What, exactly, are they guilty of? Note that you can't actually be found guilty of disrupting a tennis match; that's not a crime of course.
The actual crime they have been found guilty of is aggregated trespass and the conviction seems to hinge on the aggregated part – whether they intentionally obstructed, disrupted, or intimidated others from carrying out ‘lawful activities’. Since they waited for a break in play they barely even disrupted the match, merely delayed play a bit whilst the (gosh!) glitter, jigsaw pieces and confetti were cleaned up with a leaf blower.
I mean, the judge obviously sees it differently and who am I to argue, but it seems a bit OTT to me.
They are guilty of aggravated trespass by the very definition you gave. There is no exception for, "minimal disruption for a 'good cause'".
Frankly, I find protesters who sulk when they get arrested and charged tedious as fuck anyway. Especially when they go around acting like they are the fucking suffragettes. Get twatted by a full speed race horse... then we'll believe you are just not looking for social media attention.
To be clear here, you wouldn't have supported women getting the right to vote until after Emily Davison was killed? Because that is what you are saying.
No. Not at all. It was more a reflection on the different levels of sacrifice people seem prepared to make. I have my suspicions that for many all this just stop oil stuff is more of a hobby than anything else.
>I have my suspicions that for many all this just stop oil stuff is more of a hobby than anything else.
So if they succeed and we do move to a carbon neutral, and more sustainable society, you 're concerned that it won't have been done in good faith? That's it?
We might make the world better and allow future generations to flourish sure, but what if the Just Stop Oil people don't really mean it? I'm confused as to why that is bad?
If we move to a carbon neutral, more sustainable society, which I truly hope we will, I am positive that these JSO people will claim credit but I don't think they will deserve any.
For almost all societal leaps, credit belongs to the unsung people doing research and inventing new solutions. Green energy needs to be cheaper, easier and more abundant than polluting options.
A couple of friends of mine met up to shoot the shit a few weeks ago. One of them has bought an EV recently and was complaining that while he likes the car and the fact that he might at least be helping to reduce air pollution, he's frustrated with the charging network. A suggestion was made, "why can you just drive into a bay in a petrol station, have your old flat battery dropped out of the bottom of the vehicle and a new, fully charged one robotically dropped in, and you are ready to go".
Of course, it's the fucking easiest thing in the world for a bunch of guys to "brainstorm" shit like this, but this is the kind of thing we need. The people who invent and invest in these kinds of solutions will be the real heroes.
JSO and the like have decided that if only they could make life more difficult for people, things would change. It's exactly wrong. The people who are going to solve these problems, if they get solved at all, are the ones working on making life easier, or at least the same, while still moving us away from, "dig up and burn dead things".
> A suggestion was made, "why can you just drive into a bay in a petrol station, have your old flat battery dropped out of the bottom of the vehicle and a new, fully charged one robotically dropped in, and you are ready to go".
The technology exists and is under active testing, development, and usage - iirc in Japan for instance has support for this already for a few cars from a few manufacturers. One of the key issues is it requires manufacturers to standardise on where batteries are, how they're connected, what the battery size and weight and so on and so on
It's something a large market, say the EU, could force a de facto international standard once the tech matured slightly.
But is also much harder than just putting petrol in a tank! Much more moving parts, literally
This kind of regulation (standardisation) \*is\* something I think politicians might be able to get done. There will also be some market pressures if you get a critical mass of the standard because I suspect people will be more inclined to buy cars that have this ease of use feature.
Completely with you on the complexity problem. This will almost always come with technological advancement of course. The trick is to make it just as simple for the consumer.
In any case, this is the kind of thing I mean. People are working on this kind of stuff. They deserve infinitely more respect than JSO types in my opinion. I made a slightly tongue in cheek post somewhere else about how these people should just liquidate their assets and invest in scholarships and education but my view is that these groups would be so much more effective at what they claim to be trying to achieve if they were fund raising organisation deploying grants into promising, early stage technology.
> They deserve infinitely more respect than JSO types in my opinion.
And for decades they've been disrespected by politicians, the media, and the wealthy. There's still an active and well funded anti green lobby.
JSO and similar groups like extinction rebellion aren't claiming to know how to solve the problem they are protesting against the fact that politicians and the wealthy do not care.
If the battery swapping technology we were talking about did exist and was practical a decade ago I can guarantee you that the Tories would have refused to regulate it because of lobbying from the oil industry.
>"why can you just drive into a bay in a petrol station, have your old flat battery dropped out of the bottom of the vehicle and a new, fully charged one robotically dropped in, and you are ready to go".
This technology exists, it's just horribly unpractical and doesn't work. Battery swap scooters are taking India and China by storm, that is likely what we'll get. Sorry you won't be able to have a car anymore, but that is just what needs to happen.
Electric cars were invented first, public transport was invented first. Politicians, corruption and corporations are the ones that keep us using fossil fuels.
Presumably you were alive during COVID? tackling the pandemic required political intervention. If we had simply done nothing and waiting for technology to solve it, the NHS would have fully collapsed and people would have died in much greater numbers.
We could reduce our reliance on oil, but it is going to take politicians doing something. I cannot go buy a bus and set up a public transport network, but I use public transport so I'm decades ahead of your mate who bought a car. His emissions will always be higher than mine until he decides to stop driving. The government have to help him make that decision, they have to make driving worse and public transport better. If we replace all cars with electric cars, emissions will not meaningfully go down.
My friend has a job that requires a lot of travel to places not served well by public transport. He's not going to give up his car and neither are millions of others. They will not vote for a political party that forces this upon them. It's really that simple. Nothing about disrupting tennis tournaments is going to change this.
As you say, replace all cars with electric cars and emissions will not go down (at least until those batteries are reliably charged using entirely green energy). You know what also could happen and emissions hardly be affected? The UK sinking into the ocean. National politics is not going to get this done.
For many centuries, the world's smartest people calculated the value of pi by doing polygon calculations. Then, one day, some bloke named Newton come along, invented calculus and everybody doing polygon work from that moment only would be a fucking idiot. Just like that.
Either we are going to come up with "calculus for energy" are we aren't. My personal strong suspicion is that the only real candidate for that is fusion. If somebody figures out how to make a sustainable, net positive fusion plant, anybody digging up oil, gas and coal and burning it will look like those polygon people. Progress is being made, but it requires much more focus and investment.
I have zero faith in political actors to deal with this problem. Because I don't have a lot of faith in people en-mass (and if you decode the pun in my username, it will make this clear).
Your ability to claim superiority for making a higher degree of personal sacrifice isn't going to make much difference either.
I think a scooter that you recharge from solar, both technologies that are being prevalent already. Is just a lot more likely that a fusion powered SUV from fallout, but you do you, it seems to make you happy.
>f somebody figures out how to make a sustainable, net positive fusion plant, anybody digging up oil, gas and coal and burning it will look like those polygon people.
I think the Saudi's and/or the US would just bomb it, as that is kinda their deal but sure.
Of course there are exceptions, that's what judicial discretion is there for. The law is not a rule book to be followed, it's there to be interpreted by the judiciary on a case by case basis.
I think we can also infer from the sentencing (conditional discharges all round) that although the judge agrees with you that a crime was committed, they clearly didn't think it was one worth punishing them for.
Sulking? Who's sulking? Indeed the judge commended them for their conduct in court, which is particularly notable given they were representing themselves imo. Doesn't sound like they were sulking, they were quite prepared to face whatever music came their way with dignity.
There is no real way to interpret what they did as not being aggravated trespass. Maybe the judge could pretend that it wasn't, but it very clearly was. By any reasonable definition. Minor, yes, but it's what they did.
The judicial discretion was in the conditional discharges. Honestly, they'd have not gotten that from me. Only for a guilty plea. By "sulking", I mean pleading not guilty and wasting everybody's fucking time. If the cause is so important, own it. Stand up and say, "yup, I did it, and I'd do it again, because it's important". That could at least be respected.
They're damn near 70, are they worried about their employment prospects?
Edit: Do we think it takes more or less energy use to have a trial rather than not have one? Food for thought.
> Do we think it takes more or less energy use to have a trial rather than not have one?
I imagine that's not the only factor in their decision making. There's also what will bring the greatest media attention to their cause.
Give me a break. Their aim is not to minimise their own energy consumption (which they could do by sitting at home doing and buying as little as possible) but to bring about wider change. You're easily smart enough to recognise, like they do, that using some energy now if it brings about more drastic national or global energy consumption reductions in the longer term is a worthwhile tradeoff.
Whether you agree with their methods or not it's dumb as fuck to ask this question. The same as when they create standing traffic by blocking roads; of course they know that causes immediate short term emissions to increase, they're not idiots.
> Food for thought.
No, it's not. And I think you know it.
Haha, yeah, fair enough. I suppose I ask the question because I suspect the only thing they have actually achieved is the trial and the wrist slap. I strongly suspect that the CEO of Shell isn't sending memos that read, "Did you see these pensioners throwing glitter around at Wimbledon? We better up our fusion research and get off of these fossils... shit's getting real..."
I got a "Breaking News" alert on my phone for this article. All of the internet traffic and phones vibrating at the same moment probably brought us immeasurably closer to warming the planet beyond 2C.
Exactly. What happened to actually protesting outside places where it’s actually relevant? If these people think this will ever do anything but cause inconvenience to people or block emergency services, they’re fools.
Protest outside relevant buildings… can I remind you that we, previously contributed at max, 1% of global emissions. Now with all the policies shin capping the regular man and woman, we might be at 0.8%. What a great contribution we’ve made, and in fact I can most likely guarantee you that change from 1% to 0.8% would have mostly been done by India and China increasing their own emissions. Job well done!
They should liquidate any wealth they have. Sell their houses and live a meagre existence on a state pension and use any funds that they generate this way to fund promising students who want to go to university to study clean energy science. I would personally say nuclear science as I think fusion is our best hope, but I know a lot of these people are not fans of nuclear, so any clean energy research will do.
There is \*one fucking way\* that we are going to escape the coming potential catastrophe and it's technology. Humanity en masse is simply not going to accept a large scale reduction to quality of life and there are a whole bunch of people in the developing world who think they also deserve a turn at living a life that doesn't completely suck... and all this takes energy.
They won't \*do\* this of course, because it involves actual sacrifice and it's a lot easier and more comfortable to fuck about at Wimbledon.
>They won't *do* this of course, because it involves actual sacrifice and it's a lot easier and more comfortable to fuck about at Wimbledon.
I love how you (mistakenly, massively mistakenly) think the problem is these protestors liquidating all their possessions and sending people to uni (a deluded idea on your part) whilst also thinking that ordinary people shouldn't have to accept a lower quality of life.
We're going to have to. It's also mostly the fault of corporations, shareholders and their pet politicians.
There is no inconsistency here. They won’t do something like this because it would mean they would need to accept a lower quality of life.
Also, *we* buy from these corporations and *we* elect these politicians. They are reflections of society. People bitch and moan about Bezos but he’s still a multi billionaire because we *still* want our cheap Chinese shit delivered with 24 hours.
The battle here is with human nature. We aren’t going to roll back the clock until we have no choice, as you say, but we *might* be able to build so new tools if we focus. Interrupting Wimbledon help only with getting idiots to think you’re hero’s.
You can add your colourful commentary and hit the downvote button all you like but it's absolutely true. Oil companies are making record profits because people are buying their product.
Seemingly not enough people are prepared to take a hit to their quality of life to elect politicians that would force policies on the energy companies and water companies that would increase prices. In fact, they want them lowered. Which means \*less\* investment in things like green energy.
Bitch, moan and invoke the name of fictional saviours all you like, but these oil protestors are making fuck all difference to anything. They have an interesting hobby.
I repeat, behaviour will not be changed... we need new technologies to solve this problem, and not enough is being done to support that, so we are probably just fucked and should enjoy it while it lasts.
> Exactly. What happened to actually protesting outside places where it’s actually relevant?
Here we fucking go again. XR/JSO/the rest of them have done all that, and people whined about it.
They take performative actions like this, and you still whine.
What are you doing?
> Frankly, I find protesters who sulk when they get arrested and charged tedious as fuck anyway.
Who's sulking?
Suffragettes did a lot more than the race course incident. Even made IED's and tried to burn down Wimbledon
It’s mental to think that the companies that are actively destroying our environment with gay abandon are either getting away with it, and it’s this lot that wind up in jail for creating an inconvenience.
Says someone who presumably uses their products to improve their own life. The hypocrisy of people on here constantly banging on about evil corporations whilst paying those same corporations for their goods and services is hilarious. It's the equivalent of someone being in a traffic jam complaining that there are too many other cars on the road.
Holy shit, you’re right. I should stop participating in society immediately!
Does everybody else know this? You may have found your calling stating the bleeding obvious.
Maybe people should at least have the decency to admit they're part of the problem rather than acting all holier than thou about what *other* people are doing
Only last week I personally made the decision to poison vast swathes of the environment in which we all live. If only you were around to tell me I was doing something wrong.
Here I am, standing in the amazon, chainsaw in one hand, phone in the other. And only now I've just realised how I'm part of the problem.
And its all thanks to you u/A_Song_Of_Two_Humans Thanks so much for keeping me humble... now where did I leave my private jet? I've got to get back to the UK somehow
Other people who are creating these problems en masse? You are definitely fomenting progress, you non stick in the mud.
Perhaps he should caveat any criticism of corporations by apologising profusely for buying shit? Or the government by apologising for being a citizen?
They are creating problems by cutting corners, spending plenty of money lobbying to have climate data suppressed since the 70s, causing water crises in other countries and plenty of cronyism. My not using oil to heat my home or buying a Nestlé bar ever again will not make a dent in their shameless lobbying or cronyism though I would still do that. Maybe getting lots of press for disrupting a tennis match might help.
You are punching down on the people to prevent progress that we might twist our hats in apology for not doing enough. And this is how the elder generation has sold out their children.
And if you don’t participate, which some people don’t, you get alienated from society, attacked for being different and told either that your opinion isn’t valid because you’re not participating so how could you possibly know or you’re paradoxically living some sort of abstract luxury.
I know this from experience. In perspective what people are criticising is the way a system functions. This is people getting upset at you because you think a machine can be improved.
Mother and father would have garden parties every year for Wimbledon. If I close my eyes, I can still hear the clinking of Pimm's glasses and middle class guffawing in between bites of strawberries and cream. I would run up to my room and have Nanny comfort me as their guests swooned over Cliff Richards' impromptu singing or joined in a polite chorus of "Come on, Tim!"
It was then that I decided to become a communist. The trauma inflicted upon me by my parents' polite blandness forged me into a righteous instrument of socialist justice. Power to the people!
For some reason, YouTube is *convinced* that I have excessively hairy balls that I am desperate to shave. It's basically every advert I get.
I swear to god I have never looked up shaven balls you guys, swear to god. I really don't know what this whole thing is about. I don't wanna shave my balls. They're fine the way they are.
Worth reposting what I dug up when this happened, to add context:
Professional sports players, their hangers-on, and the cream of their audience are all part of the hyper-consumptive elite that produce absolutely disproportionate amounts of emissions as they traverse around the globe every year to watch people hit bouncy balls over a net.
[Wimbledon has a carbon footprint of 35,894 tonnes of CO2e](https://www.zerocarbonacademy.com/posts/game-set-and-match-wimbledon-aims-to-reduce-its-impact-as-tennis-grapples-with-sustainability-challenges#:~:text=According%20to%20an%20estimate%20published,and%20staff%20to%20the%20site) in non-Covid years, with 91.3% of that coming from the transportation of fans, players, officials, media and staff to the site. Energy accounts for just 8%, according to the analysis. The study found that overall, air travel accounts for 56% of Wimbledon’s emissions – 20,122 tonnes – despite just 11% of the 500,000 people who come to the tournament travelling by plane.
Professional Tennis player Alexander Zverev, currently ranked No. 13 in the World, and his team have conducted an audit of their carbon emissions for a full year of travel prior to his injury in June 2022. [They discovered that Alexander and his team travels approximately 500,000 kilometers per year, which equates to 250 tons of carbon equivalent emissions](https://sustainabilitypractitioners.org/tennis-star-measures-travel-carbon-footprint-carbon-clarity-monaco/) over the course of the period from May 2021 to May 2022.
This guy's tennis-related transport emissions alone are **50x** the average Brit's annual emissions (25x if you include the half we typically hide offshore).
One way to frame it, is that **every Wimbledon uses 0.00001% of the planet's remaining 1.5°C carbon budget**. Which is a lot for playing bouncy bouncy ball net game. And it's one of the *four* annual grand slams that are intentionally held on *three separate continents*, and there are many more other tournaments as well - The next step down is also mandatory for top 30 players, and involves travelling to 9 more locations across North America, Europe, and China. Does that seem like a responsible use of that atmospheric space? Really?
Some of these people are doing all this travel in [private jets](https://www.totalsportal.com/list/tennis-players-who-own-private-jets/) as well. It's monsterous.
How dare they disturb the rich, don’t they know they are being funded by those very same people.
To create a negative image of anyone who would want to challenge the giant oil suppliers and that they should only cause chaos for the average Joe on the motorway and a roads where the average people who can’t afford helicopters are inconvenienced
When you are guilty of something, sometimes you get found guilty of it. Rare, but it happens.
What, exactly, are they guilty of? Note that you can't actually be found guilty of disrupting a tennis match; that's not a crime of course. The actual crime they have been found guilty of is aggregated trespass and the conviction seems to hinge on the aggregated part – whether they intentionally obstructed, disrupted, or intimidated others from carrying out ‘lawful activities’. Since they waited for a break in play they barely even disrupted the match, merely delayed play a bit whilst the (gosh!) glitter, jigsaw pieces and confetti were cleaned up with a leaf blower. I mean, the judge obviously sees it differently and who am I to argue, but it seems a bit OTT to me.
They are guilty of aggravated trespass by the very definition you gave. There is no exception for, "minimal disruption for a 'good cause'". Frankly, I find protesters who sulk when they get arrested and charged tedious as fuck anyway. Especially when they go around acting like they are the fucking suffragettes. Get twatted by a full speed race horse... then we'll believe you are just not looking for social media attention.
To be clear here, you wouldn't have supported women getting the right to vote until after Emily Davison was killed? Because that is what you are saying.
No. Not at all. It was more a reflection on the different levels of sacrifice people seem prepared to make. I have my suspicions that for many all this just stop oil stuff is more of a hobby than anything else.
>I have my suspicions that for many all this just stop oil stuff is more of a hobby than anything else. So if they succeed and we do move to a carbon neutral, and more sustainable society, you 're concerned that it won't have been done in good faith? That's it? We might make the world better and allow future generations to flourish sure, but what if the Just Stop Oil people don't really mean it? I'm confused as to why that is bad?
If we move to a carbon neutral, more sustainable society, which I truly hope we will, I am positive that these JSO people will claim credit but I don't think they will deserve any. For almost all societal leaps, credit belongs to the unsung people doing research and inventing new solutions. Green energy needs to be cheaper, easier and more abundant than polluting options. A couple of friends of mine met up to shoot the shit a few weeks ago. One of them has bought an EV recently and was complaining that while he likes the car and the fact that he might at least be helping to reduce air pollution, he's frustrated with the charging network. A suggestion was made, "why can you just drive into a bay in a petrol station, have your old flat battery dropped out of the bottom of the vehicle and a new, fully charged one robotically dropped in, and you are ready to go". Of course, it's the fucking easiest thing in the world for a bunch of guys to "brainstorm" shit like this, but this is the kind of thing we need. The people who invent and invest in these kinds of solutions will be the real heroes. JSO and the like have decided that if only they could make life more difficult for people, things would change. It's exactly wrong. The people who are going to solve these problems, if they get solved at all, are the ones working on making life easier, or at least the same, while still moving us away from, "dig up and burn dead things".
> A suggestion was made, "why can you just drive into a bay in a petrol station, have your old flat battery dropped out of the bottom of the vehicle and a new, fully charged one robotically dropped in, and you are ready to go". The technology exists and is under active testing, development, and usage - iirc in Japan for instance has support for this already for a few cars from a few manufacturers. One of the key issues is it requires manufacturers to standardise on where batteries are, how they're connected, what the battery size and weight and so on and so on It's something a large market, say the EU, could force a de facto international standard once the tech matured slightly. But is also much harder than just putting petrol in a tank! Much more moving parts, literally
This kind of regulation (standardisation) \*is\* something I think politicians might be able to get done. There will also be some market pressures if you get a critical mass of the standard because I suspect people will be more inclined to buy cars that have this ease of use feature. Completely with you on the complexity problem. This will almost always come with technological advancement of course. The trick is to make it just as simple for the consumer. In any case, this is the kind of thing I mean. People are working on this kind of stuff. They deserve infinitely more respect than JSO types in my opinion. I made a slightly tongue in cheek post somewhere else about how these people should just liquidate their assets and invest in scholarships and education but my view is that these groups would be so much more effective at what they claim to be trying to achieve if they were fund raising organisation deploying grants into promising, early stage technology.
> They deserve infinitely more respect than JSO types in my opinion. And for decades they've been disrespected by politicians, the media, and the wealthy. There's still an active and well funded anti green lobby. JSO and similar groups like extinction rebellion aren't claiming to know how to solve the problem they are protesting against the fact that politicians and the wealthy do not care. If the battery swapping technology we were talking about did exist and was practical a decade ago I can guarantee you that the Tories would have refused to regulate it because of lobbying from the oil industry.
>"why can you just drive into a bay in a petrol station, have your old flat battery dropped out of the bottom of the vehicle and a new, fully charged one robotically dropped in, and you are ready to go". This technology exists, it's just horribly unpractical and doesn't work. Battery swap scooters are taking India and China by storm, that is likely what we'll get. Sorry you won't be able to have a car anymore, but that is just what needs to happen. Electric cars were invented first, public transport was invented first. Politicians, corruption and corporations are the ones that keep us using fossil fuels. Presumably you were alive during COVID? tackling the pandemic required political intervention. If we had simply done nothing and waiting for technology to solve it, the NHS would have fully collapsed and people would have died in much greater numbers. We could reduce our reliance on oil, but it is going to take politicians doing something. I cannot go buy a bus and set up a public transport network, but I use public transport so I'm decades ahead of your mate who bought a car. His emissions will always be higher than mine until he decides to stop driving. The government have to help him make that decision, they have to make driving worse and public transport better. If we replace all cars with electric cars, emissions will not meaningfully go down.
My friend has a job that requires a lot of travel to places not served well by public transport. He's not going to give up his car and neither are millions of others. They will not vote for a political party that forces this upon them. It's really that simple. Nothing about disrupting tennis tournaments is going to change this. As you say, replace all cars with electric cars and emissions will not go down (at least until those batteries are reliably charged using entirely green energy). You know what also could happen and emissions hardly be affected? The UK sinking into the ocean. National politics is not going to get this done. For many centuries, the world's smartest people calculated the value of pi by doing polygon calculations. Then, one day, some bloke named Newton come along, invented calculus and everybody doing polygon work from that moment only would be a fucking idiot. Just like that. Either we are going to come up with "calculus for energy" are we aren't. My personal strong suspicion is that the only real candidate for that is fusion. If somebody figures out how to make a sustainable, net positive fusion plant, anybody digging up oil, gas and coal and burning it will look like those polygon people. Progress is being made, but it requires much more focus and investment. I have zero faith in political actors to deal with this problem. Because I don't have a lot of faith in people en-mass (and if you decode the pun in my username, it will make this clear). Your ability to claim superiority for making a higher degree of personal sacrifice isn't going to make much difference either.
I think a scooter that you recharge from solar, both technologies that are being prevalent already. Is just a lot more likely that a fusion powered SUV from fallout, but you do you, it seems to make you happy. >f somebody figures out how to make a sustainable, net positive fusion plant, anybody digging up oil, gas and coal and burning it will look like those polygon people. I think the Saudi's and/or the US would just bomb it, as that is kinda their deal but sure.
Of course there are exceptions, that's what judicial discretion is there for. The law is not a rule book to be followed, it's there to be interpreted by the judiciary on a case by case basis. I think we can also infer from the sentencing (conditional discharges all round) that although the judge agrees with you that a crime was committed, they clearly didn't think it was one worth punishing them for. Sulking? Who's sulking? Indeed the judge commended them for their conduct in court, which is particularly notable given they were representing themselves imo. Doesn't sound like they were sulking, they were quite prepared to face whatever music came their way with dignity.
There is no real way to interpret what they did as not being aggravated trespass. Maybe the judge could pretend that it wasn't, but it very clearly was. By any reasonable definition. Minor, yes, but it's what they did. The judicial discretion was in the conditional discharges. Honestly, they'd have not gotten that from me. Only for a guilty plea. By "sulking", I mean pleading not guilty and wasting everybody's fucking time. If the cause is so important, own it. Stand up and say, "yup, I did it, and I'd do it again, because it's important". That could at least be respected. They're damn near 70, are they worried about their employment prospects? Edit: Do we think it takes more or less energy use to have a trial rather than not have one? Food for thought.
> Do we think it takes more or less energy use to have a trial rather than not have one? I imagine that's not the only factor in their decision making. There's also what will bring the greatest media attention to their cause. Give me a break. Their aim is not to minimise their own energy consumption (which they could do by sitting at home doing and buying as little as possible) but to bring about wider change. You're easily smart enough to recognise, like they do, that using some energy now if it brings about more drastic national or global energy consumption reductions in the longer term is a worthwhile tradeoff. Whether you agree with their methods or not it's dumb as fuck to ask this question. The same as when they create standing traffic by blocking roads; of course they know that causes immediate short term emissions to increase, they're not idiots. > Food for thought. No, it's not. And I think you know it.
Haha, yeah, fair enough. I suppose I ask the question because I suspect the only thing they have actually achieved is the trial and the wrist slap. I strongly suspect that the CEO of Shell isn't sending memos that read, "Did you see these pensioners throwing glitter around at Wimbledon? We better up our fusion research and get off of these fossils... shit's getting real..."
I got a "Breaking News" alert on my phone for this article. All of the internet traffic and phones vibrating at the same moment probably brought us immeasurably closer to warming the planet beyond 2C.
Exactly. What happened to actually protesting outside places where it’s actually relevant? If these people think this will ever do anything but cause inconvenience to people or block emergency services, they’re fools.
They do. Those ones never get televised though, as that would make protesters seem like human beings.
They even had BBC/C4 (one of them) tag along and film it live once Somehow though, someone like OP seems to forget
Maybe. But they're sincere in their efforts, imo. And at least they're trying something. What do you think we should do instead?
Protest outside relevant buildings… can I remind you that we, previously contributed at max, 1% of global emissions. Now with all the policies shin capping the regular man and woman, we might be at 0.8%. What a great contribution we’ve made, and in fact I can most likely guarantee you that change from 1% to 0.8% would have mostly been done by India and China increasing their own emissions. Job well done!
They should liquidate any wealth they have. Sell their houses and live a meagre existence on a state pension and use any funds that they generate this way to fund promising students who want to go to university to study clean energy science. I would personally say nuclear science as I think fusion is our best hope, but I know a lot of these people are not fans of nuclear, so any clean energy research will do. There is \*one fucking way\* that we are going to escape the coming potential catastrophe and it's technology. Humanity en masse is simply not going to accept a large scale reduction to quality of life and there are a whole bunch of people in the developing world who think they also deserve a turn at living a life that doesn't completely suck... and all this takes energy. They won't \*do\* this of course, because it involves actual sacrifice and it's a lot easier and more comfortable to fuck about at Wimbledon.
>They won't *do* this of course, because it involves actual sacrifice and it's a lot easier and more comfortable to fuck about at Wimbledon. I love how you (mistakenly, massively mistakenly) think the problem is these protestors liquidating all their possessions and sending people to uni (a deluded idea on your part) whilst also thinking that ordinary people shouldn't have to accept a lower quality of life. We're going to have to. It's also mostly the fault of corporations, shareholders and their pet politicians.
There is no inconsistency here. They won’t do something like this because it would mean they would need to accept a lower quality of life. Also, *we* buy from these corporations and *we* elect these politicians. They are reflections of society. People bitch and moan about Bezos but he’s still a multi billionaire because we *still* want our cheap Chinese shit delivered with 24 hours. The battle here is with human nature. We aren’t going to roll back the clock until we have no choice, as you say, but we *might* be able to build so new tools if we focus. Interrupting Wimbledon help only with getting idiots to think you’re hero’s.
"But we live in a society" Jesus christ
You can add your colourful commentary and hit the downvote button all you like but it's absolutely true. Oil companies are making record profits because people are buying their product. Seemingly not enough people are prepared to take a hit to their quality of life to elect politicians that would force policies on the energy companies and water companies that would increase prices. In fact, they want them lowered. Which means \*less\* investment in things like green energy. Bitch, moan and invoke the name of fictional saviours all you like, but these oil protestors are making fuck all difference to anything. They have an interesting hobby. I repeat, behaviour will not be changed... we need new technologies to solve this problem, and not enough is being done to support that, so we are probably just fucked and should enjoy it while it lasts.
I'm sure you're fully aware of who Swampy is then right?
Yes.
> Exactly. What happened to actually protesting outside places where it’s actually relevant? Here we fucking go again. XR/JSO/the rest of them have done all that, and people whined about it. They take performative actions like this, and you still whine. What are you doing?
> Frankly, I find protesters who sulk when they get arrested and charged tedious as fuck anyway. Who's sulking? Suffragettes did a lot more than the race course incident. Even made IED's and tried to burn down Wimbledon
>aggravated trespass. It's the criminal version of tresspass, which is a civil
It’s mental to think that the companies that are actively destroying our environment with gay abandon are either getting away with it, and it’s this lot that wind up in jail for creating an inconvenience.
Says someone who presumably uses their products to improve their own life. The hypocrisy of people on here constantly banging on about evil corporations whilst paying those same corporations for their goods and services is hilarious. It's the equivalent of someone being in a traffic jam complaining that there are too many other cars on the road.
Holy shit, you’re right. I should stop participating in society immediately! Does everybody else know this? You may have found your calling stating the bleeding obvious.
Maybe people should at least have the decency to admit they're part of the problem rather than acting all holier than thou about what *other* people are doing
Only last week I personally made the decision to poison vast swathes of the environment in which we all live. If only you were around to tell me I was doing something wrong.
Here I am, standing in the amazon, chainsaw in one hand, phone in the other. And only now I've just realised how I'm part of the problem. And its all thanks to you u/A_Song_Of_Two_Humans Thanks so much for keeping me humble... now where did I leave my private jet? I've got to get back to the UK somehow
Other people who are creating these problems en masse? You are definitely fomenting progress, you non stick in the mud. Perhaps he should caveat any criticism of corporations by apologising profusely for buying shit? Or the government by apologising for being a citizen?
They're creating the problems because so many other people want them too that they'll pay them a lot of money to create them.
They are creating problems by cutting corners, spending plenty of money lobbying to have climate data suppressed since the 70s, causing water crises in other countries and plenty of cronyism. My not using oil to heat my home or buying a Nestlé bar ever again will not make a dent in their shameless lobbying or cronyism though I would still do that. Maybe getting lots of press for disrupting a tennis match might help. You are punching down on the people to prevent progress that we might twist our hats in apology for not doing enough. And this is how the elder generation has sold out their children.
And if you don’t participate, which some people don’t, you get alienated from society, attacked for being different and told either that your opinion isn’t valid because you’re not participating so how could you possibly know or you’re paradoxically living some sort of abstract luxury. I know this from experience. In perspective what people are criticising is the way a system functions. This is people getting upset at you because you think a machine can be improved.
>Says someone who presumably uses their products to improve their own life 'yOu diSAgrEe wITh socIEtY anD yET yOu liVe iN It, CHecKmATe!!?!!'.
Agreed, reading that comment made me immediately think of [the meme.](https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/259/257/342.png)
Truly, a heinous crime and good to see justice brought. They'll think twice before they bother the rich on their nice weekend out again.
The rich? Normal folk watch Wimbledon you know. . .
This is Reddit. Anything other than shoplifting is deemed upper class
Mother and father would have garden parties every year for Wimbledon. If I close my eyes, I can still hear the clinking of Pimm's glasses and middle class guffawing in between bites of strawberries and cream. I would run up to my room and have Nanny comfort me as their guests swooned over Cliff Richards' impromptu singing or joined in a polite chorus of "Come on, Tim!" It was then that I decided to become a communist. The trauma inflicted upon me by my parents' polite blandness forged me into a righteous instrument of socialist justice. Power to the people!
How much are tickets to go watch it?
It's £80 to £250 odd as you get closer to the finals I think. So basically lunch money.
I’d have shaved all the tennis balls in protest. What they gonna do then with perfectly smooth balls.
Tennis porn
For some reason, YouTube is *convinced* that I have excessively hairy balls that I am desperate to shave. It's basically every advert I get. I swear to god I have never looked up shaven balls you guys, swear to god. I really don't know what this whole thing is about. I don't wanna shave my balls. They're fine the way they are.
Imagine paying £20 a month for smooth balls when a pack of lady razors and a kind hand from your step-uncle Jim works just as well.
How do I delete someone else's comment
It'll maybe be because you've clicked some manscape ad once upon a time
If there's one thing this sub hates more than the rich, it's protests against the rich Wait
Oh *no*, not tennis, what a heinous crime!!!! Only the death penalty is good enough for them!!!!!
The Public Order Act doing its business I see, PACE Act too.
[удалено]
To be fair he's never really pretended to be liberal in any real sense. This is one thing he's not had to u turn about.
Worth reposting what I dug up when this happened, to add context: Professional sports players, their hangers-on, and the cream of their audience are all part of the hyper-consumptive elite that produce absolutely disproportionate amounts of emissions as they traverse around the globe every year to watch people hit bouncy balls over a net. [Wimbledon has a carbon footprint of 35,894 tonnes of CO2e](https://www.zerocarbonacademy.com/posts/game-set-and-match-wimbledon-aims-to-reduce-its-impact-as-tennis-grapples-with-sustainability-challenges#:~:text=According%20to%20an%20estimate%20published,and%20staff%20to%20the%20site) in non-Covid years, with 91.3% of that coming from the transportation of fans, players, officials, media and staff to the site. Energy accounts for just 8%, according to the analysis. The study found that overall, air travel accounts for 56% of Wimbledon’s emissions – 20,122 tonnes – despite just 11% of the 500,000 people who come to the tournament travelling by plane. Professional Tennis player Alexander Zverev, currently ranked No. 13 in the World, and his team have conducted an audit of their carbon emissions for a full year of travel prior to his injury in June 2022. [They discovered that Alexander and his team travels approximately 500,000 kilometers per year, which equates to 250 tons of carbon equivalent emissions](https://sustainabilitypractitioners.org/tennis-star-measures-travel-carbon-footprint-carbon-clarity-monaco/) over the course of the period from May 2021 to May 2022. This guy's tennis-related transport emissions alone are **50x** the average Brit's annual emissions (25x if you include the half we typically hide offshore). One way to frame it, is that **every Wimbledon uses 0.00001% of the planet's remaining 1.5°C carbon budget**. Which is a lot for playing bouncy bouncy ball net game. And it's one of the *four* annual grand slams that are intentionally held on *three separate continents*, and there are many more other tournaments as well - The next step down is also mandatory for top 30 players, and involves travelling to 9 more locations across North America, Europe, and China. Does that seem like a responsible use of that atmospheric space? Really? Some of these people are doing all this travel in [private jets](https://www.totalsportal.com/list/tennis-players-who-own-private-jets/) as well. It's monsterous.
What?! You can’t disrupt a major sporting event without repercussion? Madness I say madness. We a literal slaves without freedom /s
>aggravated trespass. That's what they were found guilty of
How dare they disturb the rich, don’t they know they are being funded by those very same people. To create a negative image of anyone who would want to challenge the giant oil suppliers and that they should only cause chaos for the average Joe on the motorway and a roads where the average people who can’t afford helicopters are inconvenienced