Protesters force stoppage of Premiership final

180

I’m not sure they’re winning friends, but they’re definitely getting people’s attention.

And honestly if I were them, I couldn’t think of a way to draw more attention to a cause without upsetting more people.

87

u/sp8der Northumberland May 27 '23 edited May 27 '23

Unfortunately all the attention they're getting is "how can we get these cunts stopped" not "we should give in to their demands".

This, and other stupid stunts, will increase support for anti-protest legislation by a massive amount.

Thinking that any attention is good attention is pure Mizzy logic.

81

u/TheCorpseOfMarx May 27 '23

Tell that to the suffragettes and the civil rights movement.

29

u/1rexas1 May 27 '23

It's extremely debatable how much the suffragettes actually helped their own cause, don't know enough about the civil rights movement to comment but using the suffragettes as a comparison isn't the argument you think it is.

46

u/TheCorpseOfMarx May 27 '23

It's extremely debatable how much the suffragettes actually helped their own cause

Go on, elaborate

63

u/Kharax82 May 27 '23 edited May 27 '23

The right for women to vote was enacted in 1918 and at the time was generally considered recognition for their work during WWI while the men were off fighting.

Just a note the reform act of 1918 gave all men over 21 the right to vote and women over 30 who met certain property ownership qualifications. It wasn’t until 1928 the right to vote was equalized between men and women

21

u/GreggsFan May 27 '23

Due to plural voting and the gradual extension of voting rights I’d argue votes weren’t ‘equalised’ until 1969.

7

u/[deleted] May 28 '23

A very important point when considering the UK franchise as a whole.

7

u/PuzzledFortune May 28 '23

It's often overlooked that the 1918 reform act enfranchised more men than women.

50

u/1rexas1 May 27 '23

I don't know how much you know about this movement, but suffragette is not a term for everyone that participated in the women's suffrage movement. The suffragists, for example, came first and continued to work for women's rights all the way through and employed peaceful methods targeted at challenging perceptions rather than just disturbing things for the sake of it. There's plenty of other factors too, like the war for example, which wiped out a huge and predominantly male chunk of a generation and this gave women significantly more leverage.

I'm not going to write you a full essay on the subject but this is a hotly debated topic, if you google it you won't have a problem finding the arguments.

I will ask what I always ask JSO supporters on these threads, and I have yet to get a good answer - what positive effect has this protest had on furthering the overall cause of tackling climate change?

And before you say "exposure, all publicity is good publicity", tell me how many albums the lostprophets have sold lately.

6

u/[deleted] May 27 '23

[deleted]

10

u/1rexas1 May 27 '23

That's an interesting point that actually I'd like to explore - in the UK right now, we've got a lot of issues. The cost of living crisis, for example, is having an absolutely enormous impact on a lot of people and at least some impact on everyone. Perhaps the reason why other issues come to the fore of your mind is because they are at least equally important?

I chose the cost of living crisis as an example for good reason, because it's linked to tackling climate change. Wouldn't it be great if we stopped buying bread that was grown in Australia, packaged in America and flown to Germany before it treks across Europe to your local supermarket? Wouldn't it be better for the environment, for the local economy and for our own self sustainability to buy local instead? Problem is, the stuff from down under is cheaper, and when bills are going through the roof and food prices are doubling and some, the simple fact is that people can't afford the more environmentally friendly option.

I guess my point is don't vote Tory please :)

3

u/[deleted] May 27 '23

[deleted]

1

u/1rexas1 May 27 '23

Yeah you're not wrong, it's hard at the moment with a cost of living crisis, collapsing public services and infrastructure, the constant attempts at distracting us by trying to create a "culture war" as well as climate change etc... not a simple time!

→ More replies

2

u/Hal_Fenn May 27 '23

I will ask what I always ask JSO supporters on these threads, and I have yet to get a good answer - what positive effect has this protest had on furthering the overall cause of tackling climate change?

I'm not a JSO supporter but I might be able to give you 1 good answer.

Extreme organisations like JSO and insulate Britain are needed, not because of what they achieve but because of what they allow others to achieve.

Take Extinction Rebellion for example, they've pretty much stopped doing this sort of shit afaik. They don't need to anymore which means they can actually get on with being the grown ups. Interacting with the government and persuading / helping create genuine legislation.

Not sure I've put that particularly well as I'm shattered but if you interested John Richardson (of all people) has a fantastic pod cast with 2 futurist that do work with governments and all sorts and they cover it in one of their episodes, it's called John Richardson and the futurenauts and I highly recommend it.

1

u/Boustrophaedon May 28 '23

Fine, I'll bite - whilst I don't necessarily agree with them, I see their logic. The problem isn't that people don't think that we shouldn't be doing something about climate change, it's that the radical action required to address it is well outside the political mainstream. They're not trying to persuade (and as a sidebar, fuck everything about democracy treating voters like consumers!) - they're trying to mainstream. The process worked very well for UKIP/the alt-right last decade. Do/say something outrageous -> massive media coverage for the rage clicks -> sensible journalist comes on to talk about your "genuine concerns" -> rinse and repeat. Persuading is stage 2 - you have to force a choice before you can vote for it.

→ More replies

1

u/FriendlyGuitard May 27 '23

Well, it is a sign of time.

Maybe the more adversarial protest are not actually helping, but the energy that pushes a minority to those actions is the same one that pushes the rest of the actions.

7

u/sp8der Northumberland May 27 '23

What a joke that you'd think these twats are in any way comparable.

11

u/TheCorpseOfMarx May 27 '23

Care to spell out the differences?

→ More replies

10

u/HelpMeSum1Help May 27 '23

Are you one of those climate change deniers?

19

u/sp8der Northumberland May 27 '23

I'm one of those "pissing off the public won't get you what you want, it will in fact generate opposition to you" people. You know, who lives in the real world.

I've already heard people IRL say they'll be furious if the government gives an inch to these types.

21

u/_GG_Bro May 27 '23

You'd be amazed how people at the time talked about the civil rights movement then.

9

u/HelpMeSum1Help May 27 '23

From their point of view, nothings changed so far so they need to try different things. I don’t plan on having kids so the world can turn to hell for all I care. I do see their point though.

If people are going to intentionally damage the world more because these people are protesting, it feels awfully like a kid throwing his toys out the pram because he got taught a valuable lesson

10

u/sp8der Northumberland May 27 '23

From the public's point of view, these dickheads are annoying them, the powerless ordinary people, for no reason, and threatening to do it more if their demands aren't met.

Why don't they just hold a gun to a puppy's head and cut out the middleman if they're going to use tactics like that? Just go whole hog.

→ More replies

3

u/jxmzapho May 27 '23

Yes, but so did the two groups you just said they're nothing alike to. I don't see how the civil rights for a marginalised group in one country is more important than the rights of EVERYONE in the future to live a comfortable and peaceful life?

1

u/CraigJay May 28 '23

Being disruptive will absolutely give them the best chance at getting what they want.

Remember, we’re talking about climate change and reducing the amount of oil we use and stopping these giant companies from wrecking the planet. The majority of people all agree that something needs to be done about these issues, so your idea that the protesters need people on their side is wrong the from the start. The government know that it would be popular with the general public if they moved to tackle these big issues

People said exactly what you’re saying about MLK and it’a the history books that look back and say their disruptive protestors were very effective, like the probably will about climate change protestors. Just that you’ll be in the wrong side of history

1

u/sp8der Northumberland May 28 '23

This all reads like Saint George in retirement. People who want so badly to slay a dragon, but there are no dragons left to slay, so to get their self-righteous high they just glom onto whatever good sounding thing they can. And drive it into the ground.

Comparing them to civil rights movements is a total joke. They so desperately want to be considered in that regard, and this intense huffing of their own farts drives them to believe they can do no wrong.

4

u/Kvovark May 27 '23

There is an issue with that comparison.

At the time of the suffragette and CR movement the injustices they were protesting were obvious and seen daily in society. I.e. women (as well as a lot of men) and black people having fewer rights than others. And what they wanted done was obvious and implementable (I.e give rights to these groups).

With JSO (and extinction rebellion) there is a big difference. Climate change is not an obvious thing people in the country see daily. For the record I acknowledge man driven climate change and the impact it is already happening. But it's not as apparent to the people of the country as women/black people not having rights was at the time of the respective movements. They don't see the problem occuring. Plus there is wide skepticism on it and the proposed solutions are for more drastic on a practical level than providing rights to groups of people.

So what the public sees is protesters disrupting public life and making a scene for something they're not seeing and asking for things that many are scared would make life harder for them.

Hence why this "it worked for the suffragettes and CR movement!" argument is flawed and these protests won't have the same impact on public opinion.

3

u/TheCorpseOfMarx May 27 '23

I've not seen "people aren't aware enough of climate change" as a reason against these protests before.

The signs are all there. We are still in a drought in large areas of the country, we had record temperatures last year, we had food shortages like a month ago.

People just aren't taking it seriously. That's the point of these protests.

2

u/Kvovark May 27 '23

Compared to the injustices that the suffragettes and CR movement were pushing against of course its bloody not as obvious

At the time of the suffragette and CR movement everyone was aware that women and black people had less rights. There wasn't any group in society going ".... Hmm you know I just don't think they have any less rights than us". It was blatant hey had less rights. You would have to be absolutely delusional to deny that at the time of those movements

You can't compare climate change to human injustice in terms of perception by the public. The latter is blatant and can start to be effectively addressed immediately by legislative change. It's easier for the public to ignore reported data on climate change (e.g. the recent news about temperatures rising) or disregard weather events as "freak bad weather that happens all the time".

How the public perceives the problem that the protesters are calling to be addressed massively impacts how the public views the protesters. If the problem is blatant and easier to solve the public will support. If it's not obvious and needs major change the public will view the protesters as overreacted and extreme. Its not complex psychology.

0

u/sleadbetterzz May 28 '23

There weren't people debating that minorities and women had less rights or not. There were many who did not believe that they deserved those rights at all.

The same as privileged populations of developed countries knowing that climate change will undoubtedly affect the world's most vulnerable and poor the most yet not caring in the slightest.

1

u/Kvovark May 28 '23

Here is the difference. Again and for the last time.

Civil rights: -people see obvious injustice and inequality in their society daily (e.g. restricted access to education, voting rights) -the suffering these minorities have is due to the government legislation/policies that can be changed to address the issue

Climate change: -people see reports in the news of climate change and the impact it is having on communities in other countries. Their daily life is not obviously impacted. -proposed methods to tackle climate change would require major societal upheaval, with no quick and apparent result

The tactic of disrupting public life only works if the problem is something the people seeing the disruption are experiencing/witnessing it directly and frequently. Otherwise the public says "what a bunch of dickheads". As is happening here. S

1

u/sleadbetterzz May 28 '23

Climate change will cause major societal upheaval anyway, whether we do anything or not. Other than that I pretty much agree with you.

4

u/charliedhasaposse May 27 '23

There's no real direct comparison. The suffragettes were denied their right to democracy. Every major political party has accepted that something must be done about climate change. These individuals want it done on their schedule - they aren't entitled to that.

6

u/TheCorpseOfMarx May 27 '23

WE are entitled to that. Why do you think these people aren't fighting for YOU?

It's YOUR society that's at stake, "their schedule" is a fucking stupid take when doing it slowly means the end of civilisation as we know it.

11

u/sp8der Northumberland May 27 '23

Why do you think these people aren't fighting for YOU?

Because they're antagonising me and trying to degrade my quality of life.

It's YOUR society that's at stake

Yes, it is. These cunts can't be allowed to get their way or they'll pursue the massive downgrade of my quality of life to offset China's pollution by 0.4%.

9

u/TheCorpseOfMarx May 27 '23

Oooooh you're one of them. "Why should I not loot this corpse, everyone else is!"

"Why shouldn't I own a slave? Everyone else does!"

"Why shouldn't I rob this old woman? If I don't, someone else will!"

If you think mitigating the impact of climate change is going to inconvenience you I can't wait until your reaction to the whole of Europe's crops failing, and the reservoirs running dry, and people dropping down dead in their homes from the 40 degree August.

15

u/sp8der Northumberland May 27 '23

I'm sure you're just as up in arms about hypocrisy when these types fail or refuse to live up to their own standards and ideals. When people fly off on private jets for climate change conferences, or, say, cause hundreds of cars to idle pointlessly in town centers. Right? Right???

Oh, no, you just want to defend people being twats. My mistake.

I've been hearing doom prophecies for the last 30 years, and I am still. Here. Stop crying wolf.

10

u/Thestilence May 27 '23

Why do you think these people aren't fighting for YOU?

Because I don't want roads blocked, artwork vandalised, shows ruined. If they want to help climate change, they should go and invent a new type of solar panel or something.

-1

u/TheCorpseOfMarx May 27 '23

Whether you like their tactics or not, they absolutely are fighting for you.

Trying to deny that is just childish.

6

u/Thestilence May 27 '23

they absolutely are fighting for you.

I didn't ask them to. How do they know what I want? What are their policies? What are they actually doing that's productive?

2

u/TheCorpseOfMarx May 27 '23

Do you want to die in a climate disaster? Because if not, they are fighting for you.

How do you people still not understand what climate change will mean? How do they know what you want? Do you want crop failures, mass migration, drought, millions dead? Because if not, their aims and yours align.

6

u/Thestilence May 27 '23

Because if not, they are fighting for you.

What are they doing to solve climate change?

→ More replies

7

u/1rexas1 May 27 '23

You're ignoring the persons point, which is a really intelligent one. Giving women the vote could be done relatively quickly. A large part of the problem with tackling climate change is that our society isn't geared up to it, which is why we're in this situation in the first place. This isn't a reason to rest, its definitely not, but this isn't a case of just convicting a few people to make the a change. Actually enacting that change will take time, time we are running out of if we haven't already (again, this is not an argument for taking our feet off the gas with pushing the climate agenda) but the sort of shit JSO cannot achieve a sudden victory because a sudden victory is not possible.

1

u/TheCorpseOfMarx May 27 '23

There needs to be a group of people pulling society forwards as fast as possible. Otherwise it's just the rest of us plodding along walking into disaster.

7

u/1rexas1 May 27 '23

... and the way to do that is invading football pitches? How exactly does that pull society towards a more climate-aware state?

1

u/TheCorpseOfMarx May 27 '23

That's a different argument, the one you just made and that I replied to was that "it can't be done as fast as they'd like".

However, how many people do you think will have thought about "climate change" today that wouldn't have without these protests? I'm more cognizant of it this evening than I was this morning, as are you.

It's about getting the entire populace to keep it at the front of their minds, that's how you drive long term behaviour changes. The message of "We are all going to suffer and millions will die unless we do something" apparently wasn't enough. Maybe when people vote next, "do something or people will throw orange powder around" will be in people's minds.

I think we both agree that current actions are not enough. So one of two things will happen. Either society as we know it will collapse, or something needs to change. What do you propose we do and how do you propose we do it?

3

u/1rexas1 May 27 '23

I'd already answered that point multiple times in my answer, it's about being realistic about what can be achieved in what time frame but that does not mean slowing down.

And, I'll say again, climate change is not in the forefront of people's minds today because of this protest. Its the protest itself that's being talked about, not the cause they claim to represent as justification for their actions.

I have replied to another comment in answer to the "what would you do" question, I'll see if I can paste it here.

→ More replies

4

u/charliedhasaposse May 27 '23

They don't have a plan. It's not costed and budgeted. Giving in to them and doing what they want to do could be just as dangerous. We live on a house of cards. It doesn't take much to cause major damage to our society.

8

u/TheCorpseOfMarx May 27 '23

Jesus christ did you really just say "sure we know not going anything quickly enough will lead to armageddon, but what if going TOO FAST also has negative consequences!?"

How much have we spent subsidising the oil and has industry's massive profits? How much have we spent on unusable PPE? How much have we spent on bombs and guns to Ukraine? The money is always there when it's for something shady that enriches the wealthy. Where is for saving us all?

If you're still worried about large spending causing "major damage to our society" wait until you see what happens when all Europe's crops fail for three years, when the reservoirs run empty, when people are dying in their homes because the temperature has been above 40 for 2 weeks straight.

Jesus the shortsightedness of some people, how can you still not understand how close to destruction our way of life is??

8

u/charliedhasaposse May 27 '23

And if the economy collapses because we "just stop oil", millions will die. If we "just stop oil" you'd fuel fires all over Europe.

Ukraine is just an example of this.

4

u/TheCorpseOfMarx May 27 '23

Oil is going to run out one way or the other. Why would decarbonising before that happens collapse the economy? And what do you even mean by collapse the economy in this context?

7

u/charliedhasaposse May 27 '23

Because these people have shown no more political agenda beyond "we must stop oil."

They have no idea how complex planning an economy to move away from non renewable resources it is.

The economy isn't a racing car. We can't just turn the steering wheel and go on a different path. It's like a cargo ship. You turn the wheel, and way down the road you start going in a different direction

→ More replies

2

u/Ivashkin May 27 '23

We are entitled to absolutely nothing.

1

u/TheCorpseOfMarx May 27 '23

We are entitled to whatever we are willing to fight for.

6

u/4mogusy May 28 '23

Tell that to the suffragettes and the civil rights movement.

I genuinely don't get this kind of logic.

"But the suffragettes bombed things!!"

And? Are you trying to tell me terrorism is okay?

3

u/TheCorpseOfMarx May 28 '23

I am trying to tell you that sometimes history recognises that the ends justify the means.

Nelson Mandela bombed things too, and he's a global hero. The UK dropped millions of bombs onto innocent Germans in their cities, but nobody says the UK was the bad guy for WW2. If killing one person saves 10, most people would realise its justified.

It's called utilitarianism and yes, it does mean that sometimes what we call "terrorism" can be the morally justified course of action.

2

u/4mogusy May 28 '23

It's called utilitarianism and yes, it does mean that sometimes what we call "terrorism" can be the morally justified course of action.

Anyone can point to instances in the past where terrorism was used to advance an ideology that is nowadays seen as righteous.

But it's a lot easier to be a normal person and say "killing innocent people is wrong, just because we entertained this violence in the past doesn't mean we should now" than to engage in mental gymnastics attempting to justify this stuff.

2

u/TheCorpseOfMarx May 28 '23

But it's a lot easier

Yeah and there were plenty of people back then saying the same thing about acts of violence that we now support, and now we look back and see that those people were on the wrong side of history.

Sometimes the easiest thing isn't the correct thing.

6

u/4mogusy May 28 '23

I mean you're basically no different than some random ISIS sympathizer in Iraq with this logic.

2

u/TheCorpseOfMarx May 28 '23

So is your position that violence is never ever ever the answer? Nelson Mandela was a terrorist who should have rotted in jail, and the suffragettes were evil monsters who should have been sent to Guantanamo for waterboarding?

0

u/4mogusy May 28 '23

Nelson Mandela was freed because State President FW de Klerk was sympathetic towards him. Women got the right to vote in the UK largely because of WWI. Whether terrorism actually helped these movements is dubious at best.

Not to mention that in the United States, women got the vote and segregation was ended without those movements going anywhere near that level of violence (Yes the Black Panthers did some bombings, but they were just a Black Supremacist Communist group that threw tantrums largely after all the civil rights legislation was passed. They faded into obscurity when no one supported or cared about them).

Also I'm not going to argue anymore. Perhaps losing a loved one to the climate terrorism that will eventually start happening might change your mind on whether killing innocent people is okay, but my words certainly can't.

→ More replies

4

u/Parking-Owl8568 May 28 '23

Yep and now women have men taking over their sports!

0

u/TheCorpseOfMarx May 28 '23

Man so do you just inject the Daily Heil directly into youtlr blood then or what?

9

u/bantamw Yorkshire May 27 '23 edited May 27 '23

My daughter made a good point earlier - it almost feels like, right now, Just Stop Oil are sponsored by the big oil companies - because you wouldn’t be able to get publicity this big to drive such huge media attention & negative collective public sentiment and hate towards an environmentally positive cause and positively in the favour of the oil companies as they are now doing - it doesn’t feel inadvertent but more calculated.

Btw - doesn’t mean I agree with that sentiment myself - I do think we’re on track to utterly destroy our planet through our selfish attitudes and we have to change. However, I don’t think Just Stop Oil are currently doing themselves any favours as it is becoming immensely negative and is damaging all the hard work the environmental campaigners are doing elsewhere.

14

u/sp8der Northumberland May 27 '23

It would be interesting, but no, I think they really are that stupid and hopped up on the Mizzy logic that there's no such thing as negative attention.

8

u/bantamw Yorkshire May 27 '23

I agree with you. Whilst I agree with what Just Stop Oil’s sentiments are, and I agree we’re heading for an environmental disaster of biblical proportions, unfortunately the way they are going about it isn’t working and it is creating a huge wave of negative / anti sentiment that will not work in their favour.

10

u/sp8der Northumberland May 27 '23 edited May 27 '23

The answer isn't to forsake modernity and go back to living in druidic treehouses in harmony with mother gaia, though, the answer is to invest more into developing better technologies to mitigate the effects on humanity.

Degrowth is simply not an option. We're already dealing with a lost generation who will, for the first time, have less than their parents, who are currently going through a cost of living crisis, and who will likely never own a home until their parents pass (and even then maybe not), and they want to demand those people sacrifice more? No holidays, no meat, no house, no financial stability, no community, just give up your entire life and every single pleasure in it?

8

u/bantamw Yorkshire May 27 '23

I totally agree. (I’ve been a small part of that technological investment - making data centres more efficient, automating the ability for turning off infrastructure when it’s not being used, making things way more environmentally friendly, more ‘capacity’ with less energy, and potentially making these platforms carbon neutral or better by enabling sequestering of carbon dioxide)

And those things you suggest are being done.

This is why I think Just Stop Oil is so negative. It has to be done at a country level by the government not by a load of hippies who think we can roll back to the dark ages.

The answer isn’t one or the other - we can have both if we do it right…

3

u/Mikolaj_Kopernik May 27 '23

the answer is to invest more into developing better technologies to mitigate the effects on humanity.

Technology is certainly crucial, but at the same time I think it's important to consider the notion that what we've been doing is inherently unsustainable. There's no amount of technological advancement that can save us while we cling to a socioeconomic model predicated on infinite growth and infinite resource extraction.

0

u/sp8der Northumberland May 27 '23

Disagree. We need to soundly reject all watermelon activists.

2

u/Mikolaj_Kopernik May 27 '23

So you genuinely believe that it's possible to decarbonise quickly enough to meet the bare minimum (60% cut from 2019 levels by 2035) whilst doing nothing to reduce consumption?

2

u/sp8der Northumberland May 27 '23

In just this country? No.

→ More replies

0

u/aehii May 28 '23

Eh? Just stop oil want no new oil drilling expansions, that's all. Not 'stop drilling', just 'no expansions'. What has a house got to do with anything?

0

u/United-Ad-1657 May 28 '23

invest more into developing better technologies

"Throw money at it and hope scientists develop some magical technology before civilisation collapses" isn't really a solution.

1

u/sp8der Northumberland May 28 '23

"Massive downgrade in quality of life" or "mass death through opportunistic revolution" aren't solutions either.

-1

u/CocoCharelle May 28 '23

Right, and it feels like you are a shill paid by big oil to make that comment?

Now obviously that's not the case, but do you see how pointless such arguments are? I think one of the major issues on this topic is that most people just read headlines about JSO protests and then don't actually look into anything about them. If you've talked to one of their activists or protested with them yourself, then you'd know that such a suggestion is patently absurd. Whereas if you've glanced at a headline and moved on, just feeling a sense of annoyance toward them, then maybe it's plausible. I'd encourage people to be more open to engaging with JSO and thinking about how they could join the movement because they're not just doing this for fun.

Moreover, even if JSO are unpopular, that doesn't come with making oil companies popular. People may be annoyed at them and their methods, but they're not suddenly batting for big oil companies or going around claiming that climate change is a myth. People aren't concluding that climate change is less serious because JSO are annoying, so I don't think it's fair to say that they're undoing all the work that other environmentalist protesters have done over the years.

What JSO is trying to do is mobilise the people who care about the issue into persuading the government to take more urgent action. This doesn't require the sympathy of the majority of the population, as long of they are a significant cost to the country, and as long as they can get more media coverage and more opportunity to express their views and inform the public, then it's absolutely better than doing nothing.

4

u/Spamgrenade May 27 '23

"how can we get these cunts stopped"

Police have been given plenty of new powers to stop these people. They could, for example arrest them for wearing a belt which they could use to lock on to something.

2

u/sp8der Northumberland May 27 '23

Yeah it's well known that the police being useless is because that's how they choose to be.

3

u/Nine_Eye_Ron May 27 '23 edited May 27 '23

We can stop them by voting with our wallets

2

u/Character_Tower_3893 May 28 '23

That’s the whole point though.

BLM protests, LGBT+ Activists, suffragettes, civil rights movements, protests in Iran over the Burkha etc.

It literally takes this kind of disruption for people to pay attention. Those who choose to disagree will continue because the government and media tells them to.

But once the government and media become fearful of a loss of control, they too will begin to acknowledge the problem.

And once that happens, those who bury their head in the sand, and like to believe the world is perfect, will listen to their beloved government.

1

u/santiabu May 28 '23

Prior to seeing OP's post, I hadn't been thinking about climate change. I'd been thinking about the route I'm going to run tomorrow morning. Now I'm thinking about climate change.

5

u/geniice May 27 '23

And honestly if I were them, I couldn’t think of a way to draw more attention to a cause without upsetting more people.

Start destroying russian oil infrastructure.

5

u/mankindmatt5 May 28 '23

And honestly if I were them, I couldn’t think of a way to draw more attention to a cause without upsetting more people.

Bob Geldof managed to get millions of people to care about an Ethiopian famine back in the 80s. Massively punching above his weight in terms of his own level of stardom.

Networking with other stars. Writing a catchy song. Using imagery and language to devastating effect. A passionate/emotional attitude.

Another Live Aid might not be the answer here, that in particular was a fund raising cause, but you don't have to be a dickhead and annoy people to make them care about things

Think harder brain.

2

u/AdmiralCharleston May 27 '23

If you get one open person joining the cause its successful, the people complaining likely wouldn't listen to them however they protest so pissing them off just comes with the territory

4

u/mijolewi May 28 '23

Ok we’ve stopped oil… Now what?

JSO are a bunch of champagne social justice warriors who have no idea how complex this problem is. None of us on Reddit do.

I’m not arguing we don’t need to transition away from oil and that work needed to start yesterday but these protests have no impact on anyone that can make a difference.

Imo what JSO need is to have a concerted effort to get people on side, to get people to actively back them, to make waves with the right people: not inconvenience everyone else.

And no protests aren’t about inconvenience they are about disruption that affects people who can make a change. They also should bring people to the cause not alienate themselves.

1

u/SlowJay11 May 27 '23

The objective is never about winning friends. Protesting is always thankless work and protesters are always attacked by knee-jerk regressives who are more devoted to order than progress.

1

u/Character_Tower_3893 May 28 '23

Remember the BLM protests?

It took burning cities to the ground for politicians and police chiefs to admit maybe they were the problem.

Prior to that, the majority of the population (being white) were happy to turn a blind eye, and believe that there was no racism within the police.

Following that, protests began in the UK, and only just are the police force in the UK being investigated for racism, historical cases of harassment and rape and negligence. That’s solely because they feared a repeat of that here.

These protestors are doing what needs to be done, because too many people are happy living in their bubble of “It doesn’t effect me, so its not my problem.”

→ More replies

71

u/ShutYourDick May 27 '23

Our planet is fucked and people are pissed off at people spraying orange on a field. They wouldn’t be there if their demands were met (for the good of humanity)

16

u/Ivashkin May 27 '23

Do you know that China approved an average of 2 new coal power stations every single week in 2022? That's 6x more than the rest of the planet combined.

31

u/aiDio_ May 27 '23

Just because there are worse countries doesn't mean we shouldn't be doing more.

0

u/[deleted] May 27 '23

[deleted]

1

u/atastylittlereset May 28 '23

The companies are polluting making stuff for us and governments to buy. They’re not polluting in a vacuum.

13

u/Thestilence May 27 '23

They wouldn’t be there if their demands were met

So if I want the government to implement my policy, I just ruin a sports game or stand in a road, and get whatever I want?

-3

u/TonyKebell May 27 '23

If what you wanted was genuinely positive for the whole of humanity, sure.

5

u/Thestilence May 27 '23

And who decides that? If decisions are being made based on who causes the most disruption, then it could be for any cause.

→ More replies

2

u/rugbyj Somerset May 28 '23

Except if it is untenable it would reverse gradual progress. Changes does exist in a vacuum, if it negatively impacts the quality of life of enough people in a democracy they will vote in a reactionary government in response that:

Undoes the positive changes

Kills any public clamour for future changes

This isn't a post saying we shouldn't be making changes, or increasing the pace of said changes. Just a note that a catch-all "good" thing doesn't matter if it is a flash in the pan.

1

u/[deleted] May 28 '23

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies

11

u/scojholl61987 May 27 '23 edited May 28 '23

Mate, I'd paid nearly £100 to be there and ecaspe for reality for 80 minutes. Sorry if I gave him a mouthful when the stewards rightfully brought him past the bar.

-2

u/TBHBP May 28 '23

Heaven forbid you were disrupted for 10 minutes that must have been so traumatic :,(

4

u/scojholl61987 May 28 '23

Yeah, sorry I've paid money for enjoyment and 2 hours of escapism watching the biggest match of the season.

How dare I be disgruntled.

→ More replies

1

u/rugbyj Somerset May 28 '23

Insulting the bloke for being annoyed about wanting to watch a rugby game he paid for, and being interrupted, isn't really helping matters. And he's likely more annoyed that stoppages can affect the flow of play, in the most important game of the season.

5

u/scojholl61987 May 28 '23

Welcome to Reddit.

Especially this sub.

People aren't allowed to enjoy things any more. We all have to be doom and gloom merchants

-2

u/TBHBP May 28 '23

First world problems

5

u/rugbyj Somerset May 28 '23

We literally live in the first world.

0

u/TBHBP May 28 '23

Dont worry give it 100 years and it won't feel like it any longer

3

u/ExtensionAir6248 May 28 '23

Why are you wasting electricity typing out pointless comments on here? You should be ashamed

→ More replies

2

u/Successful_Debt_7036 May 27 '23

What are the demands?

-1

u/[deleted] May 27 '23

The planet is not "fucked", stop being so hyperbolic.

5

u/TonyKebell May 27 '23

No, it is. Almost every scientific study on it says so.

→ More replies

→ More replies

40

u/HawkAsAWeapon May 27 '23

When future generations look back on these people they’ll thank them for trying to bring about meaningful change to their increasingly uninhabitable world. It’s a pity so many people are so short sited that they can’t see past the mild inconvenience it causes people here and now.

33

u/Unlucky-Jello-5660 May 27 '23

How are they bringing about meaningful change ?

36

u/sp8der Northumberland May 27 '23

They're increasing public support for anti-protest legislation.

26

u/mildlymoderate16 May 27 '23

Yeah, no matter how childish and reactionary much of the British public is, taking contrarian positions against climate protestors just because they refuse to go away isn't going to make climate change go away.

10

u/sp8der Northumberland May 27 '23

Neither is pissing off the general public, but I don't see you telling these morons to stop.

8

u/mildlymoderate16 May 27 '23

The general public is dumb, to put it bluntly. We voted for a lib dem/tory alliance thinking things would improve, we voted Brexit and then we voted for more tory rule despite all the evidence that they're making things worse for us.

I don't care about the feelings of the general public. When the inevitable happens, as many people as possible need to be aware that we were warned and chose not to act.

20

u/sp8der Northumberland May 27 '23

The general public is dumb, to put it bluntly.

I love that every redditor is a 130 IQ genius who stands far, far above the mere plebs in the real world. Mate, you are the general public.

and then we voted for more tory rule despite all the evidence that they're making things worse for us.

Did you ask why? Did you ever attempt to listen and understand? Or did you just chalk it up to "everyone except me is really dumb" and end your thought there with your nose held high in the air with superiority?

I don't care about the feelings of the general public.

This is why you will continue to lose. Even if people agree with the cause at hand, nobody wants to be on the same side as these people because they are widely regarded as total twats.

0

u/0000000000420 May 28 '23

There's only one person looking like atwat in this thread.

-3

u/mildlymoderate16 May 27 '23

I love that every redditor is a 130 IQ

I love that every redditor puts words in the mouths of people they disagree with when they have no arguments or point beyond being a reactionary contrarian.

Did you ask why?

Yes. The answer was reactionary nonsense about immigration. Blaming literally every consequence of capitalism on helpless non-pale people arriving on boats.

This is why you will continue to lose.

I really don't think you get it. This isn't some game. There are already very real, devastating consequences of capitalism happening, right now. But, that's fine. Like I said, keep that energy. What do you reckon about energy prices this winter? Going up or down, do you think? Do you think?

5

u/sp8der Northumberland May 27 '23

Yes. The answer was reactionary nonsense about immigration.

So no, you didn't listen at all then, you just heard what you wanted to. Thanks for confirming.

There are already very real, devastating consequences of capitalism happening, right now.

Do you know why there aren't any very real consequences of socialism happening right now? Because they already did, and all those nations collapsed after millions of deaths.

What do you reckon about energy prices this winter? Going up or down, do you think? Do you think?

Down, last I heard. But I guess that doesn't hold a candle to your amateur reckonings, oh mega genius.

10

u/mildlymoderate16 May 27 '23

So no, you didn't listen at all then

Nah, I heard loud and clear. I paid close attention to that campaign, run by fascist millionaire nepotists and white nationalist African mine owners.

Do you know why there aren't any very real consequences of socialism happening right now?

You want to talk about the left wing? Ok, Martin Luther King Jr, Vladamir Lenin, Carl Sagan, Freidrich Engels, Albert Einstein and many other great activists and thinkers of the modern age (i.e. not intellectually lazy and dishonest opportunistic grifters like Jordan Peterson) believed that the workers are exploited and the planet destroyed under capitalism, and that humans would enjoy more freedom under a system in which wealth is distributed in such a way that societies are sustainable and people are provided with necessities like decent accommodation, nutritious food, potable water, education, healthcare, public transport and public spaces. What a nightmare!

The reality is that the left wing has freed workers from the tyranny of landlords, capitalists, monarchies and other exploiters, in countries across all continents on this planet.

The reality is that left wing economics has lifted millions of people out of poverty and in some cases it was even able to fend off the barbarism of the capitalists.

The reality is that it is the disruption of left wing action that has progressed the emancipation of various historically oppressed groups, from dark skinned people in the west, to women and LGBTQ groups.

The reality is that even if you leave climate change out of the equation, (even though it is easily the most important issue of our time) capitalism doesn't spread wealth, it simply concentrates it, while causing immeasurable environmental destruction.

→ More replies

3

u/TonyKebell May 27 '23

Mate, Brexit was 90% racist bollocks and idiots ate it up.

→ More replies

0

u/Sir_Keith_Starmer May 27 '23

Because they already did, and all those nations collapsed after millions of deaths

No now be fair there's currently some Venezuelans eating the family pet.

9

u/Unlucky-Jello-5660 May 27 '23

I don't care about the feelings of the general public.

Then don't be surprised when they don't support you in your revolution.

6

u/mildlymoderate16 May 27 '23

A revolution would be great and a majority of the public aren't needed for one of those, but that aside, what revolution are you talking about?

This is about climate change, which isn't about anyone's feelings about capitalism. This is a result of reading the studies of climate change's impact. Do you think NASA scientists are a bunch of far left loonies?

This about people acknowledging the reality of capitalism's consequences.

4

u/Unlucky-Jello-5660 May 27 '23

A revolution would be great and a majority of the public aren't needed for one of those, but that aside, what revolution are you talking about?

Yeah a revolution with minority support never results in lots of deaths or anything.

You're the one on about the evils of capitalism, and trying to lump changing from capitalism in with taking action on climate change. So you tell me what revolution you're advocating for.

which isn't about anyone's feelings about capitalism.

Yet you keep bringing up capitalism.

Do you think NASA scientists are a bunch of far left loonies?

No? Where did I say anything about left or right? Renewable energy, improving public transit, decarbonising industries isn't a left or right policy. Its taking advantage of technology to reduce our impact on the planet.

1

u/mildlymoderate16 May 27 '23

Yeah a revolution with minority support never results in lots of deaths or anything.

All revolutions have deaths.

Yet you keep bringing up capitalism.

Because it's a major cause of the issue. Just because it's not about my feelings doesn't mean it's not about capitalism lol

No? Where did I say anything about left or right?

You mean left or liberal.

Public services is very much a left wing concept. Being able to implement methods of combating climate change instead of waiting for it to be profitable is very much a left vs liberal issue. Liberals want us to wait until capitalists decide combating climate change is profitable for them. For liberals, taking action has nothing to do with what's good for the workforce or for the planet.

→ More replies

2

u/scojholl61987 May 27 '23

Lol.

I'm sure the 60,000 feel that ...

11

u/sp8der Northumberland May 27 '23

I would love to see these idiots try and start a face to face dialogue with the people in the stadium.

I do not think it would end well for them, but it would be extremely informative, hopefully.

2

u/scojholl61987 May 27 '23

The funny thing is most of us travelled by train.

1

u/MP_Lives_Again May 27 '23

wait so are you saying the violence makes your point correct?

6

u/sp8der Northumberland May 27 '23

I think the term is direct action.

Don't worry, it's totally legal, they're just protesting the actions of JSO. Directly.

2

u/mildlymoderate16 May 27 '23

They said they're trying to, by forcing people to acknowledge that climate change is real and the liberal, capitalist lifestyles of westerners are making it worse.

I hate to break it to you, but climate change isn't going to go away just because you're ignoring it, and when it becomes impossible to ignore it will be too late for millions of us. Have you ever gone a few days without water? I have, and I don't like the idea of going through that again.

12

u/Unlucky-Jello-5660 May 27 '23

They said they're trying to, by forcing people to acknowledge that climate change is real

87% acknowledge climate change is real so seems weird to act like the public doesn't think climate change Is real.

I hate to break it to you, but climate change isn't going to go away just because you're ignoring it, and when it becomes impossible to ignore it will be too late for millions of us. Have you ever gone a few days without water? I have, and I don't like the idea of going through that again.

Who said it was going away? Point is JSO have had zero impact on our trajectory.

Again, you can agree that climate change is an issue while disagreeing with a particular protest group. No different to the suffragists who disagreed with the suffragettes bombing and arson tactics that hurt the cause for the women's vote.

→ More replies

→ More replies

11

u/LS6789 May 27 '23

This is the third time I've sen thiis exact posted by different people. Trols or bots?

→ More replies

10

u/JonnyArtois May 27 '23

They aren't trying to bring about anything.

The people to thank will be those that actually are doing something, like scientists or politicians etc.

Most people 90%+ believe in climate change so these nutters aren't even bringing attention to anything.

5

u/Thestilence May 27 '23

they’ll thank them for trying to bring about meaningful change

They aren't doing shit.

1

u/StatingTheFknObvious May 27 '23

No they won't because we'll teach them this is unacceptable behaviour.

0

u/ScotVonGaz May 28 '23

No they won’t. No amount of spoilt brat protesting has ever changed anything. These idiots need to learn politics and take a seat within the government to have changes met. Pissing off the public has NEVER a worked in doing anything other than pissing off the people you really want to have as an ally. Learn how the world works for fuck sake.

1

u/HawkAsAWeapon May 28 '23

The tories keep getting re-elected. What hope is there for meaningful change now without protests

1

u/ScotVonGaz May 28 '23

Literally just said they have to enter politics as a profession and be elected to a seat within government if they want to see change.

Protesters are pissing off the people they want as an ally. It’s like a guy/girl crying and having a temper tantrum with their ex partner in the hope they decide to take them back. It’s NEVER going to work.

3

u/HawkAsAWeapon May 28 '23

Exactly, but what scope is there to make real change in that way when faced with a party who is fucking over the country yet keeps getting re-elected? Influencing the voter base by bringing these issues to attention is the only impactful way right now.

Protests have proven historically productive over time, even when facing opposition from the likes of yourself.

-1

u/ScotVonGaz May 28 '23

Nobody is caring about your plight. They care about you fucking around with being disruptive to their day with the childish protesting.

Protests that disrupt the voting public have never worked. Don’t confuse it with an actual organised protest against a government that’s done in the thousands. 7 cry babies glueing themselves to the road makes people look like knobs rather than shedding light on a topic. Plain and simple. That will never change.

3

u/HawkAsAWeapon May 28 '23

Our* plight.

Time will tell. I wonder who will be on the wrong side of history.

-1

u/ScotVonGaz May 28 '23

It’s not my plight. There’s a bigger risk of people starving to death, suicide, murder, accidents, etc than any climate issue you think is happening.

You probably still own/use items that were made or used with the oil you tell people to stop consuming so quit your bullshit.

1

u/HawkAsAWeapon May 29 '23

They're bigger individual threats, but this is the biggest existential threat. We owe it to future generations to do what we can to improve the world for them.

And yes, because we are all confined to a system that has been built to require the use of oil. That doesn't mean we can't push for a better system whilst being constrained by the current one.

1

u/ScotVonGaz May 29 '23

*there are

It really isn’t the threat you have been led to believe either. If you did your own research instead of believing everything you’re told, you’d learn that for yourself.

→ More replies

1

u/ScotVonGaz May 29 '23

*there are

It really isn’t the threat you have been led to believe either. If you did your own research instead of believing everything you’re told, you’d learn that for yourself.

→ More replies

32

u/SlowJay11 May 27 '23 edited May 27 '23

It's our subs favourite time again! It's time for knee-jerk regressives who have never protested and will never protest in their entire lives, to pontificate on how people should protest, while they sit on their arses and do nothing at all. Bring on the performative hand-wringing and the finger-wagging! It's an extra treat when they blame the protestors for their own inaction (we know you were never going to do anything anyway).

14

u/MP_Lives_Again May 27 '23

also time for the cirlcle jerk of "oh the world is ending but you want to watch people play sports" bullshit

9

u/macarouns May 28 '23

And what has this achieved? Fuck all, just like their other similar stunts. I agree we need to take serious action against climate change but interrupting a rugby game does absolutely zero to progress the cause, if anything it’s a minus.

1

u/CocoCharelle May 28 '23

Asking what a single-issue ongoing protest has achieved is a bit silly because, by definition, if the protests had achieved their goal, they wouldn't still be ongoing.

But even if they haven't achieved their main goal, bringing the issue to the headlines and getting it talked about is still a success. Many protesters have had the opportunity to get their message across in the media, being invited to speak on the radio and TV. Moreover, just earlier today we've received assurances from Starmer that a Labour government would stop the expansion of oil and gas exploration.

To the question is how can you argue it's a minus? They haven't made green policies any less popular, they haven't made people less likely to take the issue seriously. Sure, they may be unpopular, but their personal popularity is irrelevant. It's about so much more important things.

→ More replies

4

u/Belawzi May 28 '23

Pity they didn't go down Millwall... That would have been entertaining...

1

u/0000000000420 May 28 '23

They're always a shocking amount of 'wahh they're going to make everyone hate them if they disrupt the sport' crowd in here, just admit you want to drive around in your planet destroying car and that's why you don't like seeing this stuff.

2

u/Netionic May 28 '23

Literally every one of those protestors used a "planet destroying car" or vehicle to get to the protest.

Is using one only ok if we complain about it afterwards?

2

u/dario_sanchez May 28 '23

If I was the Tories trying to push through a bill that would allow me to effectively criminalise acts of political protest, I don't think I could ask for a better group of patsies than Just Stop Oil. Bunch of well meaning people looking for a cause, have nebulous goals (stop fossil fuel exploration with very little "here's how we'd do that" on their website), backed by foreign millionaires, and do very little with their protests except piss people off. There's definitely such a thing as bad publicity and rather than have people think "oh what's all this about?" the reaction is starting to become "what shit have they pulled now?" A majority of people in Britain support action being taken on climate change, myself included. If this is about forcing the British government to change its mind on fossil fuels, why are they not going after the logistical chains that supply it? What does invading a pitch or gluing yourself to the road do to help?

There's at least a whiff of controlled opposition about them. Wouldn't be surprised if there's a couple of Murdoch or Koch affiliated shell companies funneling s few quid into them at a minimum.

That can keep on annoying snooker fans though, that sport could do with some livening up

3

u/CocoCharelle May 28 '23

If I was the Tories trying to push through a bill that would allow me to effectively criminalise acts of political protest, I don't think I could ask for a better group of patsies than Just Stop Oil

What even is this argument? If there weren't any protests, then obviously there wouldn't be any reason to try and criminalise protests.

How can people say, and with a straight face, that they support the right to protest, but the minute anyone actually decides to take advantage of that right and begin protesting it becomes a problem. If you support taking away right to protest because of JSO, then you never believed in it in the first place. Simple as that.

1

u/dario_sanchez May 28 '23

Okay, show me where I said I'm against the right to protest?

I'm concerned the government is using a group that reeks of false flag - and that's no reflection on the grassroots, I'm sure they're all very well intentioned - to push through more Draconian laws limiting the right to protest. You've mentioned elsewhere about engaging the activists and seeing then on TV and right enough the media is totally against them, but the narrative has shifted from "climate emergency, act now" to "the people in orange making a nuisance of themselves again". British people are largely sympathetic to a shift to green energy. Who are these protests trying to convince? What's their end goal? They have been visible for months and their message, beyond a three word catchphrase, isn't very well known. The point of protest is to make your voice heard, is it not?

I see elsewhere you've said that in me calling them a false flag you could equally accuse me of being a shill for big oil and I'm certainly not, I live as green a life as I can. I just don't know what they're trying to achieve, but they've been a very convenient excuse to ram through some of the most repressive policing measures any part of the UK outside the north of Ireland has ever seen.

1

u/CocoCharelle May 28 '23

Okay, show me where I said I'm against the right to protest?

Apologies, to clarify that was a general "you" not a personal one.

the narrative has shifted from "climate emergency, act now" to "the people in orange making a nuisance of themselves again".

I dont really agree that the former was ever the "narrative" at all, it was and still is something more like "climate emergency, we definitely should do something, sometime, shrugs". Sure, all our major parties are committed to green policies, but there's hardly a great deal of urgency from the government.

British people are largely sympathetic to a shift to green energy.

And yet the government has announced more than 100 new licences for oil and gas exploration. Luckily today, Starmer has announced that a Labour government would block any new such projects. But the point remains that govt action lags significantly behind public desires. The protests are here to pressure the govt to get a move on.

They have been visible for months and their message, beyond a three word catchphrase, isn't very well known.

True, but that lies in the fact that British people take a certain pride in being ignorant, particularly when it comes to politics. Nevertheless, more and more people are realising how to execute a basic Google search and are finding out what JSO goal is - namely to cancel the aforementioned granted licences and commit to not granting any new ones.

but they've been a very convenient excuse to ram through some of the most repressive policing measures any part of the UK outside the north of Ireland has ever seen.

Indeed, but this just proves that the general public isn't as concerned amount climate change as they should be. There's not a great deal of causes that justify disruptive protests as much as this one, and that people think clamping down on the right to protest is better than acquiescing to the demands is something which I find deeply concerning.

2

u/daveyboy2009 May 27 '23

No, they didn't.

The game was stopped for two injuries at the time.

The orange dust mainly blew away on the breeze and the rest was swept up at half time.

2

u/[deleted] May 27 '23

This doesn't look very stopped to me

I'm no rugby expert either but I'm pretty sure the game doesn't stop for injuries in general

3

u/darthunicorns May 28 '23

It depends on seriousness of the injury and where the play is moving. If people are lying on the floor not moving then play should be stopped ASAP, and if play is moving towards an injured player on the floor then play should probably be stopped (referee's discretion)

0

u/pajamakitten Dorset May 27 '23

Anyone who hates these protests and thinks they are inconvenient might want to remember that climate change is going to be even more inconvenient. That said. 'inconvenient' might be a slightly underwhelming description of mass crop failures worldwide, wars over fresh water, and mass immigration of tens to hundreds of millions of people to areas still considered habitable year round.

Still, down with this sort of thing! How dare they do something more than meat-free Monday!

1

u/MattMBerkshire May 27 '23

Given the UK isn't even in the top 10 anymore, we are clearly going in the right direction anyway.

China and the US account for 44% of global co2 production. The top 10 account for a fuck ton majority.

Again like most things, the UK is a scratch. We could be totally zero carbon and it's going to make fuck all difference to things.

One that will come back to bite the world, is climate refugees from Africa once we've mined the shit out of their countries for Cobalt and left them barren, all for the sake of shitty electric cars to appease these eco zealots, rather than plough investment into hydrogen fuel cells.

Stop using finite oil, use finite metals that are far harder and more expensive to extract and refine. I swear most people have never seen a cobalt mine or lithium refinery.

Also.. have a look at the child slavery that goes on in these mines in Africa.

Yep stop drilling people. Entitled Europeans need a battery powered car at the expense of Africans.

4

u/kenbw2 Prestonian exiled in Bradford May 28 '23 edited May 28 '23

China and the US account for 44% of global co2 production. The top 10 account for a fuck ton majority.

Any discussion about China's emissions is irrelevant if you're not talking (a) per Capita and (b) consumption

Remember that China's population is a fuck tonne more, and that they produce shit for us to consume

The average person in the UK causes more co2 than China

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions_per_capita

1

u/MattMBerkshire May 28 '23

It's an irrelevant statistic.

If you wiped everyone off this whiney little island its going to change nothing. The only benefit we'd see is the rivers and seas recover from dumping all our shit in it.

(No one seems to be giving a shit about the methane production from all this either, just "oh no it's poo, poo bad, but cars worse")

Yeah a large number of people in China and India, don't even have light bulbs.. that's not new news. If you removed people that aren't living... "Like for like".. you'd probably find they are off the scale.

1

u/sp8der Northumberland May 27 '23

mass immigration of tens to hundreds of millions of people to areas still considered habitable year round.

I've been reliably informed by this very subreddit that every single one of these people will be a net tax positive, so wow, think of the GDP! And the FOOD!

0

u/Takver_ Warwickshire May 27 '23

They could do other things though - become field researchers gathering evidence of climate change, engineers building solutions, documentary makers/writers shaping discourse, consultants/politicians developing pathways to change.

6

u/LilyAndLola May 27 '23

We already have plenty of people doing all of that and none of it's working in the slightest. We've been doing it for decades, that's why people have finally resorted to protests like this

1

u/Takver_ Warwickshire May 28 '23 edited May 28 '23

none

I think that's unfair to all the people who've dedicated their lives to say women reproductive rights (which is going to help reduce overpopulation), reducing waste (plastic, water, energy), or conservationists (rewilding, eg. reintroducing wolves, has been a proven success).

You can do something more helpful/targeted than puncturing tyres/ blocking ambulances/vandalising gardens.

The fact that all environmental scientists aren't throwing the towel en masse and joining doomsday cults should tell you there are still things to do.

Or do you know better than them?

-2

u/sp8der Northumberland May 27 '23

Even just chaining themselves to a couple private jets.

But no there might be actual consequences for that.

3

u/AdrianFish May 28 '23

As few others have said in this thread already; as long as huge corporations are doing all the things they’re doing to destroy the planet, pissing off the average sports fan at a stadium for the point of ‘exposing the issue’ is literally doing fuck all.

1

u/Bulky-Building-8236 May 28 '23

So we just sit unaware untill it’s to late?

1

u/Netionic May 28 '23

I mean according to climate protestors it's been "too late" for atleast the last 50 years lmao.

0

u/Simmo2242 May 27 '23

Hate these people. Hope if they work, their respective companies thrown a gross misconduct charge to them and they can repent at leisure for their silly choices.

1

u/pajamakitten Dorset May 27 '23

In your mind, are only unemployed people allowed to care about climate collapse? Does climate collapse not affect those of us with jobs?

-3

u/Simmo2242 May 27 '23

That's not what I said? What I said was, if they are employed then I highly suspect they won't be very soon if their face over the media.

1

u/CocoCharelle May 28 '23

That's not just what you said; that's what you're continuing to say. If you think these people protesting should lose their jobs for it, then you only think the unemployed should be able to protest. Isn't that the logical conclusion?

1

u/Simmo2242 May 28 '23

Not at all, you're surmising and drawing something which is conjecture. I said, hope if they are employed they should face serious results. You don't add 2+2 and get 8.

1

u/CocoCharelle May 28 '23

You suggested they should be fired though...

1

u/Simmo2242 May 28 '23

Indeed, as in most companies would do just that. But by proxy that doesn't mean that only unemployed should protest.