A thread about protesters

[Metal Biker]

And round and round the circle we go again, sometimes to enact democratic change you have to protest in a way that breaks that law and if those protestors are willing through sheer sense of conviction to lose their liberty/lives E.G Peterloo, the Suffragettes, Greenham Common ladies, Poll Tax riots, Miners strikesP etc etc then i support and admire those who are willing to sacrifice themselves for their cause. Meekly accepting Government diktat is serfdom and we must always guard against political over reach because they should be accountable and not be dictators.

The way the RW people on here go on, it appears they would be happy to live in an authoritarian state where all protest is banned and a strong man leader is in charge issuing diktats on every aspect of their lives. What strange times we live in where a lad who is considered far left is extolling the virtues of freedom and those on the right are against freedoms established and then consolidated by the Human Rights Act, Article 11 of the European Convention of Human Rights provides freedom of assembly. This means that every individual, regardless of cause, has the right to protest, march or demonstrate in a public space. No wonder the Tories want to pull us out if the ECHR and make us like Belarus.

Please tell me you're not comparing these middle class ideologists with those genuine causes.

Most of them don't even practice what they preach and their own 'spokesperson' admitted they don't actually care about insulation. https://metro.co.uk/2021/10/09/insu...te-who-doesnt-care-about-insulation-15393293/

I'm with you on the whole argument that the government cracking down on legal protests is a serious concern and needs addressing. A government free from criticism is as you say a step towards a totalitarian state, but this particular group being discussed are NOT the hill to die on in that respect. The Police haven't ridden in on horses and clattered them with batons, the Army hasn't opened fire on an unarmed crowd. They've been escorted off the road (via non-violent resistance) given a caution, went back and did the same thing, been escorted again, arrested, given an injunction to cease, ignored it, been arrested AGAIN, then in court demand TO THE JUDGE they be incarcerated because that is the only way they will stop doing what they're doing and then the judge granting them their wish. But #totalfascism apparently.

You are free to protest up to a certain point; once you start breaking laws that directly affects others you move from the realm of civil disobediance into criminal acts. Please don't tell me you support criminal acts so long as it is in support of a cause because then we're into the realm of an entirely different discussion. IB are a bunch of tone deaf, middle class luvvies who have no consideration for anyone they preach to want to protect nor even follow the values which they purport to want others to follow. Being critical of them isn't to suggest that people are wholy against the act of protesting or wishing to eradicate those rights. You're on the wrong side here man. If we tolerate breaking the law as an act of protest defending by rights, how long before we're defending assaults on people and politicians as "an act of protest defended by our rights?"

To anyone else, don't @ me, not interested.

 

[BobKowalski]

I don't want to ban the protests, I don't care about Insulate Britain protesting because they have the right to do it. However I draw the line at when they start to protest illegally.

You cannot mention rights and the democratic process but then advocate breaking the law which is the very thing that underpins the democratic process.

If you want to change opinions then breaking the law is not the way to do it. The way to do it is by engaging people with dialogue and education but Insulate Britain does not attempt to do any of these things.

An insulation fitter sat in traffic and missing appointments will do more on climate change than a single Insulate Britain protester sat in his way will do.

Depends on what the Govt of the day defines as ‘illegal’. If the Govt proposes a police bill that discriminates against Gypsy and Travellers by effectively criminalising their way of life am I obliged to respect that law? Are we okay with it because no one cares about Gypsies et al? Am I obliged to respect a law that seeks to make shouting too loudly at a protest a criminal offence? Am I obliged to respect any law passed by a Govt that routinely breaks its own regulations and laws?

Civil right movements rarely start on the right side of legality. The act of legal suppression is what sparks these movements in the first place.

 

[Ancient Citizen]

Your intellect has failed you I’m afraid as you can’t seem to understand the points being made. Anyhow I hope you have a lovely convenient day, after all that’s the most important thing.

As you haven't made any points that are worth consideration, I think I'll sleep tight.
I hope you too have a lovely day dreaming about ruining everyone else's.

 

[Rascal]

I don't want to ban the protests, I don't care about Insulate Britain protesting because they have the right to do it. However I draw the line at when they start to protest illegally.

You cannot mention rights and the democratic process but then advocate breaking the law which is the very thing that underpins the democratic process.

If you want to change opinions then breaking the law is not the way to do it. The way to do it is by engaging people with dialogue and education but Insulate Britain does not attempt to do any of these things.

An insulation fitter sat in traffic and missing appointments will do more on climate change than a single Insulate Britain protester sat in his way will do.

This Government though is changing the goalposts, the new police , crime and sentencing bill has clauses designed to limit legitimate protest and make legitimate protest illegal. People will no longer be allowed to "lock on" a tactic used worldwide in protests, things like chaining yourself to a gate will be illegal. No longer will you be able to stop roads being built by stopping trucks etc. The bill also includes an extension to stop and search, so anyone suspected of attending a protest can be stopped without suspicion. There are also powers that can stop an individual attending a protest which is eye opening in its anti democratic stance. Protest whether people like it or not has always been an essential corrective to mistakes made by government, now Government is saying it can not be questioned over any mistakes.

All this is being done because your insulation fitter is sat in traffic and missing appointments, its a paean to capitalist control and it is overtly authoritarian by nature and whilst people get upset because some fucker is sat in a traffic jam the Government are taking away your freedoms with your blessings. You are being conned.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Please tell me you're not comparing these middle class ideologists with those genuine causes.

Most of them don't even practice what they preach and their own 'spokesperson' admitted they don't actually care about insulation. https://metro.co.uk/2021/10/09/insu...te-who-doesnt-care-about-insulation-15393293/

I'm with you on the whole argument that the government cracking down on legal protests is a serious concern and needs addressing. A government free from criticism is as you say a step towards a totalitarian state, but this particular group being discussed are NOT the hill to die on in that respect. The Police haven't ridden in on horses and clattered them with batons, the Army hasn't opened fire on an unarmed crowd. They've been escorted off the road (via non-violent resistance) given a caution, went back and did the same thing, been escorted again, arrested, given an injunction to cease, ignored it, been arrested AGAIN, then in court demand TO THE JUDGE they be incarcerated because that is the only way they will stop doing what they're doing and then the judge granting them their wish. But #totalfascism apparently.

You are free to protest up to a certain point; once you start breaking laws that directly affects others you move from the realm of civil disobediance into criminal acts. Please don't tell me you support criminal acts so long as it is in support of a cause because then we're into the realm of an entirely different discussion. IB are a bunch of tone deaf, middle class luvvies who have no consideration for anyone they preach to want to protect nor even follow the values which they purport to want others to follow. Being critical of them isn't to suggest that people are wholy against the act of protesting or wishing to eradicate those rights. You're on the wrong side here man. If we tolerate breaking the law as an act of protest defending by rights, how long before we're defending assaults on people and politicians as "an act of protest defended by our rights?"

To anyone else, don't @ me, not interested.

He doesn't own the property it is owned by his partner.

 

[Metal Biker]

This Government though is changing the goalposts, the new police , crime and sentencing bill has clauses designed to limit legitimate protest and make legitimate protest illegal. People will no longer be allowed to "lock on" a tactic used worldwide in protests, things like chaining yourself to a gate will be illegal. No longer will you be able to stop roads being built by stopping trucks etc. The bill also includes an extension to stop and search, so anyone suspected of attending a protest can be stopped without suspicion. There are also powers that can stop an individual attending a protest which is eye opening in its anti democratic stance. Protest whether people like it or not has always been an essential corrective to mistakes made by government, now Government is saying it can not be questioned over any mistakes.

All this is being done because your insulation fitter is sat in traffic and missing appointments, its a paean to capitalist control and it is overtly authoritarian by nature and whilst people get upset because some fucker is sat in a traffic jam the Government are taking away your freedoms with your blessings. You are being conned.

You seriously need to calm down mate.

If I chain myself to a railing police will now have powers to unchain me 'against my will'? It is a literal hell on earth, isn't it.

 

[Rascal]

Please tell me you're not comparing these middle class ideologists with those genuine causes.

Most of them don't even practice what they preach and their own 'spokesperson' admitted they don't actually care about insulation. https://metro.co.uk/2021/10/09/insu...te-who-doesnt-care-about-insulation-15393293/

I'm with you on the whole argument that the government cracking down on legal protests is a serious concern and needs addressing. A government free from criticism is as you say a step towards a totalitarian state, but this particular group being discussed are NOT the hill to die on in that respect. The Police haven't ridden in on horses and clattered them with batons, the Army hasn't opened fire on an unarmed crowd. They've been escorted off the road (via non-violent resistance) given a caution, went back and did the same thing, been escorted again, arrested, given an injunction to cease, ignored it, been arrested AGAIN, then in court demand TO THE JUDGE they be incarcerated because that is the only way they will stop doing what they're doing and then the judge granting them their wish. But #totalfascism apparently.

You are free to protest up to a certain point; once you start breaking laws that directly affects others you move from the realm of civil disobediance into criminal acts. Please don't tell me you support criminal acts so long as it is in support of a cause because then we're into the realm of an entirely different discussion. IB are a bunch of tone deaf, middle class luvvies who have no consideration for anyone they preach to want to protect nor even follow the values which they purport to want others to follow. Being critical of them isn't to suggest that people are wholy against the act of protesting or wishing to eradicate those rights. You're on the wrong side here man. If we tolerate breaking the law as an act of protest defending by rights, how long before we're defending assaults on people and politicians as "an act of protest defended by our rights?"

To anyone else, don't @ me, not interested.

I have said repeatedly I could not care less about who these people are, where they come from or their cause, i have said repeatedly i support their right to protest because they are exercising their rights under the ECHR ruling. Ever increasing draconian laws brought in to quell protest is dangerous to democracy and as i have said repeatedly i support Tiny Tommy and his EDL cranks right to protest even though I vehemently disagree with them.

When a Draconian Law is introduced are we just supposed to accept it because that is the road to authoritarianism.

As for criminal acts, I am a fervent believer in the goals of CND, would i break the law to achieve those goals , yes quite possibly and i would pay for my actions, because throughout history brave men and women have always risked their liberty in the name of freedom from oppression or for a cause they believe to be just. Without these people those who govern would be under no obligation to give way on anything, they can be dictators and rule without recourse.

Of course I do not advocate violence, but when protests can be banned because they are too noisy then i would suggest the balance has tilted too far away from the protestors and towards those in power.

 

[inbetween]

You seriously need to calm down mate.

If I chain myself to a railing police will now have powers to unchain me 'against my will'? It is a literal hell on earth, isn't it.

Indeed and now the freedom to glue yourself to the road is all that matters. I thought we were talking about protesting about climate change but clearly it's not about that and quite clearly it was never about that.

Most people know it's wrong and there's no defence so they change tack to civil rights, but what about the civil rights of the people inconvenienced, nope no sh*ts given there.

Christ, I wish I had enough time in the day to go to one of these protests but many of us working mugs haven't quite got the time. I suppose these protesters see normal people as the problem so that's why they lie in the roads. It's like standing in the road is the morally superior position which we have to suffer thanks to the legal umbrella of civil rights..

 

[blueinsa]

And round and round the circle we go again, sometimes to enact democratic change you have to protest in a way that breaks that law and if those protestors are willing through sheer sense of conviction to lose their liberty/lives E.G Peterloo, the Suffragettes, Greenham Common ladies, Poll Tax riots, Miners strikes etc etc then i support and admire those who are willing to sacrifice themselves for their cause. Meekly accepting Government diktat is serfdom and we must always guard against political over reach because they should be accountable and not be dictators.

The way the RW people on here go on, it appears they would be happy to live in an authoritarian state where all protest is banned and a strong man leader is in charge issuing diktats on every aspect of their lives. What strange times we live in where a lad who is considered far left is extolling the virtues of freedom and those on the right are against freedoms established and then consolidated by the Human Rights Act, Article 11 of the European Convention of Human Rights provides freedom of assembly. This means that every individual, regardless of cause, has the right to protest, march or demonstrate in a public space. No wonder the Tories want to pull us out if the ECHR and make us like Belarus.

They are not trying to enact democratic change or at least they say they are not unless installing insulation in all homes isn’t there real intended aim?

 

[Metal Biker]

I have said repeatedly I could not care less about who these people are, where they come from or their cause, i have said repeatedly i support their right to protest because they are exercising their rights under the ECHR ruling. Ever increasing draconian laws brought in to quell protest is dangerous to democracy and as i have said repeatedly i support Tiny Tommy and his EDL cranks right to protest even though I vehemently disagree with them.

When a Draconian Law is introduced are we just supposed to accept it because that is the road to authoritarianism.

As for criminal acts, I am a fervent believer in the goals of CND, would i break the law to achieve those goals , yes quite possibly and i would pay for my actions, because throughout history brave men and women have always risked their liberty in the name of freedom from oppression or for a cause they believe to be just. Without these people those who govern would be under no obligation to give way on anything, they can be dictators and rule without recourse.

Of course I do not advocate violence, but when protests can be banned because they are too noisy then i would suggest the balance has tilted too far away from the protestors and towards those in power.

Giving Police powers to remove protestors from railings they chained themselves to isn't exactly a law change that's going to have me raising my fists in anger, mate.

Remember that the Tories didn't give two fucks about these protestors either; it was the PUBLIC anger and backlash, calling on them to do something, which saw the introductionof this law change. You think Patel is seriously bothered that the oiks are angry they can't get to their minimum wage jobs on time?

As usual they saw a PR opportunity, to be seen as "listening to the people". It's not the start of a slippery slope, and remember than all laws can be overturned; they push too far, we vote them out.