Shutting up dissent is not the answer. Discussing it intelligently often is.

But when most of those causing the dissent are not capable of discussing it intelligently then what do you do?

yes deliberate civil disobedience can be peaceful. It is never well appreciated by those trying to enforce against it.

Where peaceful protests fail, often violent protests follow. Shutting up dissent is not the answer. Discussing it intelligently often is.

---

Janice

Arrest the lot of them and have done with it.

---

Life on earth is the global equivalent of not storing things in the fridge.

Police served a Public Order Act notice, saying the crowd might cause serious damage to property or disrupt the life of the community.

"This an outrageously aggressive response to a day of principled civil disobedience,"

"The government is not listening so I think there are times when peaceful direct action can be legitimate."

I see, so deliberate Civil Disobedience is peaceful is it? Police having to serve Public Order notices to protect property is aggressive is it? Green Party MP's getting arrested is principled is it?

Grow up you Green lot! You'd protest at someone standing on a blade of grass, if you thought you'd get your picture in the paper, and there was 1/2 of shandy down the pub later.

Told you! Obviously going to happen.

Activists

From the article:

"This is the mood of the country and the government don't realise that."

It is not the mood of myself, or anyone i know, and the protesters don't (or won't) realise that!

---

Life on earth is the global equivalent of not storing things in the fridge.

Told you! Obviously going to happen.

Activists

I didn't change the goalposts Bobby, I just reminded people what the original goalposts were, and the original reason for the Shard protest in the first place.

But, there are occasions when protests do have a direct immediate effect. Fracking protests

I think this is turning into another Dale farm, where the majority of the protesters are not there against fracking, they are just professional activists intent on any excuse to undermine authority and cause the establishment trouble. They have suspended operations not because of the protests st fracking, but upon police advice after threats to damage plant and machinery. Again the protesters will say that the protest is successful because drilling will be stopped. But it wont be because they have convinced the drillers that fracking in wrong in itself.

Some might say that if the end result is what we wanted does it matter what caused the end result? I would say it does matter, because the drillers may well go on to drill again elsewhere if they are not yet convinced drilling is intrinsically wrong. NIMBYism in Balcombe?

and the fact that this thread exists and remains active a month later is a sign that they have already made some difference.

Wrong! The only reason that this thread still exists is because I say they wasted their time others say they didn't, and people want to debate that. It has got nothing whatsoever to do with their actions making any difference in the arctic.


Climber charged

Not to split hairs or anything, though only after you moved the goalposts could your "Wrong" comment be correct. There was no "in the arctic" qualification in your earlier post:

Chris S wrote:

The fact that it won't make any difference still needs to be accepted, by them and everybody else, which it isn't.

As for whether the action will make a difference to Shell's activities in the arctic in the longer term, well, your crystal ball seems to be better than mine, as I have no clue.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

They raised awareness and prompted thought.

For a brief time yes they did. But it wont make any difference in the long term.

They raised awareness and prompted thought.

I would say mission accomplished.

---

Janice

and the fact that this thread exists and remains active a month later is a sign that they have already made some difference.

Wrong! The only reason that this thread still exists is because I say they wasted their time others say they didn't, and people want to debate that. It has got nothing whatsoever to do with their actions making any difference in the arctic.


Climber charged

You may well be right, though even if you are, does that mean the participants should not have bothered?

Ah, an intuitive intelligent comment at last!

I don't think that they shouldn't have done it, it was a symbolic gesture and fair enough. For them it was also a personal challenge, and within their own movement they will go down in history as heroes. Foolhardy heroes maybe.

The fact that it won't make any difference still needs to be accepted, by them and everybody else, which it isn't. That is the point I am making. If I was ever to meet anyone of them I would say "Well done, I wouldn't have had the guts to do it. If you are sure that it was worthwhile and it will make a difference, then I am glad that you are happy about it."

The fact is there are no crystal balls, so there's no need for everybody to accept your view. The demonstrators may have a different idea of what success means, and the fact that this thread exists and remains active a month later is a sign that they have already made some difference.

As a result of our action, 50,000 extra people have joined up to the campaign.

source.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

You may well be right, though even if you are, does that mean the participants should not have bothered?

Ah, an intuitive intelligent comment at last!

I don't think that they shouldn't have done it, it was a symbolic gesture and fair enough. For them it was also a personal challenge, and within their own movement they will go down in history as heroes. Foolhardy heroes maybe.

The fact that it won't make any difference still needs to be accepted, by them and everybody else, which it isn't. That is the point I am making. If I was ever to meet anyone of them I would say "Well done, I wouldn't have had the guts to do it. If you are sure that it was worthwhile and it will make a difference, then I am glad that you are happy about it."

Yes some of them have, but I still think the Shard one won't be seen in that way in the future. I am happy to be proved wrong, and if I am I will say so.

You may well be right, though even if you are, does that mean the participants should not have bothered?

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Yes some of them have, but I still think the Shard one won't be seen in that way in the future. I am happy to be proved wrong, and if I am I will say so.

Gandhi hunger strikes were a symbolic gesture.
The Boston tea party was a symbolic gesture.
Standing in front of tanks at Tiananmen Square was a symbolic gesture.
Protests at Tahrir in Egypt were a symbolic gesture.
Rosa Parks sitting in the front of the bus was a symbolic gesture.

Symbolic Gestures can and have changed the world.

---

Janice

So your great achievement is other than adding to the trash on our planet is?...

I invented an anti-cancer drug currently in stage 2 clinical trials, which if passed safe and released to the medical world could cut death rates from breast cancer by a third.

Very good and good luck for the outcome.

So what's your great achievement?

Sorry, too modest to say. Hopefully I've helped to improve our world a little for everyone.


All on our only one planet,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

So your great achievement is other than adding to the trash on our planet is?...

I invented an anti-cancer drug currently in stage 2 clinical trials, which if passed safe and released to the medical world could cut death rates from breast cancer by a third.
So what's your great achievement?

---

Life on earth is the global equivalent of not storing things in the fridge.

Mark Thomas is a known activist and fringe comedian.

Hopefully the Shard stunt will awaken a few more people to the state of play with "Big Oil"...

You've just said it, it was a "stunt" not a serious meaningful protest. It might have been for those individuals taking part, not to the rest of us.

Stunt²
noun
1. a performance displaying a person's skill or dexterity, as in athletics; feat: an acrobatic stunt.
2. any remarkable feat performed chiefly to attract attention: The kidnapping was said to be a publicity stunt.

source

Not sure that "stunts" and "serious meaningful protests" are mutually incompatible, quite the contrary if one considers Mark Thomas serious.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...