So protesting is only ever acceptable if the only people impacted by the protests are precisely the offenders being protested. If anyone else is affected, protestors should go to jail for their heinous crime of protest. If the very people the protest target make themselves inaccessible to protesters, then protest is not allowed.
If you want to be apt about this, it’s more correct to say
"The quarterback stole our lunch money, has been doing that for years, we asked the principal to step in, but they did nothing and gave the quarterback school funds. We put up banners asking the rest of the students to join in ousting the principal, but they did not pay attention, most of them didn’t even know there were banners as the school paper didn’t report on it. So now we are blocking the entrance to the school to bring attention to it.
“Also, this weirdo on the internet keeps saying we are doing things just as bad as the quarterback because they had to take the side entrance, fucking weirdos man”
Blocking the school doors would actually affect the quarterback, as well as all the other students. JSO isn’t blocking the school doors. “Beating up the chess club” is the much more appropriate analogy to JSO’s idiotic methods.
The equivalent of blocking the school doors would be something like picketing fuel stations. Same operational concept: inconveniencing people to bring attention to the cause. Except now, the people suffering that inconvenience are actually a part of the oil production and distribution chain, and not just some random people going about their lives.
They have been picketing fuel stations, refineries, more. It doesn’t work, you obviously didn’t take notice. What’s the point in doing something that doesn’t work, just, well I was going to say so “you” aren’t inconveniced but you never were inconveniced you’re just mad that someone else might be.
He wants them to do something that doesn’t work because he wants to be able to ignore it. He doesn’t like the aesthetics of social protests and doesn’t understand the history of Civil Disobedience movements.
Have each of these JSO nitwits record a video telling a major car dealerships that only the back half of their lot can be used for ICE vehicles. The front half is for electrics and hybrids only.
They’ll scoff.
Go paint a line down their lot, separating front and back halves.
They’ll scoff.
Target your JSO “civil disobedience” at any of those ICE cars in the front half.
They’ll notice. At that point, stop talking to them and paint some more lines.
Start talking to insurance companies: they are the ones who will be putting a dollar amount on that extortion, and charging dealers commensurate to the risk. When they all realize the dealers just need to stock and promote electric vehicles instead of ICE vehicles, they’ll take the hint.
Pitting the insurance industry against the oil industry is much more likely to achieve the goals of JSO than harassing the general public.
They would simply get arrested at the first threat because that’s already illegal and people like you, who dislike protest, are in charge of the levers of law enforcement. Your theoretical protest wouldn’t even happen.
JSO already crosses the “illegal” boundary with their traffic obstruction. Since they insist on illegal activity “civil disobedience” anyway, I would say that a calculated, effective act of protest against property is far less egregious than their counterproductive, impotent, whiny angst.
If a slight risk of jail time makes them squeamish, I can only doubt their commitment to the environment. Seems all they really want is attention.
New cars on dealer lots are only associated with people actively involved in the industry. You directly affect the oil executive’s bottom line when you target those unsold cars. 100% of the harm you inflict directly impacts business of the oil industry.
Targeting a random car, the harm affects other, only tangentially related industries. Stranding a nurse, for example, affects the healthcare industry more than it affects the oil industry. Stranding an actor affects the entertainment industry more than the oil industry. Stranding a waitress affects the food service industry more than the oil industry.
If the objective is to protest the oil industry, the targets for protest need to be selected such that the majority of harm from that protest directly affects the oil industry.
So protesting is only ever acceptable if the only people impacted by the protests are precisely the offenders being protested. If anyone else is affected, protestors should go to jail for their heinous crime of protest. If the very people the protest target make themselves inaccessible to protesters, then protest is not allowed.
“The quarterback stole our lunch money, so we’re going to beat up the chess club.”
That’s you. That’s what you sound like.
If you want to be apt about this, it’s more correct to say "The quarterback stole our lunch money, has been doing that for years, we asked the principal to step in, but they did nothing and gave the quarterback school funds. We put up banners asking the rest of the students to join in ousting the principal, but they did not pay attention, most of them didn’t even know there were banners as the school paper didn’t report on it. So now we are blocking the entrance to the school to bring attention to it.
“Also, this weirdo on the internet keeps saying we are doing things just as bad as the quarterback because they had to take the side entrance, fucking weirdos man”
Blocking the school doors would actually affect the quarterback, as well as all the other students. JSO isn’t blocking the school doors. “Beating up the chess club” is the much more appropriate analogy to JSO’s idiotic methods.
The equivalent of blocking the school doors would be something like picketing fuel stations. Same operational concept: inconveniencing people to bring attention to the cause. Except now, the people suffering that inconvenience are actually a part of the oil production and distribution chain, and not just some random people going about their lives.
They have been picketing fuel stations, refineries, more. It doesn’t work, you obviously didn’t take notice. What’s the point in doing something that doesn’t work, just, well I was going to say so “you” aren’t inconveniced but you never were inconveniced you’re just mad that someone else might be.
He wants them to do something that doesn’t work because he wants to be able to ignore it. He doesn’t like the aesthetics of social protests and doesn’t understand the history of Civil Disobedience movements.
That’s all there is to it.
Have each of these JSO nitwits record a video telling a major car dealerships that only the back half of their lot can be used for ICE vehicles. The front half is for electrics and hybrids only.
They’ll scoff.
Go paint a line down their lot, separating front and back halves.
They’ll scoff.
Target your JSO “civil disobedience” at any of those ICE cars in the front half.
They’ll notice. At that point, stop talking to them and paint some more lines.
Start talking to insurance companies: they are the ones who will be putting a dollar amount on that extortion, and charging dealers commensurate to the risk. When they all realize the dealers just need to stock and promote electric vehicles instead of ICE vehicles, they’ll take the hint.
Pitting the insurance industry against the oil industry is much more likely to achieve the goals of JSO than harassing the general public.
They would simply get arrested at the first threat because that’s already illegal and people like you, who dislike protest, are in charge of the levers of law enforcement. Your theoretical protest wouldn’t even happen.
JSO already crosses the “illegal” boundary with their traffic obstruction. Since they insist on
illegal activity“civil disobedience” anyway, I would say that a calculated, effective act of protest against property is far less egregious than their counterproductive, impotent, whiny angst.If a slight risk of jail time makes them squeamish, I can only doubt their commitment to the environment. Seems all they really want is attention.
Why not do that, and deflate ICE tyres on the side of the road?
New cars on dealer lots are only associated with people actively involved in the industry. You directly affect the oil executive’s bottom line when you target those unsold cars. 100% of the harm you inflict directly impacts business of the oil industry.
Targeting a random car, the harm affects other, only tangentially related industries. Stranding a nurse, for example, affects the healthcare industry more than it affects the oil industry. Stranding an actor affects the entertainment industry more than the oil industry. Stranding a waitress affects the food service industry more than the oil industry.
If the objective is to protest the oil industry, the targets for protest need to be selected such that the majority of harm from that protest directly affects the oil industry.