A reminder folks: people engage in this kind of radical protest because it works:
Results of two online experiments conducted with diverse samples (N = 2,772), including a study of the animal rights movement and a preregistered study of the climate movement, show that the presence of a radical flank increases support for a moderate faction within the same movement. Further, it is the use of radical tactics, such as property destruction or violence, rather than a radical agenda, that drives this effect. Results indicate the effect owes to a contrast effect: Use of radical tactics by one flank led the more moderate faction to appear less radical, even though all characteristics of the moderate faction were held constant. This perception led participants to identify more with and, in turn, express greater support for the more moderate faction. These results suggest that activist groups that employ unpopular tactics can increase support for other groups within the same movement, pointing to a hidden way in which movement factions are complementary, despite pursuing divergent approaches to social change.
But did you vote?
You can’t do anything to upset the rich. That’s illegal. Please be ineffective elsewhere. That’s legal.
conspiracy to commit a public nuisance
As a member of the public, I can say it would not have been a nuisance to me.
I hope they get mild sentences because they didn’t even manage to enter.
The law is extremely dumb, as it sends the message “accomplish maximum obstruction, as you will get massive sentences, don’t talk with anyone, don’t even consider getting caught”.
Maybe next time, someone does like some alleged (claim unverified) anarchists in France. They burned a substation and cut down a high voltage pylon. Most likely a bit foolish because they didn’t stop the Cannes film festival from completing (it had backup power), but the point remains: they caused a massive pain in the ass for hundreds of thousands of people. If they get caught and get 10 years, they can say it was worth it.
Dishing out 10 year sentences for attempting to stop a plane from using a taxiway by standing in front of it… is not very smart from a judicial viewpoint. People might do the math and find they’d get smaller sentences for considerably bigger deeds.
Didn’t know that they could get harsh sentences for an attempt…where do you draw the line for an “attempt”….Got on the runway with a pocketful of glue…A ladder on the fence…A conversation in the pub after 10 pints?
I always knew that this is true but damn is it great to see actual research prove it.
I was always of the opinion that extremists drive change not by their action but by society’s perception of them, just didn’t know that it was actually society’s perception of them pushing society to accept tge less extreme memebers of the group.
As I understand it, for direct action (like this) to “work”, the crucial requirement is that the protestors pay a personal price. I.e., prosecution and if possible (!) a bit of jail. Otherwise it will be seen as obnoxious troublemaking.
Humans are social animals. When they see others suffering for their convictions, they stop and think.
… yeah, I mean, that’ll do it.
Removed by mod
Its a fairly effective means of convincing police that you can’t hurt them, and it takes a longish time to remove you. Very similar to the lockbox protests user by the anti-abortion movement in the US 15-20 years ago.
Until the police decide that they don’t care and decide to just rip your hands off the pavement and leaving several layers of skin behind.
Protests like this are not really worth it, especially if it leads to good people who care being imprisoned and thus not being able to affect anything at all because of that.
Organise and find kindred souls to work with you and then resist smartly by taking care of not getting caught and doing things that can’t be ignored but which don’t alienate the public. Its pretty much crime already to do anything that might be noticed, as is evident by this. So don’t play by their rules. People like this who are actually willing to do something are way too valuable to be wasted in prison.
There was a book called art of invisibility by Kevin D Mitnick which teaches how to stay safe regarding digital things. It should be free, but i’m not sure where you can find it beyond z-library. Its from 2017 so it might be outdated regarding how ai is likely going to be used for mass surveillance, but at least its good foundation for looking for more information about the subject.
don’t alienate the public.
yes, yes, protest the safe way, never upset anyone, wouldn’t want anyone to notice the outrage and tyranny if it meant a tad bit of inconvenience.
You know what they call sanctioned protests? the good ones, the ones that got approval first and won’t upset anyone?
Parades.
This bullshit notion that no one can be inconvenienced for small things LIKE THE DEATH OF THE ECOSYSTEM or your REPUBLIC BURNING are moronic excuses the rich feed everyone else in order to maintain the status quo.
And you parroting the bullshit is doing their work for them. So keep licking the waffle soles of those boots, but don’t fucking tell me what to do because I ain’t listening to your bullshit
i think you misunderstood what i mean with alienating. I mean don’t do things even reasonable people wouldn’t support like blowing stuff up.
I specificially said dont play by their rules which includes not limiting yourself to sanctioned protests and such.
we have one atmosphere. perhaps it’s time to upset people’s comfort zone if it means there’s one for future generations.
definitely, people have been really mild and toothless about this.
People have been doing this because it works
Even more reason to practice proper opsec. Since they arrested him before he even managed to get near the airport its clear his plan was revealed somehow.
*her
ah, yes
It doesn’t.
evidence points out that it does.
if you’re going to assert it doesn’t, at least provide a shred of evidence - the person you’re replying to linked an academic paper, and your brilliant reply “nuh uh” doesn’t really carry the same gravitas.
This is synthetic research which doesn’t match the reality. A real life example would be XR in the UK which has like 20% support from the public, especially after they blocked ambulances and disrupted the tube. And that has led to a situation that if you want to talk about the environment everyone will look at you like you’re an XR degenerate, so the whole topic is slowly becoming a taboo.
if you’re going to assert it doesn’t, at least provide a shred of evidence - the person you’re replying to linked an academic paper, and your brilliant reply “nuh uh” doesn’t really carry the same gravitas.
and have yet to provide anything substantive - like links to research.
Removed by mod
So?
While that seems like a stiff punishment for a public nuisance. I strongly question the logic of gluing yourself to a road and assuming other people will stop using it because you glued yourself. That just doesn’t strike me as an intelligent way to protest things.
This kind of tactic demonstrably works, even as people condemn it.
According to the intro, it works by making the moderate viewpoint seem more moderate. So basically the idea is being as extreme as possible so that people will say, “I agree with your point but not your methods.”
Yes, and it gets peoples attention, so they see that people care about the issue, and that they’re not alone in caring.
That doesn’t really address my concern about gluing yourself to things being a dumb way to protest. It relies on people stopping whatever they’re doing because they care about not killing you.
That generally is a good bet. People dont want a murder charge.
Sadly, there are places in the world with people who LOVE the idea of running over people with their giant trucks…
UK runways are not one of them.
Usually. Iirc, this guy didn’t get much of a punishment: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7SfHV4f0Y38 (this is Germany).
Espousing more radical ideas (as opposed to advocating similar ideas in a more radical fashion) also makes the moderate viewpoint seem more moderate. That’s how the Overton window (of the acceptability of ideas in public discourse) shifts over time.
So, the money that could have gone to an actual charity is now going to be spent on your legal defense?
Charity is not getting us out of the climate crisis
Neither is someone acting like a fool.
The stunt was ridiculous. In the time he spent holding up planes, those jets had to keep burning fuel to keep the Ac going. He put more poison in the air.
Sorry, but what are you talking about? Who is he? What jets?
Maybe take a look at the article?
And if they hadn’t done it, those jets would’ve landed on time and other jets would’ve taken off and absolutely nothing would have changed about the total net carbon gain. Protests work, they get people talking.
Not all protests are equal.
All this one did was get people to hate the guy who slowed down the airport.
Also they literally didn’t do it so maybe read the article
Kind of proving my point here.
One guy did nothing and still managed to get arrested. Makes the whole movement look silly.
Completely the opposite of the situation in the cartoon; a well organized protest that actually reaches the leader.
Thanks for helping me show how dumb the plan was.
Okay I’ll bite. What is your solution?
Apathy didn’t work
Peaceful protesting didn’t work
Scientific inquiry didn’t work
Political petitioning didn’t work
How many must die to climate change before you’re personally willing to accept the idea of a harmless but disruptive protest?
Actually invconveniencing people is secondary if you’re still able to get press coverage
