Hard disagree. As far as I’m aware, everything they’ve done so far is attention-grabbing and harmless. All the paintings were behind glass, and the stuff here is water soluble.
I disagree with their evaluation of the magnitude of climate change catastrophe affecting our lives. There isn’t going to be a Day After Tomorrow “extinction event”. Instead climate change is more insidious and will initially affect people who do not live in the West (as it is already doing). We are going to have global crises due to climate change but it’s not going to be on the same level as, say, a Mutually Assured Destruction scenario with nuclear weapons.
They have also failed to convince the majority of the rest of the public that it will be an ‘extinction event’. Since democracy has not got the result they want they are pursuing anti-democratic means of forcing their agenda onto news segments with stunts that poison the well for other - less extreme - climate change activists.
Disagree with their assessment all you like, but it’s ridiculous to say a protest, especially a non-violent one, is anti-democratic. Democracy does not end at the ballot box, especially in a representative one.
Extinction Rebellion would be the famous example of a group that has publically distanced themselves from JSO’s methods. They believe in protest but simultaneously are wary of alienating people by taking their stunts too far.
Actually I had a friend from uni who was in XR and he helped organise a protest at Canning Town tube station where they clambered ontop of the train in rush hour to try to stop it. He was saying later that he thought they probably made a bad call picking that specific part of the city.
This group undermine and delegitimise other climate activist groups by association
Hard disagree. As far as I’m aware, everything they’ve done so far is attention-grabbing and harmless. All the paintings were behind glass, and the stuff here is water soluble.
Disruptive protests help activists causes:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jul/07/disruptive-protest-helps-not-hinders-activists-cause-experts-say
How? Is your support for not going extinct really contingent on your personal feelings about a particular activist group?
I disagree with their evaluation of the magnitude of climate change catastrophe affecting our lives. There isn’t going to be a Day After Tomorrow “extinction event”. Instead climate change is more insidious and will initially affect people who do not live in the West (as it is already doing). We are going to have global crises due to climate change but it’s not going to be on the same level as, say, a Mutually Assured Destruction scenario with nuclear weapons.
They have also failed to convince the majority of the rest of the public that it will be an ‘extinction event’. Since democracy has not got the result they want they are pursuing anti-democratic means of forcing their agenda onto news segments with stunts that poison the well for other - less extreme - climate change activists.
Disagree with their assessment all you like, but it’s ridiculous to say a protest, especially a non-violent one, is anti-democratic. Democracy does not end at the ballot box, especially in a representative one.
Protest is democratic.
What other climate activist groups?
Extinction Rebellion would be the famous example of a group that has publically distanced themselves from JSO’s methods. They believe in protest but simultaneously are wary of alienating people by taking their stunts too far.
Actually I had a friend from uni who was in XR and he helped organise a protest at Canning Town tube station where they clambered ontop of the train in rush hour to try to stop it. He was saying later that he thought they probably made a bad call picking that specific part of the city.