- In short: Police have arrested and fined 72 climate activists [$385 each] for staging a protest in the middle of a Melbourne CBD intersection.
- Demonstrators from the group Extinction Rebellion say they have tried less-invasive forms of protest to make governments listen to their concerns, but they have not been heard.
- What’s next? The group is planning further disruptive action for March next year.
It was the fourth consecutive day of action by Extinction Rebellion demonstrators, culminating in a rally outside Flinders Street Station at the intersection of Flinders and Swanston streets.
The protesters are calling on the federal government to reduce carbon emissions. Many who attended the rally came prepared to be arrested, saying their actions were a last resort.
Heroes.
ah, so i guess it’s alright to follow stark signals when it comes to traffic; just not when it comes to the survival of the species.
The soulless and psychopathic CEO of Woodside is probably feeling distressed with all these hippies everywhere.
Luckily the government was swift to clamp down on that protesting.
But seriously big emitters are knowingly responsible for the destabilization of the world’s life support systems… And those fuckers will get away with it
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Police have arrested and fined 72 climate activists $385 each for blocking a Melbourne CBD intersection.
The protesters are calling on the federal government to reduce carbon emissions.
“We’ve tried so many different things to get a livable planet secure for our children and yet our government is approving more coal and gas mines — eight new ones since their term started,” she said.
"We’ve asked nicely, we’ve tried all the petitions, we’ve tried all the one-day marches and so now we’re here engaging in civil resistance.
Ms Coco said being arrested was a sacrifice protesters were willing to make because they cared so deeply about the planet.
Two smaller protests were held in the Melbourne CBD earlier in the day, finishing with the rally outside Flinders Street Station late in the afternoon.
The original article contains 288 words, the summary contains 133 words. Saved 54%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
I don’t like the idea of interfering with regular people; they’re not the ones well-suited to making meaningful change and you’re just making it harder to make ends meet.
Now dragging oil company C-levels and Board of Directors into the street on the other hand…
I’m of two minds on it: I see their point on targeting regular people, they’re the ones who vote in the politicians.
But, when you randomly stop people like this, you don’t know what harm you might be doing. It might only be annoying, or you might be the cause of someone losing a job, being late to see some specialist they waited six months to see, I’ve seen these protesters refuse to move for an ambulance in London, that’s possibly the difference between life and death.
While I acknowledge their exasperation, I don’t think this action will bring any positive change to the discussion. Unfortunately, I don’t know what will.
I’ve seen these protesters refuse to move for an ambulance in London, that’s possibly the difference between life and death.
I think this is some serious whataboutism. It’s not a centralised movement, and the actions of some cunts over in the UK doesn’t reflect on this group here in Melbourne. I’ve been to a lot of left-leaning protests in my time here, and it’s a pretty universal rule never to fuck with Ambos.
the actions of some cunts over in the UK doesn’t reflect on this group here in Melbourne.
I’m sorry, but it really does. If you’re going to give yourselves the same name and employ the same tactics, you have to acknowledge that you’ll be considered by the public as the same group. Hence “these protesters” in my comment. If you don’t want to be seen as the same people, don’t call yourselves Extinction Rebellion.
This is coming from someone sympathetic to the cause.
So… Critical thinking and logic shouldn’t apply to the lay person then? The government in the UK reflects on our actions here?
But we’re splitting hairs here. The point of disruption is to stir up conversation and keep the issue front and centre. We’re in the middle of a climate crisis. Our quality of life is trending downwards. Interrupting the public comes after scientists giving hard facts to the world that have been largely ignored for decades.
They’re causing harm to people, and making enemies of voters instead of making allies. The person driving to their daughter’s wedding, or to the hospital, or even just everyone going to work on a normal day, can’t do anything about this stuff except for vote on ballots and with their wallets. How do the activists think the average person is going to vote on an issue that they now associate with being blocked in traffic? Sure, the person should be smart enough to understand that the issue is important regardless of who is promoting it, but that’s not how a lot of people operate. If the protestors insist on inconveniencing people, they need to inconvenience people actually responsible for fixing the problem, not some random person going about the necessities of life.
I think the best thing to do is to do good education campaigns when stuff like this comes up to vote on. Endorse candidates, call normies, go door to door before elections, give people info on the way to voting centers, etc.
Inconveniencing normal people is like…in the same vein as 5 minute unskippable youtube ads. You are just burning goodwill.
I get that they care about climate change, I do too, but I don’t think this style of action is going to achieve anything. If it’s to raise awareness, I’d say most people are already aware of climate change, so they are not really doing much there. If it’s to influence the government, they don’t have enough people numbers for the government pay attention to their protest. And their style is too aggressive for the majority so it’s unlikely they can significantly grow their supporter numbers. I suspect they will remain a fringe group that gets in the news occasionally for disruptive protests but no progress will come if it.
I hear you.
But I’ve come to agree with the opinion that there’s a rampant soft form of climate denialism that isn’t about the facts of climate change but the facts about what can and can’t be done.
We’ve kind of been lured into a “business as usual”, “gotta follow the process”, “work from within the system”, “I can only do my bit”, “there’s no point in rocking the boat too much” mentality.
All of these ideas make sense (to me at least) … until they don’t. And against the egotistical moralism of “well I’ve done my part … what have you done” liberalism, that was always a divide and conquer trap, we’re all going to look like fools in history just lie Nazi era Germans.
To quote three lines from you:
I get that they care about climate change, I do too
If it’s to influence the government, they don’t have enough people numbers for the government pay attention to their protest.
And their style is too aggressive for the majority
There’s something glaring missing here. What else should be done? And is it proportionate to the stakes?
This is the denialism we have and project. Maybe it’s the majority that need to be addressed in a logical fashion about what does and does not make sense. A lot can happen once the majority actually care enough about something.
20 or 30 years ago, fine, this might have made much more sense then. But as someone who’s thought similarly to you most of my life while also caring and even volunteering my time to organisations and certainly doing “my part”, I am not looking forward to the conversations I’d have have children and grandchildren down the line about why I didn’t do more.
I’m conflicted, as I do believe that action for the sake of the climate is morally correct, but that these actions aren’t accomplishing much of anything at this point.
Andreas Malm has done a few talks about XR, Just Stop Oil, or Insulate Brittain vs groups like Tyre Extinguishers, Ende Gelända, or Les Soulèvements de la Terre: his conclusion is that the former groups have done some amount of good with consciousness raising but at this point those who are going to be moved or sympathetic have been ‘activated’ and further nuisance activities alone will not advance the cause further and could instead harden people against the movement because it is action that is seemingly targeting ‘regular people’ and not the ones responsible for the situation we are in. He commends the groups for targeting banks and other institutions but doesn’t believe actions like blocking roads for the sake of doing so (obstruction of access to specific targets is another story) or throwing powder on a game advance the cause.
He goes on to say that arrests should never been seen as some kind of virtuous thing and instead should be seen as failures because it is taking people out of the movement and making their further contributions more difficult and potentially dangerous for their continued freedom.
I generally defend blocking roads as an act of protest, but I also understand the idea that there needs to be further escalation targeting the actual polluters because you will never turn all of the western public to your side.
Here are a couple of the talks I’m referring to, interesting to listen to the perspectives:
Domestic terrorism it is then
In for a penny, in for a pound
There’s certainly a reason hardcore activists in the environmentalist and animal rights movements were targeted so heavily. I’m partial to the belief that it’s something way too many people might empathize with or even worse, copy. It’s also a pipeline into real leftism and anti-capitalism that can’t be countered with muh 100 gorgiollion dead from cummunism
Every time I see news about these activists it makes me want to join them. They’re some of the only people on the planet acting in a rational, non-selfish way re climate change.
@awwwyissss @SituationCake Mastodon is a white rose of sorts. There must be Australian security contractors scanning your posts. Keep up the good work!
That’s great, but you are not in the majority who support them. I’m fairly confident that most voice them as a generally negative group that is annoying, self centred and counterproductive.
And so what is your suggested alternative?
I agree that’s how the group is perceived, but then again their intent isn’t to win a popularity contest.
It’s the useless two faced politicians that are counter productive, we should grind the economy to a fucking halt until they start to listen
There’s literally nothing more important, no more justified reason to distrupt.
We had climae protests with hundreds of thousands on the streets. We had TTIP protests with half a million in the capital and 3 million all over my country. The governmrnt cared fuck all.
Protest that isnt disruptive is not effective. Also when people say “target the right ones”. Do they really think breaking into company HQs and dragging out the suits is going to be more accepted by society? They’d be branded terrorists and locked away for good.
This is not how you gain supporters. This is how you gain enemies.
Yeah, can’t just block traffic, even if it is for a good cause
