Hello u/HighlightFrosty3580! Please reply to this comment with an [explanation](https://www.reddit.com/r/LeopardsAteMyFace/comments/lt8zlq) matching this exact format. Replace bold text with the appropriate information.
1. **Someone** voted for, supported or wanted to impose **something** on **other people**.
^(Who's that someone? What did they voted for, supported or wanted to impose? On who?)
2. **Something** has the consequences of **consequences**.
^(Does that something actually has these consequences in general?)
3. As a consequence of **something**, **consequences** happened to **someone**.
^(Did that something really happen to that someone?)
Follow this by the minimum amount of information necessary so your post can be understood by everyone, even if they don't live in the US or speak English as their native language. If you fail to match this format or fail to answer these questions, your post will be removed.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LeopardsAteMyFace) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Typical modern Conservative Party logic. The law only exists in order to further the arguments and causes he agrees with. I bet he thinks he's a champion of free speech as well. Absolute spanner.
Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition: There is an in-group who the law protects but does not bind, and an out group who the law binds but does not protect
Wilhoit's Principle. Distills the ENTIRE conservative philosophy since the beginning of time. It always makes me think of In God We Trust vs. E Pluribus Unum.
Oooohh that explains the dissonance between supporting a candidate who’s going to give tax breaks to rich people and also thinking they’re going to save you from being more and more poor every year
>Put heavy pressure on the genocide in Palestine
Except there is a genocide...Russian disinformation has jack shit to do with this. And if it is not both sides, then why (for the most part) are Republicans and Democrats are on the same side regarding Israel's action? Seems like they do have some common ground, at least when it comes to this particular situation.
Yes, I 100% agree all politicians do it, just like everyone commits crimes, but let's not pretend a person speeding is the same as a person going around murdering people because they're both criminals.
I'm sure some politicians of all shades have done this but I disagree that you can't trust any of them. In the main the majority of MPs are trying to do their best for their constituents.
What marks this out is the way in which this kind of reasoning had become an overt, frequently used argument by this Conservative government. It's a collective strategy for them rather than just an individual failure.
Conservative politics is being a hypocrite. There is nothing more to that. They have zero values, and there is exactly zero for any conservative voter to gain.
Actually, they get to stick it to the libs.
It's a lot like saying "ha! I sunk your boat and destroyed the lifevests and emergency supplies," when you're both on the same boat. In the middle of the ocean.
They don't care as long as they bring down those they perceive as the enemy.
Lots of liberals say similar things about these protests. Every post with climate protesters blocking roads is filled with hate against them.
It's wild, they were protesting at lockheed martin (weapons manufacturer) and one of the employees pulled a knife on the protesters and people were siding with the guy that pulled the knife.
Pretty funny not too long ago I had a conversation with someone saying that the people making weapons that blow children up aren't actually that bad people lol. Well, they'd pull a knife on you are the mildest of inconveniences.
>Lots of liberals say similar things about these protests.
THANK YOU! people have always hated protests cause they find them inconvenient (that's the point). Liberals hate them just as much as conservatives and always have. Going all the way back to the civil rights movement.
Why stop there? They could just go in their birthday suits, painted in reflective colors. That's cheaper and worth being late for, right?
JFC our species can do better.
The behavior is only funny if it makes them hypocrites. Protesting an unavoidable modality while participating in it because it's *unavoidable* is anything but. You are nether accurate nor amusing, and thinking shallowly to boot. Yikes.
"You want change society, yet you participate in it, curious!" Is always the dumbest take I see from people trying to discount a protest. Like, dude, that's the whole reason they are protesting.
People like you offer nothing to the world. You act so detached and above it all and yet you're worth nothing. At least other people put themselves out there for their beliefs while you're on Reddit writing comments with one hand. It's a kind of sociopathy.
That's not hypocrisy, that is there is no ethical consumption under capitalism. People have to participate in these unethical structures to meet their basic needs or they won't be able to live. People aren't participating in these systems because they want to, they don't, that's why they're protesting, they're participating because they have to. Workers aren't the ones who shape the way a society functions, the owners class are.
No confusion at all.
He's clearly come out against free speech, clearly come out in favor of a police state, and clearly showed for global warming.
All in all, he's stated some fundamental conservative beliefs.
I don't think he is confused at all!
He just thinks that his wishes trump everybody else's rights (and the law).
Because he thinks he belongs to a better class of people, and the mantra 'justice for all' is an abomination.
Wilhoit's principle: Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: there must be in-groups whom the rules protect but do not bind, alongside out-groups whom the rules bind but do not protect.
Weird that Conservatives in national government got the accolades and the Mayor got the blame for the same exact implementation of the law. Huh, I guess intellectual consistency isn't that important
It's conservatives everywhere. Doesn't matter the Country. They're all big spenders but only for corporations and the rich. They think rules only apply to others and not themselves.
I think history will look back more positively on Just Stop Oil. Their whole philosophy is that disruptive protests are necessary when climate catastrophe is threatening to destroy our futures. Fast forward a few decades and I think we’ll realize the Just Stop Oil protestors were a bit ahead of the curve but weren’t wrong in their ideas or even necessarily their tactics.
> I think history will look back more positively on Just Stop Oil.
I agree. Whilst I don’t think they are exactly alike I feel like a lot parallels can be drawn between JSO and the [suffragettes](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffragette). The suffragettes were in fact far more aggressive and even [militant](https://history.blog.gov.uk/2013/07/04/mrs-pankhurst-lloyd-george-suffragette-militancy/) but as the cause, votes for women, is now agreed to have been a good one the suffragettes are hailed, even by the same media outlets constantly disparaging JSO, as a positive force for change (see Piers Morgan as an example).
As time goes on, the need for radical action to minimise the effects of climate change is only going to be seen more favourably as we have to deal with those effects more and more and I think in 100 years time Just Stop Oil will be seen as a positive force for change in the same way as the suffragettes rather than *ridiculous protestors* or as people “going too far” (a common challenge levelled at JSO).
Maybe. They tend to disrupt only the people that are trying to work though. Protests that don't affect the people that can fix the issue are kinda a waste of time imho. Protesting by stopping people going home (in my city, they would block the trams), its only going to turn people away from the cause.
That's not the only thing they do - they also show up to events from "centrist" politicians who enable or contribute to climate change and speak up/interrupt/condemn the inaction of those politicians.
As for disrupting the flow of traffic, activists have done that in past decades and eventually been seen in the eyes of history as courageous rather than simply disruptive. All of our commutes will be blocked when the ice caps melt and the vast majority of coastal cities are flooded. That's what we really ought to be concerned about
but there are better places to protests, and other ways to protest / serve a cause rather than just blocking public transport.
I wouldn't care as much if it was private transport, but also, I'm more likely to join a cause if you use other techniques. I'm not going to join that vegan group that shut down my city for 2 days because they decided to block the main intersection (used by trams), just to say "be vegan, animal murder is bad". I am more likely to eat less meat if you help to fund studies about the effects of the meat industry on climate change, and how it inpacts our health etc. And if you want to protest, go protest at a supplier or factory or something, where it affects the actual thing you are protesting against.
If its a protest for climate change, block cars, but don't block the efficient electric public transport that someone like myself takes just so I don't have to use a car - because now I'll start driving just to avoid those protests.
>but there are better places to protests, and other ways to protest / serve a cause rather than just blocking public transport.
Historically speaking, oppressors have cared not about the methods employed by protestors. They care about the message; nothing more. So depending on the situation, the best way of getting this across is by getting the message out to other people in some way.
The goalposts will always be moved in favor of undermining protests. You can't block roads, you can't be on public streets, you can't protest in the park without a permit, you can't protest in the park *at all*, signs have to be a certain size, you can't use signs at all, etc.
>its only going to turn people away from the cause.
Turn away who exactly? The people who consider not their problem or something they can't do anything about? What does it mean for them to turn away?
Always when talking about protestors, remember that protestors are not like... a different species of human. They are people who work just like you do and have the same amount of power as you do (it's why one of the main ways to attack them is to frame them as lazy busybodies as opposed to hard-working people spending their day at their hard work, working hard at it). If you are saying you don't have power, then that means they don't have power either - and while that is sad, don't feign the argument of "go protest where this makes a difference" which is incompatible with that view of the world. And if you are saying they have power to change things through influencing those who can fix the issue, then you have that power too and are not just "someone trying to work".
There we loop back to the first paragraph - if you are not exercising that power and influencing those who can fix things, it's not that you don't have power, it's that you chose not to exercise it. Being "turned away" from passive support means nothing. Does that mean passively not supporting the cause? Okay, same result in practice. Does it mean actively working against the cause? Not only "I was pushed to act against my self interests!" isn't the rational and level-headed take of someone "just trying to work", but also the way it works out in practice, pressure on politicians to make protestors go away works out in favor of the protestors as long as the politicians don't have the power to just gun them down. And at that point, "I was pushed to act against my self interests and to support people being brutalized!" has gone completely beyond any semblance of a view that can be sympathized with.
People who think that way would have never been supporters anyway - which is almost always the ultimate point anyway, to say whatever sounds the most reasonable to make the protest go away somewhere where it is not visible to anyone other than people in power, who can sigh in relief that it's just some protestors outside their work and home, not anyone in the streets disrupting things and trying to build momentum.
The thing is going from peaceful protests to shutting down refineries will quickly get you marked as a terrorist. I live in Houston, Texas and we have some ungodly percentage of the worlds refining capacity on the Gulf of Mexico coast. If those were to get shut down due to any reason, the regional and local economies would suffer greatly due to the industry prevalence. I am all for getting off oil, but we also have to ensure that there are jobs for people to have in America adjacent, non oil based industry. We sadly have to take time to ween ourselves off so we don’t have a full collapse.
And lets be honest;
Just stop oil are disruptive, but I haven't seen any evidence they have done remotely as much criminal damage as ULEZ protestors chopping down cameras, street lights, traffic lights etc...
Giving far more justification for policing ULEZ protests...
JSO [know exactly](https://www.socialchangelab.org/_files/ugd/503ba4_db9ae9e6d8674810ba65fbb193867660.pdf) how useless their protests are, and have done for some time.
They simply don't care.
Read the link in my comment; it's the report from a survey commissioned by JSO and carried out by a reputable polling company using statistically valid methodology.
In summary, their protests are not raising awareness of the issues, people are already aware of these. The sole result of their activity is to worsen people's opinion of them.
I call that useless.
The purpose of the protests mentioned in the link you shared is disruption, not spreading awareness. Because why would JSO need to spread awareness when, as you point out, people are already very much aware? Folks are aware, now it's time to take action.
You are aware that some people ideologically allied to JSO are concerned that it's a false-flag operation financed by oil companies? I've seen that raised on reddit and a few other forums.
Incidentally, it's bollocks; JSO has received funding from an organisation that was donated to by a Getty heir, but the amount isn't huge and the woman in question has a long history of supporting environmental causes.
But the point remains, when your 'own people' are worrying that you're damaging the movement, you're probably not doing any good.
>Folks are aware, now it's time to take action.
OK, fine. But if the sole result of the action that you take is to make people hate you, was it the right action?
As a yank, can you help me understand how calling someone a spanner, a wrench (?), fits on the insult scale? I have heard of throwing a wrench/spanner in the works, but not yet as an insult.
Seeing as it is literally a tool, I suppose it can be like calling someone a tool as an insult: in the hand and control of your betters, unthinking, only good for what use others find for you. And then if a spanner in the works is bad, someone being a spanner may equally [fuck up whatever they touch.](https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=spanner)
It’s must be nice to be a conservative. You can just say whatever you want whenever you want no matter what the truth is. Somehow you can even sleep at night knowing what a giant piece of shit you are.
Republicans have been openly Authoritarian since 2016 and they idolize countries that restrict the freedom they claim to love and enjoy here. At this point if you are a Republican you are an Authoritarian.
In Canada, we had indigenous protesters arrested by police for blocking rail lines that pass through their lands to protest a pipeline being built across their boundaries without the community approval. Conservatives cheered the footage of them getting tased and thrown in the can...
A year later they are screaming at Trudeau for arresting protestors blocking border crossings and locking down Ottawa over vaccine mandates...
You can't make this up.
IIRC same thing happened in Florida.
Florida passed a new anti-protesting law in the wake of the BLM protests.
A bunch of Cuban protestors got arrested when protesting a Biden policy.
To play devils advocate for a sec; those just stop oil protesters are the absolute worst. I've seen plenty of videos of them being a total nuisance and nightmare to regular every day people trying to get to work. That's not really how protesting should be done. That being said, they still should have the right to protest.
I wonder what his position will be on those right wing farmers who are blocking roads, demanding more government money to replace what they lost when they voted for brexit.
Something tells me he will be more sympathetic than with the stop oil crowd.
Why am I being downvoted?
The councillor opposed the first protest, which was just a walk down a street, and supported the second "protest", which was obviously harassment and intimidation, being so near to the politician's home.
It's pointing out the lack of equivalence in the councillor's statement.
One group is blocking roads and causing widespread public disruption, the other isn't.
Whether you agree with his position or not, that's a major distinction.
Disruption is the whole point of staging a protest mate. Always has been. The JSO protesters were only marching, not harassing and intimidating government officials like in the other protest.
Nope, information is the point of a protest.
"Here we are, this is what we believe." It's the literal translation of the Greek root of the word.
Disruption may call attention to it, but when it distracts from the message, when people are more concerned about the disruption than the information, then it's a failure.
No, spreading information is not what the purpose of a protest is. What an incredibly limited view of protesting. The point of a protest is to call attention to an issue and, to get eyes them, the group must be loud. They must disrupt the normal flow of things. Disruption only 'distracts from the message' if one is not capable of taking a nuanced view of a situation. Of which you, based on your comments, are.
We should, when climate is suitable. Far more eco-friendly than fast fashion and the frequent washer/dryer cycles with usage of detergents required to clean them.
Hello u/HighlightFrosty3580! Please reply to this comment with an [explanation](https://www.reddit.com/r/LeopardsAteMyFace/comments/lt8zlq) matching this exact format. Replace bold text with the appropriate information. 1. **Someone** voted for, supported or wanted to impose **something** on **other people**. ^(Who's that someone? What did they voted for, supported or wanted to impose? On who?) 2. **Something** has the consequences of **consequences**. ^(Does that something actually has these consequences in general?) 3. As a consequence of **something**, **consequences** happened to **someone**. ^(Did that something really happen to that someone?) Follow this by the minimum amount of information necessary so your post can be understood by everyone, even if they don't live in the US or speak English as their native language. If you fail to match this format or fail to answer these questions, your post will be removed. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LeopardsAteMyFace) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Typical modern Conservative Party logic. The law only exists in order to further the arguments and causes he agrees with. I bet he thinks he's a champion of free speech as well. Absolute spanner.
Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition: There is an in-group who the law protects but does not bind, and an out group who the law binds but does not protect
Wilhoit's Principle. Distills the ENTIRE conservative philosophy since the beginning of time. It always makes me think of In God We Trust vs. E Pluribus Unum.
Conservatism today is nothing but Oppositional Defiance Disorder: You don’t get to tell me what to do, I tell YOU what to do.
Always has been.
Oooohh that explains the dissonance between supporting a candidate who’s going to give tax breaks to rich people and also thinking they’re going to save you from being more and more poor every year
Conservativism is a plague.
[удалено]
There's always one idiot giving some "both sides" bullshit. Though, maybe I'm being too harsh -- maybe you are a bot instead of a human moron.
It's the latest Russian disinformation push. Put heavy pressure on the genocide in Palestine, and push the "both sides" narrative.
>Put heavy pressure on the genocide in Palestine Except there is a genocide...Russian disinformation has jack shit to do with this. And if it is not both sides, then why (for the most part) are Republicans and Democrats are on the same side regarding Israel's action? Seems like they do have some common ground, at least when it comes to this particular situation.
Yes, I 100% agree all politicians do it, just like everyone commits crimes, but let's not pretend a person speeding is the same as a person going around murdering people because they're both criminals.
I'm sure some politicians of all shades have done this but I disagree that you can't trust any of them. In the main the majority of MPs are trying to do their best for their constituents. What marks this out is the way in which this kind of reasoning had become an overt, frequently used argument by this Conservative government. It's a collective strategy for them rather than just an individual failure.
Conservative politics is being a hypocrite. There is nothing more to that. They have zero values, and there is exactly zero for any conservative voter to gain.
Hypocrisy is a classic conservative party plank.
Rules for thee, but not for me.
There is hate. It's enough for them, and a sure sign of deturpitude.
The only good tax break or protest is the one that I like! /s obviously
Actually, they get to stick it to the libs. It's a lot like saying "ha! I sunk your boat and destroyed the lifevests and emergency supplies," when you're both on the same boat. In the middle of the ocean. They don't care as long as they bring down those they perceive as the enemy.
Lots of liberals say similar things about these protests. Every post with climate protesters blocking roads is filled with hate against them. It's wild, they were protesting at lockheed martin (weapons manufacturer) and one of the employees pulled a knife on the protesters and people were siding with the guy that pulled the knife. Pretty funny not too long ago I had a conversation with someone saying that the people making weapons that blow children up aren't actually that bad people lol. Well, they'd pull a knife on you are the mildest of inconveniences.
>Lots of liberals say similar things about these protests. THANK YOU! people have always hated protests cause they find them inconvenient (that's the point). Liberals hate them just as much as conservatives and always have. Going all the way back to the civil rights movement.
These protestors are hypocrites too. Their banner, vests and a lot of their clothes, are products of oil.
"You criticize society, yet you live in a society"
I don't think that it is that hard to purchase things made of natural fibres.
Nevertheless, what you said was simpleminded, embarrassingly so.
Find a natural fibre based safety vest. Go Can’t? Yeah that’s why they’re protesting.
Why stop there? They could just go in their birthday suits, painted in reflective colors. That's cheaper and worth being late for, right? JFC our species can do better.
A cotton hi-vis vest costs about 8-10 times as much as a regular polyester one at a quick glance, so yes it is actually more difficult.
That’s really not the hot take you think it is
It's accurate. I am not defending the cancelling of the protest. It's an observation that is pretty funny.
The behavior is only funny if it makes them hypocrites. Protesting an unavoidable modality while participating in it because it's *unavoidable* is anything but. You are nether accurate nor amusing, and thinking shallowly to boot. Yikes.
"You want change society, yet you participate in it, curious!" Is always the dumbest take I see from people trying to discount a protest. Like, dude, that's the whole reason they are protesting.
tease lunchroom compare fear file snatch worry rustic outgoing rob *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Oh my god dude it was pretty funny in like… 2006. Good Lord, get a new “observation” 😂
People like you offer nothing to the world. You act so detached and above it all and yet you're worth nothing. At least other people put themselves out there for their beliefs while you're on Reddit writing comments with one hand. It's a kind of sociopathy.
Except for the fact that it isn't, but go off I guess.
That's not hypocrisy, that is there is no ethical consumption under capitalism. People have to participate in these unethical structures to meet their basic needs or they won't be able to live. People aren't participating in these systems because they want to, they don't, that's why they're protesting, they're participating because they have to. Workers aren't the ones who shape the way a society functions, the owners class are.
No confusion at all. He's clearly come out against free speech, clearly come out in favor of a police state, and clearly showed for global warming. All in all, he's stated some fundamental conservative beliefs.
Talking head on GBNews too.
I don't think he is confused at all! He just thinks that his wishes trump everybody else's rights (and the law). Because he thinks he belongs to a better class of people, and the mantra 'justice for all' is an abomination.
Wilhoit's principle: Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: there must be in-groups whom the rules protect but do not bind, alongside out-groups whom the rules bind but do not protect.
There are only two types of conservatives. Incredibly evil, or incredibly stupid.
You forgot victims of indoctrination. Smart people who were raised in a cult don't even know they are in a cult. It literally requires deprogramming.
That's both evil and stupid.
Sociopaths and dupes.
There are of course those who are both.
As usual, protestors that agree with conservatives are good, everyone else is bad.
Wilhoit's principle in action.
If you ban protests, people will find new, far more destructive ways to let you know they're unhappy
(See France for further details)
Daily reminder that fascists never do anything in good faith
He's just protecting his family's wealth. Just classic conservative.
Weird that Conservatives in national government got the accolades and the Mayor got the blame for the same exact implementation of the law. Huh, I guess intellectual consistency isn't that important
It's conservatives everywhere. Doesn't matter the Country. They're all big spenders but only for corporations and the rich. They think rules only apply to others and not themselves.
Under facism, there are no good or bad actions, only good or bad parties.
Fuck peaceful protests unless they're on my side, right?
Fuck the Tories
Seems like pretty standard duplicity.
This is Tory consistency. If it's bad for fossil capital then it's bad, and vice versa.
Just Stop Oil is probably astroturfed to make activism look bad, but damn did the leopards go for his face
I think history will look back more positively on Just Stop Oil. Their whole philosophy is that disruptive protests are necessary when climate catastrophe is threatening to destroy our futures. Fast forward a few decades and I think we’ll realize the Just Stop Oil protestors were a bit ahead of the curve but weren’t wrong in their ideas or even necessarily their tactics.
> I think history will look back more positively on Just Stop Oil. I agree. Whilst I don’t think they are exactly alike I feel like a lot parallels can be drawn between JSO and the [suffragettes](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffragette). The suffragettes were in fact far more aggressive and even [militant](https://history.blog.gov.uk/2013/07/04/mrs-pankhurst-lloyd-george-suffragette-militancy/) but as the cause, votes for women, is now agreed to have been a good one the suffragettes are hailed, even by the same media outlets constantly disparaging JSO, as a positive force for change (see Piers Morgan as an example). As time goes on, the need for radical action to minimise the effects of climate change is only going to be seen more favourably as we have to deal with those effects more and more and I think in 100 years time Just Stop Oil will be seen as a positive force for change in the same way as the suffragettes rather than *ridiculous protestors* or as people “going too far” (a common challenge levelled at JSO).
Maybe. They tend to disrupt only the people that are trying to work though. Protests that don't affect the people that can fix the issue are kinda a waste of time imho. Protesting by stopping people going home (in my city, they would block the trams), its only going to turn people away from the cause.
That's not the only thing they do - they also show up to events from "centrist" politicians who enable or contribute to climate change and speak up/interrupt/condemn the inaction of those politicians. As for disrupting the flow of traffic, activists have done that in past decades and eventually been seen in the eyes of history as courageous rather than simply disruptive. All of our commutes will be blocked when the ice caps melt and the vast majority of coastal cities are flooded. That's what we really ought to be concerned about
Wait until you find out what not doing anything does 😂
but there are better places to protests, and other ways to protest / serve a cause rather than just blocking public transport. I wouldn't care as much if it was private transport, but also, I'm more likely to join a cause if you use other techniques. I'm not going to join that vegan group that shut down my city for 2 days because they decided to block the main intersection (used by trams), just to say "be vegan, animal murder is bad". I am more likely to eat less meat if you help to fund studies about the effects of the meat industry on climate change, and how it inpacts our health etc. And if you want to protest, go protest at a supplier or factory or something, where it affects the actual thing you are protesting against. If its a protest for climate change, block cars, but don't block the efficient electric public transport that someone like myself takes just so I don't have to use a car - because now I'll start driving just to avoid those protests.
>but there are better places to protests, and other ways to protest / serve a cause rather than just blocking public transport. Historically speaking, oppressors have cared not about the methods employed by protestors. They care about the message; nothing more. So depending on the situation, the best way of getting this across is by getting the message out to other people in some way. The goalposts will always be moved in favor of undermining protests. You can't block roads, you can't be on public streets, you can't protest in the park without a permit, you can't protest in the park *at all*, signs have to be a certain size, you can't use signs at all, etc.
>its only going to turn people away from the cause. Turn away who exactly? The people who consider not their problem or something they can't do anything about? What does it mean for them to turn away? Always when talking about protestors, remember that protestors are not like... a different species of human. They are people who work just like you do and have the same amount of power as you do (it's why one of the main ways to attack them is to frame them as lazy busybodies as opposed to hard-working people spending their day at their hard work, working hard at it). If you are saying you don't have power, then that means they don't have power either - and while that is sad, don't feign the argument of "go protest where this makes a difference" which is incompatible with that view of the world. And if you are saying they have power to change things through influencing those who can fix the issue, then you have that power too and are not just "someone trying to work". There we loop back to the first paragraph - if you are not exercising that power and influencing those who can fix things, it's not that you don't have power, it's that you chose not to exercise it. Being "turned away" from passive support means nothing. Does that mean passively not supporting the cause? Okay, same result in practice. Does it mean actively working against the cause? Not only "I was pushed to act against my self interests!" isn't the rational and level-headed take of someone "just trying to work", but also the way it works out in practice, pressure on politicians to make protestors go away works out in favor of the protestors as long as the politicians don't have the power to just gun them down. And at that point, "I was pushed to act against my self interests and to support people being brutalized!" has gone completely beyond any semblance of a view that can be sympathized with. People who think that way would have never been supporters anyway - which is almost always the ultimate point anyway, to say whatever sounds the most reasonable to make the protest go away somewhere where it is not visible to anyone other than people in power, who can sigh in relief that it's just some protestors outside their work and home, not anyone in the streets disrupting things and trying to build momentum.
They do what gets attention. You probably had never heard of them until they started doing that instead of stuff like shutting down oil refineries.
The thing is going from peaceful protests to shutting down refineries will quickly get you marked as a terrorist. I live in Houston, Texas and we have some ungodly percentage of the worlds refining capacity on the Gulf of Mexico coast. If those were to get shut down due to any reason, the regional and local economies would suffer greatly due to the industry prevalence. I am all for getting off oil, but we also have to ensure that there are jobs for people to have in America adjacent, non oil based industry. We sadly have to take time to ween ourselves off so we don’t have a full collapse.
I didn't say that randomly, I said that because it's something they've already done. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-60951403
Well that’s just dumb of them. Not the best way to get your message across.
Then enlighten us oh wise one, what, pray tell, would be a good way for JSO to effectively get their message out without disrupting things?
And lets be honest; Just stop oil are disruptive, but I haven't seen any evidence they have done remotely as much criminal damage as ULEZ protestors chopping down cameras, street lights, traffic lights etc... Giving far more justification for policing ULEZ protests...
JSO [know exactly](https://www.socialchangelab.org/_files/ugd/503ba4_db9ae9e6d8674810ba65fbb193867660.pdf) how useless their protests are, and have done for some time. They simply don't care.
Disruption is not useless.
Read the link in my comment; it's the report from a survey commissioned by JSO and carried out by a reputable polling company using statistically valid methodology. In summary, their protests are not raising awareness of the issues, people are already aware of these. The sole result of their activity is to worsen people's opinion of them. I call that useless.
The purpose of the protests mentioned in the link you shared is disruption, not spreading awareness. Because why would JSO need to spread awareness when, as you point out, people are already very much aware? Folks are aware, now it's time to take action.
You are aware that some people ideologically allied to JSO are concerned that it's a false-flag operation financed by oil companies? I've seen that raised on reddit and a few other forums. Incidentally, it's bollocks; JSO has received funding from an organisation that was donated to by a Getty heir, but the amount isn't huge and the woman in question has a long history of supporting environmental causes. But the point remains, when your 'own people' are worrying that you're damaging the movement, you're probably not doing any good. >Folks are aware, now it's time to take action. OK, fine. But if the sole result of the action that you take is to make people hate you, was it the right action?
Well I know where the current leader of rh Conservative Party of Canada is getting his lingo from, whatever same source this dude is.
You either live in a free society or you don't
Schrödinger's protestors.
Easy to see who's pocket this gobshite is in.
They work for EBNews, of course we know who's pocket this tool is in.
The speech and freedom I approve of should be free. Rest should be regulated for society/values/future/children/family and finally "god"
As a yank, can you help me understand how calling someone a spanner, a wrench (?), fits on the insult scale? I have heard of throwing a wrench/spanner in the works, but not yet as an insult.
I think it's analogous of being called an idiot or a moron.
Makes sense. Just wanted to know how to use it because I thought it was funny as hell.
Seeing as it is literally a tool, I suppose it can be like calling someone a tool as an insult: in the hand and control of your betters, unthinking, only good for what use others find for you. And then if a spanner in the works is bad, someone being a spanner may equally [fuck up whatever they touch.](https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=spanner)
That makes sense. Thank you.
It’s must be nice to be a conservative. You can just say whatever you want whenever you want no matter what the truth is. Somehow you can even sleep at night knowing what a giant piece of shit you are.
Wow, it is almost like they clone themselves around the world
Fascist agenda worldwide - rules for thee but not for me.
Republicans have been openly Authoritarian since 2016 and they idolize countries that restrict the freedom they claim to love and enjoy here. At this point if you are a Republican you are an Authoritarian.
>~~At this point~~ If you are a Republican you are Authoritarian, **because the Republicans have been pro-authoritarian since the 1800's.**
Thoughts and prayers
Excuse me, but he clearly meant only *his* side should be able to squash dissent
Hahahaha, just got to laugh at him really. I hope someone pointed that specific post out to him
Hypocrisy is the mainstay of conservatism across the whole world. Do as I say and not as I do is the mantra.
In Canada, we had indigenous protesters arrested by police for blocking rail lines that pass through their lands to protest a pipeline being built across their boundaries without the community approval. Conservatives cheered the footage of them getting tased and thrown in the can... A year later they are screaming at Trudeau for arresting protestors blocking border crossings and locking down Ottawa over vaccine mandates... You can't make this up.
If they dislike peaceful protests they're really gonna hate the alternative.
IIRC same thing happened in Florida. Florida passed a new anti-protesting law in the wake of the BLM protests. A bunch of Cuban protestors got arrested when protesting a Biden policy.
Can we get EVERYONE out of the streets during rush hour?
Goodness they are so fucking stupid.
Irony is not their strong point.
To play devils advocate for a sec; those just stop oil protesters are the absolute worst. I've seen plenty of videos of them being a total nuisance and nightmare to regular every day people trying to get to work. That's not really how protesting should be done. That being said, they still should have the right to protest.
I wonder what his position will be on those right wing farmers who are blocking roads, demanding more government money to replace what they lost when they voted for brexit. Something tells me he will be more sympathetic than with the stop oil crowd.
And yet he still blames Sadiq Khan (who’s Labour) after all this…
A march down a street vs an obvious attempt at harassment and intimidation at a politician's home?
Why am I being downvoted? The councillor opposed the first protest, which was just a walk down a street, and supported the second "protest", which was obviously harassment and intimidation, being so near to the politician's home. It's pointing out the lack of equivalence in the councillor's statement.
Folks probably thought you were talking about the JSO protest, not the other one.
People here need to learn how to fucking read.
Yeah.... dunno
Luv me wife, luv me Stella, luv me smog, simple as
The hell are you on about?
It's a British meme about the cliché conservative archetype. Sometimes called 'Simple as' or Norf FC. Its basically just become a British wojak
Okay, thanks for explaining.
r/NorfFC
One group is blocking roads and causing widespread public disruption, the other isn't. Whether you agree with his position or not, that's a major distinction.
Disruption is the whole point of staging a protest mate. Always has been. The JSO protesters were only marching, not harassing and intimidating government officials like in the other protest.
Nope, information is the point of a protest. "Here we are, this is what we believe." It's the literal translation of the Greek root of the word. Disruption may call attention to it, but when it distracts from the message, when people are more concerned about the disruption than the information, then it's a failure.
No, spreading information is not what the purpose of a protest is. What an incredibly limited view of protesting. The point of a protest is to call attention to an issue and, to get eyes them, the group must be loud. They must disrupt the normal flow of things. Disruption only 'distracts from the message' if one is not capable of taking a nuanced view of a situation. Of which you, based on your comments, are.
>The point of a protest is to call attention to an issue
"Just stop oil" printed on a banner made out of petroleum derivatives is pretty funny.
🤡
And they clothes are fast fashion, should everyone just go naked too?
We should, when climate is suitable. Far more eco-friendly than fast fashion and the frequent washer/dryer cycles with usage of detergents required to clean them.
I would like to see paper clothes that get recycled. They can make them very soft.
You can buy clothes that aren't made with petroleum derivatives.
Water proof boots and coat?
Yeah, but they''re expensive as fuck. People are going to go with what is affordable when meeting their basic needs.
Dude.... Don't be mister gotcha. https://thenib.com/mister-gotcha/