OT Sorry and I know some will disagree, but...

... whilst we have to be very careful with any new laws regarding the right to peaceful protest but, at some point something has to change. I agree that Braverman's proposed Law has been rightly blocked and criticised by the vast majority including the Courts.
However, protests are becoming more extreme and recent incidents, for example, where emergency vehicles were prevented from attending an incident, and a case where a mother's please to be allowed to pass was refused by intransigent protestors when she needed to get to a hospital urgently.

Now we have this...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-63296648

I wonder how these protestors have the time and money to carry out these protests. Presumably they do not actually hold down responsible jobs.
Ironically huge traffic queues cause pollution and excess fuel wasted albeit they argue 'short term pain for long term gain'. That said, digging underground tunnels, damaging infrastructure, putting emergency service workers in danger and the sheer disruption caused to the public trying to go about their daily work is hard to justify. As someone said, causing criminal damage is not a human right'.
The other irony is that these anarchic and extreme actions actually alienate many people who are sympathetic to the overall aims of the protestors. Peaceful protest by all means but criminal damage, and causing huge problems affecting commerce( and the public) on this scale goes way beyond 'minor inconvenience' and peaceful protest and needs, IMO at least, curbing.
I wonder how many people / lorries etc heading towards ferries at Dover have missed their allotted times. Freight carrying fresh produce have enough problems post Brexit with delays at Dover without this additional obstacle. This protest alone will cost millions at a time UK can least afford it.

EDIT: I forgot to add, IMO these actions differ completely from Strike action - i.e. the right to withdraw ones labour, and peaceful picketing. I know they too can cause commercial losses and inconvenience sometimes on a large scale. However it is fairly easy to distinguish them in any legislation from political protests.

 

The Planet is literally burning, these more extreme measure to wake people up are necessary, many women went to jail to get the vote because legal means fell on deaf ears, for example. Sometimes it needs direct action, which break the law, for people to sit up and take notice. These people are prepared to go to Jail for it, they know the consequences, I doubt any of them have ever said causing criminal damage is a human right.

 

Totally agree mate, for me people like Greta Thunberg deserve our gratitude not condemnation.

The OP talks about disruption of emergency services when the government has underfunded them to the point of breakdown rendering them almost impotent. But no, just blame the protesters, easy targets.

 

I can't quite believe I'm saying this Tekky but i agree! Most of the young ones look like they rely on mum and dad and have never paid a bill in their life, and the elderly are likely retired. And the 'leaders' from what i have seen don't have a plan b, they just want to 'stop oil.' Since when did not getting your way lead directly to vandalism and chaos? What happened to responsible debate and compromise? Very worrying that these represent a portion of the future generation.

 

These kids need to stop comparing themselves to the suffragettes and civil rights movement, it's embarrassing. I saw one interview where one of their spokepersons argued it was 'early' so they couldn't think straight in response to a question posed to them. It was 8.30 in the morning.

 

I wonder how these protests will be viewed in 30 years' time.

 

My point was that sometimes it takes more then a strongly worded letter to get things done, not that they are morally equivalent, although saving humanity from climate disaster might be seen as equally important.

 

Protest isn't effective if it doesn't cause at least some degree of disruption.

It's entirely irrelevant whether or not the protest relates to a cause which you agree or disagree with, or your view of the individuals carrying out the protest. The last few years have seen frightening advances in State powers and this further erosion of the basic right to protest must be stopped.

 

On the bridge.
One is a design engineer (39yrs of age) the other apparently a teacher.
Possibly freelance. At a guess.

 

Blocking citizens from going to work, hospital appointmens etc is not the way to get the public onside.

 

While I completely agree with you in principle, if you're going to protest then you still have an obligation to consider your approach very carefully. One particularly ill-judged incident was when some PETA clowns broke into a mink farm and freed the mink into the surrounding countryside. Whatever your views on farming animals for fur (or any other human desire), releasing an aggressive and invasive species into the wild where they will cause huge disruption to the ecosystem is clearly an utterly cretinous move.

 

Of course, but there are ways of going about things that requires a degree of intelligence and dialogue is essential. What i'm seeing is a bunch of wannabe anarchists playing up to faux-social media heroism. We all want to care for the planet, but we don't have to stop ordinary folk getting to work, or throw beans at a Van Gogh in order to do something about it. If they came up with a viable alternative rather than just shouting 'stop oil!', gluing themselves to the road and setting their arms on fire, they may gain more credibility. As it stands, they just look like spoilt, dumb, petulant, white middle-class kids with too much time on their hands.

 

I'm not seeing an erosion of the basic right to protest in this case, if anything the police are protecting them.

 

Recently, in my sleepy part of Bristol in the dead of night, a supposed vegan 'activist' put a hammer through the local butcher's window, and the ice cream shop. Both are family-run businesses, and the ice cream shop especially is highly-regarded and has been family-run for generations. I am vegetarian, and I see no positives in this type of action; if anything it has the opposite effect to presumably what the person doing it intended; it alienates non-vegans further, and creates more division. It is also cowardly and childish, and wrongly targets independent businesses. They should aim their vitriol at big corporations such as McDonalds etc if anything.

 

I kinda get both sides on this one.

Protest is absolutely critical to a democracy (which we supposedly still have). And being a leftie, I’m a big fan of direct action and civil disobedience… if it changes something important.

I want to stop oil. I don’t want new oil licenses. But I don’t see how attacking a Van Gough painting brings that goal any closer. It just seems stupid, and understandably puts people off them.

Direct action done right, for me, is targeted against wherever the power is being held. Usually bent governments or mega, soulless, corporations. Not humanity’s own history and culture.

And blocking people getting to hospital is an own goal on a par with the famous one we benefited from at Wolves in the 1980s.

 

Is it okay to be totally for these protests and their methods but find the posh ******** involved incredibly infuriating?

 

Oh, don't get me wrong, I don't agree with some of the methods we've seen lately, and particularly not by some of the sock dodgers I've seen wearing too tight trousers with nonce trotters.

 

I'd imagine the very best way of protesting against climate damaging policies is for everyone to get off their arses at the next election and force a change.
Unfortunately many will not be bothered to vote. Especially the "they're all as bad as one another" brigade.

 

Protesting is a fine line - between the maximum impact of the message and the minimum impact on those who might otherwise support the cause. Throwing soup over a Van Gogh won't win any converts to the cause - and neither will sitting in the road because sooner or later one of them will be attacked and killed by an annoyed motorist. IIRC the other year they were blocking access to electric trains (might have been the DLR), which would go against their cause as more people would then drive.

The question is what they can do that would win widespread support and maximum impact...