Southport, 2024

[Jdsk]

CPS:
"We have authorised West Yorkshire Police to charge Jordan Parlour, 28, with using threatening words or behaviour intending to stir up racial hatred.
“The charge relates to alleged Facebook posts between 1 August and 5 August in connection with the violent public disorder across the UK.
“It is extremely important there should be no reporting, commentary or sharing of information online which could in any way prejudice these proceedings.”
https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/man-cha ... ial-hatred

That's the first charge that I've seen for online activity related to these riots.

Pled guilty and convicted:
https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/man-con ... ing-online
...

"Man convicted of distributing a recording intending to stir up racial hatred":
https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/updated ... ial-hatred

That could have widespread application.

"Man convicted of intending to stir up racial hatred a day after social media post was published":
https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/man-con ... -published

Excellent speed of action. Shows that it's possible. Should help with deterrence.

Jonathan

[Jdsk]

Pled guilty and convicted:
https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/man-con ... ing-online
...

"Man convicted of distributing a recording intending to stir up racial hatred":
https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/updated ... ial-hatred

That could have widespread application.

"Online Safety Act not fit for purpose after far-right riots, says Sadiq Khan":
https://www.theguardian.com/media/artic ... sadiq-khan

"Keir Starmer confirms Online Safety Act will be reviewed after far-right riots":
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ar ... s-minister

Jonathan

[pwa]

In my opinion the swift processing of rioters and those inciting violence sends the right message and is a very good thing. And it reinforces my belief that sometimes prison is the only way to deal with an offence, particularly one that involves violence. Cross this line, and you will lose your freedom.

[Tangled Metal]

How can you affect laws without the vote? Activism is the only way. No other way really. If climate change activists have support they can vote for supporting parliamentary candidates or even stand themselves. It is an option open to them by truly courageous and righteous individuals.

Are you saying that standing for parliament is more courageous than going to jail for repeated non-violent protest?

No that was a snip from a post that started talking about suffragettes in response to someone comparing these climate activists with suffragettes. Imho the truly courageous and righteous suffragettes fought for rights to vote and it is that right to vote for someone to make the change they want or even stand for parliament themselves.

I do not see them as equivalent. Suffragettes had no other way. Those who fought for rights to vote when disenfranchised had no other way. These activists have other ways fought for by brave people through history.

Also, I do not think they have the right strategy to get the change they think we need which perhaps we do. Public awareness is there. So that stage is over. The will of the majority and the elected lawmakers isn't. You are unlikely to get that will by confrontation. I feel it is self defeating.

[pwa]

Suffragettes were people protesting and being disruptive because they did not have the vote. They were shut out of the democratic process. They couldn't just go and vote for the change they wanted. But other people, protesting today, are generally doing so because they cannot get enough people to vote with them when the democratic process happens. Their cause isn't sufficiently popular to bring about the change they want through our elected bodies.

[Cugel]

Personally I feel that Just Stop Oil and many other protestors agin' the vast momentum of the current status quo are making empty gestures. There isn't a genuine or real swell of opinion on their side. In fact, the huge (HUGE) majority of people in Britain are merrily following a hundred behaviours of our long-established habits that are dooming us and the wider biosphere. Air travel, huge SUVs and rabid consumption of a ton-each plasticrap every week remains the norm and, worse, an ever increasing norm.

However, the disruption the protestors either plan or actually cause is insignificant and nothing more than a minor inconvenience to a few motorists or fatcats with an overdeveloped sense of their own importance inclusive of an absolute right to do what they want with no gainsay of any kind no matter how nasty and damaging their behaviours. The recent custodial sentences of the protestors are hugely out of proportion to their "crimes". Such sentences would be better applied to the fatcats, who do far more widespread damage, up to and including the remote-murder of many folk who fall victim to their moneymaking pollutions, exploitations and destructions.

****************
Custodial sentences, though, are ineffective at bringing about changed behaviours for the better; also cruel in their revengeful application; and hugely expensive to the taxpayer. With the exception of those who are truly dangerous to others if free, I'd like to see alternative modes of dealing with criminal behaviours that would have a genuinely reforming effect. Other nation states manage it but we Blighters seem to have a yen for cruel punishments and revengeful self-righteousness.

Even stupid yobos hypnotised by swivel-eyed self-seeking loons such as Tommy Rottenscum and Farago the Destroyer should be regarded as salvageable, with perhaps the exception of those who obviously aren't. How to distinguish the former from the latter? What are psychologists for, eh? And perhaps, rather than locking those latter up in an expensive gaol that makes them even worse in their criminal tendencies, we could just take them to the vet for spaying?

[axel_knutt]

I do not think they have the right strategy to get the change they think we need which perhaps we do. Public awareness is there. So that stage is over. The will of the majority and the elected lawmakers isn't. You are unlikely to get that will by confrontation. I feel it is self defeating.

The scientific research shows that it works, as long as it doesn't involve violence, because it motivates people who wouldn't support their actions to go and join the more mainstream pressure groups instead.

In my opinion the swift processing of rioters and those inciting violence sends the right message and is a very good thing.

See Daniel Kahneman, people don't learn from their mistakes unless the consequences are immediate and unambiguous.

Suffragettes were people protesting and being disruptive because they did not have the vote. They were shut out of the democratic process. They couldn't just go and vote for the change they wanted. But other people, protesting today, are generally doing so because they cannot get enough people to vote with them when the democratic process happens. Their cause isn't sufficiently popular to bring about the change they want through our elected bodies.

Science isn't a democracy, the climate doesn't care what people will vote for.

[pwa]

Suffragettes were people protesting and being disruptive because they did not have the vote. They were shut out of the democratic process. They couldn't just go and vote for the change they wanted. But other people, protesting today, are generally doing so because they cannot get enough people to vote with them when the democratic process happens. Their cause isn't sufficiently popular to bring about the change they want through our elected bodies.

Science isn't a democracy, the climate doesn't care what people will vote for.

And you think a minority classed by the majority as extremists will win hearts and minds by bringing a motorway to a halt? I think they do the opposite by doing that. The way to progress is through persuasion and moral pressure on the political parties with the clout to do something. Politics is how we bring about change. Either that or the change doesn't happen. But gluing yourself to the road, annoying though it is for others, isn't anywhere near as disturbing as attacking a building housing frightened asylum seekers.

[Mike Sales]

You will probably remember that a few weeks ago a couple of people sprayed one of Stonehenge's monoliths with orange powder. This got a lot more publicity than a demonstration a few days later by some tens of thousands of concerned activists, many of them well known, and some important environmental organisations.

Over 60,000 people march to parliament to demand politicians ...
Wildlife and Countryside Link
https://www.wcl.org.uk › 60,000-people-restore-nature-n...
Search for: How many people attended the Restore Nature Now march?
Who are the speakers at Restore Nature Now?
Various notable speakers including Chris Packham and Megan McCubbin, British naturalist and explorer Steve Backshall and singer Feargal Sharkey will address the crowd [2].21 Jun 2024

You can see why direct action happens.

These causes need solid, well made arguments which convince.
They also need actions which make headlines in the media.

The suffragists made a good case for women being entitled to a vote.
The suffragettes brought that cause to public attention.

[axel_knutt]

Suffragettes were people protesting and being disruptive because they did not have the vote. They were shut out of the democratic process. They couldn't just go and vote for the change they wanted. But other people, protesting today, are generally doing so because they cannot get enough people to vote with them when the democratic process happens. Their cause isn't sufficiently popular to bring about the change they want through our elected bodies.

Science isn't a democracy, the climate doesn't care what people will vote for.

And you think a minority classed by the majority as extremists will win hearts and minds by bringing a motorway to a halt? I think they do the opposite by doing that. The way to progress is through persuasion and moral pressure on the political parties with the clout to do something. Politics is how we bring about change. Either that or the change doesn't happen. But gluing yourself to the road, annoying though it is for others, isn't anywhere near as disturbing as attacking a building housing frightened asylum seekers.

So you didn't bother listening to the research I posted then?

Politics has had its chance, and it's failed. The reason is:

people don't learn from their mistakes unless the consequences are immediate and unambiguous.

Fixing climate change is inconvenient, and JSO are just trying to make ignoring climate change more inconvenient than fixing it. They're also making consequences immediate and unambiguous in the process. People will never vote for meaningful action on climate change because there will always be some other short term priority. Until it's their own house that's on fire, or flooded, then the consequences will be immediate and unambiguous, and it will be too late.

[pwa]

Science isn't a democracy, the climate doesn't care what people will vote for.

And you think a minority classed by the majority as extremists will win hearts and minds by bringing a motorway to a halt? I think they do the opposite by doing that. The way to progress is through persuasion and moral pressure on the political parties with the clout to do something. Politics is how we bring about change. Either that or the change doesn't happen. But gluing yourself to the road, annoying though it is for others, isn't anywhere near as disturbing as attacking a building housing frightened asylum seekers.

So you didn't bother listening to the research I posted then?

Politics has had its chance, and it's failed. The reason is:

people don't learn from their mistakes unless the consequences are immediate and unambiguous.

Fixing climate change is inconvenient, and JSO are just trying to make ignoring climate change more inconvenient than fixing it. They're also making consequences immediate and unambiguous in the process. People will never vote for meaningful action on climate change because there will always be some other short term priority. Until it's their own house that's on fire, or flooded, then the consequences will be immediate and unambiguous, and it will be too late.

To say that meaningful action isn't already happening, with more planned, is incorrect. Oil is, like coal before it, on its way out. But I agree that it needs to be quicker. The electorate have apparently accepted gradual change, because they have elected governments promising it. What you want, surely, is an electorate demanding that the change comes sooner. So you need the electorate on your side. If you get them angry with climate change protest, there is a real danger than politicians asking for real progress will find it more difficult to get some momentum going. And if you think climate change protestors will be allowed to obstruct everyday life for the majority, the way the police and the courts have clamped down on the far right nutters this week should show you how that will go. Winning hearts and minds is the way forward, not silly stunts that just get people angry.

[Carlton green]

I haven’t read this thread from beginning to end but I have been following it and events on the national news; there’s a lot to reflect on and to recognise as it is - rather than as any one of us might want it to be. For me the biggest thing, and maybe the most positive thing about this whole horrid saga, is how ordinary people have just cleared up the mess, supported their neighbours and got on with life. There’s been a lot of kindness within communities, folk supporting their neighbours and those that they ‘rub shoulders with’; acts which I’d worried would fragment society have actually either strengthened it or shown it to be more resilient than I’d feared.

[reohn2]

Suffragettes were people protesting and being disruptive because they did not have the vote. They were shut out of the democratic process. They couldn't just go and vote for the change they wanted. But other people, protesting today, are generally doing so because they cannot get enough people to vote with them when the democratic process happens. Their cause isn't sufficiently popular to bring about the change they want through our elected bodies.

Science isn't a democracy, the climate doesn't care what people will vote for.

And you think a minority classed by the majority as extremists will win hearts and minds by bringing a motorway to a halt? I think they do the opposite by doing that. The way to progress is through persuasion and moral pressure on the political parties with the clout to do something. Politics is how we bring about change. Either that or the change doesn't happen. But gluing yourself to the road, annoying though it is for others, isn't anywhere near as disturbing as attacking a building housing frightened asylum seekers.

Whilst I agree with you about the rioters(previous post),politics AFAICS doesn't seem to be bringing enough change quick enough and I sight Windrush,Grenfell,obscene profits from PPE during Covid,complete debacle Brexit has become,the illegal immigration/asylum seekers and finding real a solution it,the lack of the rich being taxed as they should by closing loopholes and offshore tax havens,the Israel problem and continuing to supply a rogue state with arms,climate change,to name but a few massive issues where politics has and is failing miserably.Politics seems to me to be tampering around the edges without grasping the nettle and getting to grips with addressing the central issues.
What's the first thing Labour does when they come to power? Stop winter fuel payments to pensioners and the effect it has on the rest of the populous!

As for Just Stop Oil,their tactics are making more enemies than sympathetic followers which I suspect are far and few between irrespective of how righteous the case may be,it simply isn't working and they don't seem to be grasping that fact!

[Psamathe]

Interesting how after all the rioting, Social Media issues, etc. the leader of the Conservative Party has said ... nothing. Total silence. I wonder what that says about their position on these issues.

OK, some leadership candidates have fallen hook, line & sinker for Musk's fake news.

Ian

[PDQ Mobile]

"However, a defining characteristic of the populist right – both politicians and their enablers at the tabloids and online – is an absolute, ironclad, unwavering refusal to take responsibility for the consequences of their own actions. They scuttled away from the wreckage of Brexit – always built on an economic fairytale – pointing accusatory fingers at others as their most cherished political project decimated Britain’s trade, shrank the economy and trashed our international reputation – as had been both predicted and forewarned. Now, eight years later, they are equally determined to sidestep responsibility for the long-term consequences of their short-term electoral strategies."

From here.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... y-populism