I’m making a film! Be ready for the release of my feature-length, Nebula Original documentary Boomers by signing up to Nebula at go.nebula.tv/tomnicholas
@@Tom_NicholasTom would you ever do a video that actually goes in depth on nebulas legal structure? Every time I try to find out from Dave Wiskus if all the creators actually have equity or if they just have a contract I can’t get a straight answer.
@@marchelandersen6839What do you mean? The Last Glacial Period occured 115,000 and 11,700 years ago? We’ve been out of it for years. Yeah plants die without CO2 but the excess emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere caused by human activity is intensifying the greenhouse effect and leading to global warming which will cause them (and us) to die regardless.
Can confirm from my own experience of an arrest in my teens, the Police really enjoy taking you to random rural police stations in the middle of nowhere, and then letting you out after all the buses have stopped for the night, stranding you in a village you've never heard of 12 miles from the city you were arrested in, in the freezing cold, the middle of the night, and needing to find a phone box to call a taxi from.
All these comments and likes and not a single argument as to why the novel issue of this kind of public disorder shouldn't be dealt with using legal territory. So many memes and smoke and mirrors. It's easy to be a critic when you don't have any real opinion or position on anything bar the vague bandwagon-ing you see online
No, it was public opinion and public disruption that drove the law change. Most people want people who disrupt their lives to face legal consequences. Oil companies dont care.
Regardless of whatever you feel about the efficacy or convenience of nonviolence protest movements, EVERYONE should be concerned with how quickly the UK and US justice systems moved to become way more authoritarian and fascist in response to environmental and racial justice protests in the past five years. Considering the way RICO charges are being abused against the Stop Cop City protesters in Atlanta, this is an issue we need to be openly criticizing - instead of bellyaching over inconveniences and philosophical differences in nonviolent protest.
England esecially so, thanks to the legacy culture of the peerage and the monarchy. They still have enshrined in law the idea that some people are better than others.
@@kevoreilly6557 thanks for the thoughtful and relevant response. I’ll be thinking about this for a long time - lots to ponder. Maybe you’ll figure out how to read by then.
@@ethanduncan1646 you have a fair point, it ain't necessarily fascist as it isn't hypernationalist authoritarianism but it is authoritarianism, as seemingly people can't even protest somewhat peacefully, and the police have been granted further liberties to arrest people for being a bit distruptive.
as a former security guard (for seven years); we do not want to do work. "if you'd like me to leave, I'll do that" means literally minimum work for us. I'll be honest mate, lying to security in that manner is perfect.
@@oatdilemma6395Or maybe security isn't supposed to be the police, but works more as a deterrent? Think. Or maybe working class people are alienated from their work and dont actually care if you disrupt their work?
I don’t even think they are more controversial depending on how one looks at it. Apart from the people who get paid by them only a handful of lefties care (or know) about the Koch brothers. Meanwhile everyone and their dog has an opinion on JSO not destroying a painting.
It is a thin line between aggressive activism and terrorism. In Bavaria there is a group that sabotages green energies. They collapsed a windmill (not a small one!) and destroyed several hundred of solar panels. They have not been caught yet.
@@btarczy5067 Oh I dunno, they set up several foundations which fund various arts and humanities projects back in the day in order to massage the negative perception of their name. They were broadly pretty good at managing their image up until David died in 2019. Even today Charles does some seemingly out there stuff, like, he's a major funder and proponent of efforts to legalize cannabis federally. I'd argue that's a pretty strong recipe for "controversial" as, depending on how much you know about him, where you know the name from and depending on your political disposition, you're going to hate his guts or else be confused about why anybody would.
The symbolic destruction of the glass shielding the Magna Carta got everyone's balls in a twist, but nobody batted an eye at several successive years of the Tories destroying the actualy rights enshrined within it. It'll always make me giggle when they call JSO 'performative activism' when their selective anger epitomises it.
@@deeznoots6241So we should just abolish the notion of it or any unifying legal code then? I would rather have a flawed and outdated rule of law over no rule of law, without one, we get dangerously close to justifying tyranny without a point we won't back against. "Oh the electric chair for JSO protesters? Well it certainly would save us money feeding and housing those lowlifes!"
@@deeznoots6241 sometimes, you should consider thinking before you talk. If you had thought for even a single moment, you'd recognize that it was a SYMBOLIC GESTURE. Jesus Christ 🙄 P.S. you didn't even say anything untrue, it's just that they aren't relevant either. Nothing you said changes the reality that there _are_ rights enshrined in the Magna Carta (even if we don't "use" it anymore), nor do they change the reality that it was a _symbolic gesture._
You didnt explain what rights were enshrined in the magna carta. A third party, i know little about british history and would have appreciated a discussion instead of an eyerolling rant. I bet the other person had indeed thought about the document for more than a single moment before forming their opinion on it being supposedly overhyped. May i ask politely, what rights are enshrined in the magna carta? What does it symbolize, and how? And why might someone critical call it “overhyped”?
There's only 4 originals in existence and one is badly damaged. You do realize that any light or oxygen exposure would damage it right? There's people who's entire lives are and have been dedicated to preserving historically significant works. Just because you don't care about the document doesn't mean it is in any way acceptable to try to destroy one of 3 readable originals of a historically significant text. The symbolism is "we want to rob future generations of valuable texts." That's not deep. That's just doing to history what climate change is doing to the planet and it loses people.
Because instead of targeting oil and finance and politicians, they targeted working people. The unpopularity of these protests helped those laws escape public backlash. If these people aren't plants, they're utterly misguided.
I agree, but Roger Hallam and other JSO activists planning to and attempting (but failing) to block the M25 circular route in calculated positions so the whole route would be "Filled with cars" and "Back up onto all the other motorways and all the other A roads", which would stop almost everyone and everything from getting in or out of London by car for multiple days, then claiming it was a "peaceful protest" isn't helping with that. JSO's other protests aren't too bad, but blocking traffic (especially trying to do it on this scale) does more harm than good.
@@lentilsoup460the M25 and all the other A roads being blocked and backed up would be an awesome achievement!! Although a quick glance at some stats randomly for 2017 suggests that London traffic management causes far more issues than JSO could ever dream of 😂 : “1.35 million traffic jams in past year (2017) have cost the economy a total of £9 billion” Source INRIX.
@@fluffskunk Exactly, and they made it so nobody can talk about climate action without it being derailed into a discussion on JSO because they know as soon as it goes there if you say anything supportive of JSO you lose one side and if you condemn them, you lose the other. (And because nuance is dead if you try to go down the middle you lose everyone) They've absolutely been one of the most damaging things for climate activism in a long time.
Yeah it's crazy. It's almost like someone is paying these people to lower public opinion of protestors so that they can push through these draconian laws.
I'm not a fan of the way just stop oil use the term "direct action" in my opinion it is a misuse because symbolic protest actions are anything but direct. That doesn't mean it can't have its place or serves no good purpose, but direct action is when you're addressing a problem directly. It's cleaning up a dumpster without a municipality or directly blocking access to private planes or cruise ships, because they are the problem itself or at least part of it. Breaking the glass around the magna Carta, spraying paint etc. Are all symbolic actions, not direct actions.
Yeah I had that thought too. They might be trying to be a nuisance, but their strategy still boils down to asking the powers that be to do something that goes against their interests, just slightly less than nicely. It's 1-2 steps above "write your representative." I can't fault them for trying to do SOMETHING, but yeah I'm not sure this is gonna work.
@fearsomefawkes6724 Are you suggesting that it is completely fine for me o destroyed whatever I want as long as I can fabricate an excuse in the form of activism? Did you find the recent outbreak of riots across the UK activism as well?
This topic often reminds me of things relating to MLK and Malcolm X, and the effectiveness of having multiple distinct groups who take varying methods to hand for an important matter. (edit is to correct spelling of Malcolm X's name, as somehow that mistake had slipped past me on initial posting. Thank you for bringing it to my attention)
It's not just the media. These buffoons stopped the ambulance taking my sister to hospital after she was stabbed. She died in the ambulance.I'm sure they felt so good about that, I didn't.
you people really dont get that the media is making publicity for them? if the media really hate someone they dont talk about them. from what ive seen the mainstream media is very friendly with eco activism. the green agenda is a government/mainstream agenda. but its cute that you think you are revolutionaries.
They have a lot of problems though. I can understand throwing paint on stonehenge, destroying art or damaging the magna carta since it doesn't harm anyone. But they did not need to plan and attempt to block the entire M25 motorway and surrounding roads in claculated positions to fill the 'whole circular route' with cars and try to stop almost anyone or anything getting in or out of London by car for 4 days. That would've caused extreme disruption, including food shortages and likely multiple deaths from postponing medical treatment or medication.
Well I would love to become an activist, but since I have another passport, our glorious UK government can take away my citizenship and deport me at the slightest disobedience... I guess we die.
@@dredzik My gran was in the same boat during the protests over the war in Iraq. She was deeply upset over both of her home countries engaging in imperialism and a quagmire of a war, but if she engaged in any direct action she would run the risk of being deported and separated from the majority of her family.
They weren't arrested for fighting fossil fuels, they were arrested for vandalism. Defacing artwork and monuments won't do anything to reduce fossil fuel usage, the only thing it will do is make eco-activists look like clowns.
"If it wasn't for the unrelenting disruptions and inconvenience inflicted upon the general public that was caused by the brave men and women in , none of this would have been possible!" - said no one ever.
@@sirtra Well it's a good thing they aren't unrelenting then, isn't it? Unlike the collapse of our environment, protesting does take breaks. and if you're looking for examples contrary to your statement, civil rights movement, women's suffrage, union strikes, etc. Sure would be nice if such inconveniences would never have had to been a thing. But unfortunately when some people in power get greedy, they don't listen. And if it wasn't for people taking that power back, you indeed would be in a worse place than you are now. Especially if you're in the US. Even the Civil war was fought by a bunch of people seen as troublemakers.
What if there were people on that road on their way to a job interview and couldn't make it. Or maybe they were a doctor trying to visit a patient. Or even worse. Would that be enough then? Sentences are meant to be, among the other things, deterrents
@superkulak Five years? You do know that far more serious crimes, like r*pe, regularly get a lot less. And sorry, but if you think inconveniencing people is the same as scarring someone for life then you're sick.
@@superkulak but what if a murderer was on that road heading to another victim?? Or what if without the traffic disruption a multi-car pile up would have happened with multiple fatalities?
@@superkulak your argument is no different than mine. Also your advocating taking away someone else's freedom cause they don't think like you. Your argument is garbage
that sponsor at the end - A lifetime subscription? I have a vague memory of hearing of such a thing in the ancient past. I believe it was called 'actually owning something' or something like that.
@@cheesusabidas77 It's called a LIFETIME subscription because, and I'm paraphrasing from Nebula's website: "You will have it as long as you and Nebula both exist." It would be a lawsuit if they took it away after that, and not one they could ever feasibly win. Not that they would do that in the first place. For the record, Nebula isn't a predatory corporation. It's a co-op that the workers (in this case the content creators) collectively run. It isn't beholden to capital in the same way many other companies are.
@@jacqdanieles I wonder how people managed before cars were in widespread use. Take the train? Oh, that's a non-starter, because Maggie Thatcher demolished your public transport? Recognize a pattern? Oil and its allies make it impossible to get off the drug. You are the addict. Congratulations.
Interesting video but I wish you included a more critics with different perspectives. JSO is both criticised by liberals and more radical leftists and I wish you included the perspective of the latter. I feel like more radical leftists take issue with JSO because their strategies are ineffective and very middle class. Especially throughout this video, I feel like JSO over estimates the value art has in our society, especially amongst the ruling class. The majority aren't outraged at JSO's actions because they consider art to be important to society but because certain art is considered rare and expensive and has perceived value. But ultimately, it's very low on people's list of priorities especially when you're struggling to make ends meet. I also think getting arrested on purpose is a largely stupid strategy in current climate. Through arrests, you lose activists and what is the point of wasting police time if you're not using that time to do something else. JSO and XR's impact on spurring on anti-protest laws have also shown the negative impact this has caused. While not climate activism, groups like PAL action who also focus on direct action have had much more progress with their goals. They have directly stopped operations at Elbit systems multiple times, causing the company to lose money and close offices. These activists also get arrested but with each action there is a clear result. This is something I cannot see with JSO. Breaking the casing to the Magna Carta, does not directly contribute to stopping oil. I also think JSO overestimate the importance of the media. While media can be used to recruit activists (whether those who commit direct actions or protestors) and can put some pressure on governments, I don't think it's the most effective method. Looking at PAL action again, they’re covered a lot less by the media but have been achieving their goals while also gaining support. It forces me to ask, why does JSO target art but not oil companies? Why is JSO's direct action so indirect?
Notably, the only times civil action has caused actual stoppage in oil production is when there has been far more radical action taken. Direct sabotage of oil infrastructure stopped the oil sector in Iran leading up to the revolution, as one prime example. The motivation wasn't climate activism, and the saboteurs weren't older white grandmas with upper middle class jobs - they were communist militias. By sabotaging oil pipelines, they made the economic risk of continuing production in Iran not worth the potential profits, so international companies withdrew their operations. Western climate activism has been so enamoured by the liberal idea of non-violence, they are unable to even consider actions the media would call violent (like blowing up pipelines or refineries) - even if it is still only property damage.
i also just think they publicly present very little to add to the conversation about how to tackle climate change. they’re not so stupid to believe we can “just stop oil” without living standards plummeting for the overwhelming majority of the world, but the way they present themselves makes almost everyone just think “ok, well you haven’t got any ideas of what we’re supposed to do, i guess we’ll just move on with our day”
This is such a good point. The video really lacked any kind of meaningful critique of JSO's approach and tactics. Agree that it is very middle class. Disappointing that Tom didn't include interviews with leaders of other activist groups and present some alternative options.
While I am concerned about environment, I might have more radical look, that human imprint is way too large... and there are no simple solutions to remedy that. Also, making it controllable is very unethical for various reasons. Not building some oil platform does not prevent anything - it only delays sucking the oil out of sea, which potentially will be done in future without benefiting people of UK. However the attack on art is certainly enraging - not because of value, but because of impunity to do so, what majority would not even think to do - destroying Magna Carta, dousing Stonehedge in paint or attacking paintings with soup are not the things that people would do, and equaetes to the same as standing on the roof and threatening to throw off new born to the ultimate death. When I was a kid, I thought that only greedy morons destroyed art and buyildings from the past and I never thought that modern humans would degrade to even lower level - to threaten to destroy something in the name of idea - that is pure terrorism and not the noble kind. No future generations will be thanking these people for the impact theat these people have left on Stonehenge - and to me this looks like a massive attack on values in the name of their goal, which is not their goal - the government has set up those golals decades ago and no one will remember these people for the fullfillment of these goals, while trying to hijack them.
Lets be honest, the people who get turned away from an issue by activists, were never going to care in the first place. These are the type of people who demand activists become quieter, and stay out of the way till their efforts aren't effective
@@ygthemoth9425 Half the point here - have you watched the video? - is that being abrasive about an issue as activists *doesn't* lose you "the backing of the majority of the population".
No, critics of JSO are saying that if you're gonna cause a disturbance, fight the real enemy. People commuting to and from work are not the enemy. Museums are not the enemy. Ancient stone monuments are not the enemy. Forgive me for not seeing how circular arguments about whether JSO is doing anything effective will help push the issues into the public consciousness, or why politicians/billionaires would feel threatened by a group so unpopular that even other climate activists look upon them with disdain.
@@crytoccTom hasn’t made a single tangible point in favour of JSO actually affecting meaningful change, and instead has enabled conservatives to label us all as lunatics.
"Oh no! They chipped the glass on the case of a priceless artifact! Just Stop Oil is a menace!" "Oh no! All our priceless artifacts are submerged underwater because floods have been getting worse year over year! If only someone told us this would happen!" I will not die because of an old book, I will die because the world is dying.
He chose to present a mild protest. As I commented previously, here in Italy they blocked the road to ambulances with sirens on. And that's just one example
@@superkulak which one was that? because I've not found any examples of that, edit: I guess he couldn't find any actual examples of them stopping ambulances?
@@conormurphy4328 I will take having a piece of history possibly destroyed over irreversible damage to the environment any day. The AMOC could collapse at any point in the next few years and that would devastate the world, a few paintings can have soup on them for that sake.
Hopefully people realise that if they think the actions just stop oil take are excessive, it pales in comparison to the damage being done throughout the world everyday by business as usual. Better disruption now than total collapse later
But thats the sad bit. We are winning the debate. More and more people are moving towards the idea of renewables. They just hate Stop Oil. I work in energy and I debate this on many sites fossile vs renewables. Those against renewables always bring Stop Oil into the debate. But I know how to deal with that to win online debates, I have made up stories, that stop oil, has been funded by big oil, to sabotage the move towards renewables.
@@tonycavanagh1929 the point is, it won't matter if they hate just stop oil - just so long as they hate more the system that makes just stop oil necessary
@@orterves lol what a stupid fantasy, are you going to hate the faceless corporation that you can’t see or the people stopping you from getting home on time?
It sounds quite flippant in comparison to the police response in germany. Here the police have developed specific ways to twist arms and even jaws so that the victim feels pain and is unable to do things, for months after they have been released. And the officers applying those tactics state this often in front of camera.
I mean for context, I have heard of Just Stop Oil, I haven't heard of the Climate Majority Project before. Unfortunately radical, disruptive action is the only thing that works
I really want to ask you, partially because I want to know too, what other options are there to stop this crisis which are as efficient as these are.@@Flexsan
@@Flexsan There's radical action that targets people with power and their wealth, and there's radical action that just gets you attention. JSO and Tom don't want you to know there's a difference. These "activists" are constantly attacked from their left and Tom ignores those criticisms entirely.
@@fluffskunk Yes. It's funny how JSO supporter often invoke the "disruptive" Civil Rights movement and MLK's personal unpopularity at his death, but leave out the parts where MLK and key figures (another difference-- a clear, unified and politically expedient power structure, with grassroots elements falling in line!) would tailor their protests to fit the audience (middle class white dudes) and make themselves appear both relatable and the "normal" ones. I.e. they would pay for suits, so when black people peacefully and calmly were sitting peacefully in a white only area, they would garner significant sympathy when the police responded harshly. Even when MLK blocked roads, this was in pre-planned protests organized with gov forewarning, and enough numbers of people planning to go and political support to make it hard to block. Even then, the structure of the group enabled them to avoid people spilling over-- blocking whole communities-- becoming violent, etc. And, of course, they did not camp on the roads. They marched as a group to a place, a symbol, where political power was convened or centralized, making clear demands, sharing their own experiences and gaining media attention. Sure, there are those that will oppose any protest group for being disruptive-- but the extent does indeed matter when trying to win over (a plurality of) voters.
The "Just Stop Oil's Critics" section with the Climate Majority guy is completely flaccid, and I think it's a real shame that his view was the only one in this segment. In particular, I think the absence of criticisms of JSO from their left (such as Andreas Malm's famous points in How To Blow Up A Pipeline, which I'm surprised got no mention here, at least 40 minutes in) is really conspicuous.
Agreed. It's a shame that JSO is presented as the most radical version of direct action. There's so many more issues with JSO beyond "they turn people away", they're methods are not effective and the organisation as a whole is very white and middle class.
Actually it's kind of predictable. If he did cover something like that, TH-cam *at best* would immediately demonitize the video, at worst would take down the video entirely. Also it's not unreazonable to avoid te**orism adjacent actions in a discussion about the nature of awareness protests.
my position will always be if a disruptive protest is enough to change your opinion on climate change,racial issues,etc your stance was as firm as the meme of the cheeto acting as a door lock.I just cant imagine anyone who claims to support a important cause turning limp because it was "not done the right way","why was it not done more peacefully" or "this mild inconvenience is bad for the cause".I do no care if the artwork has cheap tomato sauce on it,I do care that climate change has made its become so hot were I live that schools have to close as it too hot,or that floods have become more dangerous,and despite that their is a slow policy implantation from leaders who can see we are staring down the barrel of climate collapse.
How about it isn’t enough to change opinions and the disruptive protests only cause harm because it turns people against whatever cause they’re protesting regardless of the agree with it or not
@@conormurphy4328 Protests aren't about changing opinions and the average person is not intelligent or important enough to bother with trying to change their opinion. These kinds of protests, like all serious protests, are meant to 1) let those in power know that there are people who take climate change very seriously and 2) that they can cause problems for those in power.
@@jeffersonclippership2588 1) the people in power will hear the annoyance of those inconvenienced a lot louder and I doubt they’d be in support of the protesters 2) they’re not causing problems for those in power, they’re causing problems for normal people who will shun them regardless of the views they express.
@@conormurphy4328 disruptive protest disrupt the static of news and the backround noise that have become serious issues,how often do we see news of flooding,areas being made inhospitable due to heat,greenery withering away we have become so accustomed to the impacts of climate change that I have lost track of how many wild fires have occurred,while peaceful protests would be nice if we had time,we have a extreemly narrow window to change how we treat the climate/environment .Yearly peaceful protests have become so common place I bet one does not come to mind and thats the problem.Both effects of climate change and peacfull marches have become so common place they barely make the news or is even on the radar of the average person ,but what does get attention a group of people breaking art,streets being closed,parliament sit ins etc, it brings the issue to a place that cant be turned to background noise if you have a method to simultaneously keep the average person on their toes when it comes to social issues and have it be peaceful I would love to hear it as 30+ years of peaceful marches and community hall environmental guest speakers is not going to cut it,like I said we are on a tight deadline to change things so like a man setting himself on fire desperation requires inconveniences to get the issue on the fore front ,as eventually we will all be massively inconvenienced when the full effect of climate change collapse occurs,I would rather deal with someone throwing paint on a expensive statue rather than have my home flooded
In Australia recently, some protesters attempted to spray paint the wall outside the CEO of Woodside's house. A non-violent protest. They were arrested on arrival and the ABC journalists who were filming the action were coerced to give all their footage to the police. The ABC did not legally have to provide the footage to the police, but they keeled over and did so, and it was used against the protesters in court, I believe. We live in an age where corporate interests are protected by the police and citizens' rights to protest and critique those interests are eroded to the point of being non-existent. The protesters were arrested before they had even done anything, for trespassing - on a section of the driveway belonging to the council verge, not private property. What a joke.
@@rhythmandblues_alibi bug fucking yikes Corporate overboard are to might Capital interest is being protected above actual people Late Stage capitalism is fucked
That's not Direct Action, it's protesting. Direct Action is a specific form of protest when you take action against the people who have the power to give you what you want. It's not just raising awareness or being disruptive or even using violence; it's targeted action directed at the people with power. That's the key. It's not just about the action, but who that action is directed towards, with the tactical aim of getting prompt and tangible results. Examples would be like blocking a mine, damaging a power station or dumping oil on a PM's front yard. The *targeted action* has to *directly affect* the people with the power to do what you want.
Why are you sorry to the guard? Tried to get you to delete the video, to hell with them. Your conduct was pretty much good, as someone who filmed the demonstration, you're not there to explain things to some hired muscle who will immediately forget it, you just need to bounce ASAP with your recording intact. Ideally, upload it before you can be stopped.
yeah nowadays you can at least sometimes in theory backup your recording before going through security one of hte very very very few good things "the cloud" got us
This. That guard is a traitor to other humans and also a criminal attempting to extrajudicially destroy evidence. He should be detained until he can be proven to no longer be morally deficient.
I would add though that this guy may not be 100% cognizant of laws in the UK, his accent makes me think he might be an immigrant just trying to hold onto a job. He should not have tried to get Tom to delete the footage, but I think there may be a backstory there that we can have a measure of sympathy for. I'm much more likely to blame any boss of theirs that indicated that they should ask the question.
@@sarahwatts7152 While I see your point and we should show solidarity for everyone in tough conditions, it's pretty well established that "just following orders" isn't acceptable. We all make decisions, and this guard decided to try to intimidate someone for filming. Don't make excuses for people who carry out evil, or people will convince themselves it's okay to act like this. It's not. Don't follow orders. You're responsible for your actions.
While we hear a lot about boomers in a bad way, I think some of them get a bad rap. Especially the younger ones. Same with the younger generations. We tend to forget that many of the younger boomers were hippies. They're responsible for STARTING environmental movements. I think many younger boomers are closer to gen z and alpha than they realize.
You came so close to getting it. Generations are fake, morality does not belong to the young. You have more in common, politically, with a working class boomer than a wealthy gen z. it's *class*, not age
Aren’t hippies the old boomers? My father was in his teens in the late 60s/early to mid 70s which means he’s 70 now and was too young to really have been a hippie anyway who are now about 80.
I personally agree that disruptive tactics are important, and more effective than the peaceful protests we've been doing for years. Just Stop Oil is right; what we've been doing for decades ISN'T working. However, I think it's important to acknowledge the privilege it requires to be able to anger the cops intentionally, and be disruptive right up until arrest. Obviously it takes courage, but you also have to feel confident in the fact that the police aren't going to shoot you. Thankfully, that's not a problem in Britain, but if you tried this in America, especially if you're a person of color, you'd be putting yourself at risk of being murdered by the police. Not everyone has the ability to do stuff like this. Just something to think about.
37:54 No, working class people can make political change by organizing with their coworkers, forming or joining a union if you don’t already have one, or strengthening and radicalizing your union if you do have one, and striking.
@@conormurphy4328A diversity of tactics is important. Equally important; is understanding what objects you are defending. Yes the artwork is a priceless window into the past. Its also how trust fund babys of billionaires avoid paying taxes. Frankly, those are the people in control now, not our goverments.
@@AnonymousAnarchist2 I think coordinated targets are also very important. You can't pick any random thing, but specific things. People have a hard time associating historical pieces of art, with big oil. It's hard to see it as reasonable because of that.
Reading recommendation: Civil Resistance: What Everyone Should Know. The book is based on significant up to date research and really does not support the tactics of this group. Civil resistance needs to A) deny those in power something they need and B) get the public on your side. These protests do neither. Attention alone is not the goal. Change is the goal. Raising awareness is not needed here. People already know climate change is a problem. What you need is to change policy, not get people to know about it. Although they eventually failed, the pipeline protests in the US were MUCH better thought out and they did have a significant impact, delaying the pipeline construction and changing public opinions about it, which impacted the way lawmakers fight about it. It changed the priority in the government.
@@TealJosh What you said doesn't contradict what I said. (Not saying you necessarily intended it to, though it sounded to me like you did.) You don't need to have the people on your side at the start, but yes, the government brutalizing people does get people who weren't previously on your side to join it. This is a very common and effective goal of a lot of sit ins, die ins, and other civil resistance intended to provoke a response. But those things need to be well thought out. In particular, I question the theory of change here. The tactic of provoking a police response to get the public on your side is commonly done when the public don't already agree with you mainly because they don't know the extent of your oppression. That is not the case here. Climate activists aren't being oppressed, the planet is. And people are petty aware of that fact and already agree. Further, the things that make the most news are not likely to do that job anyway. Throwing soup on art and getting taken away quietly by police is not exactly like seeing firehoses and dogs used against peaceful protesters during the civil rights era. Awareness isn't the need and the optics move people away from wanting to help instead of towards it. Some of JSO actions are well thought out. The ones that are the highest profile often are not and they often overshadow the ones that would otherwise be more effective. I hadn't seen anything on defacing Taylor Swift's plane. That is better thought out. It directly denies her ability to use it for a short time, raises awareness of a facet that people don't know, and it doesn't alienate a lot of people. Better to do it to other billionaires first and then Swift later showing that billionaires who are a problem can even include people you like. That's more thought provoking. Mass demonstrations with hundreds of arrests are also more effective. And JSO does that. But it gets overshadowed by the counterproductive things they do. And if you want to show police overreacting because of climate change in a way that moves the needle, I would look into climate refugees in the UK right now. It would be a big ask for them to get involved because of the real risks for them. But that would be powerful. Something that actually shows why many people have come and why many more will move North because their homelands are increasingly becoming uninhabitable. That might motivate people who currently don't care about the issue to push even the conservatives.
@@TealJoshIt's not civility politics to say jso has poorly thought out protests that aren't effective in distributing their message. If we cared about "civility" why would we be talking about the pipeline protests having been an example of effective disruptive protest. Any protest is not good protest, sometimes it's dumb and poorly thought out.
I mean, you're talking about it, so I'd say they're succeeding. And climate activists ALSO disrupt what the powerful need. I work with a bunch of XR activists in New Zealand who have stopped Coal Trains, who have disrupted Cruise Ship conferences. We do both. Also the public were against Civil Rights, Suffrage, and Abolitionist protestors, does that make them wrong? Are you going to tell me the Suffragettes and Abolitionists weren't doing their job right?
Guilty of filming a public nuisance with intent to publish? Give them a chance and it'll be 7 years. My admiration of JSO's balls is boundless, and my despair of the self-righteous whines about inconvenience by the usual suspects the same. Look forward to Boomers. It may explain what 'a bunch of filming' is. Great vid.
@@hostedbysimples5416When is the last strike you have seen over a broader social issue or climate change? Most strikes are narrowly focused on what the union wants to bargain with on behalf of the workers and their own interests.
@@jordannoell4222I would argue "I want the world to continue existing in the narrow ecological parameters I've always understood it to" is a narrow, selfish interest. The problem isn't that strikes are viewed as anymore worthy - the hand-wringing over the RMT and NHS strikes speak to the fact that people don't value strikes like they used to - it's that the people who have been in a position to make any changes have used those positions to change police powers, and not environmental policy.
I met quite a lot of people associated with JSO when I worked at a Students Union and afterwards in my local community the main thing that always strikes me is that they are some of the kindest, friendliest and most thoughtful people you could meet
When I did animal welfare, I knew plenty of wonderfully nice animal rights activists. I can also tell you that their tactics often were harmful to the cause though.
@@dismurrart6648 I think JSO's tactics are a response to big media being corporate owned and thus not giving much coverage to non-controversial actions and, without coverage, you can't really spread a message. So, i would say this stuff might be actually a cold logic calculated thing of purposefully doing bad protests to get people to talk about, providing a chance to spread the message
@Alex-cq1zr so I was an activist for a good decade. I've seen variations of these tactics plenty of times. People get the idea of no such thing as bad publicity. What they end up doing though is coming off like children and alienating the public. It also makes your request a threat. "I will keep destroying things you love and disrupt your life until you fix the planet." Currently, my activism is climate activities. I'm working to mobilize people to plant native species, learning how to do it myself and I'm going to work to get my yard certified as a wildlife habitat. Beyond that, I buy chemicals and work to get reliance on more sustainable options. It's actually going pretty well because the industry all the way up to big oil has clued into the public wants green alternatives. An exec at chevron literally said "if you as a company don't go green now, your company will die within 5 years." Which brings me back to JSO. These tactics aren't effective because they're targeting the wrong people. When peta threw paint at celebrities in furs, it worked because it targeted the problem, made celebs afraid to wear fur, and thus made fur less sexy to wear. When you try to destroy art in public collections or get a big bike race called off halfway through, you're throwing paint at people who aren't even wearing fur to stop the wearing of fur.
@Alex-cq1zr their tactics are old as dirt and only really work when you target the group doing the bad actions. What they're doing here is holding public art and important documents hostage until people get on board with climate change being a thing. That's how regular people see it. ExxonMobil itself puts significant money into pretending to be green so society is already on board. That's why people reacted favorably to them trying to deface taylor swifts jet but not to them getting a bike race canceled.
44:40 I hope this was sarcasm, because the actual response is DON'T TALK TO COPS! This includes security guards and anyone else talking on a similar role.
Ong how is no one else pointing this out. COPS ARE NOT YOU'RE FRIENDS! DON'T TELL THEM ANYTHING WHATSOEVER! I wouldn't tell security guards anything either but still be more cooperative, unless you suspect them of snitching you out. After all they are actually paid for keeping the place secure, not for whatever they can get away with, like the cops.
This is fascinating. Tom constantly being surprised by the "cool as cucumber" demeanor of these ladies is funny; they have lived their lives, and by all accounts, they've lived good ones. They can be calm knowing they won't have to inherit the world our generation will be stuck with. Even a stint in jail won't rattle them. They're fighting for a future they will not see. We get the future playground of the actions of today: we should be nervous.
I agree, we all should be nervous. However, I don't think these women aren't as nervous as Tom because they are elderly, at least that's not the main reason. As someone who participates in political protests that are more direct and dangerous, you just grow committed to the cause. You understand that, in order to change the state of the world, the government will take repressive measures against you and your organisation. You also know that you have your comrades with you along the way who have your back, sometimes literally if the police want to break up your protest, for example. All these things contribute to a calm feeling that mutes out the nervousness. Source: I and most people in my political organisation all feel that way, for those reasons.
No disrespect, but I'd rather have them throw orange paint and glue themselves on corporate buildings or CEO's mansions instead. IMO, going after artwork or historical artifacts which have public and/or historical value feels super cheap to me.
It blows my mind you apologise because of your interaction with the guard. You are not obliged to tell him anything... He's just a security guard, just tell him you was there to see the exhibition and walk away. If he asks you to leave when you did nothing wrong, then that looks bad on them, it is not illegal to film. Especially what do they expect when something as big as what was happening occured.
Watched on Nebula. Those sorts of tactics aren't really useful anymore. While I don't necessarily think that they put people off their cause, they certainly don't really do much to advance it either. Maybe fifty years ago it would have been useful; but it's clear that purely symbolic gestures and non-violent inconvenience simply do not work, and never have on their own. And when peaceful protests are met with violence, as they so often are in the US, and draconian legal punishments, what's the point in remaining peaceful? No strictly non-violent protest has ever accomplished its goals on a large and long-term scale. At best, they've gotten some token concessions, but no real substantial long-term change. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. would not have accomplished anything except to get his people injured, imprisoned, and killed; if it hadn't been for the looming threat of more forceful action from the Black Panthers and Malcolm X, among others (a fact that Dr. King acknowledged later in his life, as he himself became more radical). Similarly, Indian independence was just as much the result of the various uprisings around the country (which the British Raj disgustingly insisted on calling "mutinies"), as it was of Ghandi's protests, which again he acknowledged and did not condemn. As much as I dislike some of the tactics and rhetoric of EF and ELF, their sabotage campaigns were effective, and a good starting point (tree spiking, on the other hand, was highly counterproductive and targeted the wrong people). We need more effective direct action, because the powers that be have already shown that they are not interested in making real change, and will respond to peaceful protest with increasing escalation of physical and legal violence.
Just Stop Oil have tried engaging in direct sabotage action, and the Tory government passed more stringent sentencing laws in response. Nobody noticed. Nobody cared. Meanwhile, everyday people bray and jeer at JSO activists doing annoying shit, calling for them to have harsh consequences. They can't win. If they commit to active sabotage, they get banged up for a long time. If they take more indirect, irritating action, they get banged up for a long time. If they are found to be in a call with people who act, they get banged up for a long time. There is no reasonable action that can be taken. The government has *created* this chaos, and is now acting coy and shocked that people's response to "You can't dissent in any way" is to become destructive and reckless with disregard. If your response to this is that the action doesn't help, you're missing the point - the action is *possible* whether helpful or not, and they're showing that no amount of draconian legislation or heavy-handed policing will stop *this* dissent.
"No strictly non-violent protest has ever accomplished its goals on a large and long-term scale. At best, they've gotten some token concessions, but no real substantial long-term change" Or it was the non-violent protests maintained any form of support and adoption to the ideas in spite of the violence.Violence breeds violence. But just keep on preaching that violence - it solves problems all the time and never hurts anybody, really, it's that non-violence that's the problem.
@@JH-pt6ihthere are plenty of examples in history of an unwillingness to carry out violence resulting in total failure. Hell the Russian revolutions of 1917 have several. In the July days mobs of people demanded the provisional government give all power to the Soviets and when the politicians just said no… well they didn’t do anything because they were unwilling to carry out the threats of violence they were making. The revolt of the SR’s is another, the SR’s had a strong enough force in Moscow during the revolt that had they wanted they could have overthrown the communist party of Lenin, Lenin literally spent the night terrified in the Kremlin convinced that any moment now the SR’s would launch an attack and destroy them… well the SR’s didn’t because they thought that the threat of violence would force Lenin to change his policies(primarily re-declaring war on Germany)… so the communists organised their own attavk, destroyed the SR revolt and chucked all the SR’s in prison. The idea that violence is bad protest tactics is hilariously naive and does not reflect the reality of history, every successful peaceful protest relies on at least the threat of violence, and many times in history the failure to manifest that threat has resulted in the failure of suchprotests.
This brings to mind a rather specific and OLD body of research of movements, in particular "The Propaganda of the Deed" in which by doing something, anything, a movement hopes to garner momentum by any means necessary.
The idea of turning against a movement because you dont like the protesters for said movement is silly to me. Like "I used the care about the environment, but some protesters made me mad so now I want to dump oil in the water"
Humans beings are fickle, capricious creatures. One of the many things we have in common with other animals on this planet. But also that is a rather hyperbolic analysis of what he meant by "turn against the movement". They don't mean "turn against all climate action in general", but rather "I don't think I want to be associated with that specific group".
it's not about those who care about the environment but those apathetic to it. If they didn't already care, they're really not likely to start after seeing something they don't like
Like, Just Stop Oil has made me pause about my convictions about climate change. I have always voted with the environment as a key issue, but when I see these people vandalizing works of historical and artistic importance (with tangential or no link at all to the cause they champion), I have to wonder if I have surrounded myself with a bunch of lunatics. I feel uncomfortable that we are on the same side of the debate, so I have to reflect on why I can still support what I do despite actions taken on “our side” that I deeply disagree with. Although I stayed firm on my conviction, I don’t like how this organisation tempts people to switch, if only not to be standing next to them. Not everyone makes climate change the focus of their life plan, but still support the cause in more casual ways. And just like how super radical vegans (vegan teacher, peta, etc) has alienated many people to not even consider diminishing their meat consumption, I fear JSO is doing the same for climate change.
Honestly I think we need both approaches: some radical action is good to grab attention and keep a conversation going, but you also need less radical activists that politicians and ordinary people are actually willing to sit down and talk with, or hear out their points rationally. I don't think one can work without the other though: either it's too radical and you just piss everyone off, or it's too mild and everyone ignores you.
Wow when I sat down to watch this video I certainly didn't expect to see my ex employer in it, let alone find out he's now amassed a criminal record and become co-founder of JSO in the meantime. But then, it doesn't REALLY surprise me either.
A broken glass, with legacy inside, just so people understand that that's nothing compared with corporate genocide, should speak volumes. I, personally, appreciate history, but if as a people we won't listen, this seems justified.
Still going through the video, but I do want to make an early comment to express my initial viewpoint on the movement. I will admit, their action has always made me uncomfortable as a lover of art history and the arts in general. But a key perspective that I have always kept is that I don't push the blame on Just Stop Oil for such disruptive acts (as strange as that sounds), but rather governments and companies that continues to hold onto the status quo that is currently destroying our planet. When you have governments and companies that are more than willing to ignore the reality that our planet is dying, people are going to get desperate and will go to any lengths to get people in power to stop ignoring this catastrophic problem. So I do wish people would redirect their anger towards these governments and companies rather than wasting their time getting mad at Just Stop Oil (even if their actions can feel frustrating to witness). I think the worse thing about such controversial acts, however, is that I feel that it's always has been a crap shoot whether such disruptive acts will actually make a difference. Which is honestly not surprising, considering that our global economic world has frankly put too much power into companies. And considering than the general population seem to basically have a negative opinion on the movement (no thanks to the fucking media of course), I do worry if this will be enough of a push to get these governments and companies to start caring, at least a little. Well, as you said at the beginning. It'll only be a matter of time until people in power will have to start caring. Just would be ideal if they start caring sooner so that we can actually have a fucking fighting change to save our world and our future.
Finished the video and was very informative. Thank you for the work you put in to make this. Definitely gave me a clearer idea on how successful these acts of resistance can be. Want to say that Sue and Judy seem like such kind dears and I admire their bravely for their acts of resistance. I think the most surprising info that I have learned is that the British government has enacted two new legislation to deterred Just Stop Oil protesters, which can end up making even certain peaceful protests "illegal". Absolutely fuck the British government and the police. omg
Regarding the art thing, my understanding is that they haven't actually damaged any art pieces, they just throw stuff at their protective casings. So, honestly, I have no problems with that. That being said, I do feel like being a nuisance to ordinary folks isn't really that ideal. Protesting and being disruptive to the oil companies and the government leaders funding them is a better idea, though I do understand that the punishments are likely much worse and might not be public enough.
It's constantly theater. They could disrupt the status quo by going directly after oil shareholders, executives and their pet politicians, but they won't, because that would come with actual consequences for these privileged activism tourists.
No, dont explain. If you dont need to explain, if you dont have to explain, dont answer questions from 'security'. He cant ask you to delete footage, and you owe them nothing.
people don't talk about an issue, they talk about stupid protesters and their actions which disrupts regular people's life. Make politician's life harder, not regular people.
@@yaroslavmartsinkevich1392 politicians are untouchable. its only through mass outcry can you actually change people. but sure blocking a highway is the problem, not the death of the planet you stand on.
Yeah, talking about how every eco activist is a nutjob. I can't even start talking to people about ecological issues without addressing idiots like them.
@@yaroslavmartsinkevich1392 Or actually, do make regular people lives harder, but in a meaningful way. The big problem with this sort of non-violent protest is how ineffective it is at anything other than "raising awareness". The awareness is raised, the problem is that no-one cares. Being visible does not cause policy changes. Homeless/Unhoused people are painfully visible and that doesn't drive policy change. Making policy changes the only way around the problem - does. Look at how effective wars or viruses are at limiting energy use, prioritizing energy efficiency and switching away from fossil fuels. When you need an addict to stop substance abuse, you don't spill soup on their couch until they stop - you cut off their supply. And considering how harsh punishments await those involved in these "non-violent protests" - this is now just wasted effort. A life broken for a 2 minute news report. If the truncheon hits anyway, and you're ready to receive it, at least get something of value out of it.
@@yaroslavmartsinkevich1392 politicians are untouchable. the only way to change things is through mass civil outcry. But people just dont care enough about the literal looming threat of the end of our planet. Its funny that you find getting delayed on a highway to be more annoying than the death of nearly everything. Isn't it beautiful?
I recommend everyone enjoying this to read Andreas Malm's "How to b10wup a p1pel1ne". I personally think that the sort of less disturbtive action as done by the extinction rebelion or Just Stop Oil but escalation is required to make the more moderate activists heard. so... just do as so many insurectionists do.
I will never agree with JSO because of their opposition of nuclear power, it's like being a vegan and being opposed to vegetable production. And in all for nuclear power as it is a means of generating energy that doesn't emit CO2 and generates almost no contamination in the traditional sense.
@@f1mbultyr Just because it won't solve climate change it doesn't mean we shouldn't be invested in it. Not only is it much better for the climate and the environment, but it's also a strategic asset. A country that has nuclear power has to import way less energy, making it much harder for any other country to use energy hunger as leverage... As well it's improvement of QoL as again much better for the environment and cheaper electricity as well
@@Zenik506 yes, and worst of all they bother everyday people go for the heads of the institutions, paint the CEOs instead of making everyone waste their time and hate them
“No contamination in the traditional sense” is not how it’s being described by the communities surrounding nuclear power plants. We have no genuine solution to the waste produced by nuclear, if you say you want it as a bridge to other energies maybe, but let’s not ignore the genuine waste problem they pose
The protesters who blocked the road for ambulances and other emergency services, and the lady in the car trying to get her child to hospital. Whatever side of the fence you are. These people have possibly as of this moment caused the deaths of more than they've saved.
Climate change activism won’t save lives for 30 years or more until climate effects start to really show. But when global warming kicks in more and more tens, even hundreds, of millions of people will start moving about looking for better places to live. That’s when I and my zero climate education thinks the high attrition rates will kick in. When people start on each other it could bring the population down enough to slow things down a bit 🤷♂️ Apparently Europe took 200 years for the population to catch up after losing half to the plague in the 13th century.
So, to understand the material context of the signing of this symbolic document: A bunch of land-owners were owed larger taxes to the richest land-owner and didn't want to give up their own privileges. So they rebel against the big dog, force him to sign a letter assuring that he couldn't raise taxes unilaterally, but it had no real impact for the serfs of the land-owners, still subjected to complete alienation of their life possibilities and forced to toil at their lieges' lands and serve in his armies at a whim. And the general public is supposed to relate to this instant in history as a cornerstone moment of the liberation of the common man from the tyranny of "big government"?
There's a certain irony to the Just Stop Oil spokesman having an image of massive amounts of concrete on the wall behind him, given the climate issues arising from concrete manufacture.
Disrupt and annoy common folk: Okay Prevent ambulances to reach patients: Okay Destroy art: Okay Slightly discomfort private lifes of politicans: Out of question Slightly discomfort private lifes of petro industry CEOs: Out of question
This is so true lmao, I commented under one of their protests, spraying the orange cornflower on a royal billionaire wedding, and people are MAD at me, comments still come after 2 months and people still slide into my DM's calling me slurs 😂. They're billionaires, they'll be fine lmao.
The ambulance story was disinformation spread by right-wing news outlets. The ambulances were not late, and there was a helicopter anyway Also, no art is being destroyed. If you look real close, you can see there's protective glass around it
Why on Earth is a police officer in any kind of position to say "we don't want footage of a newsworthy event published, please delete it"?? Oh, I guess he's a guard, so he can say whatever he wants I guess.
One quick anecdote that increased my respect for JSO: after spraying the (easily removed) starch on Stonehenge, I heard one of their surrogates point out a road tunnel had been approved under Stonehenge (and was only recently cancelled by the new government.) A harmless protest act that educated me about a harmful official act.
A protest act that had harmful effects on the lichen on the rocks, which educated you about something that had been in the news many times over the preceding few years. You could just try keeping up with major news stories?
@@Sam_Guevenne So do many trees. We cut them every day. Doesn't the nearby road affect growth of lichen? Did anyone care? Or tourism? Suddenly caring of lichen of all things nature is just a classic "no true Scotsman" fallacy. Also it is not about every detail in nature, it is about restoring the balance to have a future.
Change starts with organizing. Protests draw attention, but organizing is the real threat to the ruling class that makes them actually listen, however temporarily and however little. That's also why organizing needs to revolve around democracy, not specific issues; let protesters draw attention to the issues that the organized people talk about how to address. A society organized around (common, not the fraud called "representative") democracy has the power to change the systems of political and economic governance themselves, without the "thoughts and prayers" approach of asking the rulers to do the right thing on your behalf. They may control the state, but you can take over local government, local economies, and branch outwards until your movement controls everything, and from there the ruling class has no choice other than to take the people seriously. But that can't be the goal. That has to be a stepping stone towards full democratization, towards overthrowing the ruling class entirely through that democratic organization's efforts (violent revolutions won't fix things, they will merely change who stands at the top, and it will never be the people themselves. At "best" it will be individuals whose "hearts are in the right place," but who, because the SYSTEMS don't change to require democracy, don't represent anyone but themselves and their own ideas) so that their interests no longer dictate national, foreign, and economic policy.
People are organising, some of them the same ones doing these kinds of protest. Look up Assemble or similar citizens assembly groups, it's not that people aren't trying, it just doesn't get into the media for people to hear about
Rupert's group sounds great, but it does somewhat prove that only disruptive civil disobedience gains any form of attention or publicity, as I've never heard of the Climate Majority Project before now
2.9 is optimistic. 2.9 is the minimum we can keep it to if we act now. This is clearly not happening. Billions will die from climate change and associated wars. It is the single largest threat to society as we know it. I sympathize with their aims, but I seriously doubt they will achieve anything meaningful. I gave up years ago. I still talk about it with anyone that brings it up, but I'm done trying to save capitalism. It can't be saved.
It's much more fun to talk about the coming Water Wars anyway. My prediction for the US and Canada is total dissolution of the state as people become more interested in protecting scarce resources than adhering to any sense of national unity and that new governments will form around the defense of fresh water sources like the Great Lakes. Basically, the people living around the Great Lakes will confederate and militantly defend the water from any outsiders, otherwise known as drylanders. With the central North American aquifers all dried up and the southern US being too hot to live in, people will try to move north to the remaining water. Nothing says mass violence like protectionist attitudes and a large migrant population. The UK rioters are going to look like school children when compared with the stuff people will do when something as precious as water becomes contested.
Climate doomerism is tempting but you shouldn't give up, and you shouldn't be dissuading anyone from trying to make their small difference. Collective action has been at the forefront of many societal changes, and if people start going soft on governments BECAUSE they've given up then it causes the self fufilling prophecy of change not happening.
You've proven how poor the security has been in public buildings. Like you, I was astonished why the building wasn't simply shut down and everyone cleared out within 5 minutes by an emergency alarm.
This is exactly what I've always wanted to know about Just Stop Oil and similar groups! Thank you for putting this information together in an accessible format!
I've been so excited for your video on this. A lot of people are very critical of Just Stop Oil's tactics, but they're getting attention, and are the only current activist group most people can name. It's making us, as a population, think more broadly about climate change. It's also inspiring more young people to become activists and fight for their rights and planet, which is great!
Honestly, they feel like a insidious project started by the “Big Fossil” They piss people off so much that those pissed off people might just destroy the environment even faster through sheer spite 😂 Disrupting the lives of people and trying to ruin events, are they actually inspiring more activists, or are they actually inspiring new anti-activists?
I don't see the point of making people more aware of climate change if for every person you convert with your "awareness" you piss off ten more with your shock tactics. You can't really stop how opposition media is going to portray a cause.
But thats the sad bit. We are winning the debate. More and more people are moving towards the idea of renewables. They just hate Stop Oil. I work in energy and I debate this on many sites fossile vs renewables. Those against renewables always bring Stop Oil into the debate. But I know how to deal with that to win online debates, I have made up stories, that stop oil, has been funded by big oil, to sabotage the move towards renewables.
Great video tom! Whatever the opinion on JSO is, we need to be demanding way more from our governments to do more. We can actually solve the cost of living and help the climate by taxing the very wealthy until they are not as wealthy, then they csn stop polluting at the rate of small countries
Ok JSO has genuinely good intentions and can justifie disrupting stuff but what they are asking for is still just stupid, if we just stop oil our society collapses, if we keep using oil recklessly our society also collapses so we gotta find other solution rather than just stop oil
Sue and Judy remind me of an 82 year old nun who did 2 years in federal prison for a 2014 protest against nuclear weapons. Her name is Megan Rice. Solidarity forever ladies ✊
I find it ironic that people get up in arms about art and relics being defaced, but won't do a single thing to change status quo eventually resulting in those artifacts being destroyed along with everybody else on the planet. Oh and people saying they should go after the "big bad guys"? Maybe there's a reason why JSO can't even get close to those places. It's a matter of time before the army is stationed to protect refineries like it's bloody mad max.
@@toyotaprius79 it's not fascist, it's just how news network work. A community always has a common narrative, which will in turn almost always regard dissent as bad and disruptive. The problem is that dissent is part of democracy's core, you can't critcize dissent without quickly running into some issues with values.
I'm surprised Tom never asked the obvious question: why not focus these actions on government and corporate locations actually associated directly with maintaining the status quo for fossil fuels?
I mean, they kinda did. A protest at an oil plant is barely going to get any relevant media coverage. Those happen pretty often by a lot of different groups, how many did you hear about or even remember this year alone? Cultural disruption is unfortunately more attention-grabbing, which means more of a hassle to the government. Adding to that, vandalism damages are a blip for multi-billion dollar companies, as long as there's no media coverage they don't care. To achieve the same goals by only targeting coorporations/governments, they'd probably have to rise to the level of eco-terrorism, which I think everyone agrees it's a bad idea.
He answers this question in the video; it's mentioned that direct action on oil-related facilities does not generate the media focus the strategy relies on.
1:00:32 Young people today look back and cherry pick the positives from past eras and conveniently ignore the negatives. People in the UK didn’t even have freezers in their homes until the 1970s. If you lived through the 60s-80s, each day could be the last day of the human race due to the almost constant high threat of nuclear war. The worst thing that young people today have to deal with is a bad hair day or being asked to come into the office to attend a meeting
"Can a ragtag bunch British activists convince them to do so?" Bro how tf does anyone believe that a collective of people that are comitted to disrupting the lives of the general public have any measurable effect on the massive companies, corporations, and global conglomerates that are responsilbe for 99.9% of this problem? What an absolutely obsurd question to even pose in the first place.....
I just don't see the value in antagonizing the Average Joe. It gives more ammunition for those who want to shut you down AND makes those who you inconvenienced cheer. This display is also ironic: Two old people use energy ineffectively against the protections set up by those in power. Almost as Ironic as the government system that caused the worst environment for workers and cause the most death by starvation using tools of the trade to represent them.
If you think this is scary, imagine the direct action that would be involved to throw over existing power structures like capital and the state. Because nobody is going to legislate their way out of this pit b
I like to ask people who complain about these kinds of disruptive but harmless protests what exactly they suggest doing instead. The answer or lack thereof is always very telling.
As someone who's been on the "other side" (I used to be front of house manager for a large museum) don't worry about having made the lives of the staff there difficult; honestly it's all in a day's work. If nobody's safety is being endangered and there's no worry about anything escalating to violentce, it's pretty much just "OK, I'm not going to physically intervene so you do your thing, and I'll do mine - observe and make sympathetic noises to any grumbling visitors while we all wait for the police to arrive. We used to have the occasional exhibition funded by controversial sponsors so we did indeed have an SOP for protest action which, yes, included a radio code 😂 Ours was "Code Pink" but this was in the days before JSO so I would not be one bit surprised if "Code Orange" is exactly what they call it now! The staff all know it's not them that the protest has a problem with, so there's no reason for things not to stay perfectly friendly and it's also worth realising that the kind of people who want to work at a museum or a library are probably fairly agreeable to whatever the protest is about. I once had a lovely chat with a former Uni classmate who'd come to protest an event for the staff from Shell who were sponsoring an exhibit. It didn't look like Sue and Judy managed to smash that glass in the end but I don't think it really mattered, and I'm glad the MC wasn't damaged. When I saw the tools they'd bought I knew it probably wasn't going to do the job - that's toughened glass and you need to use something much harder and pointier than a cold chisel, like one of the safety hammers you can buy so you can smash your way out of your car window in an emergency. Not that I would ever condone that of course. (I bet that glass is also laminated so they still wouldn't have got through)
The big problem with this type of activism is that in order for it to work, politicians need to be able to connect the activity with their goal. Most of you actions are too vague for anyone to know what is being opposed. And politicians are usually not the sharpest of the nation's pencils.
Oh the politicians know. Unfortunately its every day people being stupid that allow politicians to brush this shit off. The goal of cliamte protest is incredibly obvious, you are just playing uninformed for the sake of it.
@@Bloodlinedev The slogan is, the methods... not likely. Politicians care what 'average Joe' thinks, and an average Joe sees a bunch of privileged kids being silly and causing disruption to THEM (not the politicians or anyone who could do anything about stopping oil) and then they expect from politicians to get rid off those privileged nuisances, not to stop investing/expanding oil consumption...
@@zwerko Politicians now EXACTLY what is what, dude. JSO and multiple other protest organizations have sat at the same table and discussed what they want. Where i am from The Last Generation won a case at the highest court (think of the American Supreme Court, but german) where the court ruled that the former and current government is breaking our constitution by not properly tackling climate change. And nothing is happening to rectify this.
Also newly elected Labour MPs have received at least £45,000 from oil and gas lobbyists since the election last month. Global Witness released the story yesterday.
Based old ladies smashing up an historical artifact while zoomer Roblox Harry Potter poops his pants and runs away from the scene before finishing his job but not before ruining the other cameraman's shot (that had the balls to stick around).
I’m making a film! Be ready for the release of my feature-length, Nebula Original documentary Boomers by signing up to Nebula at go.nebula.tv/tomnicholas
@@Tom_NicholasTom would you ever do a video that actually goes in depth on nebulas legal structure? Every time I try to find out from Dave Wiskus if all the creators actually have equity or if they just have a contract I can’t get a straight answer.
Ok, ok, I'll get a sub already!
are we coming out of an ice-age ? what happens to plants if they dont get any CO2 ( they die ) ?
@@marchelandersen6839What do you mean? The Last Glacial Period occured 115,000 and 11,700 years ago? We’ve been out of it for years. Yeah plants die without CO2 but the excess emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere caused by human activity is intensifying the greenhouse effect and leading to global warming which will cause them (and us) to die regardless.
Can confirm from my own experience of an arrest in my teens, the Police really enjoy taking you to random rural police stations in the middle of nowhere, and then letting you out after all the buses have stopped for the night, stranding you in a village you've never heard of 12 miles from the city you were arrested in, in the freezing cold, the middle of the night, and needing to find a phone box to call a taxi from.
You had the perfect opportunity to do the "Yep that's me. You're probably wondering how I ended up in this situation" meme and you missed it...
You're right damnit, unsubscibe
TIL that meme exists.
Freeze frame. Record scratch.
Thank god he didn’t. I would have unsubscribed just for the lack of originality.
"We were on the verge of greatness, we were this close"
Conspiracy to cause a public nuisance is an exceptionally british crime
Just sounds like an anti protest law
I imagine many people would consider the statement "I'm going to speak loudly on public transport" as a crime in the UK
@@kx7500that would be protesting whilst huwhite
@@nevreihathat's just diversity
@@nevreiha what a barbaric country just put on headphones and zone everyone else out
Basically the UK has now devolved into "oy! D'yav a license for that nuisance?"
"Of course not, I'm not an oil company."
Because oil companies are blocking ambulances and chemo patients in the street, apparently.
All these comments and likes and not a single argument as to why the novel issue of this kind of public disorder shouldn't be dealt with using legal territory. So many memes and smoke and mirrors. It's easy to be a critic when you don't have any real opinion or position on anything bar the vague bandwagon-ing you see online
No, it was public opinion and public disruption that drove the law change. Most people want people who disrupt their lives to face legal consequences. Oil companies dont care.
True @@Jannfndnanakid
Regardless of whatever you feel about the efficacy or convenience of nonviolence protest movements, EVERYONE should be concerned with how quickly the UK and US justice systems moved to become way more authoritarian and fascist in response to environmental and racial justice protests in the past five years. Considering the way RICO charges are being abused against the Stop Cop City protesters in Atlanta, this is an issue we need to be openly criticizing - instead of bellyaching over inconveniences and philosophical differences in nonviolent protest.
England esecially so, thanks to the legacy culture of the peerage and the monarchy. They still have enshrined in law the idea that some people are better than others.
@@kevoreilly6557 thanks for the thoughtful and relevant response. I’ll be thinking about this for a long time - lots to ponder. Maybe you’ll figure out how to read by then.
@@kevoreilly6557that must be a he sounds a person makes as leopards eat their face.
Amusing
Fascism is when enforcing the law... Lol
@@ethanduncan1646 you have a fair point, it ain't necessarily fascist as it isn't hypernationalist authoritarianism
but it is authoritarianism, as seemingly people can't even protest somewhat peacefully, and the police have been granted further liberties to arrest people for being a bit distruptive.
as a former security guard (for seven years); we do not want to do work. "if you'd like me to leave, I'll do that" means literally minimum work for us. I'll be honest mate, lying to security in that manner is perfect.
Or maybe you're just a coward and shouldn't be a security guard?
@@oatdilemma6395Or maybe security isn't supposed to be the police, but works more as a deterrent? Think. Or maybe working class people are alienated from their work and dont actually care if you disrupt their work?
@@oatdilemma6395 minimum wage, minimum effort.
@@oatdilemma6395 not enthusiastically accosting nonviolent protestors makes you a coward? get real, that's sick.
I disagree. The koch brothers are the most controversial climate change activists. Oh wait wrong direction, my bad.
I mean they are Climate activits. Just they are opposed to a livable climate.
Its a good and important framing youre making though
I don’t even think they are more controversial depending on how one looks at it. Apart from the people who get paid by them only a handful of lefties care (or know) about the Koch brothers.
Meanwhile everyone and their dog has an opinion on JSO not destroying a painting.
It is a thin line between aggressive activism and terrorism.
In Bavaria there is a group that sabotages green energies. They collapsed a windmill (not a small one!) and destroyed several hundred of solar panels. They have not been caught yet.
@@btarczy5067 Oh I dunno, they set up several foundations which fund various arts and humanities projects back in the day in order to massage the negative perception of their name. They were broadly pretty good at managing their image up until David died in 2019. Even today Charles does some seemingly out there stuff, like, he's a major funder and proponent of efforts to legalize cannabis federally.
I'd argue that's a pretty strong recipe for "controversial" as, depending on how much you know about him, where you know the name from and depending on your political disposition, you're going to hate his guts or else be confused about why anybody would.
The symbolic destruction of the glass shielding the Magna Carta got everyone's balls in a twist, but nobody batted an eye at several successive years of the Tories destroying the actualy rights enshrined within it. It'll always make me giggle when they call JSO 'performative activism' when their selective anger epitomises it.
What rights enshrined in it? The Magna Carta is the most overhyped bit of paper to ever exist, and it hasn’t been active for several hundred years.
@@deeznoots6241So we should just abolish the notion of it or any unifying legal code then? I would rather have a flawed and outdated rule of law over no rule of law, without one, we get dangerously close to justifying tyranny without a point we won't back against.
"Oh the electric chair for JSO protesters? Well it certainly would save us money feeding and housing those lowlifes!"
@@deeznoots6241 sometimes, you should consider thinking before you talk. If you had thought for even a single moment, you'd recognize that it was a SYMBOLIC GESTURE. Jesus Christ 🙄
P.S. you didn't even say anything untrue, it's just that they aren't relevant either. Nothing you said changes the reality that there _are_ rights enshrined in the Magna Carta (even if we don't "use" it anymore), nor do they change the reality that it was a _symbolic gesture._
You didnt explain what rights were enshrined in the magna carta. A third party, i know little about british history and would have appreciated a discussion instead of an eyerolling rant. I bet the other person had indeed thought about the document for more than a single moment before forming their opinion on it being supposedly overhyped.
May i ask politely, what rights are enshrined in the magna carta? What does it symbolize, and how? And why might someone critical call it “overhyped”?
There's only 4 originals in existence and one is badly damaged.
You do realize that any light or oxygen exposure would damage it right?
There's people who's entire lives are and have been dedicated to preserving historically significant works.
Just because you don't care about the document doesn't mean it is in any way acceptable to try to destroy one of 3 readable originals of a historically significant text.
The symbolism is "we want to rob future generations of valuable texts."
That's not deep. That's just doing to history what climate change is doing to the planet and it loses people.
I feel uneasy when the only political action I see being taken following these protests are the introduction of more draconian anti protest laws.
Because instead of targeting oil and finance and politicians, they targeted working people. The unpopularity of these protests helped those laws escape public backlash. If these people aren't plants, they're utterly misguided.
I agree, but Roger Hallam and other JSO activists planning to and attempting (but failing) to block the M25 circular route in calculated positions so the whole route would be "Filled with cars" and "Back up onto all the other motorways and all the other A roads", which would stop almost everyone and everything from getting in or out of London by car for multiple days, then claiming it was a "peaceful protest" isn't helping with that. JSO's other protests aren't too bad, but blocking traffic (especially trying to do it on this scale) does more harm than good.
@@lentilsoup460the M25 and all the other A roads being blocked and backed up would be an awesome achievement!!
Although a quick glance at some stats randomly for 2017 suggests that London traffic management causes far more issues than JSO could ever dream of 😂 :
“1.35 million traffic jams in past year (2017) have cost the economy a total of £9 billion”
Source INRIX.
@@fluffskunk Exactly, and they made it so nobody can talk about climate action without it being derailed into a discussion on JSO because they know as soon as it goes there if you say anything supportive of JSO you lose one side and if you condemn them, you lose the other. (And because nuance is dead if you try to go down the middle you lose everyone)
They've absolutely been one of the most damaging things for climate activism in a long time.
Yeah it's crazy. It's almost like someone is paying these people to lower public opinion of protestors so that they can push through these draconian laws.
I'm not a fan of the way just stop oil use the term "direct action" in my opinion it is a misuse because symbolic protest actions are anything but direct.
That doesn't mean it can't have its place or serves no good purpose, but direct action is when you're addressing a problem directly. It's cleaning up a dumpster without a municipality or directly blocking access to private planes or cruise ships, because they are the problem itself or at least part of it.
Breaking the glass around the magna Carta, spraying paint etc. Are all symbolic actions, not direct actions.
Yeah I had that thought too. They might be trying to be a nuisance, but their strategy still boils down to asking the powers that be to do something that goes against their interests, just slightly less than nicely. It's 1-2 steps above "write your representative." I can't fault them for trying to do SOMETHING, but yeah I'm not sure this is gonna work.
Destruction of property isn't activism, but vandalism.
Destruction of symbolism is the right kind of symbolism, my mate @puclopuclik4108
@@puclopuclik4108The ignorance of this statement is staggering. Brave of you to be so public with your lack of knowledge on the topic.
@fearsomefawkes6724 Are you suggesting that it is completely fine for me o destroyed whatever I want as long as I can fabricate an excuse in the form of activism?
Did you find the recent outbreak of riots across the UK activism as well?
This topic often reminds me of things relating to MLK and Malcolm X, and the effectiveness of having multiple distinct groups who take varying methods to hand for an important matter.
(edit is to correct spelling of Malcolm X's name, as somehow that mistake had slipped past me on initial posting. Thank you for bringing it to my attention)
Malcolm X and the Black Panthers did a lot more than just be a silly nuisance.
@@SignificantNumberOfBeavers Same for Just Stop Oil.
Yup, the "radical flank" effect is a really important aspect of activism that doesn't get touched on enough.
MLK was just as radical as Malcolm X lol, he was public enemy number 1 in the 60s.
Black Panthers are racists and open carry semi autos, MLK was also pro gun and an avid hunter.
Honestly, this video made me see JSO in a much better light. The media absolutely detests them.
The media and politicians detesting them was one of my first clues they were legit and pushing the right buttons.
The moment the rich spoke out against them, I knew they were right
It's not just the media. These buffoons stopped the ambulance taking my sister to hospital after she was stabbed. She died in the ambulance.I'm sure they felt so good about that, I didn't.
you people really dont get that the media is making publicity for them? if the media really hate someone they dont talk about them.
from what ive seen the mainstream media is very friendly with eco activism. the green agenda is a government/mainstream agenda.
but its cute that you think you are revolutionaries.
They have a lot of problems though. I can understand throwing paint on stonehenge, destroying art or damaging the magna carta since it doesn't harm anyone. But they did not need to plan and attempt to block the entire M25 motorway and surrounding roads in claculated positions to fill the 'whole circular route' with cars and try to stop almost anyone or anything getting in or out of London by car for 4 days. That would've caused extreme disruption, including food shortages and likely multiple deaths from postponing medical treatment or medication.
Well I would love to become an activist, but since I have another passport, our glorious UK government can take away my citizenship and deport me at the slightest disobedience... I guess we die.
@@kevoreilly6557 man, bait used to be believable. do you think you'll get someone easier if you reply to every single comment on the video?
If you change your mind and they send you to the US, lmk and you can crash on my couch.
That makes me laugh and smile
Great excuse for someone who wants to pretend to care.
@@dredzik My gran was in the same boat during the protests over the war in Iraq. She was deeply upset over both of her home countries engaging in imperialism and a quagmire of a war, but if she engaged in any direct action she would run the risk of being deported and separated from the majority of her family.
"I do not do this because I want to. I do it with a great amount of solemn sullen responsibility, because I have to."
They weren't arrested for fighting fossil fuels, they were arrested for vandalism. Defacing artwork and monuments won't do anything to reduce fossil fuel usage, the only thing it will do is make eco-activists look like clowns.
Not only that, whoever does not do it (like me) has no interest in the continuation of humanity.
JSO = Houthis
Same ridiculous ideas to solve a global problem
"If it wasn't for the unrelenting disruptions and inconvenience inflicted upon the general public that was caused by the brave men and women in , none of this would have been possible!"
- said no one ever.
@@sirtra Well it's a good thing they aren't unrelenting then, isn't it?
Unlike the collapse of our environment, protesting does take breaks.
and if you're looking for examples contrary to your statement, civil rights movement, women's suffrage, union strikes, etc. Sure would be nice if such inconveniences would never have had to been a thing. But unfortunately when some people in power get greedy, they don't listen. And if it wasn't for people taking that power back, you indeed would be in a worse place than you are now.
Especially if you're in the US. Even the Civil war was fought by a bunch of people seen as troublemakers.
FIVE YEARS in prison for planning to disrupt traffic on a motorway? Are you kidding me? How far Britain has fallen since Brexit. It's really sad.
What if there were people on that road on their way to a job interview and couldn't make it. Or maybe they were a doctor trying to visit a patient. Or even worse. Would that be enough then? Sentences are meant to be, among the other things, deterrents
@superkulak Five years? You do know that far more serious crimes, like r*pe, regularly get a lot less. And sorry, but if you think inconveniencing people is the same as scarring someone for life then you're sick.
@@superkulakbut fives years in prison? That’s not even overkill it’s just absurd
@@superkulak but what if a murderer was on that road heading to another victim?? Or what if without the traffic disruption a multi-car pile up would have happened with multiple fatalities?
@@superkulak your argument is no different than mine. Also your advocating taking away someone else's freedom cause they don't think like you. Your argument is garbage
that sponsor at the end - A lifetime subscription? I have a vague memory of hearing of such a thing in the ancient past. I believe it was called 'actually owning something' or something like that.
it's called a subscription so they can take it away if they want
@@cheesusabidas77 "retire service"
@@cheesusabidas77 It's called a LIFETIME subscription because, and I'm paraphrasing from Nebula's website: "You will have it as long as you and Nebula both exist."
It would be a lawsuit if they took it away after that, and not one they could ever feasibly win. Not that they would do that in the first place. For the record, Nebula isn't a predatory corporation. It's a co-op that the workers (in this case the content creators) collectively run. It isn't beholden to capital in the same way many other companies are.
I noticed cyclists were not inconvenienced by Just Stop Oil.
Let us know when you sell your car & exclusively use a bicycle
@@jacqdanieles I wonder how people managed before cars were in widespread use. Take the train? Oh, that's a non-starter, because Maggie Thatcher demolished your public transport?
Recognize a pattern? Oil and its allies make it impossible to get off the drug. You are the addict. Congratulations.
@@jacqdanielesI don't own nor have I ever owned a car. What now?
@@jacqdanielesI love not owning a car.
Much cheaper and my body is healthier
@@jacqdanielesdoing this all my life, carbrains will never understand
Interesting video but I wish you included a more critics with different perspectives. JSO is both criticised by liberals and more radical leftists and I wish you included the perspective of the latter. I feel like more radical leftists take issue with JSO because their strategies are ineffective and very middle class.
Especially throughout this video, I feel like JSO over estimates the value art has in our society, especially amongst the ruling class. The majority aren't outraged at JSO's actions because they consider art to be important to society but because certain art is considered rare and expensive and has perceived value. But ultimately, it's very low on people's list of priorities especially when you're struggling to make ends meet.
I also think getting arrested on purpose is a largely stupid strategy in current climate. Through arrests, you lose activists and what is the point of wasting police time if you're not using that time to do something else. JSO and XR's impact on spurring on anti-protest laws have also shown the negative impact this has caused.
While not climate activism, groups like PAL action who also focus on direct action have had much more progress with their goals. They have directly stopped operations at Elbit systems multiple times, causing the company to lose money and close offices. These activists also get arrested but with each action there is a clear result. This is something I cannot see with JSO. Breaking the casing to the Magna Carta, does not directly contribute to stopping oil.
I also think JSO overestimate the importance of the media. While media can be used to recruit activists (whether those who commit direct actions or protestors) and can put some pressure on governments, I don't think it's the most effective method. Looking at PAL action again, they’re covered a lot less by the media but have been achieving their goals while also gaining support. It forces me to ask, why does JSO target art but not oil companies? Why is JSO's direct action so indirect?
Notably, the only times civil action has caused actual stoppage in oil production is when there has been far more radical action taken. Direct sabotage of oil infrastructure stopped the oil sector in Iran leading up to the revolution, as one prime example. The motivation wasn't climate activism, and the saboteurs weren't older white grandmas with upper middle class jobs - they were communist militias. By sabotaging oil pipelines, they made the economic risk of continuing production in Iran not worth the potential profits, so international companies withdrew their operations.
Western climate activism has been so enamoured by the liberal idea of non-violence, they are unable to even consider actions the media would call violent (like blowing up pipelines or refineries) - even if it is still only property damage.
i also just think they publicly present very little to add to the conversation about how to tackle climate change. they’re not so stupid to believe we can “just stop oil” without living standards plummeting for the overwhelming majority of the world, but the way they present themselves makes almost everyone just think “ok, well you haven’t got any ideas of what we’re supposed to do, i guess we’ll just move on with our day”
well said
This is such a good point. The video really lacked any kind of meaningful critique of JSO's approach and tactics. Agree that it is very middle class. Disappointing that Tom didn't include interviews with leaders of other activist groups and present some alternative options.
While I am concerned about environment, I might have more radical look, that human imprint is way too large... and there are no simple solutions to remedy that. Also, making it controllable is very unethical for various reasons.
Not building some oil platform does not prevent anything - it only delays sucking the oil out of sea, which potentially will be done in future without benefiting people of UK.
However the attack on art is certainly enraging - not because of value, but because of impunity to do so, what majority would not even think to do - destroying Magna Carta, dousing Stonehedge in paint or attacking paintings with soup are not the things that people would do, and equaetes to the same as standing on the roof and threatening to throw off new born to the ultimate death. When I was a kid, I thought that only greedy morons destroyed art and buyildings from the past and I never thought that modern humans would degrade to even lower level - to threaten to destroy something in the name of idea - that is pure terrorism and not the noble kind. No future generations will be thanking these people for the impact theat these people have left on Stonehenge - and to me this looks like a massive attack on values in the name of their goal, which is not their goal - the government has set up those golals decades ago and no one will remember these people for the fullfillment of these goals, while trying to hijack them.
Lets be honest, the people who get turned away from an issue by activists, were never going to care in the first place. These are the type of people who demand activists become quieter, and stay out of the way till their efforts aren't effective
MLK's "Letter from a Birmingham Jail" is as prophetic now as it was then.
Let’s hear your plan to meaningfully affect change without the backing of the majority of the population.
@@ygthemoth9425 Half the point here - have you watched the video? - is that being abrasive about an issue as activists *doesn't* lose you "the backing of the majority of the population".
No, critics of JSO are saying that if you're gonna cause a disturbance, fight the real enemy. People commuting to and from work are not the enemy. Museums are not the enemy. Ancient stone monuments are not the enemy.
Forgive me for not seeing how circular arguments about whether JSO is doing anything effective will help push the issues into the public consciousness, or why politicians/billionaires would feel threatened by a group so unpopular that even other climate activists look upon them with disdain.
@@crytoccTom hasn’t made a single tangible point in favour of JSO actually affecting meaningful change, and instead has enabled conservatives to label us all as lunatics.
"Oh no! They chipped the glass on the case of a priceless artifact! Just Stop Oil is a menace!"
"Oh no! All our priceless artifacts are submerged underwater because floods have been getting worse year over year! If only someone told us this would happen!"
I will not die because of an old book, I will die because the world is dying.
He chose to present a mild protest. As I commented previously, here in Italy they blocked the road to ambulances with sirens on. And that's just one example
Two things can in fact be bad at the same time
@@superkulak which one was that? because I've not found any examples of that, edit: I guess he couldn't find any actual examples of them stopping ambulances?
And if they solid the same in your front room, how would you react
@@conormurphy4328 I will take having a piece of history possibly destroyed over irreversible damage to the environment any day. The AMOC could collapse at any point in the next few years and that would devastate the world, a few paintings can have soup on them for that sake.
Hopefully people realise that if they think the actions just stop oil take are excessive, it pales in comparison to the damage being done throughout the world everyday by business as usual.
Better disruption now than total collapse later
Spoiler: they won't
But thats the sad bit.
We are winning the debate.
More and more people are moving towards the idea of renewables.
They just hate Stop Oil.
I work in energy and I debate this on many sites fossile vs renewables.
Those against renewables always bring Stop Oil into the debate.
But I know how to deal with that to win online debates, I have made up stories, that stop oil, has been funded by big oil, to sabotage the move towards renewables.
@@tonycavanagh1929 the point is, it won't matter if they hate just stop oil - just so long as they hate more the system that makes just stop oil necessary
@@orterves lol what a stupid fantasy, are you going to hate the faceless corporation that you can’t see or the people stopping you from getting home on time?
@@orterves So you agree.
We need to push the rumor, that Stop OIl is funded by big OIl.
It sounds quite flippant in comparison to the police response in germany. Here the police have developed specific ways to twist arms and even jaws so that the victim feels pain and is unable to do things, for months after they have been released. And the officers applying those tactics state this often in front of camera.
The German conservative media has also successfully convinced the public that glueing yourself to some street is as bad as actual domestic terrorism
And why "de-arresting" your fellow protesters is necessary and morally just
😂 poor babies.
yeah those videos are hilarious :D
@@oskarmartin6486 cops are nasty babies, absolutely :)
I mean for context, I have heard of Just Stop Oil, I haven't heard of the Climate Majority Project before. Unfortunately radical, disruptive action is the only thing that works
Except I doesn't work, unless the goal was to make everyone hate you and your cause.
I really want to ask you, partially because I want to know too, what other options are there to stop this crisis which are as efficient as these are.@@Flexsan
@@Flexsan There's radical action that targets people with power and their wealth, and there's radical action that just gets you attention. JSO and Tom don't want you to know there's a difference. These "activists" are constantly attacked from their left and Tom ignores those criticisms entirely.
@@fluffskunk Yes. It's funny how JSO supporter often invoke the "disruptive" Civil Rights movement and MLK's personal unpopularity at his death, but leave out the parts where MLK and key figures (another difference-- a clear, unified and politically expedient power structure, with grassroots elements falling in line!) would tailor their protests to fit the audience (middle class white dudes) and make themselves appear both relatable and the "normal" ones.
I.e. they would pay for suits, so when black people peacefully and calmly were sitting peacefully in a white only area, they would garner significant sympathy when the police responded harshly.
Even when MLK blocked roads, this was in pre-planned protests organized with gov forewarning, and enough numbers of people planning to go and political support to make it hard to block. Even then, the structure of the group enabled them to avoid people spilling over-- blocking whole communities-- becoming violent, etc.
And, of course, they did not camp on the roads. They marched as a group to a place, a symbol, where political power was convened or centralized, making clear demands, sharing their own experiences and gaining media attention.
Sure, there are those that will oppose any protest group for being disruptive-- but the extent does indeed matter when trying to win over (a plurality of) voters.
It worked in motivating the creation of the most repressive anti protest laws in generations and has no other demonstrable political impact.
I'm very hung-up on that cop who used to be a climate scientist. There's just so much going on there.
Probably needed a job that pays bills better
more stable money in policing. Supply and demand.
You need a degree to be a police officer don't you? There's probably all kinds of academic backgrounds represented.
@@CarrotConsumer no... lol... no you dont
Timestamp? I totally missed that
The "Just Stop Oil's Critics" section with the Climate Majority guy is completely flaccid, and I think it's a real shame that his view was the only one in this segment. In particular, I think the absence of criticisms of JSO from their left (such as Andreas Malm's famous points in How To Blow Up A Pipeline, which I'm surprised got no mention here, at least 40 minutes in) is really conspicuous.
Tom never has covered viewpoints which differ from his own particularly well, imo probably the biggest weakness of his work.
Agreed. It's a shame that JSO is presented as the most radical version of direct action. There's so many more issues with JSO beyond "they turn people away", they're methods are not effective and the organisation as a whole is very white and middle class.
Tom's been fully taken in and is not a journalist here but a propagandist.
@@fluffskunk always has been
Actually it's kind of predictable. If he did cover something like that, TH-cam *at best* would immediately demonitize the video, at worst would take down the video entirely. Also it's not unreazonable to avoid te**orism adjacent actions in a discussion about the nature of awareness protests.
my position will always be if a disruptive protest is enough to change your opinion on climate change,racial issues,etc your stance was as firm as the meme of the cheeto acting as a door lock.I just cant imagine anyone who claims to support a important cause turning limp because it was "not done the right way","why was it not done more peacefully" or "this mild inconvenience is bad for the cause".I do no care if the artwork has cheap tomato sauce on it,I do care that climate change has made its become so hot were I live that schools have to close as it too hot,or that floods have become more dangerous,and despite that their is a slow policy implantation from leaders who can see we are staring down the barrel of climate collapse.
How about it isn’t enough to change opinions and the disruptive protests only cause harm because it turns people against whatever cause they’re protesting regardless of the agree with it or not
The question is always about effectiveness. What kinds of disruptive protests make people more inclined to your cause.
@@conormurphy4328 Protests aren't about changing opinions and the average person is not intelligent or important enough to bother with trying to change their opinion. These kinds of protests, like all serious protests, are meant to 1) let those in power know that there are people who take climate change very seriously and 2) that they can cause problems for those in power.
@@jeffersonclippership2588 1) the people in power will hear the annoyance of those inconvenienced a lot louder and I doubt they’d be in support of the protesters
2) they’re not causing problems for those in power, they’re causing problems for normal people who will shun them regardless of the views they express.
@@conormurphy4328 disruptive protest disrupt the static of news and the backround noise that have become serious issues,how often do we see news of flooding,areas being made inhospitable due to heat,greenery withering away we have become so accustomed to the impacts of climate change that I have lost track of how many wild fires have occurred,while peaceful protests would be nice if we had time,we have a extreemly narrow window to change how we treat the climate/environment .Yearly peaceful protests have become so common place I bet one does not come to mind and thats the problem.Both effects of climate change and peacfull marches have become so common place they barely make the news or is even on the radar of the average person ,but what does get attention a group of people breaking art,streets being closed,parliament sit ins etc, it brings the issue to a place that cant be turned to background noise if you have a method to simultaneously keep the average person on their toes when it comes to social issues and have it be peaceful I would love to hear it as 30+ years of peaceful marches and community hall environmental guest speakers is not going to cut it,like I said we are on a tight deadline to change things so like a man setting himself on fire desperation requires inconveniences to get the issue on the fore front ,as eventually we will all be massively inconvenienced when the full effect of climate change collapse occurs,I would rather deal with someone throwing paint on a expensive statue rather than have my home flooded
they should roadblock the oil ceos cars and offices instead
messing up private jets is also awesome
In Australia recently, some protesters attempted to spray paint the wall outside the CEO of Woodside's house. A non-violent protest. They were arrested on arrival and the ABC journalists who were filming the action were coerced to give all their footage to the police. The ABC did not legally have to provide the footage to the police, but they keeled over and did so, and it was used against the protesters in court, I believe. We live in an age where corporate interests are protected by the police and citizens' rights to protest and critique those interests are eroded to the point of being non-existent. The protesters were arrested before they had even done anything, for trespassing - on a section of the driveway belonging to the council verge, not private property. What a joke.
@@rhythmandblues_alibi bug fucking yikes
Corporate overboard are to might
Capital interest is being protected above actual people
Late Stage capitalism is fucked
That's not Direct Action, it's protesting. Direct Action is a specific form of protest when you take action against the people who have the power to give you what you want. It's not just raising awareness or being disruptive or even using violence; it's targeted action directed at the people with power. That's the key. It's not just about the action, but who that action is directed towards, with the tactical aim of getting prompt and tangible results. Examples would be like blocking a mine, damaging a power station or dumping oil on a PM's front yard. The *targeted action* has to *directly affect* the people with the power to do what you want.
Good share thanks Ryan
Why are you sorry to the guard? Tried to get you to delete the video, to hell with them. Your conduct was pretty much good, as someone who filmed the demonstration, you're not there to explain things to some hired muscle who will immediately forget it, you just need to bounce ASAP with your recording intact. Ideally, upload it before you can be stopped.
yeah nowadays you can at least sometimes in theory backup your recording before going through security one of hte very very very few good things "the cloud" got us
This. That guard is a traitor to other humans and also a criminal attempting to extrajudicially destroy evidence. He should be detained until he can be proven to no longer be morally deficient.
I would add though that this guy may not be 100% cognizant of laws in the UK, his accent makes me think he might be an immigrant just trying to hold onto a job. He should not have tried to get Tom to delete the footage, but I think there may be a backstory there that we can have a measure of sympathy for. I'm much more likely to blame any boss of theirs that indicated that they should ask the question.
@@sarahwatts7152 While I see your point and we should show solidarity for everyone in tough conditions, it's pretty well established that "just following orders" isn't acceptable. We all make decisions, and this guard decided to try to intimidate someone for filming. Don't make excuses for people who carry out evil, or people will convince themselves it's okay to act like this. It's not. Don't follow orders. You're responsible for your actions.
@@ParadoxicalThirdBruh really trying to out fascist the fascists with that comment.
All I can think is that however critical society is of these protestors, our future generations will be critical of us for our stopping them
Yeah but people today don´t care what future people think of them, because at that point they´re long dead.
Every war but the current, every social justice movement but the present, etc. etc…
You can fight against climate change with better tactics than those clowns employ.
@@zawrator4457 Blowing up a pipeline
Look, future generations will be critical of us for not stopping the relentless invasion of Islam, not that we stopped a few green hooligans.
While we hear a lot about boomers in a bad way, I think some of them get a bad rap. Especially the younger ones. Same with the younger generations. We tend to forget that many of the younger boomers were hippies. They're responsible for STARTING environmental movements. I think many younger boomers are closer to gen z and alpha than they realize.
Boomer is more a mentality now than an actual generation.
We have liberals and conservatives in the same way as boomers, it was never and has never been a monolith.
You came so close to getting it. Generations are fake, morality does not belong to the young. You have more in common, politically, with a working class boomer than a wealthy gen z. it's *class*, not age
Aren’t hippies the old boomers? My father was in his teens in the late 60s/early to mid 70s which means he’s 70 now and was too young to really have been a hippie anyway who are now about 80.
No such thing as a young boomer.
I personally agree that disruptive tactics are important, and more effective than the peaceful protests we've been doing for years. Just Stop Oil is right; what we've been doing for decades ISN'T working. However, I think it's important to acknowledge the privilege it requires to be able to anger the cops intentionally, and be disruptive right up until arrest. Obviously it takes courage, but you also have to feel confident in the fact that the police aren't going to shoot you. Thankfully, that's not a problem in Britain, but if you tried this in America, especially if you're a person of color, you'd be putting yourself at risk of being murdered by the police. Not everyone has the ability to do stuff like this. Just something to think about.
37:54 No, working class people can make political change by organizing with their coworkers, forming or joining a union if you don’t already have one, or strengthening and radicalizing your union if you do have one, and striking.
Just like the train drivers who didn’t need to deface a single historical document to get a pay rise.
@@conormurphy4328A diversity of tactics is important.
Equally important; is understanding what objects you are defending.
Yes the artwork is a priceless window into the past.
Its also how trust fund babys of billionaires avoid paying taxes.
Frankly, those are the people in control now, not our goverments.
Climate activists don't have the leverage a skilled worker does.
@@CarrotConsumer im a bit confused where youre coming from, like.. climate activists dont just exist, they have to work too usually.
@@AnonymousAnarchist2 I think coordinated targets are also very important. You can't pick any random thing, but specific things.
People have a hard time associating historical pieces of art, with big oil. It's hard to see it as reasonable because of that.
Reading recommendation: Civil Resistance: What Everyone Should Know.
The book is based on significant up to date research and really does not support the tactics of this group. Civil resistance needs to A) deny those in power something they need and B) get the public on your side. These protests do neither. Attention alone is not the goal. Change is the goal. Raising awareness is not needed here. People already know climate change is a problem. What you need is to change policy, not get people to know about it.
Although they eventually failed, the pipeline protests in the US were MUCH better thought out and they did have a significant impact, delaying the pipeline construction and changing public opinions about it, which impacted the way lawmakers fight about it. It changed the priority in the government.
@@TealJosh What you said doesn't contradict what I said. (Not saying you necessarily intended it to, though it sounded to me like you did.) You don't need to have the people on your side at the start, but yes, the government brutalizing people does get people who weren't previously on your side to join it. This is a very common and effective goal of a lot of sit ins, die ins, and other civil resistance intended to provoke a response. But those things need to be well thought out. In particular, I question the theory of change here. The tactic of provoking a police response to get the public on your side is commonly done when the public don't already agree with you mainly because they don't know the extent of your oppression. That is not the case here. Climate activists aren't being oppressed, the planet is. And people are petty aware of that fact and already agree. Further, the things that make the most news are not likely to do that job anyway. Throwing soup on art and getting taken away quietly by police is not exactly like seeing firehoses and dogs used against peaceful protesters during the civil rights era. Awareness isn't the need and the optics move people away from wanting to help instead of towards it.
Some of JSO actions are well thought out. The ones that are the highest profile often are not and they often overshadow the ones that would otherwise be more effective. I hadn't seen anything on defacing Taylor Swift's plane. That is better thought out. It directly denies her ability to use it for a short time, raises awareness of a facet that people don't know, and it doesn't alienate a lot of people. Better to do it to other billionaires first and then Swift later showing that billionaires who are a problem can even include people you like. That's more thought provoking.
Mass demonstrations with hundreds of arrests are also more effective. And JSO does that. But it gets overshadowed by the counterproductive things they do.
And if you want to show police overreacting because of climate change in a way that moves the needle, I would look into climate refugees in the UK right now. It would be a big ask for them to get involved because of the real risks for them. But that would be powerful. Something that actually shows why many people have come and why many more will move North because their homelands are increasingly becoming uninhabitable. That might motivate people who currently don't care about the issue to push even the conservatives.
@@TealJoshit *IS* civility politics. This person is pretty foolish
@@TealJoshIt's not civility politics to say jso has poorly thought out protests that aren't effective in distributing their message. If we cared about "civility" why would we be talking about the pipeline protests having been an example of effective disruptive protest. Any protest is not good protest, sometimes it's dumb and poorly thought out.
I mean, you're talking about it, so I'd say they're succeeding.
And climate activists ALSO disrupt what the powerful need. I work with a bunch of XR activists in New Zealand who have stopped Coal Trains, who have disrupted Cruise Ship conferences. We do both.
Also the public were against Civil Rights, Suffrage, and Abolitionist protestors, does that make them wrong? Are you going to tell me the Suffragettes and Abolitionists weren't doing their job right?
Very true.
Guilty of filming a public nuisance with intent to publish? Give them a chance and it'll be 7 years. My admiration of JSO's balls is boundless, and my despair of the self-righteous whines about inconvenience by the usual suspects the same. Look forward to Boomers. It may explain what 'a bunch of filming' is. Great vid.
It's like they never heard the concept of a strike, which is a whole level above the disruption that JSO is doing blocking the streets
@@hostedbysimples5416When is the last strike you have seen over a broader social issue or climate change? Most strikes are narrowly focused on what the union wants to bargain with on behalf of the workers and their own interests.
@@jordannoell4222I would argue "I want the world to continue existing in the narrow ecological parameters I've always understood it to" is a narrow, selfish interest.
The problem isn't that strikes are viewed as anymore worthy - the hand-wringing over the RMT and NHS strikes speak to the fact that people don't value strikes like they used to - it's that the people who have been in a position to make any changes have used those positions to change police powers, and not environmental policy.
@@jordannoell4222 It can be done, even with overwhelmingly hostile media screaming against it en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1926_United_Kingdom_general_strike
Balls of JSO? These are religious fanatics. Give me a break.
I met quite a lot of people associated with JSO when I worked at a Students Union and afterwards in my local community the main thing that always strikes me is that they are some of the kindest, friendliest and most thoughtful people you could meet
When I did animal welfare, I knew plenty of wonderfully nice animal rights activists.
I can also tell you that their tactics often were harmful to the cause though.
@@dismurrart6648 I think JSO's tactics are a response to big media being corporate owned and thus not giving much coverage to non-controversial actions and, without coverage, you can't really spread a message.
So, i would say this stuff might be actually a cold logic calculated thing of purposefully doing bad protests to get people to talk about, providing a chance to spread the message
Nice to your face then next day they stop you going to daughter's wedding.
@Alex-cq1zr so I was an activist for a good decade. I've seen variations of these tactics plenty of times.
People get the idea of no such thing as bad publicity. What they end up doing though is coming off like children and alienating the public.
It also makes your request a threat.
"I will keep destroying things you love and disrupt your life until you fix the planet."
Currently, my activism is climate activities. I'm working to mobilize people to plant native species, learning how to do it myself and I'm going to work to get my yard certified as a wildlife habitat.
Beyond that, I buy chemicals and work to get reliance on more sustainable options. It's actually going pretty well because the industry all the way up to big oil has clued into the public wants green alternatives. An exec at chevron literally said "if you as a company don't go green now, your company will die within 5 years."
Which brings me back to JSO. These tactics aren't effective because they're targeting the wrong people. When peta threw paint at celebrities in furs, it worked because it targeted the problem, made celebs afraid to wear fur, and thus made fur less sexy to wear.
When you try to destroy art in public collections or get a big bike race called off halfway through, you're throwing paint at people who aren't even wearing fur to stop the wearing of fur.
@Alex-cq1zr their tactics are old as dirt and only really work when you target the group doing the bad actions.
What they're doing here is holding public art and important documents hostage until people get on board with climate change being a thing. That's how regular people see it.
ExxonMobil itself puts significant money into pretending to be green so society is already on board.
That's why people reacted favorably to them trying to deface taylor swifts jet but not to them getting a bike race canceled.
44:40 I hope this was sarcasm, because the actual response is DON'T TALK TO COPS! This includes security guards and anyone else talking on a similar role.
Ong how is no one else pointing this out. COPS ARE NOT YOU'RE FRIENDS! DON'T TELL THEM ANYTHING WHATSOEVER!
I wouldn't tell security guards anything either but still be more cooperative, unless you suspect them of snitching you out. After all they are actually paid for keeping the place secure, not for whatever they can get away with, like the cops.
This is fascinating. Tom constantly being surprised by the "cool as cucumber" demeanor of these ladies is funny; they have lived their lives, and by all accounts, they've lived good ones. They can be calm knowing they won't have to inherit the world our generation will be stuck with. Even a stint in jail won't rattle them. They're fighting for a future they will not see. We get the future playground of the actions of today: we should be nervous.
I agree, we all should be nervous. However, I don't think these women aren't as nervous as Tom because they are elderly, at least that's not the main reason. As someone who participates in political protests that are more direct and dangerous, you just grow committed to the cause. You understand that, in order to change the state of the world, the government will take repressive measures against you and your organisation. You also know that you have your comrades with you along the way who have your back, sometimes literally if the police want to break up your protest, for example. All these things contribute to a calm feeling that mutes out the nervousness.
Source: I and most people in my political organisation all feel that way, for those reasons.
No disrespect, but I'd rather have them throw orange paint and glue themselves on corporate buildings or CEO's mansions instead. IMO, going after artwork or historical artifacts which have public and/or historical value feels super cheap to me.
"Oh I must go have a good look at the Magna Carta then" seconds before breaking into it. Calm and collected enough to joke about it, amazing.
It blows my mind you apologise because of your interaction with the guard. You are not obliged to tell him anything... He's just a security guard, just tell him you was there to see the exhibition and walk away. If he asks you to leave when you did nothing wrong, then that looks bad on them, it is not illegal to film. Especially what do they expect when something as big as what was happening occured.
Being honest and demanding that the "justice system" deal with you is the point. That's why Tom says he'll do better next time.
@@brenta2634 He had a press card. He can legitimately film all that happened - and to wait until the police herded him away - still filming.
what is this gibberish?
Watched on Nebula.
Those sorts of tactics aren't really useful anymore. While I don't necessarily think that they put people off their cause, they certainly don't really do much to advance it either. Maybe fifty years ago it would have been useful; but it's clear that purely symbolic gestures and non-violent inconvenience simply do not work, and never have on their own. And when peaceful protests are met with violence, as they so often are in the US, and draconian legal punishments, what's the point in remaining peaceful?
No strictly non-violent protest has ever accomplished its goals on a large and long-term scale. At best, they've gotten some token concessions, but no real substantial long-term change.
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. would not have accomplished anything except to get his people injured, imprisoned, and killed; if it hadn't been for the looming threat of more forceful action from the Black Panthers and Malcolm X, among others (a fact that Dr. King acknowledged later in his life, as he himself became more radical). Similarly, Indian independence was just as much the result of the various uprisings around the country (which the British Raj disgustingly insisted on calling "mutinies"), as it was of Ghandi's protests, which again he acknowledged and did not condemn.
As much as I dislike some of the tactics and rhetoric of EF and ELF, their sabotage campaigns were effective, and a good starting point (tree spiking, on the other hand, was highly counterproductive and targeted the wrong people). We need more effective direct action, because the powers that be have already shown that they are not interested in making real change, and will respond to peaceful protest with increasing escalation of physical and legal violence.
Just Stop Oil have tried engaging in direct sabotage action, and the Tory government passed more stringent sentencing laws in response.
Nobody noticed. Nobody cared.
Meanwhile, everyday people bray and jeer at JSO activists doing annoying shit, calling for them to have harsh consequences. They can't win. If they commit to active sabotage, they get banged up for a long time. If they take more indirect, irritating action, they get banged up for a long time. If they are found to be in a call with people who act, they get banged up for a long time.
There is no reasonable action that can be taken. The government has *created* this chaos, and is now acting coy and shocked that people's response to "You can't dissent in any way" is to become destructive and reckless with disregard.
If your response to this is that the action doesn't help, you're missing the point - the action is *possible* whether helpful or not, and they're showing that no amount of draconian legislation or heavy-handed policing will stop *this* dissent.
"No strictly non-violent protest has ever accomplished its goals on a large and long-term scale. At best, they've gotten some token concessions, but no real substantial long-term change"
Or it was the non-violent protests maintained any form of support and adoption to the ideas in spite of the violence.Violence breeds violence. But just keep on preaching that violence - it solves problems all the time and never hurts anybody, really, it's that non-violence that's the problem.
@@JH-pt6ih So then what happens when the non-violent is met with violence?
@@JH-pt6ihthere are plenty of examples in history of an unwillingness to carry out violence resulting in total failure. Hell the Russian revolutions of 1917 have several.
In the July days mobs of people demanded the provisional government give all power to the Soviets and when the politicians just said no… well they didn’t do anything because they were unwilling to carry out the threats of violence they were making.
The revolt of the SR’s is another, the SR’s had a strong enough force in Moscow during the revolt that had they wanted they could have overthrown the communist party of Lenin, Lenin literally spent the night terrified in the Kremlin convinced that any moment now the SR’s would launch an attack and destroy them… well the SR’s didn’t because they thought that the threat of violence would force Lenin to change his policies(primarily re-declaring war on Germany)… so the communists organised their own attavk, destroyed the SR revolt and chucked all the SR’s in prison.
The idea that violence is bad protest tactics is hilariously naive and does not reflect the reality of history, every successful peaceful protest relies on at least the threat of violence, and many times in history the failure to manifest that threat has resulted in the failure of suchprotests.
Fed fed fed fed fed fed fed fed
This brings to mind a rather specific and OLD body of research of movements, in particular "The Propaganda of the Deed" in which by doing something, anything, a movement hopes to garner momentum by any means necessary.
The idea of turning against a movement because you dont like the protesters for said movement is silly to me. Like "I used the care about the environment, but some protesters made me mad so now I want to dump oil in the water"
Humans beings are fickle, capricious creatures. One of the many things we have in common with other animals on this planet.
But also that is a rather hyperbolic analysis of what he meant by "turn against the movement". They don't mean "turn against all climate action in general", but rather "I don't think I want to be associated with that specific group".
Silly or not, you need those people to support you so you better embrace the silliness.
@@CarrotConsumer what is this even supposed to mean
it's not about those who care about the environment but those apathetic to it. If they didn't already care, they're really not likely to start after seeing something they don't like
Like, Just Stop Oil has made me pause about my convictions about climate change. I have always voted with the environment as a key issue, but when I see these people vandalizing works of historical and artistic importance (with tangential or no link at all to the cause they champion), I have to wonder if I have surrounded myself with a bunch of lunatics. I feel uncomfortable that we are on the same side of the debate, so I have to reflect on why I can still support what I do despite actions taken on “our side” that I deeply disagree with. Although I stayed firm on my conviction, I don’t like how this organisation tempts people to switch, if only not to be standing next to them. Not everyone makes climate change the focus of their life plan, but still support the cause in more casual ways. And just like how super radical vegans (vegan teacher, peta, etc) has alienated many people to not even consider diminishing their meat consumption, I fear JSO is doing the same for climate change.
Honestly I think we need both approaches: some radical action is good to grab attention and keep a conversation going, but you also need less radical activists that politicians and ordinary people are actually willing to sit down and talk with, or hear out their points rationally. I don't think one can work without the other though: either it's too radical and you just piss everyone off, or it's too mild and everyone ignores you.
Indigo Rumbelow is what I call it when I eat too many blackberries and have to run to the toilet with the runs
Wow when I sat down to watch this video I certainly didn't expect to see my ex employer in it, let alone find out he's now amassed a criminal record and become co-founder of JSO in the meantime. But then, it doesn't REALLY surprise me either.
Just Stop Oil is against HS2 and nuclear energy.
That is enough for me and many other people to not really take them seriously.
Nice to see they are kept dry from the rain using plastic. And that the high vis vests are also oil based.
A broken glass, with legacy inside, just so people understand that that's nothing compared with corporate genocide, should speak volumes.
I, personally, appreciate history, but if as a people we won't listen, this seems justified.
JUST STOP 'JUST STOP OIL'. Maybe we can start innovating nuclear instead of jerking around with non-solutions?
Is JSO pro-nuclear? Are they openaly anti-nuclear? I don't see much pro-nuclear talk coming from them anyway.
Nuclear fusion research is actually going pretty well in the UK these days
Still going through the video, but I do want to make an early comment to express my initial viewpoint on the movement.
I will admit, their action has always made me uncomfortable as a lover of art history and the arts in general. But a key perspective that I have always kept is that I don't push the blame on Just Stop Oil for such disruptive acts (as strange as that sounds), but rather governments and companies that continues to hold onto the status quo that is currently destroying our planet. When you have governments and companies that are more than willing to ignore the reality that our planet is dying, people are going to get desperate and will go to any lengths to get people in power to stop ignoring this catastrophic problem. So I do wish people would redirect their anger towards these governments and companies rather than wasting their time getting mad at Just Stop Oil (even if their actions can feel frustrating to witness).
I think the worse thing about such controversial acts, however, is that I feel that it's always has been a crap shoot whether such disruptive acts will actually make a difference. Which is honestly not surprising, considering that our global economic world has frankly put too much power into companies. And considering than the general population seem to basically have a negative opinion on the movement (no thanks to the fucking media of course), I do worry if this will be enough of a push to get these governments and companies to start caring, at least a little.
Well, as you said at the beginning. It'll only be a matter of time until people in power will have to start caring. Just would be ideal if they start caring sooner so that we can actually have a fucking fighting change to save our world and our future.
Finished the video and was very informative. Thank you for the work you put in to make this. Definitely gave me a clearer idea on how successful these acts of resistance can be.
Want to say that Sue and Judy seem like such kind dears and I admire their bravely for their acts of resistance.
I think the most surprising info that I have learned is that the British government has enacted two new legislation to deterred Just Stop Oil protesters, which can end up making even certain peaceful protests "illegal". Absolutely fuck the British government and the police. omg
Regarding the art thing, my understanding is that they haven't actually damaged any art pieces, they just throw stuff at their protective casings. So, honestly, I have no problems with that. That being said, I do feel like being a nuisance to ordinary folks isn't really that ideal. Protesting and being disruptive to the oil companies and the government leaders funding them is a better idea, though I do understand that the punishments are likely much worse and might not be public enough.
@@TheGeekyRedMage , protesting is a qualified right.
@@TheGeekyRedMage , furthermore compassion doesn't keep the lights in your home during the night.
It's constantly theater. They could disrupt the status quo by going directly after oil shareholders, executives and their pet politicians, but they won't, because that would come with actual consequences for these privileged activism tourists.
No, dont explain. If you dont need to explain, if you dont have to explain, dont answer questions from 'security'. He cant ask you to delete footage, and you owe them nothing.
getting any attention gets people talking when the media just ignores protests and policy work
people don't talk about an issue, they talk about stupid protesters and their actions which disrupts regular people's life. Make politician's life harder, not regular people.
@@yaroslavmartsinkevich1392 politicians are untouchable. its only through mass outcry can you actually change people. but sure blocking a highway is the problem, not the death of the planet you stand on.
Yeah, talking about how every eco activist is a nutjob. I can't even start talking to people about ecological issues without addressing idiots like them.
@@yaroslavmartsinkevich1392 Or actually, do make regular people lives harder, but in a meaningful way. The big problem with this sort of non-violent protest is how ineffective it is at anything other than "raising awareness". The awareness is raised, the problem is that no-one cares. Being visible does not cause policy changes. Homeless/Unhoused people are painfully visible and that doesn't drive policy change. Making policy changes the only way around the problem - does. Look at how effective wars or viruses are at limiting energy use, prioritizing energy efficiency and switching away from fossil fuels. When you need an addict to stop substance abuse, you don't spill soup on their couch until they stop - you cut off their supply. And considering how harsh punishments await those involved in these "non-violent protests" - this is now just wasted effort. A life broken for a 2 minute news report. If the truncheon hits anyway, and you're ready to receive it, at least get something of value out of it.
@@yaroslavmartsinkevich1392 politicians are untouchable. the only way to change things is through mass civil outcry. But people just dont care enough about the literal looming threat of the end of our planet.
Its funny that you find getting delayed on a highway to be more annoying than the death of nearly everything. Isn't it beautiful?
British jails must be inhumane if even British people think the food is awful
I recommend everyone enjoying this to read Andreas Malm's "How to b10wup a p1pel1ne".
I personally think that the sort of less disturbtive action as done by the extinction rebelion or Just Stop Oil but escalation is required to make the more moderate activists heard.
so... just do as so many insurectionists do.
I will never agree with JSO because of their opposition of nuclear power, it's like being a vegan and being opposed to vegetable production.
And in all for nuclear power as it is a means of generating energy that doesn't emit CO2 and generates almost no contamination in the traditional sense.
Plus the way they make these protests is very cringy, they have like a thousand ways of doing that without basically humiliating themselves in public
Nuclear power will not save the climate!
@@f1mbultyr Just because it won't solve climate change it doesn't mean we shouldn't be invested in it. Not only is it much better for the climate and the environment, but it's also a strategic asset. A country that has nuclear power has to import way less energy, making it much harder for any other country to use energy hunger as leverage... As well it's improvement of QoL as again much better for the environment and cheaper electricity as well
@@Zenik506 yes, and worst of all they bother everyday people
go for the heads of the institutions, paint the CEOs instead of making everyone waste their time and hate them
“No contamination in the traditional sense” is not how it’s being described by the communities surrounding nuclear power plants. We have no genuine solution to the waste produced by nuclear, if you say you want it as a bridge to other energies maybe, but let’s not ignore the genuine waste problem they pose
If you want to see what effective protest against oil looks like, look no further than the ukranian UAV campaign.
If the legal cost of non-violent activism becomes untenable how long till violence becomes inevitable?
The protesters who blocked the road for ambulances and other emergency services, and the lady in the car trying to get her child to hospital. Whatever side of the fence you are. These people have possibly as of this moment caused the deaths of more than they've saved.
Climate change activism won’t save lives for 30 years or more until climate effects start to really show. But when global warming kicks in more and more tens, even hundreds, of millions of people will start moving about looking for better places to live. That’s when I and my zero climate education thinks the high attrition rates will kick in. When people start on each other it could bring the population down enough to slow things down a bit 🤷♂️ Apparently Europe took 200 years for the population to catch up after losing half to the plague in the 13th century.
I can’t believe Tom Nicholas Cage stole the Blimey Declaration of Independence!!
You have a British version of National Treasure?!
Usually we just steal other countries treasure.
@@brulsmurfthey should be better at war then 🤷♂️
@@conormurphy4328Insufferable
@@brulsmurf Not so much anymore, but you had a hell of a run.
You mean the Magna Carta?, the document copied by your founding fathers to make your precious declaration.
This supports my theory that the British are either paralyzingly polite or don't give a single fuck, and nowhere in between.
Most often, they don't give a single fuck while being paralyzingly polite about it.
So, to understand the material context of the signing of this symbolic document: A bunch of land-owners were owed larger taxes to the richest land-owner and didn't want to give up their own privileges. So they rebel against the big dog, force him to sign a letter assuring that he couldn't raise taxes unilaterally, but it had no real impact for the serfs of the land-owners, still subjected to complete alienation of their life possibilities and forced to toil at their lieges' lands and serve in his armies at a whim. And the general public is supposed to relate to this instant in history as a cornerstone moment of the liberation of the common man from the tyranny of "big government"?
These sentences are insane. Are british people even realizing what authoritarian police state they are becoming?
There's a certain irony to the Just Stop Oil spokesman having an image of massive amounts of concrete on the wall behind him, given the climate issues arising from concrete manufacture.
Disrupt and annoy common folk: Okay
Prevent ambulances to reach patients: Okay
Destroy art: Okay
Slightly discomfort private lifes of politicans: Out of question
Slightly discomfort private lifes of petro industry CEOs: Out of question
they literally do that all the time you just never hear about it. I wonder why...
This is so true lmao, I commented under one of their protests, spraying the orange cornflower on a royal billionaire wedding, and people are MAD at me, comments still come after 2 months and people still slide into my DM's calling me slurs 😂. They're billionaires, they'll be fine lmao.
The ambulance story was disinformation spread by right-wing news outlets. The ambulances were not late, and there was a helicopter anyway
Also, no art is being destroyed. If you look real close, you can see there's protective glass around it
Why on Earth is a police officer in any kind of position to say "we don't want footage of a newsworthy event published, please delete it"??
Oh, I guess he's a guard, so he can say whatever he wants I guess.
One quick anecdote that increased my respect for JSO: after spraying the (easily removed) starch on Stonehenge, I heard one of their surrogates point out a road tunnel had been approved under Stonehenge (and was only recently cancelled by the new government.)
A harmless protest act that educated me about a harmful official act.
A protest act that had harmful effects on the lichen on the rocks, which educated you about something that had been in the news many times over the preceding few years.
You could just try keeping up with major news stories?
@@Ellie-rx3jtOh no, not the poor lichen.
@@SarahAndreaRoycesChannel Don't pretend that you care about the enviroment it takes 100 years for lichen to grow
@@Sam_Guevenne So do many trees. We cut them every day. Doesn't the nearby road affect growth of lichen? Did anyone care? Or tourism? Suddenly caring of lichen of all things nature is just a classic "no true Scotsman" fallacy. Also it is not about every detail in nature, it is about restoring the balance to have a future.
i like how a lot of these activists think that making everyone hate them is a good way to get what they want
They destroy the art today, the rest destroys the world tomorrow. All the same
Change starts with organizing. Protests draw attention, but organizing is the real threat to the ruling class that makes them actually listen, however temporarily and however little. That's also why organizing needs to revolve around democracy, not specific issues; let protesters draw attention to the issues that the organized people talk about how to address. A society organized around (common, not the fraud called "representative") democracy has the power to change the systems of political and economic governance themselves, without the "thoughts and prayers" approach of asking the rulers to do the right thing on your behalf. They may control the state, but you can take over local government, local economies, and branch outwards until your movement controls everything, and from there the ruling class has no choice other than to take the people seriously.
But that can't be the goal. That has to be a stepping stone towards full democratization, towards overthrowing the ruling class entirely through that democratic organization's efforts (violent revolutions won't fix things, they will merely change who stands at the top, and it will never be the people themselves. At "best" it will be individuals whose "hearts are in the right place," but who, because the SYSTEMS don't change to require democracy, don't represent anyone but themselves and their own ideas) so that their interests no longer dictate national, foreign, and economic policy.
People are organising, some of them the same ones doing these kinds of protest. Look up Assemble or similar citizens assembly groups, it's not that people aren't trying, it just doesn't get into the media for people to hear about
@@chestermightbeafrog "Positive Leftist News" (YT show) talks about international leftist efforts once a month that briefly mention some others.
Rupert's group sounds great, but it does somewhat prove that only disruptive civil disobedience gains any form of attention or publicity, as I've never heard of the Climate Majority Project before now
2.9 is optimistic. 2.9 is the minimum we can keep it to if we act now. This is clearly not happening. Billions will die from climate change and associated wars. It is the single largest threat to society as we know it. I sympathize with their aims, but I seriously doubt they will achieve anything meaningful. I gave up years ago. I still talk about it with anyone that brings it up, but I'm done trying to save capitalism. It can't be saved.
It's much more fun to talk about the coming Water Wars anyway.
My prediction for the US and Canada is total dissolution of the state as people become more interested in protecting scarce resources than adhering to any sense of national unity and that new governments will form around the defense of fresh water sources like the Great Lakes. Basically, the people living around the Great Lakes will confederate and militantly defend the water from any outsiders, otherwise known as drylanders.
With the central North American aquifers all dried up and the southern US being too hot to live in, people will try to move north to the remaining water. Nothing says mass violence like protectionist attitudes and a large migrant population. The UK rioters are going to look like school children when compared with the stuff people will do when something as precious as water becomes contested.
@@rainbowkrampus so will Canada throw squirtle to start the water wars or what?
Billions really? What sort of time period is that over?
Climate doomerism is tempting but you shouldn't give up, and you shouldn't be dissuading anyone from trying to make their small difference. Collective action has been at the forefront of many societal changes, and if people start going soft on governments BECAUSE they've given up then it causes the self fufilling prophecy of change not happening.
@@rainbowkrampus Isn't the technology to purify sea water getting better and better ? Who know we might avoid a water war if it become good enough.
You've proven how poor the security has been in public buildings. Like you, I was astonished why the building wasn't simply shut down and everyone cleared out within 5 minutes by an emergency alarm.
It's funny how the traffic stoppage brings the drivers to a near stand-still but the bikers can just happily go around
I think the shortest description of their activities is "desperate actions in desperate situation".
This is exactly what I've always wanted to know about Just Stop Oil and similar groups! Thank you for putting this information together in an accessible format!
I've been so excited for your video on this. A lot of people are very critical of Just Stop Oil's tactics, but they're getting attention, and are the only current activist group most people can name. It's making us, as a population, think more broadly about climate change. It's also inspiring more young people to become activists and fight for their rights and planet, which is great!
Honestly, they feel like a insidious project started by the “Big Fossil”
They piss people off so much that those pissed off people might just destroy the environment even faster through sheer spite 😂
Disrupting the lives of people and trying to ruin events, are they actually inspiring more activists, or are they actually inspiring new anti-activists?
I don't see the point of making people more aware of climate change if for every person you convert with your "awareness" you piss off ten more with your shock tactics. You can't really stop how opposition media is going to portray a cause.
But thats the sad bit.
We are winning the debate.
More and more people are moving towards the idea of renewables.
They just hate Stop Oil.
I work in energy and I debate this on many sites fossile vs renewables.
Those against renewables always bring Stop Oil into the debate.
But I know how to deal with that to win online debates, I have made up stories, that stop oil, has been funded by big oil, to sabotage the move towards renewables.
Great video tom! Whatever the opinion on JSO is, we need to be demanding way more from our governments to do more. We can actually solve the cost of living and help the climate by taxing the very wealthy until they are not as wealthy, then they csn stop polluting at the rate of small countries
Ok JSO has genuinely good intentions and can justifie disrupting stuff but what they are asking for is still just stupid, if we just stop oil our society collapses, if we keep using oil recklessly our society also collapses so we gotta find other solution rather than just stop oil
Sue and Judy remind me of an 82 year old nun who did 2 years in federal prison for a 2014 protest against nuclear weapons. Her name is Megan Rice.
Solidarity forever ladies ✊
I find it ironic that people get up in arms about art and relics being defaced, but won't do a single thing to change status quo eventually resulting in those artifacts being destroyed along with everybody else on the planet.
Oh and people saying they should go after the "big bad guys"? Maybe there's a reason why JSO can't even get close to those places. It's a matter of time before the army is stationed to protect refineries like it's bloody mad max.
The media demonize these people. I mean, the opening of this video tells me that they care more about the past than the future
As Fascists often do
@@toyotaprius79 it's not fascist, it's just how news network work. A community always has a common narrative, which will in turn almost always regard dissent as bad and disruptive.
The problem is that dissent is part of democracy's core, you can't critcize dissent without quickly running into some issues with values.
@Sir_Bucket Dym descent?
@@SamRMoyer yes apologies, english is my second language. I have been diagnosed with french, it's terminal.
@@Sir_Bucket It should be "Dissent"
These ladies have more balls than me. Big respect.
Do I support them? Hell no. Do I think the law is shit? Fuck yes and it should be repealed.
I'm surprised Tom never asked the obvious question: why not focus these actions on government and corporate locations actually associated directly with maintaining the status quo for fossil fuels?
Precisely. Makes one think what are they motive really, or guts
I mean, they kinda did. A protest at an oil plant is barely going to get any relevant media coverage. Those happen pretty often by a lot of different groups, how many did you hear about or even remember this year alone? Cultural disruption is unfortunately more attention-grabbing, which means more of a hassle to the government.
Adding to that, vandalism damages are a blip for multi-billion dollar companies, as long as there's no media coverage they don't care. To achieve the same goals by only targeting coorporations/governments, they'd probably have to rise to the level of eco-terrorism, which I think everyone agrees it's a bad idea.
He answers this question in the video; it's mentioned that direct action on oil-related facilities does not generate the media focus the strategy relies on.
Hey Tom! Integrity is great and all, but I don't think the title is clickbaity enough
1:00:32 Young people today look back and cherry pick the positives from past eras and conveniently ignore the negatives. People in the UK didn’t even have freezers in their homes until the 1970s. If you lived through the 60s-80s, each day could be the last day of the human race due to the almost constant high threat of nuclear war. The worst thing that young people today have to deal with is a bad hair day or being asked to come into the office to attend a meeting
"Can a ragtag bunch British activists convince them to do so?" Bro how tf does anyone believe that a collective of people that are comitted to disrupting the lives of the general public have any measurable effect on the massive companies, corporations, and global conglomerates that are responsilbe for 99.9% of this problem? What an absolutely obsurd question to even pose in the first place.....
I just don't see the value in antagonizing the Average Joe. It gives more ammunition for those who want to shut you down AND makes those who you inconvenienced cheer.
This display is also ironic: Two old people use energy ineffectively against the protections set up by those in power.
Almost as Ironic as the government system that caused the worst environment for workers and cause the most death by starvation using tools of the trade to represent them.
I appreciate that this video humanizes the activists. Something sorely lacking in almost all coverage of JSO.
If you think this is scary, imagine the direct action that would be involved to throw over existing power structures like capital and the state. Because nobody is going to legislate their way out of this pit b
"If we lose roe we'll riot" - libs who in fact, didn't riot
These people make me pro climate change. Pump Oil !
I like to ask people who complain about these kinds of disruptive but harmless protests what exactly they suggest doing instead. The answer or lack thereof is always very telling.
As someone who's been on the "other side" (I used to be front of house manager for a large museum) don't worry about having made the lives of the staff there difficult; honestly it's all in a day's work. If nobody's safety is being endangered and there's no worry about anything escalating to violentce, it's pretty much just "OK, I'm not going to physically intervene so you do your thing, and I'll do mine - observe and make sympathetic noises to any grumbling visitors while we all wait for the police to arrive.
We used to have the occasional exhibition funded by controversial sponsors so we did indeed have an SOP for protest action which, yes, included a radio code 😂
Ours was "Code Pink" but this was in the days before JSO so I would not be one bit surprised if "Code Orange" is exactly what they call it now!
The staff all know it's not them that the protest has a problem with, so there's no reason for things not to stay perfectly friendly and it's also worth realising that the kind of people who want to work at a museum or a library are probably fairly agreeable to whatever the protest is about. I once had a lovely chat with a former Uni classmate who'd come to protest an event for the staff from Shell who were sponsoring an exhibit.
It didn't look like Sue and Judy managed to smash that glass in the end but I don't think it really mattered, and I'm glad the MC wasn't damaged.
When I saw the tools they'd bought I knew it probably wasn't going to do the job - that's toughened glass and you need to use something much harder and pointier than a cold chisel, like one of the safety hammers you can buy so you can smash your way out of your car window in an emergency.
Not that I would ever condone that of course.
(I bet that glass is also laminated so they still wouldn't have got through)
The big problem with this type of activism is that in order for it to work, politicians need to be able to connect the activity with their goal. Most of you actions are too vague for anyone to know what is being opposed. And politicians are usually not the sharpest of the nation's pencils.
Oh the politicians know. Unfortunately its every day people being stupid that allow politicians to brush this shit off. The goal of cliamte protest is incredibly obvious, you are just playing uninformed for the sake of it.
And here I was thinking "STOP OIL" was simple enough even for politicians...
@@Bloodlinedev The slogan is, the methods... not likely. Politicians care what 'average Joe' thinks, and an average Joe sees a bunch of privileged kids being silly and causing disruption to THEM (not the politicians or anyone who could do anything about stopping oil) and then they expect from politicians to get rid off those privileged nuisances, not to stop investing/expanding oil consumption...
@@zwerko Politicians now EXACTLY what is what, dude.
JSO and multiple other protest organizations have sat at the same table and discussed what they want.
Where i am from The Last Generation won a case at the highest court (think of the American Supreme Court, but german) where the court ruled that the former and current government is breaking our constitution by not properly tackling climate change.
And nothing is happening to rectify this.
Also newly elected Labour MPs have received at least £45,000 from oil and gas lobbyists since the election last month. Global Witness released the story yesterday.
thank you for reporting on this, fantastic content and very educational at a key time.
Based old ladies smashing up an historical artifact while zoomer Roblox Harry Potter poops his pants and runs away from the scene before finishing his job but not before ruining the other cameraman's shot (that had the balls to stick around).
Is Judy aware that the nice piece of shielding on the chisel there to protect her hands is made from oil based plastic? :-)