brogdale
Coming to terms with late onset Anarchism
Awareness raising usually comes before consciousness and activism; they're already winning you over.
Just Stop Oil
- Thread starter cybershot
- Start date
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
If you say so. Perhaps if they stop me visiting my mum next week I’ll just divert to Parliament Square and harangue Michael Gove or something.
I mean if we just stop extracting stuff we can import more fracked LNG from the USA so that’s cool:
UK to announce U.S. gas deal after climate change summit -Telegraph
British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is poised to announce a major natural gas deal with the United States after the COP27 climate change summit, the Telegraph newspaper reported on Monday.
www.reuters.com
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
When is Hallam starting a Just Stop LNG Imports splinter group? Oh wait he’s in HMP Wandsworth.
brogdale
Coming to terms with late onset Anarchism
That's the spirit.
Why would they block the stairs up from your basement?
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
I don't see that as a particular obstacle, why do you think he can't start a group - is he being held in an oubliette without access to lawyers and visitors?
BristolEcho
Well-Known Member
They seem to have a consistent supply of activists to put themselves on the line. I don't think they are trying to engage the likes of talk TV viewers, or even people on Urban. They want to attract and engage people that are willing to do this sort of action and are concerned about the immediate threat of climate change.
I don't feel the tactics will work, but maybe before I was less cynical I may have been tempted enough to join. Whilst there's plenty of outrage from the usual suspects, under the surface there are probably a lot of young people thinking they'll have some of that. Especially as there isn't much else going on.
I don't feel the tactics will work, but maybe before I was less cynical I may have been tempted enough to join. Whilst there's plenty of outrage from the usual suspects, under the surface there are probably a lot of young people thinking they'll have some of that. Especially as there isn't much else going on.
8ball
Maximum Facepalm
People have certainly done some quite remarkable things from prison in the past.
Dystopiary
putting up a hook to hang my hopes upon
I'm finding the "lock them up" stuff quite alarming. It's not surprising yet I didn't think there'd be so much of it. But I don't think they should block the roads. There are so many things they could do, if you're gonna risk a criminal record (or adding to it) for this, you might as well do something that's less alienating to ordinary people and aimed at the ruling classes instead, or something symbolic.
Serge Forward
Just enjoyin' my coffee.
It's intended to cause inconvenience. If something doesn't cause inconvenience them it has zero effect. Imagine a strike that inconveniences no one. What's the point? Now while I might not be a fan of JSO, XR and IB and might not always agree with their tactics or politics (lack of) they at least understand the idea of fucking shit up. I'm surprised you don't understand this.
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
Strikes aren’t comparable because they work fundamentally due to a withdrawal of labour, not inconvenience (lots of strikes don’t affect the public at all). If inconvenience worked then strikers would remain at work on full pay and glue themselves to infrastructure in their time off.
Back when Greenpeace actually did stuff, they did direct action and were often successful, but they took direct action against relevant targets, got widespread media coverage, and widespread public support. They never blocked roads or tried to exert pressure by annoying or inconveniencing people.
Serge Forward
Just enjoyin' my coffee.
Yes, strikes are based on a withdrawal of labour and these are effective when they directly impact on the bosses' business. But guess which strikes are most effective... those which affect infrastructure and inconvenience the public. That's why RMT, ASLEF and transport sections of Unite have the most clout these days and it's why miners and other workers' actions could lead to those inconvenient power cuts in the 70s.
Obviously, strikes are about a lot more than inconvenience, and there's probably lots to criticise JSO* for, but inconveniencing the public isn't it.
* I still have no clue about what chucking soup or beans at works of art is all about.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
Clearly with paintings it's beans a long way in front of cheese
BristolEcho
Well-Known Member
Did they fuck.
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
I have so many examples. How about the "Ban the burn" campaign, against incinerating toxic waste at sea?
"As one key element of a multi-pronged campaign, Greenpeace launched direct actions to alert the public to this polluting technology. The most successful action involved trailing the burnship, Vesta, to the North Sea burnsite with its flagship, Sirius. Campaigners boarded Vesta, chained themselves to the chimney, and hung a banner that read "Ban the Burn." They prevented an assault on the North Sea in true Greenpeace style—forcing the burnship back to shore with campaigners chained to its chimney. The media captured the action on film and in photographs which circulated to locations across the globe along with wire stories detailing the hazards associated with the use of the technology."
"This action strategy was combined with supporter mailings, newsletters, and door-to-door canvassing. Greenpeace also prepared scientific and technical documents and commissioned research to contribute to international debates on ocean incineration and the potential for reducing the types of waste commonly burned at sea at the source of generation."
"Support for ocean incineration plummeted in Europe during a London Dumping Convention scientific meeting in 1988 when the British Independent newspaper headline revealed that Greenpeace had uncovered a fundamental
flaw in ocean incineration theory. The article stated that the theory used to support incineration operations for 20 years had been discredited by new scientific evidence presented by Greenpeace at the meeting.
In the wake of this publicity, Greenpeace helped the Danish government draft a resolution to ban ocean incineration for submission to the London Dumping Convention. All Nordic nations and most South Pacific and Latin American signatories supported the resolution."
NoXion
Craicy the Squirrel
Any activist organisation as notable as Greenpeace is going to attract criticism worthy of an article on Wikipedia. That doesn't necessarily mean those criticisms reflect general public opinion. So which part of that article is relevant?
Bizarre that anyone would claim that Greenpeace didn’t face huge backlashes - pretty sure they were called “yogurt weaving hippies” etc - now it’s “tofu eating wokerati” of course.
Everyone attacking JSO here would have attacked Greenpeace back in the day. Very reminiscent of Republicans now praising MLK. These protests shift the narrative you lot just need to catch up.
hitmouse
so defeated, thinks it's funny
The Jackdaw gas field, for one:
Shell invests in the Jackdaw gas field in the UK North Sea | Shell Global
BG International Limited, an affiliate of Shell U.K. Limited, has taken the final investment decision (FID) to develop the Jackdaw gas field in the UK North Sea, following regulatory approval earlier this year.
I have some bad news for you about what the effects of labour being withdrawn are.
NoXion
Craicy the Squirrel
I don't remember claiming there was no backlash. You linked to a page talking about criticisms from academics and Nobel laureates. But I didn't find anything about the prevailing opinion of the general public.
Platty Sage was making out that Greenpeace had the full backing of the general public which is obv bollocks. I’m glad you agree he’s wrong - should be everyone’s default position tbh.
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
The Jackdaw gas field, for one:
I'm sure there's others, Jackdaw just stuck in my head as an example of how there seems to be some curse on the name of ACG publications.Shell invests in the Jackdaw gas field in the UK North Sea | Shell Global
BG International Limited, an affiliate of Shell U.K. Limited, has taken the final investment decision (FID) to develop the Jackdaw gas field in the UK North Sea, following regulatory approval earlier this year.www.shell.com
Did JSO get Jackdaw in the Daily Mirror or something?
Affecting profits and shareholders isn't the same as causing inconvenience to the public. Most strikes don't inconvenience the public. Certain one will, but as I said if inconvenience to the public is the method of achieving strike demands, that doesn't actually need a strike and can be done in spare time while remaining on full pay. Why didn't the miners just keep working and block the roads and railways on their days off?
hitmouse
so defeated, thinks it's funny
It isn't, but you never said "inconvenience to the public", you just said "inconvenience", and I still think all strikes, by definition, are pretty inconvenient to someone. Strikes are effective because they disrupt the economy, and blocking roads and railways also achieves that. And wasn't one of the major factors leading to the defeat of the miners' strike that it was isolated, which means that if railworkers had come out and caused more disruption/inconvenience, they would've been much more likely to win?
Christ, I have a tremendous amount of respect and admiration for those who stayed out in 84/85, but you'd think someone would hesitate a bit before going "why don't these JSO numpties use proper effective tactics that have been shown to work, like the ones that won the miners their famous victory in 1985?"
8ball
Maximum Facepalm
I’m guessing the poster concerned wasn’t paying that much attention (or was yet to be conceived) during the 1980s.
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
I posted details about a successful Greenpeace protest that had widespread support of the public up thread, but everyone ignored it. No point in posting more examples.
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
That’s not what I’m saying is it.
The claim was made that strikes in general are effective due to disrupting and inconveniencing people, so JSO can be effective through the same tactics.
My point is if inconvenience is the key to strikes, why don’t strikers just cause inconvenience without striking and losing their pay? The reason they don’t is that JSO-style inconvenience is not the key to strikes.
Another thread where platinumsage asks questions and then just dismisses answers that don’t fit his narrative 
hitmouse
so defeated, thinks it's funny
Wot Serge actually said was:
Can you give an example of a successful strike that did not cause inconvenience? Also, you seem to reckon that JSO-style causing of inconvenience, which carries pretty much a guarantee of arrest, the likelihood of criminal charges, and the subsequent possibility of missing work and losing pay when dealing with the fallout of said criminal charges, has a higher cost to the causer than going on strike, and probably being able to claim strike pay through the union. I'm not sure you've thought this one through.
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
Pretty sure no members of the public were affected by the successful RR strikes recently:
Rolls-Royce Barnoldswick: Deal with Unite union secures plant's future
Manufacturing at a once-threatened plant will continue for at least 10 years, the firm announces.
www.bbc.com
No inconvenience, but certainly not zero effect.
hitmouse
so defeated, thinks it's funny
Not in the short term, but if it continued for long enough I reckon the public would definitely notice if there was a shortage of aeroplane fan blades. It's like the successful Chep strikes - in the short term absolutely no-one gives a shit if workers at a pallet repair factory are working or not, if supermarkets and warehouse start finding that a shortage of pallets is meaning they can't load and unload stuff along their distribution chain then it very much would have quite a notable affect on the public.Pretty sure no members of the public were affected by the successful RR strikes recently:
Rolls-Royce Barnoldswick: Deal with Unite union secures plant's future
Manufacturing at a once-threatened plant will continue for at least 10 years, the firm announces.www.bbc.com
No inconvenience, but certainly not zero effect.
Similar threads
