These days, many people tend to oppose anything and anyone. This is particularly evident among environmental activists, who sometimes become so fixated on protesting and obstructing that they lose sight of the issues they are trying to address. While I won’t give any specific names to avoid giving them more attention, we all likely know who these individuals and organizations are.
Recently, an incident in Scotland occurred where a group of individuals interrupted a bicycle road race. It could be clearer why they would do this, especially considering that biking is one of the most cost-effective modes of transportation. The true purpose behind their actions remains a mystery.
The Issue of Justification
There is a question of justification when it comes to protests. If a public member were to erect a tent or barricade across a road without a cause, simply for fun, and stop traffic, they would be immediately removed and arrested. The charges would be severe. However, negotiations would last for hours if the same person were to attach a poster to the barricade. Even then, the police would be hesitant to make any move that might be considered a violation of human rights, which is the core issue at hand. These protesters are counting on the fact that governments are hesitant to act for fear of being sued.
These individuals and groups are well-organized, with legal departments and people organizing the protests. They even train their members on how to behave when arrested and how to conduct themselves. But does this make them any different from common militias whose cause is to cause chaos and disturbance?
Militia
: a private group of (armed) individuals that operates as a paramilitary force and is typically motivated by a political or religious ideology,
specifically: such a group that aims to defend individual rights against government authority that is perceived as oppressive.
Merriam-Webster
Nowadays, some countries are prone to allow violence as part of protests. However, this is in contradiction with the common law. Displaying a banner or informing the officials beforehand does not make violence less unlawful or more lawful.
From protests to riot
The events that occurred on January 6 at Capitol Hill, where a large group attacked the government building and threatened officials, resulted in legal consequences that are still ongoing. Many lawsuits, arrests, criminal indictments, and court proceedings have followed. However, are these environmental protests any different from the ones that led to the January 6 riot? Not really. The main goal in both cases is to incite public outrage and protest the legally elected government and its decision-making. The only difference is that the leaders of these groups organizing the protests have not been indicted for instigating them. They are still able to continue organizing more provocative protests. It may be time for governments to make some changes to the laws protecting the right to protest. We all know that free speech and assembly are fundamental human rights. However, the Constitution does not state that it is a constitutional right to use violence, cause public disturbance, or destroy property while exercising these rights.
Crowd manipulation is the intentional or unwitting use of techniques based on the principles of crowd psychology to engage, control, or influence the desires of a crowd in order to direct its behavior toward a specific action.
Wikipedia, Crowd manipulation
Is there a difference in legal protection for the public versus protesters? No. Despite occasional perceptions to the contrary, the law is the same for everyone. Therefore, if someone poses a threat to a member of the public, they have the right to use force to defend themselves and their property, regardless of whether they are carrying a sign or not.
What is the threshold for a group of activists to turn to violence? This trend has been observed repeatedly across the globe. The violence may not always involve guns and explosives but could also include materials like paints, glue, and plastic sheets. While such actions may not pose a direct threat to life, they do damage property. One may wonder if this poses enough of a threat for property owners to take legal defensive measures.
Funding the cause or cult
Several groups, focused on “fighting injustice” rely on funding from volunteer donations. However, it’s not uncommon for these donors to be influenced by the group’s message. This manipulation has been happening for centuries and often leads to a false sense of reality. The phrase “Fake it, till you make it” is expected in the corporate world and can also apply to these groups. It’s important to remember that these organizations may not differ much from the corporations they protest, with similar structures, profit motives, leadership styles, and a desire for power and control. Ultimately, they are more alike than different.
What makes this make-believe cause attractive?
The human mind is fragile and easily manipulated. It does not take a lot to plant a thought. Once the thought or idea is planted, it takes little to cultivate it. Crowd manipulation, when used correctly, makes a long-lasting impact.
How is this done? By conducting opinion polls, provide these groups the approval ratings they need to continue their misbehaviour. Some other ways include Sociological- and direct propaganda.
Some of these groups also use “poll workers” who populate city centres and use their questionnaires to conduct opinion polls. The valuable data collected gives these groups e.g. Geographical data, to conduct their business more effectively.
Cause without purpose
It’s unclear how certain groups manage to travel without using transportation that harms the environment. I’m referring to their mode of travel when they organize demonstrations. How do these people get to multiple locations? Do they use bicycles, public transportation, walk, swim, or fly? However, flying is not an option since it’s against their beliefs. Hence, I wonder how they move around.
To be realistic, most individuals use regular transportation modes that are not so eco-friendly. Therefore, it’s hypocritical to protest activities that are fuelling their way of living.
“Sociological Propaganda: where a society seeks to integrate the maximum number of individuals into itself by unifying its members’ behavior according to a pattern. The propaganda element is the way of life with which the individual is permeated and then the individual begins to express it in film, writing, or art without realizing it. This involuntary behavior creates an expansion of society through advertising, movies, education, and magazines.”
Jacques Ellul, Propaganda: The Formation of Men’s Attitudes.
It would be amusing to see when these protesters ride bicycles for 200 miles to stage a protest. Unfortunately, that’s unlikely to happen since time is precious, and they must use it wisely. Protests must be timely and well-coordinated to be effective; otherwise, they become meaningless.
Alternative energy sources
There are numerous alternative energy sources to replace oil, including solar energy, wind energy, geothermal energy, ocean energy, and bioenergy. Unfortunately, no matter what approach governments take to implement cleaner initiatives, there always seems to be a group that finds reasons to complain.
Below are some instances of protests that have arisen against cleaner energy systems.
Norway
Protest outside the office of Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre against Europe’s largest onshore wind farm.
The reason: it endangers the reindeer herders’ way of life.
BBC, June 2, 2023
Bramley, Hampshire, UK
Protesters in Bramley marched against the solar farm plan.
The reason: the proposal would harm wildlife and hamper exploration of the area’s Roman history.
Euronews Green, April 17, 2023
Switzerland
Protesters call for stop to deep geothermal project in Switzerland.
The reason: The protesters are worried about risks to underground water sources, seismic activity, and possible radioactivity.
SWI swissinfo.ch, May 8, 2023
The question at hand is: if both oil drilling and renewable energy are considered unfavorable, what alternatives remain?
Stepping up protesting – walking on a thin line.
One of the most significant environmental activist groups took a step further when they draped the country estate of the British Prime Minister in black fabric. This was done to protest the planning expansion of oil and gas drilling in the North Sea.
This is only one of the cases when activists have entered private property without the consent of the property owner. The common law gives property owners the right to take necessary steps to secure their property and protect their belongings. The law varies from country to country, but the basic principles of law are the same.
“Sociological propaganda does not result in action; however, it can prepare the ground for direct propaganda. From then on, the individual in the clutches of such sociological propaganda believes that those who live this way are on the side of the angels, and those who don’t are bad.”
Jacques Ellul, Propaganda: The Formation of Men’s Attitudes.
There are plenty of examples where the protests have turned violent. If the original plan was to march and shout slogans, these protests always attract criminal activity. When the mob starts breaking the property, throwing rockets, and vandalizing public property, law and enforcement agencies must enforce the law.
Where do we go from here?
There seems to be a worldwide willingness to reduce harmful gas emissions by the year 2030.
- The European Commission’s proposal to cut greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55% by 2030 sets Europe on a responsible path to becoming climate neutral by 2050.
- Global goal of the Paris Agreement is to limit global warming to 1.5 °C, greenhouse gas emissions must peak before 2025 at the latest and decline 43% by 2030.
- Australia’s commitment is to reduce gas emissions by 43% by 2030.
- The US domestic target of reducing emissions by 50%–52% (or 44%–47% excluding emissions from land-use, land-use change, and forestry) below 2005 levels by 2030.
Based on global research conducted by both state and private institutions, it appears that the current measures in place are sufficient. However, it is unlikely that environmental activists will cease their protests. It is also doubtful that there will be any significant changes in the laws governing how these protesters are dealt with.
Unfortunately, it seems that privately and publicly owned corporations and their affiliates may continue to face harassment from these groups.
