Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Just Stop Oil

because of course no one is aware how serious they think things are.
Yes, this shit. Come on man ffs if you're going to weigh in on a conversation do you have nothing more intelligent to do than waffle on with stupid Daily Mail stereotypes? Is that really the limit of your engagement? If so what's the point? You aren't talking to JSO or people who uncritically support them, you're just Making Your Opposition Known. It really seems like you're just doing what you accuse them of except you're still in your pants at home.
 
Genuinely I am mildly surprised that there's not been a break from the creed of non-violence in the green movement yet (in the UK). I know NVDA has been pretty conceptually hegemonic for a long time but "by any means necessary" and "NVDA will get you serious jail time now" would seem to point in a specific direction.
 
Yes, this shit. Come on man ffs if you're going to weigh in on a conversation do you have nothing more intelligent to do than waffle on with stupid Daily Mail stereotypes? Is that really the limit of your engagement? If so what's the point? You aren't talking to JSO or people who uncritically support them, you're just Making Your Opposition Known. It really seems like you're just doing what you accuse them of except you're still in your pants at home.

A quick glance through your contributions to this thread reveals they almost entirely consist of you complaining about other people complaining about JSO.

What's your contribution to a conversation about JSO? What's your engagement? No need to tell me about your pants.
 
They're not raising awareness, that's straw man argument. They're raising the alarm because knowing something and urgently doing something about it aren't the same thing.

We're literally facing the extinction of our species.

Raising the alarm is literally raising awareness. Everyone already knows how alarmed JSO are, they won't stop going on about human extinction.

Personally I'm alarmed about quite a few things that don't seem to alarm most people, for example the appalling state of earthquake preparedness on the west coast of north America. Perhaps I should buy various colours of paint and head down to my local market square.
 
A quick glance through your contributions to this thread reveals they almost entirely consist of you complaining about other people complaining about JSO.
Thanks for that short stalk, but in fact I'm mostly pointing out that people complaining about JSO don't actually have much of a clue what they're talking about and seem to have confused direct action with a popularity contest, which is less moaning than it is an attempt to move the conversation beyond tedious repetition.

What's your contribution to a conversation about JSO?
Apart from the note last page expounding on the history of non-violent direct action to put their actions in context, my repeated voiced feelings of unease about JSO's sometimes culty-sounding attitudes, the clear implication throughout that I think NVDA has severe limitations, the bit I literally just posted suggesting the scene is primed for a split moving towards heavier-duty activity, my long-time criticisms of their predecessor XR over their failure to fully prepare new adherents for State interest which carry through direct to JSO itself, etc? Oh hardly any. Really I'm not critical at all until I've mumbled some bollocks about them all being middle class egomaniacs and set my stuck record on the phrase "counterproductive."
 
Personally I'm alarmed about quite a few things that don't seem to alarm most people, for example the appalling state of earthquake preparedness on the west coast of north America. Perhaps I should buy various colours of paint and head down to my local market square.
Reckon you should as the fact I wasn’t aware of this really begs the question what the fuck have you been doing about it if you’re so concerned?
 
Do you think JSO though are getting anything done? Or are the alienating more people than they convince? It’s not possible to measure it objectively I guess but subjectively I don’t know anybody who supports their actions. (Outside of the U-75 echo chamber obviously).
"Echo chamber"
 
Thanks for that short stalk, but in fact I'm mostly pointing out that people complaining about JSO don't actually have much of a clue what they're talking about and seem to have confused direct action with a popularity contest, which is less moaning than it is an attempt to move the conversation beyond tedious repetition.

I didn't mention popularity, I claimed that their protests were ineffectual. Seems you agree with that.

Apart from the note last page expounding on the history of non-violent direct action to put their actions in context

This one? I don't see anyone pitching the current protests as "uniquely outrageous" in a historical context. They will however be equally as ineffective as those protests against nuclear weapons in the 60s. (Are there nuclear weapons at RAF Lakenheath right now?) "Fill the jails with us" only works if you can convince <checks back of fag packet> 0.1% of the population to agree with you. If you can't do that despite your alarm at the future of humanity, perhaps it's time to go back to the drawing board, or maybe speak to some fellow humans outside your protest bubble to see why they aren't joining you in droves.
 
Seems you agree with that.
I have an ambivalent view on it. I think they're effective for at least some of what JSO wants to achieve. I think such tactics are extremely limited while having a few potential upsides for them:
  • Discussion pointing (just stop oil is controversial. Just Stop Oil is counterproductive. Just Stop Oil must be stopped)
  • Habitualising boundary breaking (the single greatest barrier to serious change is fear of backlash, far more than backlash itself)
  • Recruitment (big news story simply means more eyes on what you're doing = reaching more of the people who might join in)
  • Building loyalty (the unifying aspect of operating against adversity)
Please note several of these are primarily upsides for solidifying and reproducing the group itself, rather than furthering the cause, which dovetails with my criticism about its culty aspects.

I don't see anyone pitching the current protests as "uniquely outrageous" in a historical context
My post was in response to people suggesting slow walks etc should lead directly to arrests. This has historically not been a blanket policy for previous civil disobedience (let alone been a declaration of moral imperative), implying that this time the actions being undertaken are viewed as uniquely outrageous.

"Fill the jails with us" only works if you can convince <checks back of fag packet> 0.1% of the population to agree with you.
Bad fag packet. Despite recent building efforts the prison estate in Britain is overcrowded, and a shock of arrests could theoretically overwhelm it (or at least force an embarrassing setting up of rushed detention camps). The reason mass arrests doesn't work in that way though is more to do with strategies the State has developed over the last 60 years to deal with multiple similar efforts - grab/release/inconvenience. People get arrested, are sent home and then have to wait for months for a court date, then rather than being jailed are more usually fined and bound over. And every so often an organiser gets absolutely buried as an example.
 
What do you think virtue signalling is, exactly? Could it involve, perhaps, hiding behind the theoretical plight of a fictional zero-hours worker to showcase your moral correctness in an internet argument?

Question: A lever is in front of you. If you pull the lever, a zero-hours contract worker is hurt, right at this very moment, via a giant comedy boxing glove to the gut. If you don't pull it, the worker is slowly poisoned over many years. As far as the worker can tell, only the first function of the lever exists and they're absolutely furious at the idea of it being pulled.

Do you pull the lever?
 
Last edited:
Thanks for that short stalk, but in fact I'm mostly pointing out that people complaining about JSO don't actually have much of a clue what they're talking about and seem to have confused direct action with a popularity contest, which is less moaning than it is an attempt to move the conversation beyond tedious repetition.


Apart from the note last page expounding on the history of non-violent direct action to put their actions in context, my repeated voiced feelings of unease about JSO's sometimes culty-sounding attitudes, the clear implication throughout that I think NVDA has severe limitations, the bit I literally just posted suggesting the scene is primed for a split moving towards heavier-duty activity, my long-time criticisms of their predecessor XR over their failure to fully prepare new adherents for State interest which carry through direct to JSO itself, etc? Oh hardly any. Really I'm not critical at all until I've mumbled some bollocks about them all being middle class egomaniacs and set my stuck record on the phrase "counterproductive."


There is an element of the cult about JSO and Rogers “I’m the only one you should trust we must constantly raise awareness” talk. He paints a grim picture of social collapse and climate migration and he’s fond of doing it while remaining short on solutions. He’s already had XR top levels collapse because he wouldn’t adapt or negotiate*


I’m still not going to give a shit if they throw paint on Chelsea Flower Show or walk slowly in the road.

I’d like everyone else to be more angry and think getting irate with JSO is doing the fossil fuel companies and governments a favour. We should all be fucking livid and the media should be blasting some of the fuel companies 70s predictions that map directly to current temperatures as the first item on every bulletin

*he behaves very similarly to other people I’ve known with similar causes
 
Reckon you should as the fact I wasn’t aware of this really begs the question what the fuck have you been doing about it if you’re so concerned?
What have jso being doing about the use of oil/ fossil fuels?

Was that orange dye herbal or is it derived from petrochemicals? Looks to bright to be natural to me.

Where do they think all the super glue they use comes from?

Etc. :facepalm:
 
What have jso being doing about the use of oil/ fossil fuels?

Was that orange dye herbal or is it derived from petrochemicals? Looks to bright to be natural to me.

Where do they think all the super glue they use comes from?

Etc. :facepalm:
I presumed this was a joke but actually not sure…
 
Since when was being concerned about the state of the planet and what we're doing to it virtue signalling?
 
I have an ambivalent view on it. I think they're effective for at least some of what JSO wants to achieve. I think such tactics are extremely limited while having a few potential upsides for them:
  • Discussion pointing (just stop oil is controversial. Just Stop Oil is counterproductive. Just Stop Oil must be stopped)
  • Habitualising boundary breaking (the single greatest barrier to serious change is fear of backlash, far more than backlash itself)
  • Recruitment (big news story simply means more eyes on what you're doing = reaching more of the people who might join in)
  • Building loyalty (the unifying aspect of operating against adversity)
Please note several of these are primarily upsides for solidifying and reproducing the group itself, rather than furthering the cause, which dovetails with my criticism about its culty aspects.
Well said. I think in addition, creating disruption plays back the “divide and conquer” tactic at those who are normally using it themselves. People organising events have to start worrying about being a target of disruption, and they thus create a pressure to resolve the issue. Does anybody seriously think the Good Friday Agreement would have happened without the preceding terrorist activity, for example?
 
Yep, and a large part of this "think of the workforce" media push (as though the likes of the Mail or the Sun actually give the first shit about zero-hours peons) is specifically designed to head off that argument (why are we having to put up with disruption to protect BP and Shell) by making it seem as though the cost of disruption is isolated, unpopular and will thus remain minor.
 
Back
Top Bottom