bovlomov wrote:Carlton green wrote:To put the gatecrash in a different light who would be pleased to have a similar action at their wedding reception? A load of people descending on your private event to protest because meat was on the menu or because some of your guests had flown to the event. I predict that the overwhelming majority of guests and hosts would be pretty upset by such a wilful abuse.
I think upsetting the guests and host was the purpose. The history of the world would be very different if protesters had eschewed annoyance as a tactic. In any case, a Mansion House dinner can't be reasonably compared with my wedding reception. For one thing, we invited no guests. For another, we have no influence over national environmental policy.
Ben@Forest has supplied you with a good answer which I don’t think I can add much too.
As they say: “there’s a time and place for everything”. In this case I believe that the protesters overstepped the mark, however I do take your point about ‘if protesters had eschewed annoyance as a tactic’. It’s a tricky balance or a fine line to tread, and this time the protesters were the wrong side of it. Personally I want protests to be legal, responsible, reasonable and effective; gatecrashing an event like this just degrades genuine protest and is effectively a form of aggression towards others who might even have already been positive toward your cause.