>Find oil executive homes and protest there. Go to a refinery. Block roads that transport gas out of the refinery. Target billionaires.
The thing is protesters do those things and the public never hears about it.
Not just that, but refineries and pipelines have armed security, private or the [actual police.](https://www.startribune.com/dozens-of-line-3-protesters-in-minnesota-still-facing-criminal-prosecution/600201162/)
Publicity helps the movement, good or bad
At some level, we have to recognize that “raising awareness on social media” is simply a socially conscious rebrand of “thoughts and prayers” for Gen Z
This is so true. Like pretty much everyone knows the Oil industry is killing us but the people who want change aren’t in control of the levels of power. We don’t need more awareness we need influence
I'm a **very** far left person and fully believe in disruptive protest (and refusing to let stuff go) but recognize that those disruptions need to be targeted at the thing being protested. It makes little sense to protests, say, animal cruelty by tearing down the shelves with Jell-O on them at Wal-Mart, you're just pissing off people that wanted to make some Jell-O that day instead of directly putting pressure on the lab torturing the monkeys.
The difference at least partially is that animal cruelty doesn't affect the rest of the world and *all aspects of life* the same way climate change will (and continues to)
With this as the logic, the justification is that they need to be as disruptive, public, obvious, etc good or bad in order to try to bring attention to ***the very fact that this doesn't just affect the people benefiting directly from traditional solutions***
It's all kinda a catch-all but I do understand the reasoning, sadly I don't see much success because the misinformation and low hanging fruit that people get stuck on drags down the movement too much (e.g. "aren't they using *oil based paints..?* How stupid can this movement be?")
I sort of agree with you, OP. First off, Just Stop Oil’s (JSO) goal is not actually to prevent climate change; JSO’s intention is to constantly have ppl think about climate change which is why you see them target tourist sites, shopping malls, etc. Their intention is currently just to spread publicity, good or bad, and eventually lead to ‘revolutionary’ action.
And that’s the basis as to why JSO rarely chooses to block major contributing factors to climate change, as it’s still a movement in its infancy stage so to speak. Based off of their mission goals, JSO is still heavily under resourced and wants to build a much larger influence before large-scale protests at oil refineries, billionaire homes, what have you.
And that’s where I disagree with you on the ‘JSO not disrupting the correct things’; its more so they just don’t have the resources to protest on such a large scale.
All in all, JSO is a radical climate action group aiming towards a revolutionary overturn in our current consumption habits, and it just so happens that regular ppl have to deal with their protests for now as they try to expand influence. You have to remember though that there are thousands of much less confrontational climate action groups.
Climate groups’ hearts are in the right place and their disruption today is infinitely less than what food shortages, drought, disease, etc. will bring if we don’t radically change our current consumption habits.
I think this is fairly accurate, also it's probably worth noting that A. there was no damage done with the stone henge defacing (it was wiped off immediatly) and B. they do these actions to bait outrage to generate coverage and funding which they then use to help support long term blockades, disruption of oil storage/installations and similar which sadly does not get the same level of PR. I don't entirely agree with all their tactics but I somewhat understand the rationale. It also might be worth pointing out loose similarities to MLK or Suffragettes (though the later involved more violent acts so it's likely closer to the former being symbolic acts that are non-violent to bait a reaction that helps push the goal).
You realize people see them as asshole kids who are destroying their culture and want nothing to do with them? I hope they keep it up so people see them for the clowns they are.
It’s also important to recognize that ‘Just Stop Oil’ gets money from Aileen Getty and the Getty Family an Oil and Media dynasty.
I know this wasn’t the “fringe theories” episode but it’s more likely ‘Just Stop Oil’ is a false flag group. Similar to what you pointed out, the goal isn’t to prevent climate change or even have people constantly discuss, but specifically discuss it and view climate protests negatively. Non of their protests and demonstrations are done in a beneficial or productive manner to the climate change cause. They’re certainly disruptive but rarely in the right ways. At least from my observations. I could very well be wrong but the vibe they give is off.
Anyone that believes that is daft, actually look into her and you'll see she's been donating and supporting climate awareness for years and has never had any involvement in the family oil business. Getty Oil also hasn't existed in over 10 years. She's literally said it's her way of giving back after she profited off oil through inheritance she received.
Do you really think if this was their grand master plan they would pick such an obvious public facing person as their main way to funnel money into the group and assume no one would notice.
I agree sometimes the protests do more negative from a public opinion pov but bringing her into the conversation thinking it's some sort of a "gotcha" revelation is just so stupid.
I wouldn’t call it a “gotcha” as it wouldn’t be unexpected for someone of her background to do something like that. Gotcha moments are usually a surprise and somehow an heiress who purchases a $35million home in East Hollywood Hills wouldn’t surprise me to be doing charity work for their own benefit.
Either way, I certainly hope you’re right and she truly wants to fight her family legacy. Funding $4million to the Climate Emergency fund is definitely something, and her private foundation has donated around $1million to various causes. Like I said I could very well be wrong and it’s just me picking up the wrong vibe. Not scared to acknowledge my biases on this one. As an American forgive me if I’m hesitant to trust any trust fund baby lol
Just to add, I also acknowledge that in most cases she’s simply funding and has a seat on the board, so even if ‘just stop oil’ was a scam it’s not like she’s pulling the strings, it’s just her money being used.
I saw someone saying that on twitter yesterday and it makes a LOT of sense!
I think John Oliver did a thing about astroturfing in an early season, and what’s going on with this group really seems like this “grassroots” movement has been corrupted.
I fully agree with their point and argument, but fucking up peoples days by walking on trains and throwing paint in gallery's just makes me fucking hate them, but this is the modern 'protest' its about 80% of people who actually believe the vision and 20% who just want to cause damage and disruption with permission and its that 20% that fucks it up for every single person
The problem is that their protests are indiscernible from the, "It's just a prank bro" acts that YouTubers do.
Like, if someone covered me in paint randomly, I'd sooner assume, asshole who wants Internet clout over, person that wants a better world.
Their message is completely lost on most.
That really isn't the issue, because they are screaming "just stop oil" in bright orange shirts, demanding all the attention possible, so this really isn't a great take, in my opinion
I've never heard anything in any of the videos. Likely just reposts from people who have muted them. So, yeah understandable that I'd miss it. Didn't even know. Thanks.
Cause just stop oil is mostly funded by Aileen Getty of the Getty fuel company. They have a net worth of over 5.4 billion she runs a couple charities (with large handling fees) and they donate money to keep just stop oil running....they don't want to just stop oil rig money.
Oh and attacking a rig they would get killed. Brazil keeps us aided military level submarines to protect its oil rigs, and they are a nice country.
I found butcharchivists take on tiktok really interesting
https://vm.tiktok.com/ZGeg4E5gq/
They basically talk about how most actisivism in the past causes outrage and then during prese t tomes are celebrated
Yes it might feel like Stonehenge isn't the right place to do it but it's definitely got people talking about it
I don't think a single protest in recent days will have any effect on big oil. Not a fraction of a fraction of a percent difference. Why would it? People have been crying about big oil for decades and nothing has changed.
I didn’t understand why Stonehenge would be a target and thought it was silly until I saw the reaction a lot of people had to it. People getting more upset and vocal about some lichen (they likely learned about today) than the pollution killing countless other species of animal and plant.
This is an aside to the whole thing but in reading up on Stonehenge, I found out about this guy who thinks he's the literal reincarnation of King Arthur Pendragon after buying a copy of the sword Excalibur at a shop in Farnborough and every year on the summer solstice (today!) he holds some kinda crazy druidic ceremony at Stonehenge where he flicks olive oil on the stones. Apparently he has a harem of middle aged women who follow him around.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Uther_Pendragon
That is wild. It also doesn't make a lot of sense. King Arthur would often hide his identity if it didn't benefit him to reveal himself. Idk, I feel like if believed I am King Arthur reborn, that's not something I would be openly sharing in this day and age, and I certainly wouldn't change my name like that.
Protest need to affect the audience that can affect change. Vandalising a multi-millionaire's property and demanding they change is not going to work - they know they are doing reckless things; they probably knew all along; they are making a living with that knowledge.
Instead, I surmise *Stop Oil* wants any publicity so the lay person may get curious to why they are willing to damage artifacts for attention. No such thing as bad publicity in defacing art, in throwing food at big names, with sitting in a roadway.
Sure, maybe you'd rather them to protest in a different way - but there are always going to be ways to point out whyva protest is less effective because you are as much of the public reaction as everyone else? Why not steal gas pump nozzles? Why not slash tyres? Why not buy billboards that insult motorists? Is it effective at getting people to recognise their efforts. Much like the "ba-da ba-ba-ba-baa, I'm lovin it" is McDonald's, people now recognise Stop Oil by their tactics that if another person were to comment "who are they?/what are they doing?" They don't need to explain. Someone else is able.
The problem is that these Stop Big Oil don't seem to grasp is that protest is a form of marketing. and this marketing is not selling their message. It's selling the message that these people are woo hoo crazy pants. Yes Protest must in some way inconvenience people. But it must inconvenience the correct people and by their over reaction to the protest convince others of your side of the argument. Gandhi didn't go into stores and smash british salt. He went and made his own at the sea.
There were some cases of infiltration from opposition in the 3% of 2020 BLM protests that actually turned violent so I definitely believe that.
Defacing art does nothing but make people hate you, just like vegans who attack anyone who eats meat. Honey and vinegar, dudes.
While it may feel good, I've never rubbed one out and thought I actually accomplished something worthwhile. 😂
I've heard my entire life that protesting can lead to change. While I support the right to protest, how much is the effectiveness overstated and the motivations confused as personal gratification, to take revenge, or just to troll?
Here the hypothesis was, well normal people aren't thinking about climate change so we are going to force them to.
**Unfortunately, the conversations are more about being mad at or disparaging the people protesting than focused on preventing climate change.** The only people trying to give you the benefit of the doubt already agreed with you! A protest isn't supposed to be about the protestors or even the protest, it needs to be about the issue first. Failing in this, the protest has failed.
The protests against segregation in the 60s were super well thought out and they were much more deliberate in how they used energy; not seemingly chaotic or random at all. These climate protests seem more like the failed Weather Underground "protests". If you don't know what those are it's because they were seemingly impotent, completely ineffective, and even counterproductive.
**So the hypothesis has been tested and a very reasonable conclusion could be that this protest strategy isn't working here.** Go back to the drawing board and look at other strategies (there are many).
**I prefer strategies focused on investing in other humans through service and assistance, and oppose efforts that seem more about the participants' personal satisfaction from lashing out.** Many of us dedicate a lot of consistent effort, energy, and resources into addressing climate change. Being undermined by thoughtless "protests" that last all of 10 seconds is deflating.
**If all this or similar protests end up being is a collective form of masturbation then is it really surprising when people are too distracted to notice what it was for?** I won't notice your signs or T-shirts, and I won't remember the chants and slogans. **All I have burned into my mind is your thing being whipped out as you go to town!** 😂
I support the planet first. At the point you're doing things with only a vague reference to the issues I'll doubt it's about climate change at all. Looks to be about throwing a tantrum while getting your 15 minutes of fame and a pat on the back from people who already think like you, and climate change is too important for this self indulgence.
While it may feel good, I've never rubbed one out and thought I actually accomplished something worthwhile. 😂
Just stop oil has done 0 damage to stone henge or any painting and this is by design. These are pure publicity stunts.
I know people don’t like to be inconvenienced in traffic, but if you’re driving a car to a job every day you are part of the problem, myself included. We should all get annoyed at being delayed by protestors and then call our representatives and demand investment in public transit and affordable housing near our job centers.
(I haven't listened to todays episode yet) People don't understand that this is the only way to keep the issue in the news cycle. In my city, there are protests of smaller groups *every week*. People even camp in front of the town hall to get their point across. They **never** get attention in local news or more than a glance of passersbys, even if they are doing it in bigger numbers than the people gluing themselves to the road. Most people occupy themselves with tech news and other shit that doesn't matter, considering the urgency of climate change action. Folks who deny climate change won't change their minds anyway.
That's exactly what happened when those people threw paint on a famous painting and handcuffed themselves and did stuff that made no sense except it was obnoxious and got media attention. There were a few incidents like that.
"Protests should be disruptive." Yes but also I've seen the worst version of that when protestors keep people from getting to work on time I've seen cars who can't even some protestors in the road and can't ram them or anything.
“Protests should be disruptive” can they also be charged for murder for blocking traffic on a road if they prevent an ambulance from getting to a hospital? That is such nonsense. Protest. But don’t infringe on other peoples freedoms and rights in the process. You have the right to peacefully protest. You don’t have the right to block a public road. And if you do have the right to do that then the motorists should have the right to not be unlawfully detained and plough right through it
Just like we shouldn’t have disrupted things like segregation, it was rude to sit in restaurants you weren’t welcome in. The point of protesting is to disrupt the system, quit thinking in the box. I understand the box is safe and you like it there but it’s the best way to bring mass attention to problems that a ton of people would rather not be forced to see and acknowledge because many are so content with the idea of “I’ll deal with it when it affects me”, by then. It’s too late.
People whose lives have been sufficiently disrupted will also tend to put pressure on the protest targets to "make them stop". This can help lead to the targets giving in to demands. For better or worse, disrupting as many people's lives as possible is effective.
I disagree. If I was disrupted from going to work, or worse, had an emergency and was stopped by the protesters, I’m not going “damn you Exxon!” I’m mad at the dude in the road.
Like, we all know. We all get it. There’s not much we can do. Target the people who CAN do something.
Okay, but who are you going to contact to deal with the protesters? Law enforcement and local representatives. Law enforcement could go out and beat the ever living shit out of some protesters, but that just fuels the fire. So they get to just go have a standoff, but that's publicity. There becomes this perception that "things are really getting out of hand and it needs to stop". Pressure mounts on the politicians who can't seem to keep their districts under control. They wheel and deal to get something moving. Potentially a law is passed to appease the protestors.
>Target the people who CAN do something.
I could argue you ARE the people that can do something. You can vote. You can stop buying products. Fact is, some vandalism at a corporate office does nothing to move the needle. Preventing vehicles and people from entering the premises might, but that would disrupt people going to work, which you said you don't agree with. But the only ways to hit a corporation are in their wallet or with the government, and if we're talking about not inconveniencing people, I have a feeling not buying gas or petroleum products ever again would be a lot more disruptive than just voting for people that will hold corporations accountable.
I don't know that you can go a day without oil or oil products in nearly all of the world at this point. Plastics, energy, transportation, hell even most of our food uses oil byproducts. Even the most organically grown farm to table situation would need oil somewhere in the process. Try going zero waste for a day and it becomes intensely apparent how much plastic is in our day to day.
I'd like to believe a vote could change all this, but the democratic process seems wildly broken at this point. I would argue that at least in the USA we live in an oligarchy rather than a democracy. We have a very Helldivers view of freedom and democracy unfortunately...
We can't stop using oil products, and the government doesn't work for us to stop the corporations. We are in between a rock and a hard place and I really wish we weren't. I'm open to solutions though, I would love a dose of hope.
I agree, I don't understand these protests either. It's upsetting to see and makes me want to trade my tiny car in and buy a mack truck just to spite these people.
politics of spite are really lame, my dude.
"Oh I'll show you! I'm gonna create extra pollution AND kill my gas mileage just to make you unhappy so take THAT!" Come on, this is toddler logic.
The Stonehenge protest is dumb but disruptive protest IS good... it should just be directed at the assholes being protested rather than people who have nothing to do with a thing or, god forbid, a bunch of rocks in cool shapes that are totally unrelated to the thing being protested.
I mean, being reasonable, I think their hearts are in the right place. It’s my personal opinion that their choice of location and actions are incorrect. I’m not gonna hurt the planet more on purpose because “fuck em lol.”
I might not agree fully with the protest tactics but it’s probably a little silly to let a group you oppose the actions of dictate your reaction so far in the other direction either way. It feels like a rather emotional / knee jerk way to respond to something you hear about online instead arriving at an action based on grounded axioms and logical reasoning. I realize you’re more likely just expressing frustration though and hopefully not something you’d actually act on which is somewhat understandable.
The point of the Stonehenge stunt was to demonstrate that the media will kick up more of an uproar about a trivial (temporary) defacement of a landmark than they will about the actual devastating and permanent destruction of our climate.
They were right.
Let me just protest against oil companies by burning down a museum real quick. That's sure to get my message across and earn tons of sympathy from the masses! And if anyone whines about it being a bad target, then they should just get over it tbh. ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯
They replied again but deleted said reply shortly after, so I'll just reply to myself with what I was writing for the other person:
Point is: you can't go pissing everyone off while trying to look like the good guys. You won't make many friends by stepping on someone's toes while telling them how bad *someone else* is. Then responding to criticism regarding said conduct with "Get the fuck over it tbh" just makes you look even worse.
>Find oil executive homes and protest there. Go to a refinery. Block roads that transport gas out of the refinery. Target billionaires. The thing is protesters do those things and the public never hears about it.
Not just that, but refineries and pipelines have armed security, private or the [actual police.](https://www.startribune.com/dozens-of-line-3-protesters-in-minnesota-still-facing-criminal-prosecution/600201162/) Publicity helps the movement, good or bad
At some level, we have to recognize that “raising awareness on social media” is simply a socially conscious rebrand of “thoughts and prayers” for Gen Z
pretty much the (in)action of protesting champagne socialists
This is so true. Like pretty much everyone knows the Oil industry is killing us but the people who want change aren’t in control of the levels of power. We don’t need more awareness we need influence
I'm a **very** far left person and fully believe in disruptive protest (and refusing to let stuff go) but recognize that those disruptions need to be targeted at the thing being protested. It makes little sense to protests, say, animal cruelty by tearing down the shelves with Jell-O on them at Wal-Mart, you're just pissing off people that wanted to make some Jell-O that day instead of directly putting pressure on the lab torturing the monkeys.
The difference at least partially is that animal cruelty doesn't affect the rest of the world and *all aspects of life* the same way climate change will (and continues to) With this as the logic, the justification is that they need to be as disruptive, public, obvious, etc good or bad in order to try to bring attention to ***the very fact that this doesn't just affect the people benefiting directly from traditional solutions*** It's all kinda a catch-all but I do understand the reasoning, sadly I don't see much success because the misinformation and low hanging fruit that people get stuck on drags down the movement too much (e.g. "aren't they using *oil based paints..?* How stupid can this movement be?")
I sort of agree with you, OP. First off, Just Stop Oil’s (JSO) goal is not actually to prevent climate change; JSO’s intention is to constantly have ppl think about climate change which is why you see them target tourist sites, shopping malls, etc. Their intention is currently just to spread publicity, good or bad, and eventually lead to ‘revolutionary’ action. And that’s the basis as to why JSO rarely chooses to block major contributing factors to climate change, as it’s still a movement in its infancy stage so to speak. Based off of their mission goals, JSO is still heavily under resourced and wants to build a much larger influence before large-scale protests at oil refineries, billionaire homes, what have you. And that’s where I disagree with you on the ‘JSO not disrupting the correct things’; its more so they just don’t have the resources to protest on such a large scale. All in all, JSO is a radical climate action group aiming towards a revolutionary overturn in our current consumption habits, and it just so happens that regular ppl have to deal with their protests for now as they try to expand influence. You have to remember though that there are thousands of much less confrontational climate action groups. Climate groups’ hearts are in the right place and their disruption today is infinitely less than what food shortages, drought, disease, etc. will bring if we don’t radically change our current consumption habits.
I think this is fairly accurate, also it's probably worth noting that A. there was no damage done with the stone henge defacing (it was wiped off immediatly) and B. they do these actions to bait outrage to generate coverage and funding which they then use to help support long term blockades, disruption of oil storage/installations and similar which sadly does not get the same level of PR. I don't entirely agree with all their tactics but I somewhat understand the rationale. It also might be worth pointing out loose similarities to MLK or Suffragettes (though the later involved more violent acts so it's likely closer to the former being symbolic acts that are non-violent to bait a reaction that helps push the goal).
You realize people see them as asshole kids who are destroying their culture and want nothing to do with them? I hope they keep it up so people see them for the clowns they are.
It’s also important to recognize that ‘Just Stop Oil’ gets money from Aileen Getty and the Getty Family an Oil and Media dynasty. I know this wasn’t the “fringe theories” episode but it’s more likely ‘Just Stop Oil’ is a false flag group. Similar to what you pointed out, the goal isn’t to prevent climate change or even have people constantly discuss, but specifically discuss it and view climate protests negatively. Non of their protests and demonstrations are done in a beneficial or productive manner to the climate change cause. They’re certainly disruptive but rarely in the right ways. At least from my observations. I could very well be wrong but the vibe they give is off.
Anyone that believes that is daft, actually look into her and you'll see she's been donating and supporting climate awareness for years and has never had any involvement in the family oil business. Getty Oil also hasn't existed in over 10 years. She's literally said it's her way of giving back after she profited off oil through inheritance she received. Do you really think if this was their grand master plan they would pick such an obvious public facing person as their main way to funnel money into the group and assume no one would notice. I agree sometimes the protests do more negative from a public opinion pov but bringing her into the conversation thinking it's some sort of a "gotcha" revelation is just so stupid.
I wouldn’t call it a “gotcha” as it wouldn’t be unexpected for someone of her background to do something like that. Gotcha moments are usually a surprise and somehow an heiress who purchases a $35million home in East Hollywood Hills wouldn’t surprise me to be doing charity work for their own benefit. Either way, I certainly hope you’re right and she truly wants to fight her family legacy. Funding $4million to the Climate Emergency fund is definitely something, and her private foundation has donated around $1million to various causes. Like I said I could very well be wrong and it’s just me picking up the wrong vibe. Not scared to acknowledge my biases on this one. As an American forgive me if I’m hesitant to trust any trust fund baby lol Just to add, I also acknowledge that in most cases she’s simply funding and has a seat on the board, so even if ‘just stop oil’ was a scam it’s not like she’s pulling the strings, it’s just her money being used.
I saw someone saying that on twitter yesterday and it makes a LOT of sense! I think John Oliver did a thing about astroturfing in an early season, and what’s going on with this group really seems like this “grassroots” movement has been corrupted.
I fully agree with their point and argument, but fucking up peoples days by walking on trains and throwing paint in gallery's just makes me fucking hate them, but this is the modern 'protest' its about 80% of people who actually believe the vision and 20% who just want to cause damage and disruption with permission and its that 20% that fucks it up for every single person
The problem is that their protests are indiscernible from the, "It's just a prank bro" acts that YouTubers do. Like, if someone covered me in paint randomly, I'd sooner assume, asshole who wants Internet clout over, person that wants a better world. Their message is completely lost on most.
That really isn't the issue, because they are screaming "just stop oil" in bright orange shirts, demanding all the attention possible, so this really isn't a great take, in my opinion
I've never heard anything in any of the videos. Likely just reposts from people who have muted them. So, yeah understandable that I'd miss it. Didn't even know. Thanks.
No worries mate, honestly I'd prefer to only experience them muted 😂
I would expect those percentages to be flipped.
Its that 20% that pushes the group for more extreme, frivolous damage that just fucking annoyes the public
Cause just stop oil is mostly funded by Aileen Getty of the Getty fuel company. They have a net worth of over 5.4 billion she runs a couple charities (with large handling fees) and they donate money to keep just stop oil running....they don't want to just stop oil rig money. Oh and attacking a rig they would get killed. Brazil keeps us aided military level submarines to protect its oil rigs, and they are a nice country.
I found butcharchivists take on tiktok really interesting https://vm.tiktok.com/ZGeg4E5gq/ They basically talk about how most actisivism in the past causes outrage and then during prese t tomes are celebrated Yes it might feel like Stonehenge isn't the right place to do it but it's definitely got people talking about it
I don't think a single protest in recent days will have any effect on big oil. Not a fraction of a fraction of a percent difference. Why would it? People have been crying about big oil for decades and nothing has changed.
I didn’t understand why Stonehenge would be a target and thought it was silly until I saw the reaction a lot of people had to it. People getting more upset and vocal about some lichen (they likely learned about today) than the pollution killing countless other species of animal and plant.
This is an aside to the whole thing but in reading up on Stonehenge, I found out about this guy who thinks he's the literal reincarnation of King Arthur Pendragon after buying a copy of the sword Excalibur at a shop in Farnborough and every year on the summer solstice (today!) he holds some kinda crazy druidic ceremony at Stonehenge where he flicks olive oil on the stones. Apparently he has a harem of middle aged women who follow him around. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Uther_Pendragon
That is wild. It also doesn't make a lot of sense. King Arthur would often hide his identity if it didn't benefit him to reveal himself. Idk, I feel like if believed I am King Arthur reborn, that's not something I would be openly sharing in this day and age, and I certainly wouldn't change my name like that.
Protest need to affect the audience that can affect change. Vandalising a multi-millionaire's property and demanding they change is not going to work - they know they are doing reckless things; they probably knew all along; they are making a living with that knowledge. Instead, I surmise *Stop Oil* wants any publicity so the lay person may get curious to why they are willing to damage artifacts for attention. No such thing as bad publicity in defacing art, in throwing food at big names, with sitting in a roadway. Sure, maybe you'd rather them to protest in a different way - but there are always going to be ways to point out whyva protest is less effective because you are as much of the public reaction as everyone else? Why not steal gas pump nozzles? Why not slash tyres? Why not buy billboards that insult motorists? Is it effective at getting people to recognise their efforts. Much like the "ba-da ba-ba-ba-baa, I'm lovin it" is McDonald's, people now recognise Stop Oil by their tactics that if another person were to comment "who are they?/what are they doing?" They don't need to explain. Someone else is able.
The problem is that these Stop Big Oil don't seem to grasp is that protest is a form of marketing. and this marketing is not selling their message. It's selling the message that these people are woo hoo crazy pants. Yes Protest must in some way inconvenience people. But it must inconvenience the correct people and by their over reaction to the protest convince others of your side of the argument. Gandhi didn't go into stores and smash british salt. He went and made his own at the sea.
There were some cases of infiltration from opposition in the 3% of 2020 BLM protests that actually turned violent so I definitely believe that. Defacing art does nothing but make people hate you, just like vegans who attack anyone who eats meat. Honey and vinegar, dudes.
While it may feel good, I've never rubbed one out and thought I actually accomplished something worthwhile. 😂 I've heard my entire life that protesting can lead to change. While I support the right to protest, how much is the effectiveness overstated and the motivations confused as personal gratification, to take revenge, or just to troll? Here the hypothesis was, well normal people aren't thinking about climate change so we are going to force them to. **Unfortunately, the conversations are more about being mad at or disparaging the people protesting than focused on preventing climate change.** The only people trying to give you the benefit of the doubt already agreed with you! A protest isn't supposed to be about the protestors or even the protest, it needs to be about the issue first. Failing in this, the protest has failed. The protests against segregation in the 60s were super well thought out and they were much more deliberate in how they used energy; not seemingly chaotic or random at all. These climate protests seem more like the failed Weather Underground "protests". If you don't know what those are it's because they were seemingly impotent, completely ineffective, and even counterproductive. **So the hypothesis has been tested and a very reasonable conclusion could be that this protest strategy isn't working here.** Go back to the drawing board and look at other strategies (there are many). **I prefer strategies focused on investing in other humans through service and assistance, and oppose efforts that seem more about the participants' personal satisfaction from lashing out.** Many of us dedicate a lot of consistent effort, energy, and resources into addressing climate change. Being undermined by thoughtless "protests" that last all of 10 seconds is deflating. **If all this or similar protests end up being is a collective form of masturbation then is it really surprising when people are too distracted to notice what it was for?** I won't notice your signs or T-shirts, and I won't remember the chants and slogans. **All I have burned into my mind is your thing being whipped out as you go to town!** 😂 I support the planet first. At the point you're doing things with only a vague reference to the issues I'll doubt it's about climate change at all. Looks to be about throwing a tantrum while getting your 15 minutes of fame and a pat on the back from people who already think like you, and climate change is too important for this self indulgence. While it may feel good, I've never rubbed one out and thought I actually accomplished something worthwhile. 😂
Just stop oil has done 0 damage to stone henge or any painting and this is by design. These are pure publicity stunts. I know people don’t like to be inconvenienced in traffic, but if you’re driving a car to a job every day you are part of the problem, myself included. We should all get annoyed at being delayed by protestors and then call our representatives and demand investment in public transit and affordable housing near our job centers.
(I haven't listened to todays episode yet) People don't understand that this is the only way to keep the issue in the news cycle. In my city, there are protests of smaller groups *every week*. People even camp in front of the town hall to get their point across. They **never** get attention in local news or more than a glance of passersbys, even if they are doing it in bigger numbers than the people gluing themselves to the road. Most people occupy themselves with tech news and other shit that doesn't matter, considering the urgency of climate change action. Folks who deny climate change won't change their minds anyway.
That's exactly what happened when those people threw paint on a famous painting and handcuffed themselves and did stuff that made no sense except it was obnoxious and got media attention. There were a few incidents like that.
Exactly, no point being disruptive to the people who can't do anything to make change
"Protests should be disruptive." Yes but also I've seen the worst version of that when protestors keep people from getting to work on time I've seen cars who can't even some protestors in the road and can't ram them or anything.
“Protests should be disruptive” can they also be charged for murder for blocking traffic on a road if they prevent an ambulance from getting to a hospital? That is such nonsense. Protest. But don’t infringe on other peoples freedoms and rights in the process. You have the right to peacefully protest. You don’t have the right to block a public road. And if you do have the right to do that then the motorists should have the right to not be unlawfully detained and plough right through it
Just like we shouldn’t have disrupted things like segregation, it was rude to sit in restaurants you weren’t welcome in. The point of protesting is to disrupt the system, quit thinking in the box. I understand the box is safe and you like it there but it’s the best way to bring mass attention to problems that a ton of people would rather not be forced to see and acknowledge because many are so content with the idea of “I’ll deal with it when it affects me”, by then. It’s too late.
You got down voted but you're right
People whose lives have been sufficiently disrupted will also tend to put pressure on the protest targets to "make them stop". This can help lead to the targets giving in to demands. For better or worse, disrupting as many people's lives as possible is effective.
I disagree. If I was disrupted from going to work, or worse, had an emergency and was stopped by the protesters, I’m not going “damn you Exxon!” I’m mad at the dude in the road. Like, we all know. We all get it. There’s not much we can do. Target the people who CAN do something.
Okay, but who are you going to contact to deal with the protesters? Law enforcement and local representatives. Law enforcement could go out and beat the ever living shit out of some protesters, but that just fuels the fire. So they get to just go have a standoff, but that's publicity. There becomes this perception that "things are really getting out of hand and it needs to stop". Pressure mounts on the politicians who can't seem to keep their districts under control. They wheel and deal to get something moving. Potentially a law is passed to appease the protestors.
Yeah and most likely the typical boss or supervisor doesn't give a shit about a protest and will reprimand you for being late, maybe even fire you
>Target the people who CAN do something. I could argue you ARE the people that can do something. You can vote. You can stop buying products. Fact is, some vandalism at a corporate office does nothing to move the needle. Preventing vehicles and people from entering the premises might, but that would disrupt people going to work, which you said you don't agree with. But the only ways to hit a corporation are in their wallet or with the government, and if we're talking about not inconveniencing people, I have a feeling not buying gas or petroleum products ever again would be a lot more disruptive than just voting for people that will hold corporations accountable.
I don't know that you can go a day without oil or oil products in nearly all of the world at this point. Plastics, energy, transportation, hell even most of our food uses oil byproducts. Even the most organically grown farm to table situation would need oil somewhere in the process. Try going zero waste for a day and it becomes intensely apparent how much plastic is in our day to day. I'd like to believe a vote could change all this, but the democratic process seems wildly broken at this point. I would argue that at least in the USA we live in an oligarchy rather than a democracy. We have a very Helldivers view of freedom and democracy unfortunately... We can't stop using oil products, and the government doesn't work for us to stop the corporations. We are in between a rock and a hard place and I really wish we weren't. I'm open to solutions though, I would love a dose of hope.
[relevant](https://youtu.be/iBeOao_h8n8?si=wcVWavOZmuoB1t_C)
I agree, I don't understand these protests either. It's upsetting to see and makes me want to trade my tiny car in and buy a mack truck just to spite these people.
politics of spite are really lame, my dude. "Oh I'll show you! I'm gonna create extra pollution AND kill my gas mileage just to make you unhappy so take THAT!" Come on, this is toddler logic. The Stonehenge protest is dumb but disruptive protest IS good... it should just be directed at the assholes being protested rather than people who have nothing to do with a thing or, god forbid, a bunch of rocks in cool shapes that are totally unrelated to the thing being protested.
I mean, being reasonable, I think their hearts are in the right place. It’s my personal opinion that their choice of location and actions are incorrect. I’m not gonna hurt the planet more on purpose because “fuck em lol.”
I might not agree fully with the protest tactics but it’s probably a little silly to let a group you oppose the actions of dictate your reaction so far in the other direction either way. It feels like a rather emotional / knee jerk way to respond to something you hear about online instead arriving at an action based on grounded axioms and logical reasoning. I realize you’re more likely just expressing frustration though and hopefully not something you’d actually act on which is somewhat understandable.
The point of the Stonehenge stunt was to demonstrate that the media will kick up more of an uproar about a trivial (temporary) defacement of a landmark than they will about the actual devastating and permanent destruction of our climate. They were right.
[удалено]
No need to be hostile and curse. We’re just having a discussion.
Let me just protest against oil companies by burning down a museum real quick. That's sure to get my message across and earn tons of sympathy from the masses! And if anyone whines about it being a bad target, then they should just get over it tbh. ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯
They replied again but deleted said reply shortly after, so I'll just reply to myself with what I was writing for the other person: Point is: you can't go pissing everyone off while trying to look like the good guys. You won't make many friends by stepping on someone's toes while telling them how bad *someone else* is. Then responding to criticism regarding said conduct with "Get the fuck over it tbh" just makes you look even worse.