http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/aug/24/twitter-backfires-climate-camp

These people really need an image makeover if they don’t want to come across as a bunch of middle class do-gooders.

Is it a news story that Old Holborn spends his entire day on Twitter trying to lampoon people. Not really…

Fair point.

I was rather thinking of the fact that climate change protesters can easily be accused of hypocrisy given that many of them do very well out of the system of consumer capitalism that they appear to oppose.

Also Richard, we already knew about problems with unfiltered hashtags with the tories and the whole #cashgordon stuff.

given that many of them do very well out of the system of consumer capitalism that they appear to oppose

They’re opposing the destruction of the environment and publicly owned banks funding this destruction.

If they carried around banners saying ‘let’s ban iPods’ you may have a point. And lastly – most people I’ve met at climate camp are quite poor.

Lastly – I’m shocked that right-wing libertarian nuts oppose direct action on climate change.

Well there’s direct action and direction action.

Greenpeace activists attempting to face down larger boats on the high seas is possibly admirable, whether or not I agree with whatever the cause might be.

Camping (with the agreement of RBS as I understand?) and deploying a treacly pig, somewhat less admirable.

I was rather thinking of the fact that climate change protesters can easily be accused of hypocrisy given that many of them do very well out of the system of consumer capitalism that they appear to oppose.

But in any unjust system (and let’s say purely for argument’s sake that consumer capitalism is such) there will be people who benefit from it, so what is more laudable – recognising that it is unjust and trying to do something about it, or just enjoying the benefits without worrying about the consequences for others? And what is likely to be more effective, people trying to change the system from within or from outside? If someone is consciously exploiting the injustices in the system for their personal benefit while campaigning against them then yes, it can be viewed as hypocritical, but otherwise it is not neccessarily so.

excellent, all those climate terrorists can be clearly identified, 42 days detention without charge and equipment confiscated soon to follow then. Hey you introduced the legislation.

It is a real puzzle why a bank headquartered just off the North Sea in Edinburgh would be financing oil companies. Seriously as long as there is demand for oil by consumers producers will supply it and banks will finance the supply. No amount of protests will change that dynamic because the protesters are aiming for the wrong target. Instead of futile protests against supply their efforts would achieve more if they targeted demand. Campaigns to support and promote alternatives and measures to force oil users to meet the full cost of their oil use are much better. Oil demand falls and oil supply will follow.

One minute and ten seconds sufficed.

A bunch of hippies discarded their traditional multi-hued garb and borrowed the black outfits associated with anarchists. They then pranced around with a fake pig on a sedan chair. In the background, we listened to music that normally accompanies a Guy Ritchie gangster romp.

This is supposed to be “new politics”?

I reckon that politics is as much about art as substance (ie irrational and rational values determine events). My expectations about art are high; that video scored zero out of ten for art.

A bunch of hippies discarded their traditional multi-hued garb and borrowed the black outfits associated with anarchists.

Way to go with making assumptions about people you know nothing about. I thought only middle-class people did that about chavs. Or perhaps it’s ok to sneer at anyone if they look vaguely middle-class…

@11 Sunny: “Way to go with making assumptions about people you know nothing about.”

I have survived a couple of relationships with hippy girlfriends. Last week I dragged out a shirt from the back of the wardrobe; it is a mega splash acid event; I do not need to worry about dribbling sauce on my shirt because the outcome becomes invisible. It is a great hippy shirt which brings back great memories.

But my polemic against climate camp hippies was not intended to be about dress sense. Or class. It was about a silly video.

But my polemic against climate camp hippies was not intended to be about dress sense. Or class. It was about a silly video.

Really? “traditional multi-hued garb” and “black outfits associated with anarchists” – isn’t about outfits?

” In the background, we listened to music that normally accompanies a Guy Ritchie gangster romp.” – hmmm.. whatever could you be referring to?

If you want to make a comment about the artistic quality of the production – fine – but it doesn’t look like you were

Does Climate Camp have any impact on its targets, eg RBS? No.

Does it help or hinder its cause in the eyes of the public? Doesn’t help.

Does it make the participants feel good about themselves? Yes.

Does it make the participants feel good about themselves? Yes.

So do you feel good about yourself when you do something you consider to be worthwhile?

But it isn’t worthwhile since it makes no difference to the “villains” and alienates the don’t knows.

Did they not clean that crap up after themselves?

”The oil industry is in our sights and things could get messy
Join us in October for a mass action to switch off oil”

Why is this nonsense on a supposedly serious bolg?

cjcjc,

Well I guess we will see if you’re right. The example of Kingsnorth springs to mind – I don’t know how much of a difference the protests there made but they certainly didn’t do any harm.
But of course many protests on a variety of issues come to nothing regardless of how worthy they are, that doesn’t mean that those involved were wrong to try or that we should suspect their motives.