麻豆约拍

Wimbledon, the Ashes, the Proms and George Osborne鈥檚 wedding have all been interrupted by 鈥楯ust Stop Oil鈥� protesters in recent days. Several areas of London have been brought to a standstill, provoking the ire of motorists and leading to multiple arrests. 鈥楯ust Stop Oil鈥� describes itself as a 鈥渘onviolent civil resistance group demanding the UK Government stop licensing all new oil, gas and coal projects鈥�. The Prime Minister Rishi Sunak said he wouldn't be 鈥済iving in to eco-zealots鈥� disrupting the British summer.

The group鈥檚 supporters believe that blocking traffic, interrupting sporting events and vandalising artwork, are entirely proportionate in the face of an existential crisis bequeathed to our children and grandchildren. Right now, they argue, parts of Europe are literally on fire, and there is no more time left to wait for those in power to do the right thing. Their critics object to the fact that the targets of the protests are often ordinary people, who have more immediate concerns like the rising cost of living. Moreover, some believe the use of apocalyptic language is less likely to elicit a change in behaviour, since despair, like indifference, is not a good motivator.

How might our descendants judge today鈥檚 climate activists? Successful movements for social change, like the Suffragettes, have historically been disrupters who, in the face of inaction, adopt increasingly radical tactics. For some, the spirit they embody is irrepressible and necessary, which means that their methods cannot always be peaceful. For others, social progress can only be fully achieved through conventional democratic means.

Are acts of civil disobedience and sabotage by climate activists morally justifiable?

Producer: Dan Tierney.