Deflating SUV Tyres

[mattheus]

You're still criticisng protestors on the grounds that they don't measure up to your ideal - in this case Rosa Parks (!)

I suspect bad faith when I see this sort of thing. There is always some excuse for putting down protestors, some reason to ignore the point they're actually making:
"oh, I'd listen to Rosa Parks - but not this rabble. They undermine their cause with their silly tactics!"

[mattheus]

And I assume you backed all the recent protests where campaigners WERE arrested?

I don't think that's the point. At least such people are acting openly and accepting the consequences - subject to being able to gain more publicity etc through the subsequent legal processes. If people snoop about secretively, it's not so easy to be certain of their motivation, or their circumstances.

Can you confirm if pwa did support such protests? That is the point I was making.

[thirdcrank]

And I assume you backed all the recent protests where campaigners WERE arrested?

I don't think that's the point. At least such people are acting openly and accepting the consequences - subject to being able to gain more publicity etc through the subsequent legal processes. If people snoop about secretively, it's not so easy to be certain of their motivation, or their circumstances.

Can you confirm if pwa did support such protests? That is the point I was making.

I really don't know and in the absence of any comment from pwa I'm not really bothered. The implication that an exchange between two members of an open internet forum should not attract comment from others is not one I attach weight to.

[mattheus]

I don't think that's the point. At least such people are acting openly and accepting the consequences - subject to being able to gain more publicity etc through the subsequent legal processes. If people snoop about secretively, it's not so easy to be certain of their motivation, or their circumstances.

Can you confirm if pwa did support such protests? That is the point I was making.

I really don't know and in the absence of any comment from pwa I'm not really bothered. The implication that an exchange between two members of an open internet forum should not attract comment from others is not one I attach weight to.

That's fine - you can say what you want, and I've replied to your comment. Your reply of "I really don't know" suggests that you commented from a position of ignorance.

Should I attach weight to any of your posts?

[thirdcrank]

Can you confirm if pwa did support such protests? That is the point I was making.

I really don't know and in the absence of any comment from pwa I'm not really bothered. The implication that an exchange between two members of an open internet forum should not attract comment from others is not one I attach weight to.

That's fine - you can say what you want, and I've replied to your comment. Your reply of "I really don't know" suggests that you commented from a position of ignorance.

Should I attach weight to any of your posts?

IMO there's a difference between "not knowing" and the implications of a "position of ignorance."

The weight you attach to my posts is very obviously a matter for you and a source of some indifference to me. I post in good faith and in particular always try to make the difference between "IMO" and something I think I can support with a source, and I would hope an open-minded reader would get that. AIUI, the is the basis of sensible discussion.
=====================================

PS I've reflected on the matter of quotes. I'm by no means familiar with all the etiquette and protocol of the internet. Some years ago meic made the point that not including the name of a poster when quoting was less aggressive. (I've been back to look but I cannot find his actual post to quote - which is a bit ironic in these circumstances.) If I seem to get something like this wrong, it's not done with any intention to mislead. And I thought that was obvious.

[pwa]

And I assume you backed all the recent protests where campaigners WERE arrested?

I don't think that's the point. At least such people are acting openly and accepting the consequences - subject to being able to gain more publicity etc through the subsequent legal processes. If people snoop about secretively, it's not so easy to be certain of their motivation, or their circumstances.

Can you confirm if pwa did support such protests? That is the point I was making.

No I didn't back all those protests because some took the form of obstructing people, fairly randomly, which is clearly meant to cause stress to those affected, and stress is harm. It is disingenuous to call such protest peaceful, just because the harm inflicted doesn't result in cuts and bruises. If people want to conduct selfless protest that attracts the media and has a bit of drama, a hunger strike is a way of doing it. Better still, just put one's own house in order and find a way of living one's own life without planes, trains and automobiles. If one's own way of doing things isn't perfect, how can one justify picking on someone else's weak spot? They may be better than us in some other way. Maybe they heat their home more efficiently, don't fly, or something else that we don't know about.

[PedallingSquares]

I'm not about to read 23 pages but I really don't get it.These little pretend SUVs are no more polluting than any other vehicle and a good few are now Hybrid/Electric.These new groups,Extinction Rebellion/Insulate Britain etc are just a magnet for idiots who jump on any old band wagon.
It's not helping anyone or anything and damages rather than helps the cause IMO.

Thankyou caller.

?
After reading some of the posts from here on in I think I have done the right thing not reading the previous 23 pages
So thank you.

[cycle tramp]

I'm not about to read 23 pages but I really don't get it.These little pretend SUVs are no more polluting than any other vehicle and a good few are now Hybrid/Electric.These new groups,Extinction Rebellion/Insulate Britain etc are just a magnet for idiots who jump on any old band wagon.
It's not helping anyone or anything and damages rather than helps the cause IMO.

Thankyou caller.

?
After reading some of the posts from here on in I think I have done the right thing not reading the previous 23 pages
So thank you.

However you did waste some time by posting on this thread

[mattheus]

No I didn't back all those protests because some took the form of obstructing people, fairly randomly, which is clearly meant to cause stress to those affected, and stress is harm. It is disingenuous to call such protest peaceful, just because the harm inflicted doesn't result in cuts and bruises. If people want to conduct selfless protest that attracts the media and has a bit of drama, a hunger strike is a way of doing it.

So anything less than a Hunger Strike is in your opinion unjustified?? Brilliant.

I don't think you really understand protest, and how it works in making changes in society. Or you just don't like being inconvenienced!

[Carlton green]

No I didn't back all those protests because some took the form of obstructing people, fairly randomly, which is clearly meant to cause stress to those affected, and stress is harm. It is disingenuous to call such protest peaceful, just because the harm inflicted doesn't result in cuts and bruises. If people want to conduct selfless protest that attracts the media and has a bit of drama, a hunger strike is a way of doing it.

So anything less than a Hunger Strike is in your opinion unjustified?? Brilliant.

I don't think you really understand protest, and how it works in making changes in society. Or you just don't like being inconvenienced!

It’s an interesting thought that only others should be inconvenienced by protest. I live in a society that needs to change and some of what I - and others - do can only change for the better if the frame work that society gives me to live within changes. To me it seems obvious that in supporting things that exert pressure on society to change I’ll also have to accept some personal inconvenience. Would it not be selfish to view things differently?

As for SUV’s. I have no issue with necessary Utility Vehicles, however putting Sport into them changes my attitude completely and SUV’s are something that we’d be better off pretty much removing from the roads.

[Bmblbzzz]

To be most effective, change at an individual level needs to bring about change at an institutional level. In this case, the institutions are government transport and planning departments, and vehicle manufacturers.

[mattheus]

No I didn't back all those protests because some took the form of obstructing people, fairly randomly, which is clearly meant to cause stress to those affected, and stress is harm. It is disingenuous to call such protest peaceful, just because the harm inflicted doesn't result in cuts and bruises. If people want to conduct selfless protest that attracts the media and has a bit of drama, a hunger strike is a way of doing it.

Are hunger strikes better than human road-blocks?

"Angus Rose, 52, has gone 18 days without food. He has a sign and a wooden stool to sit on as he waits outside the Houses of Parliament in Westminster.

The software engineer is demanding that MPs be given a crucial briefing on climate science that Prime Minister Boris Johnson described as his "Road to Damascus" moment on the issue of global warming.

So far, Mr Rose has lost at least 10.9 kilograms in weight, drinking zero-calorie drinks such as water, coffee and tea while refusing all offers of food.

Mr Rose is aware that the lack of nutrition could lead to lasting damage to his health, including cognitive impairments and heart arrhythmia, but he says he is undeterred such are his fears over irreversible climate change."
March 13 2022
https://www.thenationalnews.com/world/u ... -briefing/

Has this guy got half the coverage that the Insualrte Britain road-blocks managed in just a few hours?

[reohn2]

To be most effective, change at an individual level needs to bring about change at an institutional level. In this case, the institutions are government transport and planning departments, and vehicle manufacturers.

And as long as governments only plan for the next general election whilst promising the moon an a stick after they're elected we're doomed!

[Psamathe]

No I didn't back all those protests because some took the form of obstructing people, fairly randomly, which is clearly meant to cause stress to those affected, and stress is harm. It is disingenuous to call such protest peaceful, just because the harm inflicted doesn't result in cuts and bruises. If people want to conduct selfless protest that attracts the media and has a bit of drama, a hunger strike is a way of doing it.

Are hunger strikes better than human road-blocks?

"Angus Rose, 52, has gone 18 days without food. He has a sign and a wooden stool to sit on as he waits outside the Houses of Parliament in Westminster.

The software engineer is demanding that MPs be given a crucial briefing on climate science that Prime Minister Boris Johnson described as his "Road to Damascus" moment on the issue of global warming.

So far, Mr Rose has lost at least 10.9 kilograms in weight, drinking zero-calorie drinks such as water, coffee and tea while refusing all offers of food.

Mr Rose is aware that the lack of nutrition could lead to lasting damage to his health, including cognitive impairments and heart arrhythmia, but he says he is undeterred such are his fears over irreversible climate change."
March 13 2022
https://www.thenationalnews.com/world/u ... -briefing/

Has this guy got half the coverage that the Insualrte Britain road-blocks managed in just a few hours?

Maybe not the coverage but also he has achieved something. He has managed to initiate a briefing for MPs about the Climate Crisis from Gov Chief Scientific Adviser.

I doubt we'll ever find out but it would be interesting to know if that MP who keeps starting up denial groups called <something> Research Group attends the briefing and if he believes any of it (Steve Baker and his the Net Zero Scrutiny Group (NZSG) of Climate Denial with close links to Lawson's Global Warming Policy Forum? of Climate Denial)

Ian

[thirdcrank]

No I didn't back all those protests because some took the form of obstructing people, fairly randomly, which is clearly meant to cause stress to those affected, and stress is harm. It is disingenuous to call such protest peaceful, just because the harm inflicted doesn't result in cuts and bruises. If people want to conduct selfless protest that attracts the media and has a bit of drama, a hunger strike is a way of doing it.

Are hunger strikes better than human road-blocks?

"Angus Rose, 52, has gone 18 days without food. He has a sign and a wooden stool to sit on as he waits outside the Houses of Parliament in Westminster.

The software engineer is demanding that MPs be given a crucial briefing on climate science that Prime Minister Boris Johnson described as his "Road to Damascus" moment on the issue of global warming.

So far, Mr Rose has lost at least 10.9 kilograms in weight, drinking zero-calorie drinks such as water, coffee and tea while refusing all offers of food.

Mr Rose is aware that the lack of nutrition could lead to lasting damage to his health, including cognitive impairments and heart arrhythmia, but he says he is undeterred such are his fears over irreversible climate change."
March 13 2022
https://www.thenationalnews.com/world/u ... -briefing/

Has this guy got half the coverage that the Insualrte Britain road-blocks managed in just a few hours?

Maybe not the coverage but also he has achieved something. He has managed to initiate a briefing for MPs about the Climate Crisis from Gov Chief Scientific Adviser.

I doubt we'll ever find out but it would be interesting to know if that MP who keeps starting up denial groups called <something> Research Group attends the briefing and if he believes any of it (Steve Baker and his the Net Zero Scrutiny Group (NZSG) of Climate Denial with close links to Lawson's Global Warming Policy Forum? of Climate Denial)

Ian

Coverage must be important but surely nobody thinks it's a measure of success?