I've mentioned before that I have some problems with using direct action. It has its place, of course, and I can see nothing wrong with making a point by closing a few filling stations.
But there is sometimes a gulf (if you'll pardon that term!) between what the protesters hope their actions will achieve, and what the public actually perceives, and it's that gulf which bothers me.
Iain Dale expresses his frustration at the protesters, but that is mild compared to the vitriol directed at Greenpeace on BBC Radio Five Live yesterday morning. During an interview and phone-in, one poor protester had to listen to caller after caller haranguing her to the point where one member of the public said that he hoped the protesters would be imprisoned and the keys thrown away.
Had the public who phoned in been personally inconvenienced? No. Had they listened to Greenpeace's message? No. So what causes the kind of mentality that says no one should ever protest (unless it's a pro-fox-hunting demo!) even though they have no personal involvement?
Probably the same kind of mentality that a colleague of mine has, who used his Facebook status to inform the world that Ian Tomlinson's death during the G20 protests last year was "Darwinism". Or the commenter on that Iain Dale article who says of Greenpeace:
"...do they need the French to remind them, again, of their place in society?"If I'm not mistaken, that's a call for Greenpeace activists to be murdered, and I hope Iain Dale will take the appropriate action and delete the comment.
There are some nasty people in the world with nasty opinions, and no amount of direct action will change their mind. However, hopefully the protesters yesterday will have made some decent people think for a moment, and consider where they fill up their car in the future.
0 comments:
Post a Comment