Extinction Rebellion
- This topic has 447 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 5 months, 1 week ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Curious. Why anti working class?
For causing suffering and distress to tens of thousands of workers by disrupting and ruining their holidays. A direct attack on members of the working class.
So are strikes anti working class? Are all protests anti working class then? They all disrupt other workers – I don’t get your logic here.
I would have said that flying, mainly the preserve of the better off, is anti everyone given its excessive long term environmental impact.
And it’s not yet clear why the perpetrators did this, it’s only an assumption it is a protest. Perhaps they are working class people pissed off with aircraft noise?!
The more valid comparison would be with the bombing of that pub in Birmingham and of the shopping centre in Wigan by IRA which were clearly anti-working-class in that they were directly aimed at harming workers.
No. There is a huge difference between deliberate death or harm and inconvenience.
Anyway, it was the ruling class….
Check out @domdyer70’s Tweet: https://twitter.com/domdyer70/status/1076497312946503680?s=09
I agree there is a huge difference between death and harm but what they have in common is where the aim is to deliberately target workers.
That’s the same as a strike then. It deliberately targets the company, but also affects workers who want to work and in the case of transportation, travelling workers, so do we as socialists not support any action that might inconvenient any worker…..??
Not being argumentative, just don’t understand why you see this disruption as an attack on the working class…
I think we have to be very careful that our pronouncements are not identified with the anti-working class rhetoric spouted by the mass media. Almost any action (whether industrial or direct) by workers is inevitably bound to affect other workers and to that extent is regrettable but unavoidable. An extreme example is when doctors, nurses and ancillary workers take strike action, the consequence of which may, in rare instances, threaten the lives or even cause the death of other workers in hospital.
ALB’s case was presented by him in his first post on this thread.
“I am not convinced that this particular stunt was a good idea. Blocking bridges and disrupting the travel arrangements of ordinary workers. More likely to be counter-productive. In fact, if as originally envisaged, we had tried to get the stall from Head Office (south of the river) to the BBC (north of the river) by car we would have been prevented from doing so. They need to chose better stunts if that’s what they want to do.”
And i answered very much the same as you have, Dave.
And ER have indeed chosen different tactics and targeted their protests as i indicated earlier about the anti-BBC protests but these inconvenienced the likes of Annika Rice.
Was that a price too heavy to pay?
No, an ecowarrior attack on an airport would not be like a strike. All the two have in common, yes, is in being deliberate acts. But a strike is aimed at employers, with any harm or inconvenience to other workers being incidental or even accidental. An ecowarrior attack on an airport would be deliberately targeted at workers using it, either to express displeasure at them flying or to punish them for doing so. Quite different. Besides, a strike is part of the class struggle.
An ecowarrior attack is likely to be counter-productive even on its own terms. As Dave B has pointed out, those whose lifestyle is being criticised (in this case ordinary workers flying to a holiday destination) are likely, to defend their choice, to deny that there is a climate change problem and become or listen to climate-deniers.
Also, of course, we’d be hypocrites to sympathise with such a stunt. To be honest, I myself flew from and to Gatwick a couple of months ago, without feeling the slightest guilt. Many members will too (all the members of my branch do or have). And why not? Of course there’ll be airports and flights in socialism, though a trip in a balloon might be fun.
Of course, it is still to be determined who was responsible. Certainly not Extinction Rebellion. And no it seems the couple who had been arrested who now have been released
Maverick eco-warriors? Perhaps but we do have a history of police agent provocateurs embedded within the environmentalist movement? But that is just another conspiracy theory
Many unions do target the dates of industrial action to maximise disruption.
My own union often used the Xmas period as a lever by threatening strikes and go-slows. Other unions do so too. It is purposeful, not accidental. Unions aim to make their industrial muscle effective as possible. Easter break is often used by the transport unions, isn’t it?
The risk of an air collision is indeed an important factor to consider and not lightly dismissed. It was reckless and stupid and i have no compunction in saying when found the culprits should face a lengthy jail sentence.
we have had many examples of laser pens being used, dazzling pilots and each November pilots complain of the close proximity of fireworks.
I’ll stick to my original guess – and guess it is – idiots. The simplest explanation
But my concern with ALB’s approach to direct action is that he initially condemned ER obstructing road traffic as a protest tactic that alienated the public. And later chided them for not risking Polish jails. Rather unsympathetic attitude, imho. I suggest it is a legitimate form of non-violent demonstration not too different from sit-ins or sit-downs or chaining oneself to railings.
“Also, of course, we’d be hypocrites to sympathise with such a stunt. To be honest, I myself flew from and to Gatwick a couple of months ago, without feeling the slightest guilt. Many members will too (all the members of my branch do or have). And why not? Of course there’ll be airports and flights in socialism, though a trip in a balloon might be fun.”
I find it mildly hypocritical that those who are not climate-change deniers should, “without feeling the slightest guilt”, choose to bury their heads in the sand for the sake of preserving questionable personal “lifestyle” choices.
The environmental impact of aviation cannot be dismissed lightly. Aircraft engines emit heat, noise, particulates and gases which contribute to climate change and global dimming. Aircraft engines emit particles and gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2), water vapour, hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulphur oxides, lead, and black carbon which interact among themselves and with the atmosphere.
Despite emission reductions from less polluting turbofan and turboprop engines, the rapid growth of air travel in the past years contributes to an increase in total pollution attributable to aviation. From 1992 to 2005, passenger kilometers increased 5.2 percent per year. And in the European Union, greenhouse gas emissions from aviation increased by 87 percent between 1990 and 2006.
Comprehensive research shows that despite anticipated efficiency innovations to airframes, engines, aerodynamics and flight operations, there is no end in sight to rapid growth in CO2 emissions from air travel and air freight, due to projected continual growth in air travel.
I would be very surprised indeed if this particular mode of transport, in its present form, would continue unabated in socialism.
As for me, I haven’t flown since 1985 and have no intention of ever doing so again. I have a car which I only use when there is no viable alternative.
My bet is still that it’s the Unabomber.
Ecowarrior type are generally anti-working class. Cheap flights have been a real boon to the working class over the last few decades and surely it’s worth remembering that the most frequent flyers are the bourgeoisie (‘high flyers’, as they say).
Stephen, those “budget” flights has been a race to the bottom.
Not just for the passengers who have witnessed comfort sacrificed and check-in and luggage costs introduced but also for the flight and cabin crews, as airlines adopted a similar business model and worsening conditions of employment.
Virgin Atlantic went to court on technical grounds and banned a festive season strike by pilots.
Dave made the point about air travel, but shipping also has been identified as a major contributor to global warming.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.