Protesting

[discovolante]

Just Stop Oil decorate Stonehenge.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cw44mdee0zzo

Looks counterproductive to me but YMMV.

Counterproductive....well I do wonder if there's a difference between blocking road/sit down protests vs damage to relevant objects e.g. Bank windows v damage to unrelated high profile objects.

[lpm]

And now JSO are attempting to dig a massive tunnel all across the wider Stonehenge area, destroying unknown archaeology. Stop them.

[Gfamily]

Just Stop Oil decorate Stonehenge.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cw44mdee0zzo

Looks counterproductive to me but YMMV.

Counterproductive....well I do wonder if there's a difference between blocking road/sit down protests vs damage to relevant objects e.g. Bank windows v damage to unrelated high profile objects.

Although I agree that it's most likely to be counterproductive* it's not clear that there will have been any particular 'damage' done to the stones by the application of dyed cornflour. So I think, 'unrelated' but also 'undamaged' **

* I can see there's an argument that "you should be more concerned at the ongoing damage to the environment that is likely to lead to catastrophic effects on human life, than at this act of protest which will do no permanent harm to an iconic work. If you are concerned at the potential for damage to this work, you should be even more concerned at the damage to the environment" - but it's not what people's first, or probably even their second, thought will be.

** somebody suggested 'rare lichens' may be harmed.

[monkey]

** somebody suggested 'rare lichens' may be harmed.

I saw that being said, and it made me wonder if the lichen would cause more damage to the stones than cornflower.

[Tristan]

Well, their action certainly convinced me. I sold my Porsche this afternoon as a direct result of it, having not cared at all about climate change until they did this. All my friends cancelled any flights they had booked as a direct result too. It 100% changed focused minds on climate change and didn’t in any way make people think they’re just a bunch of nob heads.

[Martin Y]

** somebody suggested 'rare lichens' may be harmed.

I saw that being said, and it made me wonder if the lichen would cause more damage to the stones than cornflower.

Well cornflowers are a nicer colour IMO.

I agree with Gfamily: while their intended message is presumably "You should be concentrating on the climate emergency FFS" that is not what stunts like this will achieve. Anyone who was not already fully on board with addressing the climate crisis will probably have as their first thought "tw.ts". Their second thought might be "Entitled tw.ts ruining things for everyone". And if they stick around for a third thought it might be "I bet they cut down that tree at Hadrian's wall. That's just the sort of thing tw.ts would do".

They are not likely to have, as a result of this stunt, a Damascene revelation that we should stop digging stuff up and burning it.

[Gfamily]

** somebody suggested 'rare lichens' may be harmed.

I saw that being said, and it made me wonder if the lichen would cause more damage to the stones than cornflower.

Allegedly the lichen serves to protect the stones^{[citation needed]}

[lpm]

When people have lichen on their patios, doesn't it require toxic chemicals to get rid of it? Maybe a dusting of orange flour was what patio cleaning needed.

[discovolante]

** somebody suggested 'rare lichens' may be harmed.

I saw that being said, and it made me wonder if the lichen would cause more damage to the stones than cornflower.

Well cornflowers are a nicer colour IMO.

I agree with Gfamily: while their intended message is presumably "You should be concentrating on the climate emergency FFS" that is not what stunts like this will achieve. Anyone who was not already fully on board with addressing the climate crisis will probably have as their first thought "tw.ts". Their second thought might be "Entitled tw.ts ruining things for everyone". And if they stick around for a third thought it might be "I bet they cut down that tree at Hadrian's wall. That's just the sort of thing tw.ts would do".

They are not likely to have, as a result of this stunt, a Damascene revelation that we should stop digging stuff up and burning it.

I'd say Extinction Rebellion were quite successful in the late 2010s while also managing to piss a whole lot of people off. I'm really wondering more specifically how stunts and protests can be used effectively whether or not you win over the hearts and minds of the public.

Personally, seeing people pretty much try to drive over Just Stop Oil protesters is a pretty shocking image to me and the symbolism smacks you right in the face, but I realise I'm probably not representative on that front.

[Martin Y]

... Personally, seeing people pretty much try to drive over Just Stop Oil protesters is a pretty shocking image to me and the symbolism smacks you right in the face, but I realise I'm probably not representative on that front.

Seeing people pretty much try to drive over any protesters is indeed pretty shocking, but I don't believe they're doing that because of the particular thing the protesters happen to be protesting about. It's because of the way they're protesting.

Nobody believes they themselves are the bad guys in that situation. The protesters think they're literally trying to save the world and that's obviously the right thing to do. People they're blockading think they're being arbitrarily picked on for harassment and having their rights taken away by some mob of whever-they-ares. If you use civil disobedience type tactics against the authorities they at least should have the discipline to behave non-violently, but if you do it to ordinary people they act from how they feel and they feel they're the ones being attacked. They feel justified in opposing the people who are oppressing them. And of course they don't know the first thing about how to deal with protesters calmly, civilly and lawfully. That may sound daft but it's not about the campaign. It's just people being people as always.

[dyqik]

** somebody suggested 'rare lichens' may be harmed.

I saw that being said, and it made me wonder if the lichen would cause more damage to the stones than cornflower.

Allegedly the lichen serves to protect the stones^{[citation needed]}

You know what damages lichen more than a dusting of flour and orange food dye, and causes greater weathering of stones at the same time?

Climate change.

[discovolante]

... Personally, seeing people pretty much try to drive over Just Stop Oil protesters is a pretty shocking image to me and the symbolism smacks you right in the face, but I realise I'm probably not representative on that front.

Seeing people pretty much try to drive over any protesters is indeed pretty shocking, but I don't believe they're doing that because of the particular thing the protesters happen to be protesting about. It's because of the way they're protesting.

Nobody believes they themselves are the bad guys in that situation. The protesters think they're literally trying to save the world and that's obviously the right thing to do. People they're blockading think they're being arbitrarily picked on for harassment and having their rights taken away by some mob of whever-they-ares. If you use civil disobedience type tactics against the authorities they at least should have the discipline to behave non-violently, but if you do it to ordinary people they act from how they feel and they feel they're the ones being attacked. They feel justified in opposing the people who are oppressing them. And of course they don't know the first thing about how to deal with protesters calmly, civilly and lawfully. That may sound daft but it's not about the campaign. It's just people being people as always.

That part of my post was really just my personal view. Although I'd hesitate to call people who try to run over other people 'ordinary people'. My overall point was that a campaign doesn't necessarily have to be obviously popular with the public to be effective. Just Stop Oil are managing to maintain a steady drip feed of news about them and by extention climate change, which could be enough to be considered a success because it means it's not forgotten about. On the other, that news/publicity does still need to translate to pressure on those responsible to act. I'm genuinely unsure at this point whether the tactics being used will lead to that or not.

It looks like attitudes towards climate change started to change from around 2017 (one link here, sorry no time to trawl through lots of polls/look at methodology: https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factshe ... ate-change) - pre XR, so they didn't cause it. A quick glance at Wiki seems to show though that a lot of countries declared climate emergencies in 2019: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate ... eclaration I'm not suggesting XR were the sole cause of that but they may well have had an influence.

Edit: didn't finish my post! Anyway what I'm less sure about now is that in around 2019ish a big hurdle seems to have been overcome and what should or could happen now in terms of protest/civic action might or might not be the same, I'm not sure at the moment.

[jaap]

Just Stop Oil decorate Stonehenge.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cw44mdee0zzo

Looks counterproductive to me but YMMV.

You'd think they'd have learned from when Greenpeace irreversably damaged the Nazca lines ten years ago.

[Stranger Mouse]

Just Stop Oil have a go at some private planes. This seems are far more apt target than Stonehenge as they are more salient to the problem of climate change.

https://inews.co.uk/news/just-stop-oil- ... ed-3121497

I’m a bit concerned about security implications though. And I worry that the protestors may not be prepared for the weight of criminal law about to come down on them (although I also don’t really see how they can complain).

[discovolante]

Just Stop Oil have a go at some private planes. This seems are far more apt target than Stonehenge as they are more salient to the problem of climate change.

https://inews.co.uk/news/just-stop-oil- ... ed-3121497

I’m a bit concerned about security implications though. And I worry that the protestors may not be prepared for the weight of criminal law about to come down on them (although I also don’t really see how they can complain).

Protest groups have quite a lot of access to legal advice about this sort of thing.

[Grumble]

I saw that being said, and it made me wonder if the lichen would cause more damage to the stones than cornflower.

Allegedly the lichen serves to protect the stones^{[citation needed]}

You know what damages lichen more than a dusting of flour and orange food dye, and causes greater weathering of stones at the same time?

Climate change.

That’s a pretty weak excuse. Climate change causing damage to my house doesn’t give you leeway to damage my house.

[Gfamily]

Allegedly the lichen serves to protect the stones^{[citation needed]}

You know what damages lichen more than a dusting of flour and orange food dye, and causes greater weathering of stones at the same time?

Climate change.

That’s a pretty weak excuse. Climate change causing damage to my house doesn’t give you leeway to damage my house.

English Heritage don't think there will have been any visible damage.

There's a high profile Twitter account (higher since this protest action anyway) called @ST0NEHENGE with a zero) that is prone to talking bollox about science (for example saying "The exact moment of the solstice is the time of year that the Earth is closest to the sun."). It was claiming 'damage' to lichens.

[dyqik]

Allegedly the lichen serves to protect the stones^{[citation needed]}

You know what damages lichen more than a dusting of flour and orange food dye, and causes greater weathering of stones at the same time?

Climate change.

That’s a pretty weak excuse. Climate change causing damage to my house doesn’t give you leeway to damage my house.

I don't see you complaining about oil companies damaging your house, causing increased flooding and wind damage, so I don't see why you'd complain about extremely minor damage from other causes.

[Grumble]

You know what damages lichen more than a dusting of flour and orange food dye, and causes greater weathering of stones at the same time?

Climate change.

That’s a pretty weak excuse. Climate change causing damage to my house doesn’t give you leeway to damage my house.

I don't see you complaining about oil companies damaging your house, causing increased flooding and wind damage, so I don't see why you'd complain about extremely minor damage from other causes.

Pretty sure I’ve been contributing to the Death of Fossil Fuels thread for a while.

[lpm]

Stonehenge has only been there 5,000 years which is a trivial amount of time in the scheme of things.

In the next 5,000 years there's one major change Stonehenge will see - all ice will melt and sea level will be about 70 meters higher.

Stonehenge is at 120 meters so won't submerge. Salisbury will be a key port at the head of the tidal Avon estuary. Stonehenge will be an important marker - on the east-west route between the North Downs peninsular and the Somerset highlands; on the south-west route heading to Devon; and the southern end of the East Coast road that goes past the port of Reading and onto Leicester on the south side of the Trent estuary. From there the ferry service across to the Port of Nottingham will save the long journey going round by Stafford and Stoke.

On the other hand losing a bit of lichen is pretty grim.

[Stranger Mouse]

I have done some highly scientific research into public reactions to the Just Stop Oil protests. I….errr…..looked at their Twitter feed. Apropos of nothing the replies to the Stonehenge stunt were universally negative. The replies to the airport stunt are a mixture of “that’s more like it”, “better than the Stonehenge thing” , “at least I agree with your point here even if I can’t support the criminality” and a much lower level of clearly negative responses.

[insignificant]

Apparently the lichens will be fine because it hasn't rained and Stonehenge's caretakers have been able to use to air blowers to remove the powder instead of having to use more destructive methods to remove a cornflour paste

I still don't get it though, seems like scratching a "do something" itch instead of something that's effective, and justifying it using examples of successful direct action or similar protests is just assuming it will be successful

Fossil fuel use is now at record levels - link from The Guardian today - and I often feel powerless, but what am I going to achieve by walking down the road and spraying orange paint on the tanker that's delivering heating oil to a property?

[IvanV]

When people have lichen on their patios, doesn't it require toxic chemicals to get rid of it? Maybe a dusting of orange flour was what patio cleaning needed.

Clearly patio moss, algae and lichen killers are toxic to moss, algae and lichen. But there's a couple of things that you can use that are reasonably innocuous to other things.

The brand I use contains ferrous sulfate (FeSO4) as its active ingredient. It takes quite a long time - a few weeks - for the algae and moss to be addressed, and several months for a thick build-up of lichen to cease to be present. Otherwise, ferrous sulfate is reasonable innocuous. It is also used as lawn moss killer, and is actually deliberately used as a soil supplement for horticulture, particularly if you are trying to grow lime-hating plants in non-acidic soil. And no worry about splashing it on you or ingesting small amounts.

Other "mild" brands have acetic acid as the active ingredient, ie vinegar, which is also which is reasonably innocuous if not too concentrated.

You can buy bleach (sodium hypochlorite, NaOCl solution) of suitable concentration for patio cleaning, and that is more harmful. It will kill other plants too. The expensive stuff that removes "black spots" (the mild stuff doesn't) doesn't admit what it is. It says it is "toxic to aquatic life". I suspect it might be bleach, as it says "evolves toxic gases if mixed with acids".

[Gfamily]

I wonder whether the Private Jet action would have had as much publicity if it hadn't been preceded by the Stonehenge action.

[monkey]

I wonder whether the Private Jet action would have had as much publicity if it hadn't been preceded by the Stonehenge action.

Taylor Swift was mentioned, so yes, they probably would have. Even more if her plane was actually there and got tango'd.