Protesting

Discussions about serious topics, for serious people
User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2900
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: Protesting

Post by EACLucifer » Sun Oct 16, 2022 6:54 pm

Bird on a Fire wrote:
Sun Oct 16, 2022 6:50 pm
EACLucifer wrote:
Sun Oct 16, 2022 6:33 pm
Bird on a Fire wrote:
Wed Sep 29, 2021 12:58 pm
Well Starmer's just committed to a £6bn home insulation program at the conference, so the idea is getting somewhere.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/li ... f3005a64c7
And this of course came because some almost universally socially privileged morons in a group founded by someone unable to separate his spectacularly dodgy fantasies from politics decided to stop people visiting their dying relatives, block green transport options in one of the poorest parts of London, and so on, rather than because it's absolute no-brainer for reducing carbon emissions and in line with Labour's view of the role of the state.
Of course it is. Climate policy has nothing to do with what's sensible, which is why what we have is so woefully inadequate. It's to do with perceived public acceptability. Without pressure groups, including XR, keeping the issue in public discourse politicians would focus on other areas.
Of course. Starmer would never have considered a policy that appeals to those concerned about climate - which was a fucktonne of people before XR ever existed - and also saves people money day to day. No, that would never possibly be a vote winner without some tw.ts trying to f.ck over ordinary people's ability to get around their own f.cking cities.

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 9992
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: Protesting

Post by Bird on a Fire » Sun Oct 16, 2022 7:08 pm

Well neither of us know what would have happened on an alternate timeline. But take a look at the graph above for the impact of XR protests on public prioritisation of climate change: it pretty clearly made a difference.

Insulating properties has been a no-brainer for decades, but it only appeared in the Labour manifesto shortly after a bunch of protests brought it to public attention, at the same time a bunch of other activists within the Labour party were pushing for various progressive measures to be adopted. Could be a coincidence, but I suspect that's unlikely, not least because both sets of activists overlap hugely. It's quite clear the policy didn't come from Starmer himself.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 9992
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: Protesting

Post by Bird on a Fire » Sun Oct 16, 2022 7:16 pm

Do note as well that these kinds of stunts are generally pretty popular with actual climate scientists, who are generally the people who know most about climate change and who have been concerned the longest.

There's various articles, like this one in Nature Climate Change, on the issue https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-022-01461-y (ETA non-paywalled pdf).The Scientists Rebellion in April had about 1000 participants. IPCC lead authors have been arrested recently. The sensible experts are sh.tting their pants, because the old pathways to effecting change have done too little, too late and there's little time left to avoid catastrophic climate change.

So climate scientists will be amongst the first people to tell you that actions by XR, Just Stop Oil, Insulate Britain etc are (in general) a Good Thing, though I'm sure plenty would have criticisms of particular incidents. See e.g. https://scientistrebellion.com/our-posi ... d-demands/
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.

User avatar
bjn
After Pie
Posts: 2315
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:58 pm
Location: London

Re: Protesting

Post by bjn » Sun Oct 16, 2022 8:47 pm

I dislike the idea that non violent protest should never impact other people. It prioritises business as usual over dissent, and has been used time and again to suppress not only protest but such things as strikes and other actions.

Yes it sucks to be caught in the side effect of a protest or strike, but it also sucks to have your right to protest or strike taken off you.

I’d posit that countries with robust union action and robust protests that do impact on normal day to day activities have better quality of life, and stronger more diverse civil societies. No idea how you can test that.

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2900
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: Protesting

Post by EACLucifer » Sun Oct 16, 2022 9:04 pm

bjn wrote:
Sun Oct 16, 2022 8:47 pm
I dislike the idea that non violent protest should never impact other people.
And I can stop there, because I never actually said that.

However, there is a moral imperative when deciding to cause a negative impact on other people that it be done carefully, with attention to causing least possible harm to achieve the necessary effect, and paying serious attention to who is affected.

Blocking the (electric) trains at Canning Town, for example, fails radically at that.

PS. It can be informative to ask this sort of protester how they think the impact of what they seek (ie abolition of use of oil but also frequently all private transport, degrowth, etc) would be on disabled people and what they would be willing to compromise on to mitigate it. It is

User avatar
bjn
After Pie
Posts: 2315
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:58 pm
Location: London

Re: Protesting

Post by bjn » Sun Oct 16, 2022 9:24 pm

I wasn’t aiming it at you but making a general point.

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2900
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: Protesting

Post by EACLucifer » Sun Oct 16, 2022 9:25 pm

bjn wrote:
Sun Oct 16, 2022 9:24 pm
I wasn’t aiming it at you but making a general point.
Fair enough :)

User avatar
bjn
After Pie
Posts: 2315
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:58 pm
Location: London

Re: Protesting

Post by bjn » Sun Oct 16, 2022 9:31 pm

But yes, protest and strikes need to be thought about as to its intended outcome and effects on others. Which doesn’t mean playing nicely all the time.

Ironically BBC news is now on saying that Braverman wants to crack even harder, criminalising more forms of protest and issuing more injunctions.

Millennie Al
Dorkwood
Posts: 1528
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2020 4:02 am

Re: Protesting

Post by Millennie Al » Mon Oct 17, 2022 4:39 am

Bird on a Fire wrote:
Sun Oct 16, 2022 6:49 pm
EACLucifer wrote:
Sun Oct 16, 2022 6:25 pm
The thought that you might be about to hit someone through no fault of your own, that you whatever you do it might not be quite enough to stop it, and the added fact that you are having to emergency brake and the person behind you might be slightly slower to brake and go into the back of you is, in fact, pretty terrifying.
Of course it is, and I didn't say otherwise. But it's obviously far scarier to be in that situation without a vehicle, standing in front of oncoming traffic. Riskier, too.
Any protester who found it too scary was perfectly free to stop and go home. Unlike the people subjected to their actions.

Millennie Al
Dorkwood
Posts: 1528
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2020 4:02 am

Re: Protesting

Post by Millennie Al » Mon Oct 17, 2022 4:41 am

Bird on a Fire wrote:
Sun Oct 16, 2022 7:08 pm
Insulating properties has been a no-brainer for decades, but it only appeared in the Labour manifesto shortly after a bunch of protests brought it to public attention, at the same time a bunch of other activists within the Labour party were pushing for various progressive measures to be adopted. Could be a coincidence, but I suspect that's unlikely, not least because both sets of activists overlap hugely. It's quite clear the policy didn't come from Starmer himself.
Or maybe a bunch of protesters only decided to do something once their solution had already become so accepted that it was about to be adopted by a major party for its manifesto.

User avatar
Woodchopper
Light of Blast
Posts: 5992
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: Protesting

Post by Woodchopper » Mon Oct 17, 2022 8:06 am

Bird on a Fire wrote:
Sun Oct 16, 2022 7:08 pm
Insulating properties has been a no-brainer for decades, but it only appeared in the Labour manifesto shortly after a bunch of protests brought it to public attention, at the same time a bunch of other activists within the Labour party were pushing for various progressive measures to be adopted. Could be a coincidence, but I suspect that's unlikely, not least because both sets of activists overlap hugely. It's quite clear the policy didn't come from Starmer himself.
Not really, the Insulate Britain protests started in 2021.

Here's some quotes from previous Labour manifestos

2019
Labour will tackle the climate crisis and cut energy bills by introducing a tough, new zero-carbon homes standard for all new homes, and upgrading millions of existing homes to make them more energy efficient.
2017
Labour will insulate four million homes as an infrastructure priority to help those who suffer in cold homes each winter. This will cut emissions, improve health, save on bills, and reduce fuel poverty and winter deaths.
2015
We will bring down energy bills by making homes more energy efficient, delivering a million interest free loans for energy home improvements in the next Parliament. For those on low incomes, we will make 200,000 homes warm every year, delivered street-by-street by local authorities and community organisations. Privately rented properties will have to meet a decency standard, bringing warmth to a further three million homes.
Different language but home insulation has been a priority for years. Probably earlier but I stopped at 2015.

plodder
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2981
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:50 pm

Re: Protesting

Post by plodder » Mon Oct 17, 2022 10:00 am

But it hasn't happened. You lot are being obtuse. Protestors don't glue themselves to walls because they want more R&D funding for fusion or whatever, they're sick and tired of the blindingly obvious being repeatedly ignored because vested interests.

User avatar
El Pollo Diablo
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2998
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:41 pm
Location: FBPE

Re: Protesting

Post by El Pollo Diablo » Mon Oct 17, 2022 12:45 pm

I'd add the Labour 2010 GE manifesto as well:
To be on track for the transition to a low-carbon economy in a way that is fair, secure and helps create the jobs of the future, as we protect and enhance our natural environment and quality of life. For the Tories the environment has been all about image — by failing to deliver on our renewable energy targets, reversing our planning reforms and giving up on our new industrial strategy, they would put Labour’s low-carbon revolution in jeopardy.
(which obviously is exactly what the Tories did)
Make greener living easier and fairer through ‘pay as you save’ home energy insulation, energy-bill discounts for pensioners and requiring landlords to properly insulate rented homes...

Everyone can play their part in reducing carbon emissions and protecting the environment. Through our requirement that energy companies provide subsidies for insulation, we will ensure that all household lofts and cavity walls are insulated, where practical, by 2015. By 2020 every home will have a smart meter to help control energy use and enable cheaper tariffs; and we will enable seven million homes to have a fuller ‘eco-upgrade’.

We will legislate to introduce ‘Pay As You Save’ financing schemes under which homeenergy improvements can be paid for from the savings they generate on energy bills. Already with our new ‘feedin tariffs’ and incentive for renewable heat, households fitting micro-generation
technologies such as solar can earn financial rewards from the energy they generate themselves.
There's also these titbits:
Link together new protected areas of habitat; maintain the Green Belt; increase forest and woodland areas.
One of BoaF's more frequent comments about habitat in the UK needing to be more linked.
Achieve around 40 per cent low-carbon electricity by 2020 and create 400,000 new green jobs by 2015.
Not sure how the market ended up (think we reached the 40% target anyway?) but Labour wanted this even back then.
If truth is many-sided, mendacity is many-tongued

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 9992
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: Protesting

Post by Bird on a Fire » Mon Oct 17, 2022 1:26 pm

I stand corrected - there's clearly been reference to insulation in Labour manifestos for a while. (I did check the 2019 one by searching for "insulat", which only produced a result about insulating NHS properties.)

OTOH, the nature of the plans seems to have changed from offering cheap loans to a "National Mission" investing billions to do the work, on a timescale reflecting the current urgency given rising energy costs and accelerating climate crisis. The "Green Tories" (lmao) are asking for something similar, and good luck to them.

So I still think it's clear that insulation has risen up the agenda. Whether that's because both protestors and Labour are reacting to the same external stimuli in complete independence, or there's some synergy, is probably moot. But given the evidence above I suggest that by increasing public awareness of and support for the issue, protestors are likely to increase the chance that (1) something is included in the manifesto, (2) it's appropriately detailed and ambitious, and (3) the policy actually gets enacted, if the English finally stop electing the f.ck-the-planet party.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 9992
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: Protesting

Post by Bird on a Fire » Mon Oct 17, 2022 1:34 pm

Even the actual Tories have plans to pay for insulating social housing, which was one of Insulate Britain's demands:
Insulate Britain wrote:WE DEMAND

1) That the UK government immediately promises to fully fund and take responsibility for the insulation of all social housing in Britain by 2025.
Low-income homes in England are to have their energy efficiency improved under a £1.5bn government plan that will also address poor insulation.

The funding is being made available to local authorities and social housing providers with the aim of upgrading 130,000 homes.

Wall and loft insulation, double glazing, heat pumps and solar panels are all measures that could be funded.

The UK currently has some of least energy efficient homes in Europe.

The £1.5bn will come from £6.6bn that was announced in 2021 as part of the government's Heat and Building Strategy.
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-63069445

Who saw that coming from Jason Rees-Mogg?

Let's not pretend anyone thinks we would have got there without a fight, including both public pressure and the opposition having a sensible, workable and costed plan.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 9992
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: Protesting

Post by Bird on a Fire » Mon Oct 17, 2022 1:40 pm

Interesting to compare it with the governments "Heat and Building Strategy" from October 2021 (so presumably devised before the protests). It merely says things like
In particular, we expect public sector organisations to plan to reduce direct emissions from their heating systems by:

insulating buildings better
making buildings more energy efficient
But no funding. https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... r-net-zero
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.

User avatar
Woodchopper
Light of Blast
Posts: 5992
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: Protesting

Post by Woodchopper » Mon Oct 17, 2022 1:47 pm

Bird on a Fire wrote:
Mon Oct 17, 2022 1:40 pm
Interesting to compare it with the governments "Heat and Building Strategy" from October 2021 (so presumably devised before the protests). It merely says things like
In particular, we expect public sector organisations to plan to reduce direct emissions from their heating systems by:

insulating buildings better
making buildings more energy efficient
But no funding. https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... r-net-zero
There was 2 billion allocated to the 2020 Green Homes Grant scheme: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/qual ... mes-grants

But as we've discussed before there was very low uptake (as far as I remember the application process was complicated and there are labour shortages in the construction industry).

Pretty much everyone has agreed for many years that home insulation is a good thing and should be a priority. The problem is that no one has yet worked out how to actually design and implement a policy that delivers millions more energy efficient homes in a short time.

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 9992
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: Protesting

Post by Bird on a Fire » Mon Oct 17, 2022 1:58 pm

Yeah, but that was a short-lived one-off with poor uptake. Only open for a year 6 months and required tradespeople to recertify. Almost like they weren't taking it seriously.

Insulation needs long term investment (not the Tories' strong point).
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.

User avatar
Woodchopper
Light of Blast
Posts: 5992
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: Protesting

Post by Woodchopper » Mon Oct 31, 2022 8:10 pm

Just Stop Oil have sprayed paint over Murdoch’s HQ, pro-fossil fuel lobbyists and an Aston Martin Bentley showroom.

I can get behind that. I00% should do again.

User avatar
Grumble
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3771
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:03 pm

Re: Protesting

Post by Grumble » Mon Oct 31, 2022 8:36 pm

Fossil fuel activists destroyed a nice old church, which is one step lower than spraying paint on stuff.

https://twitter.com/openclimatedata/sta ... 5V5MNKitUg
A bit churlish

User avatar
discovolante
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3570
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:10 pm

Re: Protesting

Post by discovolante » Mon Oct 31, 2022 8:56 pm

Grumble wrote:
Mon Oct 31, 2022 8:36 pm
Fossil fuel activists destroyed a nice old church, which is one step lower than spraying paint on stuff.

https://twitter.com/openclimatedata/sta ... 5V5MNKitUg
Huh?
I'M HEATING STREAKY BACON IN A TROUSER PRESS

User avatar
Gfamily
Light of Blast
Posts: 4434
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:00 pm
Location: NW England

Re: Protesting

Post by Gfamily » Mon Oct 31, 2022 9:00 pm

discovolante wrote:
Mon Oct 31, 2022 8:56 pm
Grumble wrote:
Mon Oct 31, 2022 8:36 pm
Fossil fuel activists destroyed a nice old church, which is one step lower than spraying paint on stuff.

https://twitter.com/openclimatedata/sta ... 5V5MNKitUg
Huh?
Pro fossil fuel activists - and the church was on the land they wanted to use as an open cast coalmine I gather.
My avatar was a scientific result that was later found to be 'mistaken' - I rarely claim to be 100% correct
ETA 5/8/20: I've been advised that the result was correct, it was the initial interpretation that needed to be withdrawn
Meta? I'd say so!

User avatar
Sciolus
Dorkwood
Posts: 1128
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 6:42 pm

Re: Protesting

Post by Sciolus » Mon Oct 31, 2022 10:16 pm


IvanV
After Pie
Posts: 1632
Joined: Mon May 17, 2021 11:12 am

Re: Protesting

Post by IvanV » Tue Nov 01, 2022 12:11 pm

The building was demolished on 9 January 2018, amidst protests by Greenpeace activists.
Ie, the church was demolished to make way for the coal mine, while Greenpeace protested against it.

User avatar
lpm
Junior Mod
Posts: 5263
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:05 pm

Re: Protesting

Post by lpm » Tue Nov 01, 2022 12:24 pm

The vandalism of fossil fuel activists is non-stop. This isn't the only church they've damaged.
⭐ Awarded gold star 4 November 2021

Post Reply