Plane Stupid shut down Stansted Airport

[danny la rouge]

not exactly direct action in the classic sense,

It either is or isn't.

 

[kyser_soze]

Just because this airport is used as a base for low cost airlines doesn't give it immunity from legitimate protest actions IMO, and if I was someone who considered myself to be left wing, I'd be seriously considering my position if I found myself defending scum like ryan air, and using the view of the Sun and Telegraph as vindication of my position.

Well aside from the fact that I've not defended Ryanair, nor using the Sun and Telegraph as 'vindication' for my position merely used them illustrate a wider point about a media narrative, all I can assume is that you really don't get why this was a bad, ill thought out protest that will achieve none of it's presumed wider aims, and is in fact more likely to damage wider support for anti-air expansion protest as well as the overall debate about climate change.

 

[free spirit]

Who is defending Ryanair? Who has the same position as the Sun?

you and several others on this thread.

well actually you are defending the position of Ryan Air on this issue, and taking up much of the same position on it as the Sun, which'd be enough to make me stop and think about my position.

You may claim and think that you're taking up a position based on nuanced class based analysis of the issue, but the effect is the same.

Upper crusties
THOUSANDS of ordinary families faced airport hell yesterday — as well-heeled youngsters blockaded Stansted’s runway in a demo over climate change.
The protesters — whose Plane Stupid campaign counts sons and daughters of peers among activists — chained themselves together to halt flights.

[the sun]

 

[danny la rouge]

Just wondered, is Mark Constantine a CEO of a profit-hungy corporation? Or is that not as bad a thing on page 15 as it was on page 9?

 

[danny la rouge]

you and several others on this thread.

well actually you are defending the position of Ryan Air on this issue

Don't be silly. You clearly haven't read what I said.

and taking up much of the same position on it as the Sun,

Don't be silly part 2.

 

[free spirit]

It either is or isn't.

well it's obviously not direct action in the classic sense as I don't think they've actually started work on the new runway yet.

Direct action campaigns though have rarely waited until work actually starts to take take action to raise public awareness, get media coverage, try to reverse the decision before work actually does start, and effectively serve notice that this decision will be fought all the way.

but then you know that anyway.

 

[teuchter]

Don't be silly. You clearly haven't read what I said.

Don't be silly part 2.

Do you think you would have reacted differently if exactly the same action had been carried out by "working class" people?

 

[kyser_soze]

I'd be interested to see a vox pop done among the good burghers around Stanstead and Heathrow and compare their overall views on CC (lets see how the West Londoners felt about say, the CCharge extension), runway expansion etc if it wasn't happening on their doorsteps. Much like the good burghers of Kent led to the billions of extra cash that had to be spent on the CTRL because they went all NIMBY on it.

I wonder if Plane Stupid would be quite so passionate if BAA were following Boris' idea and building an airport using reclaimed land in the Thames estuary? I don't think they would somehow.

 

[kyser_soze]

Do you think you would have reacted differently if exactly the same action had been carried out by "working class" people?

Not me.

 

[danny la rouge]

Do you think you would have reacted differently if exactly the same action had been carried out by "working class" people?

I didn't know the class composition of the group of activists when I posted my first post.

My comments about class analysis aren't about whether protester A is a son of a peer or not. And if you think that's what it's about, then you've very much misunderstood what I've been saying.

 

[free spirit]

Just wondered, is Mark Constantine a CEO of a profit-hungy corporation? Or is that not as bad a thing on page 15 as it was on page 9?

on a 1-10 scale of evil profit hungry corporations I'd rate lush at a 1-2, and Ryan Air / BAA at around 7-8.

Lush is pretty much the Body Shop of the last decade, probably not perfect, but about as good as a privately owned company is likely to get.

 

[danny la rouge]

on a 1-10 scale of evil profit hungry corporations I'd rate lush at a 1-2, and Ryan Air / BAA at around 7-8.

Lush is pretty much the Body Shop of the last decade, probably not perfect, but about as good as a privately owned company is likely to get.

And that, if you don't mind me saying, is why you're a liberal and I'm not.

 

[free spirit]

Well aside from the fact that I've not defended Ryanair, nor using the Sun and Telegraph as 'vindication' for my position merely used them illustrate a wider point about a media narrative, all I can assume is that you really don't get why this was a bad, ill thought out protest that will achieve none of it's presumed wider aims, and is in fact more likely to damage wider support for anti-air expansion protest as well as the overall debate about climate change.

I totally get what you're saying about it generating negative press coverage, but then I also remember that the entire anarcho/green earth first strand of activism that Plane Stupid are modelling themselves on / linking into, was never about expecting positive press coverage from the corporate media.

In fact most of the campaigns have at least begun with negative press of the 'upper class crusty hippies inconvenience ordinary working class people / cost tax payers money' type variety. It's pretty much the reason that Indymedia exists (for all it's faults).

For an example, the roads protests of the early 90's were greeted with a similar style of press coverage, yet they were ultimately relatively successful in achieving their aims of changing government policy.

At the end of the day, actions speak louder than words, and this action has generated far more press coverage and awareness about the decision to allow a 2nd runway at stansted than pretty much anything else anyone could have done. As the old maxim goes, any publicity is good publicity.

 

[kyser_soze]

The road protests were successful because they ended up costing the govt additional billions to build the fucking things, and we got a ton of legislation limiting legal protest, so I'd count that as a phyrric victory at best!

As the old maxim goes, any publicity is good publicity.

See if you can find anything about Audi and 'Sudden Acceleration Incidents' for an example of how this isn't true...or amend it to:

Any publicity is good publicity...for someone else.

I also loath and detest NIMBYism, which, having met a couple of the local Stanstead protestors, is unfortunately in more evidence than any concern about the planet at large

 

[free spirit]

And that, if you don't mind me saying, is why you're a liberal and I'm not.

tbf I worked out it was fairly pointless tying to work with the traditional left around the time of the G8 when some of the trad left mob lost it slightly and decided to inform us that we'd be first against the wall come the revolution.

up til that point I'd always thought we were on the same side, they put me straight and no mistake. So yeah forgive me if I'm not overly sensitive to your demands for class analysis before targeting multinational corporations hell bent on destroying the environment.

there is a somewhat bigger picture here than the impact on a few passengers, some of whom happened to be working class.

 

[danny la rouge]

Free spirit, I have no problem with multinational corporations being targeted.

 

[free spirit]

I'd be interested to see a vox pop done among the good burghers around Stanstead and Heathrow and compare their overall views on CC (lets see how the West Londoners felt about say, the CCharge extension), runway expansion etc if it wasn't happening on their doorsteps. Much like the good burghers of Kent led to the billions of extra cash that had to be spent on the CTRL because they went all NIMBY on it.

I wonder if Plane Stupid would be quite so passionate if BAA were following Boris' idea and building an airport using reclaimed land in the Thames estuary? I don't think they would somehow.

are you saying that climate change campaigners shouldn't link up with local groups who're more concerned with the impact of airport expansion on localised noise, air pollution, traffic, and the destruction of local houses and land?

it really is tough to please everyone isn't it. I mean for years people on here have been bemoaning the environmental protest movement's inability to engage with local residents on the issues and protests, and now when they do start to do this, the goal posts are moved.

I see what you're saying, but I disagree.

 

[teuchter]

Free spirit, I have no problem with multinational corporations being targeted.

Working class people work for multinational corporations though. If you damage the corporations' profits you are putting the workers' short term interests at risk, surely. Just like these protests against these flights we are told are all full of hard-working working class folks.

 

[free spirit]

Free spirit, I have no problem with multinational corporations being targeted.

so long as no working class people are temporarily inconvenienced by the actions?

what actually are your parameters? I'm struggling to work it out, and if I'm struggling then it's no wonder that the Plane Stupid lot are having problems gaining the DLR seal of approval.

 

[kyser_soze]

there is a somewhat bigger picture here

Refer to my posts about how this protest is making that bigger picture harder to sell.

Thing is, even some basic marketing analysis like SWOT - who do we need to convince of this, what are the wider aims, how will this action be perceived - would have shown that this wasn't a great idea.

Compare that with the CCC - generally neutral to good press coverage, widespread public support, geniunely successful in raising awareness of the issues, even got old polecat out debating about coal. Compare that even with the biggest own goal Greenpeace ever scored - Brent Spar. Widely successful (altho it screwe them credibility-wise in the papers) in gathering public support.

 

[Taxamo Welf]

ok here's my take on it.

I don't think the Plane Stupid action was perfectly thought out, and I don't think that Plane Stupid as a campaigning group are at the stage where they've either fully thought through their strategy or actions in every nuanced detail, and yes they probably are largely from educated middle / upper class backgrounds so may not have a fully worked through class analysis of their actions.

aaaaactually that's not the case; the people you see doing Plane Stupid stuff are not the only people making decisions about actions and media strategy etc. The people doing the actions are totally genuine but no, they didn't come up with this all themselves, neither did they have the nous for media, court and so on. There are professional interests at work. If you think about it, a group of previously apolitical young people *all* suddenly deciding that aviation was the most pressing environmental issue of the day is some coincidence...

But then so fucking what. There's a fair argument that it takes groups of young and fairly politically naive people to have the balls, energy and determination to actually attempt to take on such an entrenched government backed industry in this manner. Most older activists I know who may be more politically aware are pretty much burnt out, so yes I'm going to support the fact that there is a new generation of protesters coming through who're prepared to take the government on head on, regardless of the supposed imperfections of their politics or strategy (much of which seems to be based on nothing more than class envy)

They are taking high profile actions targeting the most obviously hypocritical aspect of the UK government's climate change policy - ie. the decision continue with a predict and supply policy to enable continued rapid expansion in air travel regardless of the environmental consequences.

At present there are 2 main high profile examples of this expansion programme - the plans that the government has forced through against fierce local resident and council objections to build additional runways at Heathrow and Stansted airports.

Heathrow was targeted by the climate camp in an extremely high profile action less than 18 months ago, so it makes perfect sense that Stansted should also now be targeted less than a month after the government decision to over-rule the local council and force through a new runway against fierce local opposition.

Just because this airport is used as a base for low cost airlines doesn't give it immunity from legitimate protest actions IMO, and if I was someone who considered myself to be left wing, I'd be seriously considering my position if I found myself defending scum like ryan air, and using the view of the Sun and Telegraph as vindication of my position.

i like this, well said

I'm not reading through the 15 or so pages, but i went to the heathrow climate camp expecting a very 'us and them' mentality and was actually faced with a totally class conscious campaign that had local interests at its heart. Now Plane Stupid are quite separate, but its the same people and same kind of scene; writing them off was a mistake.

 

[kropotkin]

And that, if you don't mind me saying, is why you're a liberal and I'm not.

 

[free spirit]

aaaaactually that's not the case; the people you see doing Plane Stupid stuff are not the only people making decisions about actions and media strategy etc. The people doing the actions are totally genuine but no, they didn't come up with this all themselves, neither did they have the nous for media, court and so on. There are professional interests at work. If you think about it, a group of previously apolitical young people *all* suddenly deciding that aviation was the most pressing environmental issue of the day is some coincidence...

I'm aware that at least 2 of the founders of plane stupid now work for greenpeace, that links have been forged with the older generation Earth First networks, and between plane stupid and the climate camp people - and that they're all fairly interchangable.

I'm sure there is strategic thinking going on, and some older wiser heads involved, I wasn't really trying to denigrate Plane Stupid at all, merely preface what I was about to say about their actions deserving support regardless of them maybe not being 100% perfect in the eyes of the class analysts of urban 75.

I also think they could well be playing a much better media game than Kyser Soze gives them credit for.

 

[kyser_soze]

a group of previously apolitical young people *all* suddenly deciding that aviation was the most pressing environmental issue of the day is some coincidence...

Not to mention all coming from West London...

 

[Taxamo Welf]

I'm aware that at least 2 of the founders of plane stupid now work for greenpeace, that links have been forged with the older generation Earth First networks, and between plane stupid and the climate camp people - and that they're all fairly interchangable.

there's more to it, but it isn't my place to say.

 

[free spirit]

Refer to my posts about how this protest is making that bigger picture harder to sell.

Thing is, even some basic marketing analysis like SWOT - who do we need to convince of this, what are the wider aims, how will this action be perceived - would have shown that this wasn't a great idea.

Compare that with the CCC - generally neutral to good press coverage, widespread public support, geniunely successful in raising awareness of the issues, even got old polecat out debating about coal. Compare that even with the biggest own goal Greenpeace ever scored - Brent Spar. Widely successful (altho it screwe them credibility-wise in the papers) in gathering public support.

go on then, let's do a media strategy analysis shall we.

your take on this seems to be based upon the assumption that the aim of the media coverage generated by this campaign should be to generate positive across the board coverage of the issue in order to sway public opinion of the entire population behind the campaign.

While this would obviously be a nice way to do things, in reality it is never going to happen, and isn't actually necessary to achieve the ultimate goal of the campaign in terms of reversing the government policy on airport expansion. This policy really is tetering on a knife edge, with high level cabinet opposition, large numbers of MP's opposed to it, and large scale local opposition around the airports seeking expansion.

Plane Stupid therefore doesn't need to convince 100% of the population as to the rightness of it's cause, it merely needs to convince a few additional percent of the population to come off the fence, at the same time as making it clear to MP's that there is going to be a sustained high profile campaign on the issue to convince fence sitting MP's that this is a battle that's not worth fighting.

To do this, they do not need to target the readership of the Sun, who'd be the hardest constituency to win over to their side given the decades they've had swallowing the suns bollocks... besides the fact that the sun would never support the campaign without murdoch's backing, and the chances of murdoch backing an environmental protest movement over multi-national corporate interests is slim to nil.

What they need to do is to target the readerships of the guardian and independant who're most likely to be sympathetic to their cause, to bring them off the fence, to start writing to their MPs, and getting riled up about the issue generally.

Essentially this relies on the concept that airport expansion won't be an electrion issue for people who're generally pro-expansion, or more likely haven't actually got a position on it, but are slightly narked at crusty protestors delaying working class families from going on their well earned holidays... but the specific airport expansions could well become an election issue in the immediately affected areas among those opposed to the expansions, and that the airport expansion programme can also become an election issue for the wider constituency of environmentally conscious voters for whom airport expansion could be forced onto the agenda as being the symbol of whether the government is serious about tackling climate change or not.

essentially it's about consilidating the campaigns base of support among those who're already most likely to be sympathetic to the issue, rather than trying to win over hardened climate sceptics and the like.

Another crucial element to it IMO is that it could well act as a rallying call for other activists to converge on this issue as a winnable issue with an active high profile campaign to get involved with, potentially bringing in more experienced older activists to the campaign.

I'd say it was fairly successful on these terms.

 

[free spirit]

there's more to it, but it isn't my place to say.

I've no doubt there is.

 

[Taxamo Welf]

Not to mention all coming from West London...

1) not true, some are from islington and nice villagey type places outside london Actually they are a from everywhere and they aren't all middle class either.

2) that they seem quite similar really isn't sinister - what it is a big friendship group or groups that met through childrens camping holidays, grew up and went to climate camp and wanted to keep doing climate activism. I've known most of them since i was 14.

 

[Taxamo Welf]

if you need a whipping boy by the way have a bit of this

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/12/414837.html

RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGE

 

[free spirit]

well, I was a fairly confrontational activist happy to work alongside and support more revolutionary left type's until I was informed in no uncertain terms that me and my lot would all be first against the wall come the revolution.

Turkey's may or may not vote for christmas given the option, but I personally choose not to actively work towards a revolution where my would be revolutionary partners intend to stab me 'and my kind' in the back as soon as the revolution is won.

I don't know if this is DLR or your personal position, but it is the position of a fair few of your comrades / fellow travellers, so apologies if I chose to work confrontationally to change the current system rather than work alongside a bunch of hopelessly ineffectual 'class warriors' endlessly spouting revolutionary drivel, while actually achieving fuck all, who in the highly unlikely event that we did manage to force a revolution that put them in charge, would then line me up against the wall and shoot me.

It may have just been drunk bravado, but it seemed more like their mask had slipped for a minute to reveal what they truly thought... and history shows that such threats shouldn't be taken lightly.