A common refrain from those opposing these protests was to protest at the oil companies instead of on the highway. But they did that already, blocked office entrances and even coal transports. But they were ignored by the media and politics. The companies in question were hardly inconvenienced. The new strategy of public disruptive campaigns was a result of this. Highly effective in gathering the attention of media and politics. But the push back as the article states is driving certain protestors into the next phase;

“He said new laws further criminalising disruptive protests had made traditional, accountable methods of activism increasingly unsustainable, and a clandestine approach increasingly attractive.”

If you get 5 years for cutting data cables or sitting on the street, might as well do the thing that seems more effective.

2 years ago I was at a “Just Stop Oil” gathering nearby, mostly out of curiosity. The room was packed and outside a small group was discussing more escalating measures, which I won’t repeat here. The reasoning was that disruptive tactics had been losing effectiveness and governments were still lagging behind their own unambitious goals. That more violent action could be justified because of self-defence. If companies are deploying violence towards our environment, why should they not defend it in the same manner.

From that moment it became clear, to me at least, that for some violence is not off the table. And that this kind of vandalism would just be a first step to more extreme action.

Yet no one even dares to hold china or russia accountable for what they‘ve been doing the last 10 years.