Insulate Britain protests

[Paul Calf]

2.7% of a massive and growing number is still a massive number in absolute terms.

Urr, yeah maybe. But it's nowhere near as big as the other numbers that are bigger.

[Sebastian Cobb]

i dunno what this means

tell me if i'm mistaken but it seems to me you're visualising an environmentalist model where the state would restrict a certain amount of liberties while not  tackling the root cause who made our planet fucked ie capitalism and the governmental systems it allows. do your numbers take into account the whole economy which surrounds the aircraft industry?
and then there's the whole idea that travelling around the world is actually something that people should aspire to in order to fulfill themselves.

What I'm saying is I think the focus on the airline industry is often disproportionate to the amount of damage I think it actually causes, and the amount of attention it gets in environmental talk (which is generally speaking, in terms of the public is a limited space) and that attention could be focused elsewhere. I think any solution that puts the state (or state adjacent body) in direct control of who gets to leave a country is bad (the UK is an island after all). Capitalism is as you say the problem, but this seems to be at the consumer end and is far too individualist for my liking - we've got socialists in here trying to pillory people for taking flights they haven't taken - so I think it's adjacent to the big industry greenwashing narrative that we can all save the planet as individuals if we recycle our cans and put a jumper on, don't look at what the man in the suit behind the curtain is doing, just pick up that bit of litter!

And as you say, government and capitalist protections mean it's quite likely individuals would get their one-or-two flights clamped while they continue to swan about destroying the planet. I have no problem with disincentivising flights both in absolute terms and making them/travel appear less aspirational. But I think there are other aspects of big business that could be tackled, or streamlined first that would make more difference... even now we're arguing about a sticking plaster and who is them/us.

[Sebastian Cobb]

2.7% of a massive and growing number is still a massive number in absolute terms.

If you had a big lorry that had to shed 50% of its load would you implement a bureaucratic rationing system to decide who needs widgets that make up the 2.7% of the overall weight or would you fuck off some big bulky items going to some of the world's biggest businesses because they'll be alright?

[GMTV]

Urr, yeah maybe. But it's nowhere near as big as the other numbers that are bigger.

But it's still a big change. Plus as I said currently a provision of the rich but would be accessible to more given the chance. An increasing % of an ever increasing total emissions is a relatively big thing to tackle. So as a minimum a freeze of current air traffic level would seem like a good first step.

[Sebastian Cobb]

So as a minimum a freeze of current air traffic level would seem like a good first step.

I've said further expansion should be curbed every time this is mentioned.

[GMTV]

I've said further expansion should be curbed every time this is mentioned.

And so if global emissions keep rising that 2.7% will start to reduce eh?

[Sebastian Cobb]

And so if global emissions keep rising that 2.7% will start to reduce eh?

I'd be concerned about the red line and the gap between it and the blue line, rather than the blue line specifically.

[chveik]

What I'm saying is I think the focus on the airline industry is often disproportionate to the amount of damage I think it actually causes, and the amount of attention it gets in environmental talk (which is generally speaking, in terms of the public is a limited space) and that attention could be focused elsewhere. I think any solution that puts the state (or state adjacent body) in direct control of who gets to leave a country is bad (the UK is an island after all). Capitalism is as you say the problem, but this seems to be at the consumer end and is far too individualist for my liking - we've got socialists in here trying to pillory people for taking flights they haven't taken - so I think it's adjacent to the big industry greenwashing narrative that we can all save the planet as individuals if we recycle our cans and put a jumper on, don't look at what the man in the suit behind the curtain is doing, just pick up that bit of litter!

And as you say, government and capitalist protections mean it's quite likely individuals would get their one-or-two flights clamped while they continue to swan about destroying the planet. I have no problem with disincentivising flights both in absolute terms and making them/travel appear less aspirational. But I think there are other aspects of big business that could be tackled, or streamlined first that would make more difference... even now we're arguing about a sticking plaster and who is them/us.

i don't particularly disagree but i'd say it's mostly the media that presents the whole issue in individualistic terms whether it's to make people afraid that they will lose their few remaining liberties or to present the problem in a way that a few small gestures would be sufficient to save us. i suppose the focus on airplanes comes from the fact it entails other destructive aspects of our way of life. i'm not sure if there's a environmentalist project possible without discussing the particular sacrifices we will have to make and that some of them will have to be forced on people (airplanes obviously not being the most important factor), but the lockdowns have shown it's a bit of a myth that self-interests always trump the greater good in people's mind. maybe the issue is how to introduce the positive form of communist discourse with the idea that what we're supposed to expect from life presently doesn't actually make us happier.

self-proclaimed radicals will be cheering on the neolib authoritarianism.

hmm that's quite a heavy accusation. no one is cheering for greenwashing projects here as far as i can see.

[Sebastian Cobb]

i don't particularly disagree but i'd say it's mostly the media that presents the whole issue in individualistic terms whether it's to make people afraid that they will lose their few remaining liberties or to present the problem in a way that a few small gestures would be sufficient to save us. i suppose the focus on airplanes comes from the fact it entails other destructive aspects of our way of life. i'm not sure if there's a environmentalist project possible without discussing the particular sacrifices we will have to make and that some of them will have to be forced on people (airplanes obviously not being the most important factor), but the lockdowns have shown it's a bit of a myth that self-interests always trump the greater good in people's mind.

That's all reasonably agreeable. I think with the lockdown stuff we have to seriously acknowledge there was an end in sight and that was a significant factor in people's acceptance of things, and when that went away, largely to government fucking around and making it look indefinite - then compliance and acceptance dropped off. This environmental stuff is only going to go one way as far as I can tell, which will cause resistance.

[MojoJojo]

Interesting to note the protesters aren't blocking shipping lanes, or cruises more specifically.

SOx and NOx are mainly* harmful as lung irritants. So they've been massively reduced in the fuels used in cars/lorries because they were killing people in cities. The level of SOx/NOx emissions is falling globally. Ships emitting SOx/NOx isn't a major public health issue as it can't build up to the concentrations it could in cities.

Most importantly SOx/NOx are not green house gasses. In fact they create particles that have a cooling effect. So that would be why Insulate Britain aren't protesting about ships.

I don't know if this is what you were doing, but the whole thing about ships SOx/NOx is just a big distraction tactic that lets people feel better about their cars.

(* they also contribute to acid rain. How much you care about that I'll leave up to you. I will note that I've heard pretty convincing arguments that the acid rain scare of the 80s was basically media misunderstanding science again though)

[The Ombudsman]

SOx and NOx are mainly* harmful as lung irritants. So they've been massively reduced in the fuels used in cars/lorries because they were killing people in cities. The level of SOx/NOx emissions is falling globally. Ships emitting SOx/NOx isn't a major public health issue as it can't build up to the concentrations it could in cities.

Most importantly SOx/NOx are not green house gasses. In fact they create particles that have a cooling effect. So that would be why Insulate Britain aren't protesting about ships.

I don't know if this is what you were doing, but the whole thing about ships SOx/NOx is just a big distraction tactic that lets people feel better about their cars.

(* they also contribute to acid rain. How much you care about that I'll leave up to you. I will note that I've heard pretty convincing arguments that the acid rain scare of the 80s was basically media misunderstanding science again though)

My intent wasn't to move the subject away from cars for flights. I'm a member of the green party and strongly think many things need to be done to stop the damage we are doing. I think what gets my goat is the way in which these protesters are trying to make a statement. I see acts like this as damaging the overall cause. I agree with their cause just not the actions.

[Buelligan]

No, you don't understand. It's MUCH easier to bully individuals into not flying any more than it is to get big companies to change their policies. So even if it's ineffective, that's what will happen and self-proclaimed radicals will be cheering on the neolib authoritarianism.

It's not a question of how easy or hard it is.  It's not a question of just slipping in a chekky chokky.  All of it has to stop.

How many more people need to drown in mud or starve because people who aren't yet refuse to concentrate?

[thenoise]

Nothing wrong with the houses. We need to normalise wearing woolly jumpers and housecoats indoors. Propagate the idea that central heating is bad for you, and it definitely shouldn't be turned on at night. Blankets, bed jackets, night caps (hat not drink). Basically, put my late Nan in charge.

[Pinball]

What do you think they should do?

Something fun, like a nude run (I jest). Gets on the news, and smiles all round :-)

Basically, reward works better than punishment, but no-one seems capable of 'positive protests'.

[chveik]

My intent wasn't to move the subject away from cars for flights. I'm a member of the green party and strongly think many things need to be done to stop the damage we are doing. I think what gets my goat is the way in which these protesters are trying to make a statement. I see acts like this as damaging the overall cause. I agree with their cause just not the actions.

you'd get behind blocking cruise ships then?

[beanheadmcginty]

I was astonished to discover during a conversation with workmates last winter that a good proportion of them have their central heating setting to between 26 and 28 degrees C. Anything above 16 and I start sweating. A lot of good could be done by nobbling everyone's thermostats I reckon.

[Buelligan]

Something fun, like a nude run (I jest). Gets on the news, and smiles all round :-)

Basically, reward works better than punishment, but no-one seems capable of 'positive protests'.

Any examples?  Examples of what you'd call positive protests that have achieved their goal?

[TrenterPercenter]

Basically, reward works better than punishment, but no-one seems capable of 'positive protests'.

Chenoweth and Stephan's (2011) groundbreaking work focuses on 323 campaigns that focus on a variety of political and social outcomes, including ending foreign occupation, regime change, self-determination, anti-apartheid movements. Both generally and specifically for all types of movements except secession movements, nonviolent protest campaigns are much more successful than violent campaigns.

https://direct.mit.edu/isec/article/33/1/7/11935/Why-Civil-Resistance-Works-The-Strategic-Logic-of

The article states that that major nonviolent campaigns have achieved success 53 percent of the time, compared with 26 percent for violent resistance campaigns.  They give two reasons for this; the perceived commitment to non-violent peaceful protests enhances legitimacy and broaden appeal to resistance bases; violence by states against non-violent peaceful protest work against states in the public perception whilst violent protest are perceived as maximalist in demands.

Not sure if there has been any research directly on "positive protests" but in similar fashion it is not hard to see why "positive" protests like protest concerts and taking the knee etc... are more likely to be successful than disruptive ones (not always and I'm not advocating either).  Anyone that's actually been on a protest march would have noticed the largely positive, usually colourful and lively culture that exists in them.  Folk music and protest songs also fit the bill here.

Where I do disagree is that "no-one" can do positive protests anymore - they occur all the time you just don't hear about them; or rather they do not meet the salacious divisive criteria for the press which quite paradoxically means that people either think they don't exist or never work.

[thenoise]

I was astonished to discover during a conversation with workmates last winter that a good proportion of them have their central heating setting to between 26 and 28 degrees C. Anything above 16 and I start sweating. A lot of good could be done by nobbling everyone's thermostats I reckon.

Guarantee that they change into PJs immediately they get home.

[Captain Z]

Guarantee that they change into PJs immediately they get home.

They get paintballs shot in their eyes?

[Pinball]

Any examples?  Examples of what you'd call positive protests that have achieved their goal?

https://www.amnesty.org.uk/secret-policemans-tour

https://www.comicrelief.com/

Do you have any ideas for positive protest/campaign approaches? I would say that ER and its cavity wall insulation spin-off is a PR disaster. Definitely not 'carrying the people' with it, to say the least.

[Fambo Number Mive]

Aren't the above examples more fundraising than campaigning?

[Pinball]

Fundraising yes, but campaigning a big part of it too.

Campaigning and lobbying are vital. Ask the corporations who run the UK.

Frankly standing in a giant joke immersion heater with placards in front of the HOC would have achieved more than this now criminal group of protesters.

[Retinend]

A bit off-topic, but on this YT upload from a Good Morning Britain broadcast, they decided to blur everything that isn't a talking head - is this some sort of licensing issue? I've never seen it before.

[The Ombudsman]

A bit off-topic, but on this YT upload from a Good Morning Britain broadcast, they decided to blur everything that isn't a talking head - is this some sort of licensing issue? I've never seen it before.

Maybe the lorries had logos on and they didn't want to advertise them? Or GDPR with licence plates? Must be something like that I'm sure.

[Buelligan]

https://www.amnesty.org.uk/secret-policemans-tour

https://www.comicrelief.com/

Do you have any ideas for positive protest/campaign approaches? I would say that ER and its cavity wall insulation spin-off is a PR disaster. Definitely not 'carrying the people' with it, to say the least.

People?  People who suck up whatever gruesome shite the mainstream media feeds them will never hear the penny drop.  Thankfully, they're a rapidly diminishing demographic.  The tutting'll get even worse, not a chuckle to be heard anywhere, when they realise what global warming is going to do to the lawn.  And the new carpet.  And their holibobs.

[lipsink]

Feel kinda sorry for that Insulate Britain protestor they keep having on. He's obviously not the best at interviews and in that clip he has 3 complete fannies just shouting over him. Madeley's laugh at the end as the guy walks off  Just a hateful, bullying cunt.

Novara did a great bit about it: https://youtu.be/UmNFlMyWoLs

[Fambo Number Mive]

Good to see XR disrupting private flights today. Stopping the wealthy from flying around the globe making things worse for everyone else is a easy win for any government which cared about climate change.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-57858103

@XRebellionUK
Farnborough airport has 30,000 private flights a year, each with an average of 2.3 passengers, each passenger responsible for emitting 20x more carbon than passengers on an economy flight to🇪🇸

Farnborough airport has permission to expand to 50,000 private flights a year

[Sebastian Cobb]

Yes, that is good.

[Fambo Number Mive]

Priti Patel will announce a series of police powers to prevent disruptive protests in her speech to the Conservative Party conference next week, The Times has learnt.

Police will be given powers to stop and search individuals they suspect are carrying devices intended to lock themselves to critical infrastructure, such as handcuffs, bike locks or glue.

From the Times. How long before the police can just stop anyone for no reason like under the sus law?