X R rebellion at Canary Wharf this morning

Protestors have been causing "criminal damage" throughout history. It's highly unlikely that any of the freedoms and democracy we currently enjoy would have been gained without them. You might ask why on earth isn't the history of protest taught in schools, instead of wars and battles, but actually it's obvious isn't it?
As for the protestors paying for the damage, do you really not appreciate how much financial organisations like HSBC are making and how little they are contibuting towards any sort of green agenda? Paying for a few windows is just a drop in the ocean for them.

So what trisher they are a business and no doubt have insurance anyway.That isn’t the point.
In any case they do more harm than good by their extreme actions.
A bit like the Animal Rights people, their protests if peaceful do good, are thought provoking, their so called liberation of animals is simply cruel, the animals are picked off or die of hunger.

I do wish I was in a position of authority, I would bring back the stocks and put the protesters in them and allow people to pelt them with rotten fruit and vegetables, a perfect use of inedible produce.
This is the polite version. What I would really like to do to these people causing criminal damage is best left unsaid.

Nine women have been charged with Criminal Damage after yesterday’s XR stunt in Canary Wharf and IMO rightly so.

I am totally with those who condemn this wanton vandalism. It plays into the hands of their opponents by discrediting the Extinction Rebellion organisation. If I didn't think some members of this organisation were stupid enough to behave like this, it could almost be the work of agents provocateurs. Climate change deniers will be laughing their heads off.
I have a theory that otherwise honourable and just causes/organisations attract those who just want to cause mayhem and feel important. They could just as easily have taken up a n other cause. Pathetic.

It's in a great tradition of women's militancy. In June 1909
“^At nine o’clock, a group of thirteen women, using small stones wrapped in brown paper, began to break windows at the Privy Council, Treasury, and Home Offices. To avoid injuring anyone within, pieces of string had been tied to the stones, which were swung against the windows while held by the string, and then dropped through the holes. The window-breakers were arrested immediately.^

Despite their determination, the deliberate action of criminal damage didn’t come easy to some of the saboteurs; one noted

To women of culture and refinement and of sheltered upbringing the deliberate act of throwing a stone, even as a protest, in order to break a window, requires an enormous amount of moral courage. After much tension and hesitation, I threw my stone at the window… I was immediately arrested and marched off by two policemen.

These were the women who won the vote.
Let's hope the ones breaking windows today herald a greener agenda.

But of course the suffragettes just wanted to "cause mayhem" and "feel important". That's why they were prepared to be imprisoned and force fed, it made them feel really good!!!!

You only have to look at the amount of trash left behind (I'm thinking about the sit-ins in London a couple of years ago) to see that the majority of XR are in it for their 15 minutes of fame and have absolutely no interest, or just plain ignorance, of anything to do with climate change. Criminal damage is never acceptable.

People causing criminal damage as a means of making protests throughout history were suffering far greater injustices than these Extinction Rebellion supporters. They have the right of free speech, the use of all forms of media, written and spoken, are articulate and able to promote their views freely at conferences, meetings and platforms open to all.
This criminal behaviour is a direct result of the intolerance of these protesters towards those whom they decide, arbitrarily,are not supporting their cause.
Mob violence.
One of the women arrested, Valerie Brown, considers herself to be a suitable candidate for the position of Mayor of London.

trisher do you have a car or ever go in one? What if I object to individual polluting by such vehicles and decide to slash the tyres, break the lights and windscreens as my protest. Still OK with "criminal damage" as a means of protest? (no idea why you put it in quotation marks). Ability to pay for said damage is irrelevant. I assume you dismiss peaceful protest as preferred by Gandhi and Martin Luther King.

There are far better and more direct ways to support children in the 'third world' or women's rights than smashing HSBC's windows in London. I am sure I could find a justification for many such criminal acts if I didn't think this was self-indulgent protest. In practical terms, this will achieve little and set even more people against the protesters.

It is not like the suffragettes who had a justified specific grievance for which there was a solution. As we know, women's suffrage did not create equality but it was an important, necessary step forward.

What we need on climate change, an issue that is recognised and being addressed to a degree, are constructive solutions to get from where we are to where we would like to be. Smashing windows is not one of them.

Whitewavemark2 caught our attention yes but all l thought about was the violence and not the subject, l support the ideals but I'm sure there must be a better way to get the point across. Every peace rally I've seen on TV ended in violence and destruction its very sad

Well said @Whitewavemark2. The objectives of Extinction Rebellion are totally clear, contrary to some claims here. They are spelled out in three simple points in large letters at extinctionrebellion.uk/the-truth/demands/. The CO2 implications of their action are trivial in the context of global emissions. So far government is all talk and not much action. Meanwhile banks push things further along the path of destruction. Passing the buck to China etc just won’t do. Why would they accept use telling them to do things we aren’t prepared to do? We have an impending crisis. If you don’t like XR’s approach, you need to propose an effective alternative.

Actually I dont think that's coherent at all. I dont like simplistic solutions to complex problems.

The idea that this is just about some poor children in the third world is about as stupid as believing everyone believed women should have the vote.
Criminal damage is always condemned by some at the time. It is only later when the objectives are acheived that people say "oh well we knew they would get it anyway". No they wouldn't!!!

Janburry

Whitewavemark2 caught our attention yes but all l thought about was the violence and not the subject, l support the ideals but I'm sure there must be a better way to get the point across. Every peace rally I've seen on TV ended in violence and destruction its very sad

No they haven't I attended a "Stop The War" march and there was no destruction and no violence just a lot of people walking for peace. Mind you it failed anyway so perhaps peaceful protest doesn't actually work.

'So far government is all talk and not much action.'

UK CHG emissions down 43% since 1990 with targets of 57% reduction by 2030 and 78% by 2035.

'Passing the buck to China etc just won’t do.' Maybe not but UK accounts for just 1% of global emissions and China 28% [August 2020]. USA accounts for 15%, India 7% and Russia 5%. The plain fact is that whatever we do in the UK will not change the world, however much we wish it would.

I cannot vouch for this information which has been taken from the Internet. If accurate, though, it suggests the message has been heard is being acted upon and, indeed to some extent, has been acted upon since 1990. It may not be fast enough but it is not all talk.

We shouldn't console ourselves with the fact that things are being "acted upon". We've picked the low hanging fruit and now it gets hard.

As for the China thing - do we just carry on regardless because Chinese emissions are much worse than ours? We have international agreements and action about this because everybody has to act. There's no point is us saying we've done our bit so now its up to them. When the sea levels go up, and our coastlines start to disappear, saying its all China's fault won't make it any better.

The UK has a very ambitious climate change target to meet, I really don’t see the point of a protest in London, our CO2 emissions are tiny, China and the US are the major polluters contributing nearly half, of the CO2. China is still increasing emissions, mainly because we and other western nations have just “exported” our pollution to China
Of course it’s consumer demand that drives Chinese industry, until we all starts consuming less there is going to be no decrease in emissions, it’s not up to government it’s up to all of us.
In reality global emissions are not going to fall because demand from developing nations and population growth are going to maintain demand, the best we are going to achieve is leveling off increase.

I think Extinction Rebellion have done their cause no good at all - it is awful to think of all the litter left and damage to buildings - they are so weird - I vote Green in local elections because they can do quite a lot for the area in which you live.

“If you don’t like XR’s approach, you need to propose an effective alternative.”

The only way to reduce emissions is to reduce global consumption, if consumer goods were less affordable they would have to last longer, so a big tax on consumer goods, across all developed countries as a start would reduce emissions.

Is it going to happen, not a chance, never.

Alegrias1: What else would you have the UK do if it fully complies with international agreements and if, big if, it cuts emissions to 78% of 1990 levels by 2035, said to be an exacting target by international standards? We are constantly being reminded how insignificant the UK is on the world stage and, in respect of emissions, it is certainly true.

I agree with Katie59 that governments (at least democratic governments) can only go so far. Thereafter, it is up to individuals. As we have witnessed in the pandemic, people don't always do what they are told; and, as regards climate control, some of the elite don't practise what they preach.

Of course, there are those who would prefer we had a less democratic government to ensure its edicts were followed but even with a green dictatorship in Whitehall, we would not make a significant difference to global emissions.

GrannyGravy13

Mining for lithium which is used in batteries which power phones, tablets, laptops and electric vehicles is destroying areas of South America and Tibet. Killing all surrounding wildlife and polluting rivers and water courses.

This is what the search for alternative to fossil fuels is doing to the world. Many articles on line for those who want to
see for themselves.

That thought worries me too. Whatever we do as humans, we cause damage.

Cunco I would expect us to take our place in international negotiations and try to influence other parts of the world. Maybe lead by example? There seems to be a narrative along the lines that we are doing our part and these other countries aren't. So it allows some to say that its not fair and there's no point is us trying any more. I'm not suggesting that is what you are saying, not at all.

I am a bit taken aback by the "Green dictatorship" comment though, which seems to suggest that you might think governments who decide on environmentally friendly policies are not democratic? Environmentally friendly policies don't have to be negative, there is lots of money to be made from alternative energy sources and so on and they don't have to make our lives miserable!

The only entities that can make a difference are the world’s governments and through legislation that will ensure big business complies.

We must all as individuals do our bit, but it is a drop in the ocean compared to the emissions by the process of production.