Just Stop Oil
Crude oil and other fossil fuels such as coal and oil are bad, plain and simple. They had their use at the beginning of the industrial revolution, and helped spur technological development and massively increased human living standards (though depending on who you are, you may view this as a bad thing, but we're going to assume you're sane), however in the modern age, given the development of cleaner and more effective power sources they have become not only obsolete energy sources, but dangerous ones as well.
It's beyond any reasonable doubt that climate change will be a serious problem in the coming years for humanity (especially those living in developing countries), and usage of oil, coal, and gas is one the the main contributers, so yes, it's a good idea to get off of them as soon as possible, lest we suffer the consequences. This is largely a political issue however, and given the partisan divide on environmental matters, progress on this issue tends to be slow, so slow in fact that people get frustrated by all the bureaucracy, and will take to the streets to protest, often in the form of civil disobedience, such as vandalism and mass demonstrations.
If you're involved with Vegan Activism, this may ring familiar. Animal Rights Activists protesting certain events or causing some other form of dispruption tends to be mostly ineffective, and possibly counterproductive, because of how it negatively affects how people at large view the movement. If we really care about accomplishing what we want as a movement, we should take care to ensure that what we're doing is actually getting results; This tends to involve educational outreach, donating to the right charities and knowing where to spend our money, or simply having productive conversations with friends and family. If we aren't concerning ourselves with what's actually effective and insist on a certain method even though it's clearly a lost cause, that might raise questions as to whether our hearts truly are in the right place.
The same standards apply to the British Environmentalist Group known as Just Stop Oil (JSO). Similar to the animal rights movement's Animal Liberation Front (ALF), it is a leaderless and largely decentralized group that has the goal of "ending all new licenses and consents for the exploration, development and production of fossil fuels in the UK." While there does not seem to be anything egregious about their organization as far as positions are concerned (such as taking anti-nuclear and anti-capitalist stances), the effectiveness of their movement is questiontionable.
Positions of the Movement
Before we get into criticisms of the organization itself, it's important to note that currently, there appears to be a large anti-capitalist wave of environmentalists that are involved in the movement.
Making climate change a partisan political issue is the worst thing you can do if you want to do anything about it (moreso if you think the best way to solve it is political outreach), though at this point it's too far gone to undo. That doesn't mean we shouldn't attempt to slow down the polarization however, but it's becoming even more excacerbated when people outside of the overton window attempt to coopt the movement for their own agendas.
As mentioned earlier, JSO does not appear to hold these extremist views (though it is possible a large number of their members do) which is something that should be condoned. Something we're concerned with in the animal rights movement is left-wing political extremists attempting to turn veganism into a communist ideology, which wouldn't be very good for converting people across the political spectrum. We'll also give them credit for not opposing nuclear energy, which would be counterprodutive to their overall goals.
However that's pretty much all the credit we're gonna give them as far as their positions are concerned.
Despite what was just said, JSO is still making climate change a hardcore political topic with their actions (primiarly with their methods of actions, as discussed in the next section), just within/around the Overton Window.
Their website claims
"OIL IS CAUSING THE CLIMATEAND COST OF LIVING CRISIS,
MAKING US POORER AND DESTROYING EVERYTHING WE LOVE.
BUT TOGETHER WE WILL WIN!"
This isn't an entirely accurate claim. Actually it's barely accurate at all, and almost sounds like something you'd read off of a conspiracy theory site (Just replace "Oil" with anything else (Vaccines, government, globalists, the Jews) and you'll get typical talking points from those type of folk).
Is oil a cause of the climate crises? Absolutely yes, but this statement is implying it's the one and only cause. If you want to argue that they're being broad and are including all fossil fuels in that (which is likely), fair enough, but even granting that is also ignoring other causes of climate change, namely animal agriculture, deforestation, unproductive crops (such as rice and palm oil), and gluttonous lifestyle choices by society at large.
And claiming that it's causing the cost of living crises is pretty absurd. There does not seem to be anything on their website about HOW oil is causing the cost of living crises, just that it is. The cost of living crises is being caused primarily by the unprecedented inflation (mainly as a result of the COVID-19 recession) and the increase in gas prices due to the sanctions placed on Russia, which was a major provider of oil to the west. There's actually a chance of Europe getting off oil soon because of this, but that's besides the point.
The claim that oil is making everyone poorer is a typical left-wing talking point that doesn't have any evidence to back it up, and again it doesn't seem as though anything on the website elaborates on that claim either, it more seems just focused on what the movement is doing and stands for it seems.
Now of course, fossil fuels WILL make citizens of the third-world poorer since a lot of them are gonna, y'know, DIE, but this claim seems to be entirely first-world centric. There will be negative effects from climate change on first-worlders certainly, however they are unlikely to be anywhere near as dire as the reprecussions that will be faced by those in the third-world. Things may get a bit more expensive and housing will be affected, but this won't happen to the state of completely reverting our quality of life.
Fossil fuels are sort of the reason why we're able to enjoy the high quality of life that many of us take for granted. If it weren't for climate change and a bunch of geopolitical issues, fossil fuels would be nothing but a massive net positive for everyone. We aren't using that as an argument in favor of keeping fossil fuels around, we're saying that if you were to stop all fossil fuel plants tomorrow, millions would die, and send the survivors back to the fuckin' stone age.
You wanna get off fossil fuels, great, awesome. What the hell are you going to replace it with though? While there isn't anything AGAINST nuclear power on their site, there isn't anything endorsing it either (in fact, there is not a single mention of it at the time of this writing). That would imply that even if they DID support Nuclear Power but aren't actively endorsing it, that means they view it as a mere side issue and are uneager to alienate possible environmental acitivists, which is nothing but counterproductive considering how essential it is to providing clean energy to civilization.
And "Destroying everything we love?" What kind of insane rhetoric is this?
Methods of Activism
In just about every movement, there will always be those who are really passionate about their cause, which is respectable, but often this is done through rather extreme means, which tend to be less than optimal, and often, counterproductive.
The animal rights movement especially is plagued by this, with demonstrations and other public dispruptions being done by a very visible minority of activists. The biggest offender of this would be the aforementioned Animal Libertation Front, which also has questionable effectiveness.
While it's great to care about your cause, you ideally should go about contributing to it in the right way, and this is something the Animal Rights Movement and JSO need to understand; If you aren't going about it in the most effective way possible, do you really care about the issue, or is it more just performative?
JSO has been known to do things such as slow down traffic, disrupt ceremonies and sporting events, and vandalize public spaces. We hate to be buzzkills, but if you want to rally the general public behind your movement, don't do crap like this. When people are having their daily lives made more difficult by a group of activists, 9 times out of 10 that's going to brew resentment amongst the common folk, who will not only be less likely to support your movement, but more likely to oppose it. You can't be surprised when people start hating your movement when you are the ones who are actively impeding them just going about their lives.
And people aren't just going to hate the organization (JSO); since it's associated with the enviornmentalist movement, they're going to be against that too. There's also a chance that they'll have no idea that it was Just Stop Oil in particular, and it's just a bunch of deliquent hippies gone mad (why would anyone want to support those environmentalists, they won't even let me get to work!).
Some of the members of JSO have been arrested for their protests, and as badass as that may be, can anyone honestly say that sort of thing is a good look?
Helping stop climate change via political activism has questionable effectiveness anyway, even putting aside all the provocative methods. Aside from the political opposition which is an obstacle, viewing political engagement as the meta implies that government intervention is more or less the only way to stop climate change.
As important as getting the government to step in is, and I know I've said this like ten centillion times, but for fucks sake dude, let's not forget that we share a lot of this responsiblity too. We can't sit around blaming corporations for all the problems in the world, as enticing as that is. The politics on the issue is a crapshoot, but getting people to go VEGAN would be a much better use of your time. Give or take 20% some odd emissions are due to animal agriculture globally, you'll help do far more good for the environment just by convincing a dozen or so people to go vegan than if you were to spend time dicking around in whatever the hell JSO is up to today.
