Latest news with #JustStopOil
Forbes
4 days ago
- Politics
- Forbes
Are Protesters Who Do Outrageous Things Truly Nutty?
Climate protesters hold a demonstration as they throw cans of tomato soup at Vincent van Gogh's ... More "Sunflowers" at the National Gallery in London, United Kingdom on October 14, 2022. The gallery said that the work was unharmed aside from some minor damage to the frame. (Photo by Just Stop Oil / Handout/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images) As pro-Palestine and anti-ICE protests command our attention, climate protests have receded into the background. Yet not so long ago, the world was captivated by two climate activists who smeared red and black paint on the pedestal and enclosure of Degas' 'Little Dancer' sculpture at Washington's National Gallery of Art, and by activists who appeared to splatter Van Gogh's 'Sunflowers' with tomato soup at the British Museum. What in the world were these protesters thinking? To answer this question, I talked to two activists who adorn iconic statues with climate messages as a form of protest–including on the Cornell University campus (where I teach). This led me to an exploration of the history of art protests, and a more nuanced view of how launching symbolic attacks on art could help change the Day Protest at Cornell University Early on May 24, before proud parents and happy graduates assembled for their graduation march across the Cornell University campus, a small protest was taking shape. Activists attempted to blindfold the statue of Cornell's co-founder and first president, Andrew Dickson White. Their plan was to drape the blindfolded statue with banners carrying the messages 'Stop fossil fuel complicity' and 'Don't look away from our futures.' The activists–part of the group Cornell on Fire–also planned to hold banners along the route of the graduation procession demanding Cornell offer a 'fossil-free degree.' But before they could finish assembling their blindfolds and banners, the protesters were stopped by the campus police and told to leave the campus. In fact, they were declared personae non gratae and barred from all Cornell properties for three years. The police encounter and three-year suspension from Cornell properties garnered Cornell on Fire media attention, more so than its carefully choreographed video of the event would have captured in the absence of the stern police response. But was the protest successful in reaching Cornell on Fire's climate goals? Let's start by looking back at the history of art Protest: From Suffragettes to Anti-War to Climate Museum and art protests are not new. In 1914, British suffragette Mary Richardson walked into the British National Gallery and slashed Diego Velázquez's 'The Rokeby Venus' with a meat cleaver. Her goal was to draw attention to women's right to vote after half a century of struggle. And in a 1974 action to protest the Vietnam War, Iranian American Tony Shafrazi spray-painted 'KILL LIES ALL' in red on Picasso's 'Guernica' at New York's Museum of Modern Art. Activists believe that these 'radical fringe' protests are critical to getting the media, the public, and elected officials to pay attention to their cause, and to creating a space for more conventional advocacy to be taken seriously. But I was dubious: don't they also risk alienating the public?Art 'Vandalism' Unlike Mary Richardson's slashing 'The Rokeby Venus,' recent climate art vandalism has not actually damaged the works of art, which are protected by glass or other means. Regardless, the shock value of these protests is real. Perhaps the most famous incident of climate art vandalism was the Just Stop Oil activists who splattered tomato soup on Van Gogh's 'Sunflowers' in the National Gallery in London. As stunned visitors looked on, the activists demanded: 'Are you more concerned about the protection of a painting or the protection of our planet and people?' In another incident at the National Museum of Norway, protesters tried to glue themselves to Edvard Munch's 'The Scream,' shouting: 'I scream for people dying' and 'I scream when lawmakers ignore science.'Museum Performances In 2013, fifty veiled figures dressed in black walked into the Tate Museum's 1840 room, the mid-1800's being a time when the industrial revolution began to significantly raise climate emissions. They continued their solemn march through the chronologically arranged galleries to the present day contemporary art collection, noting that CO2 levels had reached 400 parts per million–exceeding what scientists say is needed to keep the earth safe for human life. In another of 14 climate 'performances,' Liberate Tate protesters occupied the museum's Turbine Hall throughout the night, scrawling warnings about climate devastation on the floor. These performances were intended to bring to light the role of fossil fuel giant BP in sponsoring the museum's exhibits, and thus the Tate's complicity in the climate change crisis. Although denying that their decision had anything to do with the protests, BP ended its 26-year sponsorship of the Tate shortly after these actions. Scientist blindfold statue and drape statue with anti-fossil fuel message as part of Don't Look Away ... More protest at UC Berkeley. Don't Look Away Statues According to bethany ojalehto mays, co-founder of Cornell on Fire, the graduation day statue blindfolding protest was intended to spark curiosity using a fun, likable activity–one less likely to draw ire than throwing soup toward a famous painting. The protesters hoped that curious bystanders would take their flyers with a QR code linked to the organization's demands: sign a resolution demanding Cornell declare a climate emergency and take appropriate urgent actions; urge Cornell to dissociate from fossil-fuel funding for their retirement funds; and join a sister group called Fossil Free Cornell. Later that morning, other Cornell on Fire activists held up a banner for students and faculty marching in the graduation procession to see. The banner read: 'We demand a fossil free degree.' Like the earlier statue protest, the banner protestors were quickly stopped by the campus police. Although I didn't realize it at first, the Cornell protests were part of a larger statue blindfolding campaign organized by Scientist Rebellion. Scientist Rebellion is a group of scientists who realize that the decades they spent writing papers, advising governments, and briefing the press have failed to generate the policies needed to thwart the climate crisis. After looking at the civil rights and other successful protests, they became convinced that non-violent civil resistance–including getting arrested for disruptive actions–was needed to bring about urgently needed change. They recognized that protests around iconic statues can generate visibility for the climate cause. So, they launched their 'Statue Blindfolding: Don't Look Away' campaign to signal to public officials: 'Don't look away (from the climate crisis) if you hope one day your city will build a statue of you"--or more seriously, to create awareness of the urgency of the climate crisis. According to Scientist Rebellion organizer Greg Spooner, one such protest in a San Francisco park near a conference center was '100 % ignored' by police as conference attendees talked with the protesters and took selfies with the blindfolded statue draped in climate protest Protests: Effective or Not? Lest we think recent art protests are without precedent, we can look back to the struggle for women's suffrage, which started in the mid nineteenth century. By 1913, the suffragettes were committing an average of 20 bombings and arson attacks per month. In comparison, contemporary climate activism seems rather mild. But have these disruptive protests been effective in garnering women's right to vote or changing climate policy? We know that many people have a negative view of disruptive protests. German Chancellor Scholz reacted to protestors gluing themselves to museum art and to asphalt in the middle of busy highways: 'it's completely nutty to somehow stick yourself to a painting or on the street.' In an Annenberg Policy Center survey conducted after protestors threw tomato soup towards Van Gogh's 'Sunflowers,' 46% of respondents said that disruptive nonviolent protests decreased their support for efforts to address climate change, whereas only 13% said it increased their support. Pointing out the misfit between art vandalism and the climate movement's goals, renowned climate scientist Michael Mann warned: 'From a communications standpoint, the protest seemed like an even bigger mess than the soup-splattered painting.' Yet a study of climate change and animal rights movements found that unpopular tactics of a 'radical flank' increase public support for moderate factions within the same movement. Other studies have shown that while people may not like the radical flank protesters, this dislike does not influence their support for the protestors' cause. Further, radical protests might not influence what people think but can influence what they think about. After disruptive climate protests in the UK, the environment emerged among the top three public concerns for the first time. The authors conclude: 'People may 'shoot the messenger,' but they do – at least, sometimes – hear the message.' When I asked Cornell on Fire founder bethany ojalehto mays what they were accomplishing by blindfolding the President White statue, she had a ready answer. An earlier such protest had attracted many curious students, and the activists quickly ran out of flyers with the QR code connecting to actions the students could take. She hoped that the media attention generated by the police response to the graduation day protest would help Cornell on Fire amplify its message and potentially attract more adherents to its climate demands, and maybe to some of its other activities like creating science-backed reports documenting the university's emissions. In essence, Cornell on Fire combines 'radical flank' actions designed to garner attention with more moderate advocacy. Think of Greenpeace commanding media attention with its kayak flotillas surrounding huge oil tankers combined with the Environmental Defense Fund producing science-based reports for decision Is the Radical? UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres takes issue with Chancellor Scholz's characterization of art protestors as 'nutty.' Speaking to climate scientists in 2022, Guterres said: 'Climate activists are sometimes depicted as dangerous radicals. But the truly dangerous radicals are the countries that are increasing the production of fossil fuels. Investing in new fossil fuels infrastructure is moral and economic madness." Guterres believes 'We are sleepwalking to climate catastrophe.' The soup throwers and activists blindfolding statues hope to wake us from our climate stupor.
Sky News AU
5 days ago
- Politics
- Sky News AU
The 'counter-productive' Greta Thunberg product is about to expire after getting nowhere - as emissions are still rising
There's a difference between being brave and being performative. Greta Thunberg, once hailed as a pint-sized prophetess of climate doom, seems unable to grasp that distinction. Her recent attempt to sail into Gaza as part of the so-called 'Freedom Flotilla' - only to be redirected by the Israeli navy, crying 'we've been kidnapped!' - wasn't just farcical - it was a masterclass in moral cosplay. Thunberg, now 21 and apparently moonlighting as a Middle East conflict expert, embodies a broader problem: the narcissism of Western activism. These aren't efforts to change the world. They're acts of self-affirmation, like posting a black square on Instagram - but with more diesel flotilla she joined wasn't bringing meaningful aid. It was there to 'enforce' international law, or so the Thunberg brigade claims - quoting selectively from recent International Court of Justice rulings as if they were binding military orders. This wasn't humanitarianism. It was a cargo cult of global virtue-signalling, with Thunberg as its figurehead. And predictably, the Western commentariat went into meltdown. Owen Jones - never one to miss an opportunity for online hysteria- actually suggested Israel might murder Greta Thunberg. Yes, really. We've entered a realm where online outrage has looped back on itself and become indistinguishable from satire. But Thunberg's antics are part of a broader trend: the collapse of modern activism into what some critics have dubbed neotoddlerism - a worldview where impulsivity, emotionalism and moral absolutism are mistaken for virtue. It's political 'tantruming', fuelled by smartphones and retweets. If 'neotoddlers' had a clubhouse, Thunberg would be its is enabled by what's been called the Omnicause: a kind of ideological soup where every fashionable grievance blends into the next. One week it's climate change, the next it's Palestine, then it's trans rights or anti-capitalism or whatever else is trending. The specific issue doesn't matter. The performance performance is what it is. When Just Stop Oil blocked the M25 or hurled soup at Van Gogh paintings, they weren't building public support. They were feeding the beast of clickbait activism - and feeding their own egos in the process. Thunberg's Gaza voyage is just the same formula applied offshore. This shift towards omnidirectional outrage reflects a deeper cultural trend. The youthful rebellion that once expressed itself through music or fashion has now migrated to politics, especially online politics. That rebellious impulse, once harnessed by punk rockers and hippies, now manifests as TikTok lectures on settler colonialism by people too young to remember dial-up internet. But rebellion on its own rarely leads to real change. The Civil Rights Movement didn't succeed because it blocked train stations or used trending hashtags. It succeeded because it had focused leadership, realistic goals, and a strategy. Today's activists, by contrast, are mostly decentralised, addicted to social media, and allergic to compromise. They have no means to create, only to disrupt. And disrupt they do, often in spectacularly counterproductive ways. Pro-Palestine protestors chant for peace while glorifying Hamas. Environmental activists call for an end to fossil fuels while also attempting to halt nuclear and electric innovation. The irony is lost on them. Neotoddlers don't do also don't do strategy. 'Ceasefire now!' is a nice chant, but who enforces it? Hamas? 'Just Stop Oil!' sounds great until you realise it would plunge the West back into pre-industrial darkness. These movements have no viable endgame. Just feelings, slogans, and a need to be this performative activism often alienates the very people it claims to speak for. It's no coincidence that many of these protestors are affluent, highly educated, and, quite frankly, a bit bored. Philosopher Eric Hoffer noted in 1951 that mass movements thrive on boredom. When real problems are scarce, the privileged invent new ones. Enter Thunberg, stage left. Let's be honest: Thunberg was never a serious intellectual force. Her fame didn't come from original thought, but from emotional appeal - her plaintive 'how dare you?' speech, her youth, her autism, her uncanny resemblance to a real-life Pippi Longstocking. She was a media product: carefully packaged, widely distributed, and now, inevitably, close to the reality is, Thunberg is no longer young enough to be novel or old enough to be wise. She's ageing out of her niche. Her climate movement, once radical, is being absorbed and neutralised by the same institutions it claimed to oppose. She's addressed parliaments, the UN, even Davos - like the activist equivalent of signing a multi-album deal with HMV. And yet, global emissions are still her pivot to Palestine reflects this creeping irrelevance. But her new slogan of 'no climate justice on occupied land' is little more than a slogan. It's vapid. It's emotionally manipulative. And it reveals how little she understands the complexities of either issue. Gaza isn't a climate problem. And its overlords, Hamas, Qatar and Iran, are hardly green pioneers. The idea that climate justice can be achieved by shouting empty phrases at a crowd is absurd. Worse, it dilutes legitimate environmental activism by tying it to unsolvable geopolitical conflicts. It muddies the waters, both literally and metaphorically. So where does that leave Thunberg? Probably where she began: as a symbol. But what she symbolises now is less inspiring. Not youthful purity, but institutionalised angst. Not bravery, but attention-seeking. Not change, but performance. And frankly, that's a shame. Because there are real problems in the world. Real wars. And real injustice. But none of them will be solved by a flotilla of Westerners yelling into the wind, hoping someone somewhere will applaud their bravery online. In the end, activism that's more interested in being seen than being effective is just another form of narcissism. And no amount of chanting or crying will change that. Esther Krakue is a British commentator who has regularly appeared on Sky News Australia programs, as well as on TalkTV and GB News in the UK. She launched her career with Turning Point UK, with whom she hosted a show featuring guests including Douglas Murray and Peter Hitchens
Times
5 days ago
- Politics
- Times
Palestine Action: police clash with protesters in London — follow live
The crowd has restarted chants of 'shame on you' as police carried away two more protesters near Trafalgar Square. They swarmed around officers carrying the protesters, with one officer shouting: 'Stop resisting!' Protesters have formed a circle around individuals detained by the police and are chanting 'let them go' and 'police go home'. A Just Stop Oil supporter who had been imprisoned on remand for the climate activist group but refused to be named, said he had seen about 15 others from the group at the protest. 'If they're coming for Palestine Action, who are they going to come for next? That's why I'm showing up, I support other movements as well,' he said. 'Last year Just Stop Oil were doing airport actions and some of them got remand and stuff but they didn't proscribe Just Stop Oil. 'We've been curtailed … how come we're not allowed down at Parliament Square?' The home secretary's move will make it illegal to be a member or invite support of Palestine Action with a punishment of up to 14 years in jail. It will require a vote in both Houses of Parliament, scheduled for Wednesday and Thursday next week and if passed, the group will be proscribed by the end of next week. Cooper listed a series of attacks committed by Palestine Action since its inception in 2022 which have led to her decision to proscribe the group. She also pointed to its media output that promotes its attacks involving 'serious property damage, as well as celebrating the perpetrators' as evidence that has led to the decision. The home secretary said: 'In several attacks, Palestine Action has committed acts of serious damage to property with the aim of progressing its political cause and influencing the government.' Palestine Action will be proscribed as a terror group by the end of next week subject to a vote in both Houses of Parliament, the home secretary has announced. Yvette Cooper said she had decided to ban Palestine Action after a 'long history of unacceptable criminal damage' committed by members of the group. She said its 'disgraceful attack' on RAF Brize Norton on Friday was the latest example of its threat to Britain's national security and said the government will 'not tolerate those that put that security at risk'. Cooper will publish secondary legislation next Monday to add Palestine Action to the list of proscribed terrorist organisations alongside the likes of Al Qaeda, ISIS and Hamas. Miriam Scharf, 75, a pensioner of Jewish heritage from Newham, east London, said: 'It is extremely important to me that it is not done in the name of Jewish people. 'It is extremely important that those who stand up for what is just and for humanity, are allowed to protest about it. 'I think from the beginning under the previous government, they've always wanted to shut us up. The Labour government had gone along with it. They don't like any protests against their policies because our government is … complicit in a genocide, complicit in what's happening.' Diana Neslen, 85, a 'regular' at marches in support of Palestine, attended the protest on two crutches but left after altercations between protesters and the police. 'I'm here today to support democracy, to support free speech and to support our right to peaceful action,' she said when protesters were gathered before Nelson's Column. 'Look at this, we should have the right to stand in front of parliament and show our faith until the MPs see why we think what they're doing is wrong. 'Instead we're herded into little tiny spaces so that hardly anyone can see us, and certainly not the politicians.' Palestine Action has lashed out at the Metropolitan Police's 'draconian response' to the protest at Trafalgar Square, in which several protestors were dragged off by police. 'They want to ban us, they banned our protest at parliament and now they attack us,' the group said on X. 'The people will not be intimated. We are all Palestine Action.' The protesters now spread across the junction of Trafalgar Square, Charing Cross Road and Duncannon Street. Pushing in the crowd has now stopped although there remains a heavy police presence. Pedestrians are able to pass although traffic is blocked. In one corner, protesters who brought young children have put down picnic blankets. Sir Mark Rowley, the Metropolitan Police commissioner, earlier said he was 'shocked and frustrated' at the planned demonstration, as the group is soon expected to be proscribed as a terrorist organisation. The Met has placed restrictions on the protest, including an exclusion zone around parliament, and stipulating that it must end by 3pm. Organisers had changed the location of the protest to Trafalgar Square after police enforced an exclusion zone around parliament. The protest has now spread into the road, blocking traffic. One protester handed out cards with instructions on what to do if arrested. The home secretary, Yvette Cooper, has said she has decided to proscribe Palestine Action and will lay an order before parliament next week which, if passed, will make membership and support for the protest group illegal. Disorder has broken out at a protest in support of Palestine Action in London, as the group is expected to be proscribed as a terrorist organisation. Police appeared to lead away some protesters, while the crowd chanted 'shame on you' and 'let them go' and tried to pull activists away from officers.
The Guardian
6 days ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
Police arrested autistic activist in supported housing as part of Quaker raid operation
The Met police operation in which officers raided a Quakers meeting house also resulted in the arrest of an autistic climate activist at his supported accommodation, the Guardian can reveal. Joe Booth, 23, had been in bed when seven police officers arrived at the flats for vulnerable adults in New Barnet, north London, to arrest him on suspicion of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance. The arrest appeared to be linked to his attendance at weekly meetings of Youth Demand, an off-shoot of Just Stop Oil, that describes itself as a nonviolent protest movement. The evening before his arrest, up to 30 Met officers broke down the front door of a Quaker meeting house to arrest six female members of the group in what appears to be a linked raid. It is thought to be the first time that police had forced their way into a place of worship used by the pacifist Quakers movement. The raid has been heavily criticised by politicians, campaigners and religious groups. Booth, who has never been involved in disruptive protest and who had previously attended one peaceful Youth Demand march on Downing Street, said the arrest has left him with post-traumatic stress disorder. He said the officers who arrested him appeared to be surprised that he lived in supported accommodation for vulnerable adults. After a support worker let the police into his flat, an officer had grabbed his arm, he claimed, and asked whether 'I need to put you in handcuffs' before reading him his rights. 'They did not know until they turned up that I lived in supported accommodation,' claimed Booth, who is a cleaner on the London Underground. 'When they arrested me, they said to me: 'Joe, is this supported accommodation?' They didn't know. You would think there would be a system in place when they are going to an address to say this is a care setting.' Booth had been in his pyjamas when the police arrived. They searched his bedroom and seized his work phone. He was then taken on a two-hour drive to Kingston police station where he was questioned and held for more than seven hours. He was released on police bail with conditions that included a ban on him entering Westminster. Booth, whose brother was allowed to attend the police interview as an 'appropriate adult' due to his vulnerability, said: 'They showed me pictures of protests that I wasn't even in. They showed me pictures of [information about] upcoming events, only a few of which were actually protests, the other which were just meetings and free food events. So they didn't tell me at any point what evidence they had on me and why they got me and how they even knew my face.' He had previously attended Youth Demand meetings at the Quaker meeting hall on St Martin's Lane in London where attenders enjoyed a spread of jasmine tea, ginger biscuits and a selection of vegan cheese straws. Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion Youth Demand had been planning a series of 10-minute protests in London and Booth had handed out leaflets promoting the group's plans to oppose arms sales to Israel and a lack of action on fossil-fuel harm, he said. Booth, whose father is John Leach, the assistant general secretary of the RMT union, added: 'I was only planning to spread news of the events. I'm not at a stage in my life where I'm ready to risk going to prison. 'Like all autistic people, I can often struggle to understand certain messages that are told to me, which is why I often need staff with me when I receive letters, because I interpret things differently and I also can't survive without structure and routine. So when that gets disrupted by ongoing issues that becomes a problem.' Booth said the arrest, which will raise fresh questions about the overpolicing of protest groups, had seriously affected his mental health. He said: 'Every time I hear noise in the corridor, even from a distance, I get scared that it might be police, especially when there's a knock at my door, especially if that knock at my door is early in the morning. 'But even if it's just from support staff or Amazon delivery or whatever, I get scared that it might be police. So my alertness has increased and my anxiety has increased. And I see a therapist every single week, because I always have and he's in full knowledge of how it's been affecting me.' Booth had previously been arrested in June 2024 on the same grounds after attending Just Stop Oil meetings, he said, but again released on police bail without charge. Booth had never been involved in their disruptive activities, he claimed. 'I remember specifically going to meetings and saying: 'I have not been at a protest,'' he said. 'It has left me bewildered.'
Yahoo
09-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Energy boss' claim against publisher thrown out
Dale Vince's High Court claim against a newspaper publisher has been thrown out. Mr Vince, industrialist and founder of Stroud-based energy firm, Ecotricity, brought legal action against Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) over a Daily Mail article headlined "Labour repays £100,000 to sex pest donor", published in June 2023. The story said Labour was handing back money to donor Davide Serra with a picture showing Mr Vince holding a Just Stop Oil banner. Mr Vince claimed ANL misused his personal data, but the judge said it should have been heard with the defamation claim in July 2024 as "any ordinary reader would very quickly realise Mr Vince was not being accused of sexual harassment". More news stories for Gloucestershire Listen to the latest news for Gloucestershire An employment tribunal in 2022 heard Mr Serra had made sexist comments to a female colleague which were found to amount to unlawful harassment related to sex. The original picture remained in print but was changed on The Mail+ app to one of Mr Serra 47 minutes after publication. ANL had defended the claim and its lawyers previously told the High Court in London it was an abuse of process and a "resurrection" of a libel claim that was dismissed last year. Mr Justice Swift said at the High Court on Monday: "There is no real prospect that Mr Vince will succeed on his claim. "As in the defamation proceedings, it is accepted that on reading the text of the article published in Mail+ and the Daily Mail any ordinary reader would very quickly realise that Mr Vince was not being accused of sexual harassment. "Considered on this basis the personal data relating to Mr Vince was processed fairly." He said there was "every reason" why the data protection claim should have been heard with the defamation claim last year. Following the decision, Mr Vince said he planned to appeal and the relevant media law "predates the internet". He said: "The judge said if you read the whole story, you'd realise the headline was not about me, begging the question why was my face highlighted in the articles perhaps. "But more importantly, people don't read entire articles, the law assumes it - but does so wrongly, against all data and against common sense." Follow BBC Gloucestershire on Facebook, X and Instagram. Send your story ideas to us on email or via WhatsApp on 0800 313 4630. Green energy boss settles High Court libel case
