-
It's still pretty vague with regards to how exactly this is going to work. They already have the support of a certain minority, so I assume they do still want to get more support. And then what? What does that 'large enough' minority do? They're all about being peaceful, so I'm supposing they're not talking about a revolt here, which basically leaves voting 'the right people' into power, right? Is that the avenue through which they want this to happen? I genuinely don't know.
This is completely disregarding a much more fundamental issue with their argument, which is basically repeating the 'homo oeconomicus' mistake, but on a much bigger level as they are applying it to the entire government: governments don't always make 'rational decisions', purely weighing up the costs. Actually, they rarely do. If they did, Cannabis would have been legalised a long time ago, and cycling would be the main way people get around. There's so many different factors influencing decisions, and that's before taking into account that there are plenty of people in government who are working to benefit themselves and their mates, and really don't care about how much it costs the country as a whole at all.
SwissChap-
-
I agree with your critique - I think a lot of this is perfomative and that their theory of ‘praxis’ is largely self-serving guff to justify making the scenes they want to make.
There’s a place for protest and I think that there’s space for some of their tactics - for example, when they shut down Oxford Street it was an amazing illustration of how we don’t actually need cars going up and down that road, and showed people that it could be a more pleasant environment than it normally is because of a big change. Sure, some people may have been pissed off by it, but I think most pedestrians on the street would have liked the change in the street dynamics - which is a great way to build consensus.
But identifying targets like that, where there’s scope to change minds through praxis, seems to be largely anathema to those involved in the latest round of actions - instead of trying to build consensus, they want to be so big a nuisance that it’s easier to pay to make them go away.
I think they’re vastly underestimating the costs the public will incur if the mood is against the movement, though. As you said, rationality can go out the window when it’s a point of principle. Just look at Brexit!
-
If they did, Cannabis would have been legalised a long time ago, and cycling would be the main way people get around.
Yeah, but there'd be so many people riding around stoned.
sohi
h2o
Oliver Schick
This piece from the NS is interesting re XR strategy.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/environment/2019/10/extinction-rebellion-may-enrage-commuters-it-doesnt-rely-majority
I personally disagree with the premise that nobody has been doing anything - quite a lot has been done, although much more is clearly needed. Obviously everyone has their own view on whether this is the best way to go about it.