawberry float all.

The difference here is that they're protesting about reducing emissions, something the government has already said it will be committing to, just not at the (unrealistic) speed and scale that the protestors want. It's also not like they're protesting against a counter-group or an established evil force like the anti-LGBT lobby or the KKK, it's just "let's turn up in London and cause a fuss", it's just anarchy. Who have these protestors got as targets to be violent against? They don't have anyone, it's a nebulous "the establishment", which is actually just everyday people (including them) that use energy. They've vandalised an energy producer's office, where no energy is produced but is the workplace of plenty of normal law-abiding people just trying to get through the 9-5 grind. That's not winning any hearts and minds and actively undermines their cause.

So often these people are also revealed to be the son/daughter of some multimillionaire.

Everyone I've seen interviewed so far has been suspiciously posh sounding

[captain red dog]

I just felt the need to respond to Preezy's post, as it's a bogus argument that is always used against most kind of protest. The idea that all actions you take should be informed purely by how much it will make people like you, ultimately leads to maintaining the status quo and achieving nothing.

I wouldn't say it was a bogus argument (more radical and bodacious IMO), it's pretty logical to assume that if you want to gain public support you have to get that public onside, something rarely achieved by actively disrupting peoples' lives and jobs. Especially during the half-term holidays when adults around the country are stressed out of their mind at the thought of keeping their kids entertained for 2 weeks without having to worry about some dreadlocked twat gluing himself to a train

I think you are wrong. Some of the biggest changes that were ever made to society came about through direct action and even outright violence.

The women’s suffrage movement used violence and disruption in order to make their case.

The Civil Rights movement in America involved disrupting people’s lives.

Whereas the calm and orderly Iraq War and Brexit protests achieved strawberry float all.

The Civil Rights movement and women's suffrage still managed to bring people with them. It's about getting the balance right between bringing people with you and causing mass disruption. These protestors have now taken the curious move of glueing themselves to Jeremy Corbyn's fence. I'd say they aren't the smartest bunch in strategically targeting their protest! They are going to win nobody over and probably set their cause back.

[KK]

I like the plastic branded water bottles. Very on message.

[Tineash]

Jesus this some strawberry floating sorry Daily-Mail-as-fuck discourse

[That]

The problem with peaceful, media-friendly mass protests like the March for Europe is that they are very easy for the people at the top to ignore. The streets fill for a day on Saturday, there's a big party, and by Monday everyone's back at work -- you could do this every week and the only material effect the establishment would notice would be increased rail revenue and rising stocks for miniature EU flag producers.

I don't think that means that kind of political expression is useless. They are great for building solidarity and raising awareness. It for sure sends a message when millions sign a petition: "we're here and we care about this". It sends a louder message when there's a big march: it says "we really care, we're serious". That's great! But without sustained direct action, there is no pressure on the bourgeoisie to actually... do anything about it. At the moment they know they can ignore it and get away with it. There's no threat of escalation.

Direct action has negative consequences for those atop the hierarchy - however small and petty they may seem - so therefore organised direct action at a large scale can provide that element of pressure needed to push change.

Imagine you're part of a neoliberal think tank, or you're a pro-establishment journalist, or you're part of some government or civil service working group. You want to protect your own interests (probably not because you're an illuminati lizard-person, but essentially because society works great for you and you don't want it to change too much). You know direct action is necessary and peaceful marches don't achieve anything on their own, because you've read a lot of history. What message do you push? "Direct action is for brutish losers, it makes you look stupid, and it will never work anyway. Just keep signing those petitions."

Now, this particular group of eco protestors could be doing a better job to be honest. A lot of their incidents seem to miss the opportunity to create meaningful narrative and symbolism. If they blockaded the motorways and A-roads chanting "Get on a bike!" or "Use the tube!" they would be building a story people could latch onto. I came up with that off the top of my head; they should have done even better given they've been planning it for however long. However I still think they're fundamentally doing good for doing something.

[KK]

Members have been on TV today and needless to say it hasn’t gone particularly well, with one of them telling former Saturday member Rochelle Humes that she ‘has an attitude’, which garnered a less than impressed response of 'Just to clear up, I have no attitude at the fact we're facing a drought. That's not right,' and another doing an Owen Jones like a petulant child and storming off Sky News:

Robin Boardman-Pattison, 21, stomped off set when Extinction Rebellion protestors were branded 'incompetent, middle class, self-indulgent people' by host Adam Boulton.

He was being quizzed by the news channel as the group continued to cause chaos across London for a third day, which has seen more than 300 people arrested.



Veteran broadcaster Mr Boulton said: 'You're like the incompetent middle-class, self-indulgent people and you want to tell us how to live our lives. That's what you are, aren't you?' The activist then got up from his chair and stormed off the set.

Boardman-Pattison, a climate change activist who stormed off Sky News once vandalised Tory headquarters and a magistrates' court with graffiti, often recites his own poetry on YouTube.

Former Bristol University student Robin Boardman-Pattison, 21, who went to a £17,500 a year private school, has also been involved in protests against the expansion of Heathrow - despite enjoying numerous holidays abroad.

The environmentalist was today branded a 'stroppy teenager' when he stomped off Sky News as he was being quizzed about the Extinction Rebellion protests.

"We would only use air travel in emergencies". What a wanker.

[Tafdolphin]

So we've learnt that environmental activists are sometimes lacking honed media skills. Which immediately invalidates all their arguments, methods and principles.

[That]

So this "Robin Boardman-Pattison" left an interview when an interviewer was rude to him? The article is saying he is too posh to have an opinion, but "Thomas Adam Babington Boulton" (educated at Westminster and then Oxford) gets a pass?

In an ideal world he would have dunked on Adam Boulton, bringing him to tears and forcing him to beg for forgiveness, but getting up and leaving is a pretty reasonable alternative for a protestor with no media training, isn't it?

[Benzin]

I hope they all got to London via completely green methods of transportation...

As said, causing disruption to Londoner's public transport is the quickest way for your group to be met with sheer despair rather than joining the cause... Apparently they were gonna disrupt the Tube? Probably realised that 1000s of angry commuters would rip off their glued hands before discussing climate change...

Especially in the modern day, these things don't directly affect those in charge... Money lost in the day/year inevitably end up affecting the common people, either through reduced pay or job losses as the company "adapts to modern effects"...

[Tineash]

Adam Boulton's educational history goes Prep School, Prep School, Boarding School, Oxford. When he poses as a man of the people/salt of the earth type to accuse other people of being middle-class, he's a lying banana split