In recent years, vandalism and impeding traffic in the name of the climate seem to have exploded, especially in Europe. It's a bit of a baffling phenomenon; these people seem to think that somehow, despite all evidence to the contrary, their antics might convince people of the rightness of their cause. Now noodle on that for a moment. These people, useful idiots if there ever were any, are thinking that someone will happen across them blocking a major roadway or throwing tomato soup on a priceless piece of art, and think, "Hey, you know, I think they may have a point."
The odds of that happening are slim to none.
Now, several UK "Just Stop Oil" activists, jailed for just the kinds of shenanigans described above, are trying to get their sentences knocked back because of their sacrifice. The excellent climate website, Watt's Up With That, just published an op-ed by Eric Worrall, who began his piece with an excerpt from the Guardian:
“… they argued judges defied decades of precedent by ignoring their conscientious motives. …”
Climate activists ‘did what they did out of sacrifice’, appeal court told
Lawyers invoke philosophies of Hannah Arendt and Henry David Thoreau in bid to have long sentences of 16 protesters quashed
Damien Gayle
Thu 30 Jan 2025 05.02 AEDT
The philosophies of Hannah Arendt and Henry David Thoreau were aired in the court of appeal on Wednesday as 16 climate activists sought to convince England’s most-senior judge to quash their long sentences for disruptive acts of civil disobedience.
The roadblocks ended up having an almost comic air to them, as angry Brits got out of their cars and dragged the protesters off the road by main force. The protestors tried to counter that move by passive resistance - by going limp, in other words.
This is the caliber of screwball that is appealing (if only in the legal sense):
Among the 16 was Roger Hallam, the co-founder of Extinction Rebellion and Just Stop Oil, whose five-year sentence for planning roadblock protests on the M25 is thought to be longest ever handed out in the UK for non-violent protest; Larch Maxey, sentenced to three years for tunnelling beneath the road leading to an Essex oil refinery; and Phoebe Plummer, imprisoned for two years for throwing tomato soup on the glass covering Van Gogh’s Sunflowers painting at the National Gallery.
This is a veritable portrait of stupidity in action.
See Related: Consequences Finally Arrive for 'Just Stop Oil' Lunatics, and the Response Is Priceless
And they want their sentences commuted, or at least scaled back, because of their... sincerity?
Mr. Worral writes:
In my opinion the protestors actions went well beyond any reasonable definition of acceptable protest. By forcibly inflicting their deranged extremism on others, the protestors caused outrage and distress, incited violence from people desperate to get home to their kids or to their jobs, and likely cost lives by blocking roads used by emergency services.
This is the rub. These acts are not acceptable protests, not in the name of climate change, not in the name of anything. Granted, they are somewhat more tolerable than looting and burning, but that's no reason to reduce their sentences; if anything it calls for harsher sentences for looters and arsonists.
We have, in recent months, seen protestors in North America and Europe screeching to “end oil,” apparently not realizing – or caring – that without oil, our modern technological society cannot exist. We have seen Greta Thunberg, the Doom Pixie, wagging her finger at us daily, while she leads followers in illegal protests to attempt to shut down oil and natural gas shipments - that's when she's not offering moral support to Hamas terrorists. We have heavily subsidized electric cars, solar panels, and windmills, devices that would fail in an open market but are seeing market share increase because of government subsidies.
These perps, these petty vandals and annoying road blockers, are growing more than tiresome. Sooner or later, they will do serious damage; they will prevent an emergency vehicle from arriving, they will vandalize an artwork not protected by a waterproof shield, or they will commit some other act that has the potential to cause injury or death. That's why the sentences for these vandals must stay in place, regardless of whatever they think they are "sacrificing;" let them show their commitment by sacrificing their freedom, which may well discourage a few other useful idiots from attempting to repeat these stunts.
