601
Just Stop Oil protester, 78, has jail term extended after no suitable tag found
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 25 Jan 2025
601 points (100.0% liked)
World News
47861 readers
3850 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I want people to hear my valid point of view so I am going to obstruct them from carrying out everyday tasks to see if that inclines them to listen and the publicity will mark us out as reasonable people.
Edit, I undeleted the original comment otherwise unchanged for reference, it was glib but reasonable I think. I believe the woman to be acting in good faith but misled.
Protests only work if they’re disruptive. Otherwise, people just ignore them and move on.
Whenever people act like disruptive protest is such a terrible tactic, I have to wonder what they think would work instead. Like, do they think the letter writing campaigns that have gone exactly nowhere in 40 years are on the verge of a breakthrough?
Or would they prefer the environmental movement to compile an overly literal companion reader to Andreas Malm?
I just thought that disrupting the life of ordinary people often at their most busy and pressured time was not the most responsible expression of a legitimate protest and that the very irresponsibility while drawing notice might also muddy and trivialise the intended message. But that is not the reason I am replying now, just after I made the comment I saw it was drawing downvotes and that it was an annoyance to people so I deleted it. I make this reply now as the majority of its downvotes were subsequent to its removal and I would ask someone who downvoted it without reading to explain that action, because it looks like pack mentality and straight recreational bullying.
It pack mentality and left-wing echo chamberism
Yes exactly and this reply is being similarly downvoted but without any response to what I asked. The people advocating unlawful disruptive action which leads to rule by the strongest are too timid to reply alongside their anonymous downvote. How would they fair in the world they are wishing for.
What is your answer then, besides "Just don't inconvenience me cause im more importanter!"
Disruptive protests especially when you don't already have widespread support are dumb. The George Floyd protests only worked because there was widespread outcry throughout America. The people were already united on the same issue, and there was widespread agreement that immediate and radical change was necessary. Little to nobody gives enough of a shit about climate change at the moment to actually do anything about it, so protests only end up pushing away people that might be on your side.
The move should be to first garner massive and widespread support before being disruptive. It's like attempting a socialist revolution with a tiny army. You lose!
Okay well at its peak 60% of americans supported BLM while right now 70% of americans support climate change science.
So what's your next bullshit reason youll hedge this opinion on?
Edit: this climate protest was in Britain, where support for climate change science is higher.
The problem isn't the disruption. The problem is the target.
There are thousands of perfectly suitable gas stations, car dealers, muffler shops, and other agents of the oil industry around. You can cause a lot more disruption targeting these agents than targeting the general public.
The oil industry exists because people demand oil. Period.
Yes, that is a claim that the oil companies regularly make.
If nobody bought iPhones, would Apple exist?
Yes? I mean, apple existed before cell phones, let alone smartphones.
Meh, at least they care about something and they're willing to suffer the consequences to get the message out. I hope I have that much passion in my late 70s; it seems like most people don't have any passion at all.
You talk in this way about disruption because you do not know what it can become. If you allow this sort of disruptive behaviour then by your own admittance I can come and disrupt your family to any extent I choose if I have unilaterally arrived at some higher rationale for it in my mind. Understand those laws and societal pressures that inhibit such disruption are there for a reason and if you get rid of them be sure you can stand up against the gale that will blow across the country.
I'm pretty sure protests, disruptive as they can be, are very different than personally attacking or otherwise bothering an individual and their family.
That's some crazy "logic" you're working with there.
She was laying in the road impeding traffic, what about the individual child alone at the school gates because their parent is unable to reach them. It is you that is using selective logic, if you allow any unlawful act you allow them all.
What about all the people that die from climate change? The food stolen from communities cause the water is polluted from fracking? The children who can't go outside and jump in puddles cause of toxic rain. What about the loss of animal lives cause the air is too toxic? What about all the terrible things and death that follow the big polluters as they go?
All that's allowed though, right? Cause the police say it's ok. And since the law doesn't stop them, all those deaths and destroyed land are fine according to you. Just as long as you can make it to school, right?
The woman in the article is from England and I am too and I can not argue this anymore because the thread is overly replied to by American liberals who are just so universally indoctrinated by corporations to work against themselves. Moving towards renewable energy is probably the noblest cause of the modern world but these protest groups are corporate guided to nullify themselves and make the public see their views as crackpot. Do you think the corporations became as powerful as they are by sitting in the fucking road. No they marshalled their powers and lobbied governments. That is how change is effected by law, to implement unlawful means is to invite chaos which makes all your effort impotent. It would be remarkably easy and inexpensive to switch over almost entirely to renewables and the oil industry knows it so it makes you look like clowns, so no one listens to you. And you swallow it completely and put on your red noses and dance around for them.
Everything you want to happen continually gets stopped by said polluters. The nice way has been tried over and over. But those don't get talked about. But because some people decided to just sit in the road, more people are talking about it.
Sitting in the road isn't done to get results. It's done to get people to talk about what is happening as they won't and haven't otherwise.
I don't know if it's different in the UK, but in the US, no child is ever left alone. There's always at least one staff member there, and they don't leave until the last kid is picked up, no matter how long it takes.
Things must have changed since I was a kid in the US. I remember being told to start walking when my ride home fell through. They wouldn't let me use a phone to call for another ride (pre cell phone). The teacher did ask if I knew how to get home and I did, but the only route I knew was along the high way.
That happened a few times.
Why do you allow corporations to keep polluting the world? If you allow that sort of behavior then by your own admittance I can come and build a coal plant in your living room.
Corporations are acting within the law, admittedly that law might not be fit for purpose but it is still the law. The disruption is unlawful and a different category of thing, you can not allow some unlawful acts and frown on others.
Laws are man-made. Intentionally created to benefit the wealthy regardless of consequences. Facts about climate change have been around for decades but the laws haven't changed. The only way to make change is to be disruptive otherwise the only other option is removing the blight from the planet which most people don't want to participate in. I'd much rather people make the right choices than force me to protest or kill people who refuse to change in the face of facts.
The corporations and the nations allowing them to do so are not acting lawful. They are violating the Paris agreement. In many (almost all) countries, the protection of the environment is also a constitutional right. That's violated. The European court of Human rights has also ruled that climate action is a human right.
International law, constitution, and human rights are some of the most important laws that we, as a civilization and society, have.
Might doesn't make right, no, but what exactly do you think rule of law is when it doesn't represent the will or the welfare of the people? The people you're complaining about carried signs and disrupted traffic. The people who stopped them were armed and had the force of the law behind their actions.
They are protesting climate change caused by oil use by blocking a bunch of people burning oil in their cars. Sounds like the group of people that need to hear the message no? Those protestors and you are the same, stop putting them into some sort of "unreasonable person" group.