drummerman
pfm Member
Bloke superglued himself to train ...
Bloke superglued himself to train ...
I don't understand how disrupting public transport, so people use their cars, is being green
Only an idiot would take their car into central London today, given there are traffic jams being caused by the demos. It's good to see cynics have already turned up on this page. Pfm has its share of right-wing smugs.
There's a singing demo at the end of the month in Berkeley Square, you know where A Nightingale Sang. Think I'll be going along to that. Jamming up a rich section of London in the fight against climate change sounds fine to me.
Jack
Its using disruption as a means to raise public awareness of the issues and I don't see how profiling the participants (white with dreadlocks for example) is helpful in this respect. Its always the same thing "Oh, they're just a bunch of layabouts or hippies, students" etc..
Yup, it's easy to sit on your arse and sneer from the sidelines. Right-wingers almost invariably think in cliches too:
Without people like this and thousands of others willing to stand up for what they believe in (and, OK, to occasionally look like a tit in the process), we'd still be in the dark ages.
Yup, it's easy to sit on your arse and sneer from the sidelines. Right-wingers almost invariably think in cliches too:
Without people like this and thousands of others willing to stand up for what they believe in (and, OK, to occasionally look like a tit in the process), we'd still be in the dark ages.
I don’t get your argument about not condoning violence, but condoning vandalism and criminal damage. Civil disobedience may take many forms, some of which may not be lawful under current legislation. But it seems to me to be entirely right to take an ethical stance and draw the line at violence. And much, probably most of what you describe as vandalism and criminal damage seems to me to be at the trivial end of the spectrum.Sort of intriguing that she believes in non-violent civil disobedience yet, by association, seems to also condone vandalism and criminal damage.
It's also odd conflating Left vs Right with some inherent sense of caring about vs not caring about the ecology. Over simplistic at best and also erring on cliche territory.
But I do agree with this movement, just not really their methods, which alienate many from what is a noble cause.
I don’t get your argument about not condoning violence, but condoning vandalism and criminal damage. Civil disobedience may take many forms, some of which may not be lawful under current legislation. But it seems to me to be entirely right to take an ethical stance and draw the line at violence. And much, probably most of what you describe as vandalism and criminal damage seems to me to be at the trivial end of the spectrum.
Secondly it’s ‘ecology’ not ‘the ecology’; perhaps you meant ‘the environment’?
And as to the methods, I don’t see any alternative methods having had much effect. And I do see a lot of non-participants waking up to the awareness that, just maybe, a stand needs to be taken on this. So I see more upsides than downsides.
I don’t get your argument about not condoning violence, but condoning vandalism and criminal damage. Civil disobedience may take many forms, some of which may not be lawful under current legislation. But it seems to me to be entirely right to take an ethical stance and draw the line at violence. And much, probably most of what you describe as vandalism and criminal damage seems to me to be at the trivial end of the spectrum.
Secondly it’s ‘ecology’ not ‘the ecology’; perhaps you meant ‘the environment’?
And as to the methods, I don’t see any alternative methods having had much effect. And I do see a lot of non-participants waking up to the awareness that, just maybe, a stand needs to be taken on this. So I see more upsides than downsides.
Secondly it’s ‘ecology’ not ‘the ecology’; perhaps you meant ‘the environment’?