UKH

I keep hearing about people gluing themselves to stuff in protest against global warming, have been wondering what glue is it that they use

Boiled horse?

Probably some highly processed petro-chem derived sticky shit.

Must use alot to glue yourself to a road and not be able to be pulled off easily. Superglue is real nasty, wood glue takes to long to set, and your right any glue worth it's salt is probably some horrible combination of pretty nasty stuff

If you really want to create a bad sticky mess, this is what you need!

https://www.toolstation.com/polyurethane-wood-glue-750g/p93568

Yes, I have used it.

I assume it's superglue. It bonds very well to skin and many other materials in a few seconds.

Araldite would be a bit of a faff.

Thanks, this was a genuine conversation at work about what glue to use, the strength, setting time, consequences on the skin etc 

I have loads of respect for people who stand up for what they believe in especially when done in a peaceful non violent manner. This shows a good deal of dedication to their cause as once glued your stuck in whatever situation unfolds

No more nails?

If you see someone waddling round with their arms stuck straight out attached rectangle of red bus lane, give them an ask.

Copydex ? 

Stickmartyr glue is the preferred option.

They tried real nails, but found that they couldn't get the second one in...

I have never met or seen anyone who had glued themselves to something. other than their fingers together when using superglue, so would br fascinated to hear from someone who has done it or knows someone who has done it

It'll be superglue, certainly for skin to skin it bonds solidly and does little harm. it's not so good on non porous stuff but I imagine all they have to do is shout ouch when moved then wait for the solvent and a medic before they can be removed safely.

Jk

Sounds plausible 

I'm sure you do.
Trust me, what I posted will give 'them' a nightmare, it's vile stuff when used 'incorrectly'

Are they actually sticking their skin to things or just their clothes?

When I hear about them it always reminds me of the advert from when I was a child

youtube.com/watch?v=-54iTBqrD58&

I remember that advert, good point is it skin to inanimate object or is there a barrier between them and said object 

Superglue was actually designed for sticking skin - wound healing in the Vietnam war I believe.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/a25067/the-surprising-military-...

On the other hand, Copydex was designed for Blue Peter

I wonder how long it takes after glueing yourself to something that you start to think you need to pee.

Well if its anything like when I go to bed about 30 seconds 

I don't know why they don't just leave them there. Cordon them off etc. It will help potentially extinct species in the long run, I'm sure they'd be in agreement given that over population is the real problem no one cares to speak of publically. 

anyone remember this advert?

youtube.com/watch?v=4h5mErP1E6A&

Writing 'GLUE' on your hand with a sharpie is a good idea.

Horse glue !

:-D

That can be a problem when you're surrounded by uniformed police officers who are trying to pull you off.

Duck responsibility tape

Interesting to see that aside from your OP which is a genuine query about the glue, and just a few other posts, this thread is mostly full of people disapproving of, and/or pouring scorn on, the activists. 

I got chatting to someone at the Leeds protests about this. The message was that as soon as your hand (or other body part) was glued the police were not allowed to pull you off in case of injury. They had to wait for a specialist team to come in with a chemical to remove you safely. 

This was apparently tested by a protestor who pretended to glue their hand to pavement and received the above treatment, much to the annoyance of the team who came to unglue them I suspect...

Hardly surprising ! You'd have to be autistic to Super-glue yourself to any structure

Quite right! We can't allow mass pulling off in the streets!

There'd be a really bad sticky mess left behind.

I'm currently in London documenting the rebellion as a filmmaker.

Protesters use superglue straight to their skin. It bonds quickly and police have to handle them incredibly gently. It is effectively an assualt if they rip their skin of trying to move them.

Many protestors are both glued (to the road by one hand) and locked to another protester (by their hands through a steel tube).

This means they can hold the ground they have taken for a considerable amount of time as the police need a specialist cutting team to get people out of the pipes and dissolve the glue. Believe it or not the superglue is generally dissolved with soapy water as the officers gradually peel the skin from the surface.

Yesterday I sat on one of the lions at Trafalgar sq and watched for three hours as police brought in a cherry picker to remove three protestors who were sitting or standing at different levels on a tower they had constructed from wooden boxes. The guy on top was about 20ft from the ground. All were locked to the tower and each other with d-locks round their necks, and their hands were also locked on through steel tubes. By the time the police had started work with the cherry picker more protesters had locked on behind it making it impossible to reverse it back out when the work was done.

Some of the protesters are locked or glued on for over 24hrs. It takes incredible bravery and commitment to the cause.

Wd40 breaks down many glues too. That and nail varnish remover. 

Bravery?

They are in a civilised first world country with the fluffiest police in Europe and surrounded by people with cameras. Brave is the last word I'd use.

Now if they were carrying out the same action in Red Square or Hong Kong etc.. I might change my opinion. 

HUGTIGHT sticky glue

Stickiest glue in the world.

Cheers

Toby

Yes superglue is great for sticking my fingers to the tube, not great for anything useful, tried it other day. All glues seem pretty much useless.

Cool. I'm sure you wouldn't be scared at all standing on the top of a tower with a d-lock round your neck and 40 police officers coming towards you in a JCB.

I've been in London for a week with a press pass, right on the front line of the arrests. I've seen gentle and compassionate policing from officers who support what these guys are doing, and I've seen people cut and dragged out of tents and battered through crowds head first.

Have you ever been arrested Summo? I have. It's f*cking scary. So yeh, whether you agree with their tactics or not, they are brave, and I believe I'm in a position to verify that.

I’m amused that you’re picking up so many dislikes for this rather obviously accurate statement. Bravery implies taking a personal risk. What risk are these people taking? They know full well the police will look after them before they even start. 

Useless at what? Most glues are excellent at at least one task, the trick is picking the right one.

jk

Brave would be the Kurd trying to get their family to safety before the Turks kill them.

Teasing the police in London between trips to mcDs or pret...isn't brave. 

Edit. There are a few police forces in Europe who would probably water canon them off the pavement leaving their skin behind. They are only carrying out these actions, because they know the police won't seriously hurt them. 

Yep, Kurds, brave for sure.

The comment about Pret and McD shows that you have a surface-level grasp of what’s going on here.

If you are a 65 year old women, who’s never come into contact with the police and lives in a civil society, sitting down in the road for countless hours waiting to be (potentially violently) arrested takes some level of bravery. But that’s relative of course.

You didn’t seem to respond when I asked you if you’d ever been arrested. Have you?

Are you suggesting that they should up their game to a level where the police are required to use significant force, so that they can then call themselves brave as they're dragged off to a cell? No, I guess not. So, what do you think the point of this peaceful but disruptive protest is? I wonder if you entirely miss the point of it.

Contrary to the US narrative, superglue was invented by a British chap working at RAPRA. He was doing tensile testing on rubber and needed a glue to bond samples to metal fixtures and came up with cyanoacrylate adhesive.

Most formulations cure by reacting with water. This water can be in the air or on the surface to be bonded. Your skin has a film of water on it so that's why superglue sticks to it really well. If you have trouble getting superglue to cure you can try breathing on the joint. The water vapour in you breath is often enough to get it going.

If you can't ever get stuff to stick together it may be because the surfaces you're bonding are contaminated with something. It's really, really important to make sure they're clean. Wipe the surfaces with soapy water or Mr Muscle and let them dry before bonding.

Superglue is dissolved by acetone, nail varnish remover, so if you ever find yourself glued to a plane/pavement/toilet seat ask a well groomed passing lady for her nail varnish remover to allow release from said object.

protesters are locked or glued on for over 24hrs. It takes incredible bravery and commitment to the cause.

Well it must take an incredibly strong bladder certainly.

Let's face it, if the polis won't even use acetone to unglue protesters they can be pretty certain they're not going to come to any physical harm at the hands of the authorities. Whether or not you agree with their actions it's going a bit far to lionise them as heroes.

I remember seeing something on a doc about it being a glue that wears off after 24 hours or something, so they basically get sheets hung around them with a police cordon until it wears off and they can be carted off.  

what a brave comment you have made - good show sir

Stop slagging our summo off everyone, the cat's got his fingers on the pulse of the World, sat in his Scandinavian log cabin.

Is that your measure of the validity of their protests, how hurt they could get elsewhere.

You really are a funny bloke.

They're doing more than I am at present to get people to realise what a pit we're digging for ourselves.

Heroes might be stretching it, but it's better than sitting on your arse and moaning about them. That is, if you think climate change is a real thing of course.

Fair enough, if climate sceptics are taking their message on board.

Firstly I think they're attacking the wrong targets in the wrong way. Whatever the UK does will be worth nothing if the rest of the work doesn't follow. I think that's a statement of the obvious. XR should be pressurising the government into taking a more active role on the international stage and organising popular boycotts of goods and services from countries who are paying lip service to or ignoring the Paris climate agreement.

Secondly the stated aims of XR are ridiculous. Going carbon neutral in five years would require the country to more or less shut down. When people realise that I'm afraid many will begin to question the validity of climate change. Further it is becoming increasingly apparent that XR are an anti capitalist movement whose intention is to change our political system. I can think of no better way of alienating large sections of the population to tackling climate change than to politicise it, especially in such a radical manner.

Thirdly the government is taking absolutely no notice whatsoever. I guess that might change but at the moment with all eyes on Brexit, BJ will be taking the view that for the moment at least, the crusties can phuq right off while noting he should put some green stuff in his Queen's speech.

Wouldn't harm to read the previous posts before leaping in.

I was disputing the fact that folk think that sitting on the street in London along with hundreds of other people is some how brave. 

I was disputing the fact that someone called them brave. 

No I haven't.

But then unlike you it seems I'm not wearing breaking the law as some badge of honour.

If you have been arrested it's nothing to be proud of. Many of the young folk in London will no doubt be spurred on by those around them, needlessly get themselves arrested and potentially damage or limit future employment prospect. Extinction rebellion won't be around to employ them when they fail some vetting check in the future. 

The problem as I see it is they are fast  running out of sympathy from the public.

They may want to instigate actions from world leaders and our government, but is making a sodding nuisance of themselves to the public the best way? Disrupting many people's daily lives.

They are approaching it by trying to save us all and stop climate change by influencing governments - so far great -  but do it by seriously inconveniencing the public, public sympathy soon drifts away, it always does. 

So no, many of us don't think of them as heroes or brave, but rather just leave them glued to the pavement for a couple of nights.

That's because they are doing more harm than good. If you want to get the general public to be on your side about really believing in man-made climate change and then helping to stop it, p*ssing them off really isn't the way to do it.

Start by targeted advertising, really flooding social media with facts that are undeniable, get everyone with half a brain understanding that it is real. Then present facts about how each individual can actually make a difference. Then start massive petitions for government to debate about real actions that can be taken.

We could really do with Cummings campaigning for this, he's pretty good at getting people to believe stuff and act on it.

Just for clarity: I fully believe in man-made climate change and believe we should all be doing more. One thing I really don't get is why people still buy water in plastic bottles? It comes out of the tap ffs. I personally have decided to never buy another plastic bottle of drink ever again. Small change admittedly but if everyone did it that would be one big industry not using fossil fuels, not polluting the atmosphere and not creating plastic waste which ends up in our oceans.

being arrested abroad is scary. being arrested in this country is only scary if you know you've done something extremely bad and are facing a stretch inside. 1 night in a cell in a cell in the uk is just like a really shit, but free, hostel where they bring you hot tea and 3 meals per day

1100 arrested... that's a massive police burden. It's not a burden on anyone who can change the law like mps. I'd imagine fire crews and the ambulance service are being stretched too. They won't be enacting any of the protectors demands either. 

And yet they had a spoke person on Question Time, so whatever you seem to think about the futility of the demonstration, there's a bloke on the telly, who probably wouldn't have been if everyone had said, "the government is taking no notice", the present government isn't you're probably right on that, but Labour have already some targets in their manifesto. So saying and doing f*ck all, helps no one.

It's braver than doing f*ck all.

Completely pointless if the Chinese are still going to insist on wearing cotton.

I'm may not have the rhythm to bang a drum, but it doesn't mean I can't and haven't changed my lifestyle. I'm just not sleeping in a tent with lighting powered by a diesel generator; in london, whilst bleating on about it. 

Knitting is not limited to wool you bloody fabricist!

I've cottoned on to what you're doing. You think I fabricated the story and I'm pulling the wool over your eyes? That's bobbins. I have material evidence to prove it. Sew there!

It is arguably brave if one is risking arrest and charges, but when that is mentioned, you talk about how you these young people won't have extinction rebellion there as employers when they go to job interviews with a tarnished record.

''Many of the young folk in London will no doubt be spurred on by those around them, needlessly get themselves arrested and potentially damage or limit future employment prospect. Extinction rebellion won't be around to employ them when they fail some vetting check in the future. ''

So, it's either brave in taking the potential hit on their future prospects through risking arrest, or it isn't, it can't be both?

''I'm may not have the rhythm to bang a drum, but it doesn't mean I can't and haven't changed my lifestyle. I'm just not sleeping in a tent with lighting powered by a diesel generator; in london, whilst bleating on about it.'' 

Do you just want the recognition ER are getting for the steps you've taken yourself? It's not good for you to be 'bah humph' mate. Take a chill pill, or legal equivalent.

This fella?: https://digital.nls.uk/scotlandspages/timeline/1984.html

All the dislikes. Some people just can't take a joke. Lighten up it's not the end of the world

I think most people are at least willing to believe it is real.

The problem is, as you allude to, climate crusaders (be they XR activists or film stars) scream and yell about "not enough being done"...while seeming to do f*ck all themselves other than shouting, switching from plastic straws and eating a little less meat. 

The short of it is, few people are really willing to make the sacrifices that are necessary to meet XR's targets.  While advocating for the environmental footprint of a South Asian villager, no one want to live the life that entails.  You only have to see how people react to non-environmental issues like student fees, austerity, healthcare and benefits cuts to see they have little appetite for even minor inconveniences.  How many people are willing to NEVER buy a car, never own a new phone or computer, be restricted to entirely locally grown food that they have to help produce, package and sell?  

The movement looks to be a fraud and their unrealistic demands may be unecessary if technological advances, which in turn lead to societal change, beat them to a better and more sustainable form of consumption.

Looks like one or two of them could do with a bar of soap glueing to their hands.........

The group who camped out at and saved the 9 ladies historical site in the Peak could probably have done with a good bath occasionally too, but what did that have to do with anything?

There's a middle aged (65 year old) grandmother on the radio currently, talking about taking part in Extinction Rebellion protests and risking being struck off from her profession should she 'get a mark on my record' as she put it.

It's not brave at all to do that....nope...not at all....

Whatever one does, on here a range of cynical and contrarian minds will probably find fault with it, when (and because) the reality is that none of us are perfect or 'without sin' when it comes to environmental footprints.

Looking at the latest news, animal rights are in on the act with xr at Billingsgate  market.

Quote: "Kerri Waters, a spokesperson for Animal Rebellion, said: “To many, eating fish is seen as the healthy choice. But just as land animals suffer, so do fish, who think, make friends and feel pain. But their suffering goes unnoticed".

To my way of thinking, this type of thing does xr no favours at all, others jumping on the bandwagon of their cause. 

...not even the South Asian Villager and therein lies the problem.

I think there has to be agreement at world level as to the trajectories our lifestyles will take. We in the developed world have to help the developing countries reach our standard of living while at the same time making sure the whole world cuts its carbon emissions.

I must have missed the posts on here where people have suggested doing nothing. Perhaps you could point them out to me?

Labour's 2030 target is almost as poorly thought out as XR's. However I'm glad to see Ed Milliband writing a piece in the Guardian about making climate change central to the debate in the next GE. I hope Labour can draw on the knowledge of people like him to come up with a sensible, workable policy that the electorate will buy in to.

I don't quite like being lectured to by my vegan friend when she's drunk, it has to be said, but out of 5 vegans I know she's definitely the only one who does*, and the only one who seems less than full of bounce, the stereotype of 'self righteous and pale' vegans seems to be an unfair one - going on my own experience. The rest are all chilled and full of energy.

I think the angle of it being in our own self interest is possibly the one which most people will absorb most readily. 

Edit: * When her Dad commented on her being a very moral person at her wedding, some of her (drunk) friends cracked up due to knowing what she is like. It's more character related I would say, than viewpoint or lifestyle, where people lecture or harangue others.

I suspect we are working on different definitions of bravery. 

I think one would need to be grudging in the extreme to not acknowledge that risking one's career at whatever age isn't brave, but why does it need to be brave anyway? 

 Who gives a shit how brave it is? So long as they're helpful I couldn't care less, and only time will tell about that. 

I think you’re completely right, the risk is your core message get lost because you get hijacked by other groups that want to push their own agenda. XR is a really decentralised organisation so it’s easy for groups to do things in their name.

That was precisely my point that you've jumped in on. I never said they should or shouldn't be brave. I was just disputing with someone else calling them brave. 

I suspect many of the youngest haven't considered the consequences of a pointless criminal record. 

I think it’s that wallpaper glue that used to be in tha advert with someone glued to a board in an overall whilst being carried by a helicopter.

I guess you are too young to remember the miners strikes. And they were only blocking access to a mine that was closing down anyway.

Good point, because policing hasn't changed at all in 35 years.

It's the constant reports of police brutality at the protest and the endless stream of video that brought it home to me. 

that has touched a nerve I think. sorry. we are all in this crisis together. The protesters who glue themselves onto bridges do so for all of our futures. But 1300 arrests? and who are these territorial squads?

The arrests are inevitable, it's obstruction and it's intended as a core XR tactic to achieve their goal.

And I've never seen a protest where social media, from the protestors, has been more positive about the police. Including thank you letters after being released from custody.

Aye, if you'd know what it feels like from being released from a night in the cells, I'd expect you to feel grateful as well.

Try it sometime pal!

We release lots of people from the cells. It's very rare that they subsequently write to us to thank us for their treatment.  Or post on social media about how well they've been treated in custody.

Maybe the XR arrestees are just a better class of criminal, because custody standards are surprisingly consistent.

How long are these xr people locked up for?  A few hours and let off with a verbal or overnight stay with a Styrofoam cup of tea for breakfast?

However ...

I can well imagine see being nicked as a badge of honour though that they can bore everyone to death at their forthcoming dinner parties.

Well done Sherlock. Now what other negative character traits can you deduce with damning certainty about these people, given that the single piece of evidence you're going on is that they care enough about the future viability of our environment to try drastic measures to get powerful people to make big changes fast?

you no doubt are thinking of Princess Esmerelda ??

https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/extinction-rebellion-london-belgi...

I hadn't realised quite how brave I was being 30 years ago, while getting into various shenanigans at illegal raves. I thought that I was just having a laugh with my mates. Something in common with one young acquaintance of mine down in the capital for the demo. Despite 22 very privileged years on Earth, plenty of exotic summer holidays, an annual weeks skiing in the alps and 9 months long hauling it for a post uni backpacking excursion, she's quite happy exhorting others to save the planet. 

Still, at least she's consistent with the principles of XR's founder.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10123037/extinction-rebellion-founder-hypocri...

 Can't wait for the justification for rank hypocrisy

Hypocrisy ?  Not enlightenment ?

we can hopefully learn from our past, and we are courageous enough to admit 

Someone once said 

Let he without sin cast the first stone 

That's an entirely reasonable thing to say about a member of the public but not for a professional activist and co founder of XR.

This the the sort of stuff that bothers me. That action on climate change will become polarised and politicised. People not wanting to change their lifestyles will read stuff like this and see the perfect excuse for doing nothing, labelling those who do as a bunch of hypocritical hippies and druggies (she's right into her psychedelics) who have never had a proper job in their lives etc, etc, etc..

Why address the message when you can just shoot the messenger eh?

The world is in increasing ecological crisis and you’re focusing on Gail Bradbrooks holiday plans? Really?

It's not just that this level of hypocrisy provides the unengaged with an excuse to remain unengaged, I strongly suspect that many of those currently demonstrating in London are quite happy to inconvenience thousands of commuters, they're perhaps prepared to suffer the personal inconvenience of a night in the cells, but I very much doubt that many of them are prepared to unilaterally impose the sort of draconian lifestyle changes that XR supports. For many going to an XR demo is little more than a fashionable fig leaf to assuage the guilt of living unsupportable lifestyles.

Every time I see a bunch of celebs, posing with 'Earth protector' placards, with fists in the air, while their insta feeds are filled with them posing next to private jets...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7562345/Daisy-Lowe-admits-hypocrit...

Every time someone like Prince Harry takes to the podium telling us we're all killing the planet, when just the private jets he's used for holidays (not including public engagements) over the last 2 years, would require 1,400 to be planted and grown for 10 years to offset the carbon...

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/1-400-trees-to-offset-prince-harry-and-m...

...Well frankly, it makes me want to buy a V12, heavily invest in palm oil plantations and resign myself to the fact that at least the human race will be getting exactly what it deserves.

When the messanger is making decisions in her life that directly go against the very message she is promoting why should I listen to her and not carry on my life as normal? 

If the messenger is telling me to reduce my carbon footprint while sporting a carbon footprint several times my own, then frankly, the messenger can get to f*ck.

For your own self interest? 
Gail Bradbrook is a hypocrite so I don’t give a shit about my impact on the environment seems remarkably short sighted.

Well i could not go on holiday, rarely put the central heating on, ditch the car, buy the bare minimum to live on to reduce my carbon footprint and I'd still have a better life than billions of people on the planet but a far shitter one than I have now...so yes I admit it I won't be doing anything serious... I bet 90%+ of these XR protesters won't either. 

Alternatively,

Gail Bradbrook is so concerned about the environment that she started a whole protest movement 

But she’s unconcerned about her personal impact, so why should I be?

Again, for your own self interest? 
Why do you give a shit about what Gail Bradbrook is or is not doing?

For the reasons I’ve outlined, I and a great many others, don’t give a shit about what Gail Bradbrook and the whole of what XR are doing.

For a movement that wishes to change fundamental aspects of human behaviour, that represents a significant and entirely avoidable, own goal.

edit: on the other hand, if XR’s existence is really just a large exercise in social media based virtue signalling, then well done, mission achieved.

It’s just when you said “But she’s  unconcerned about her personal impact, so why should I be” it made me think you were following her lead.

I can understand people being disgusted with hypocrisy I just don’t see how it helps us with our problems.

It in no way helps with the problem, but if it’s evident that even the most concerned and vocal supposedly combating climate change can’t be arsed changing their behaviour, it sends the message that individual change is pointless and unrealistic, so I can crack on with an annual family holiday in Thailand or Florida and while we’re at it I may as well buy a 3 litre SUV for the two mile school run.

If the Prince Harry and Ms Bradbrooks of the world wish to impact public attitudes, Do As I Say,  Not As I Do, just doesn’t cut it.

Aah, fair enough. My apologies at jumping in with both feet. 

You clearly weren't being brave, which is something you already know, I don't see your point?

I can't speak for your friend, but I take the view that it's the size of one's environmental footprint overall which counts, to do with the founder of ER. While it doesn't at all look good, scientifically speaking it would depend on the rest of her lifestyle, I would suggest. Maybe it was the first time she's flown in ten years? A vegan bicycle riding recycling person, for example, would have more environmental footprint to play with regarding other things. Whether that's a perspective we can afford to have during this pivotal time is something we need to figure out, different people have different perspectives on whether we should each have 'a quota', or be somewhat compelled to be as least damaging as we can possibly be. 

Thinking more about your friend, should somebody's past be held against them indefinitely if they have a change of heart (and plausibly lifestyle too)?

What irritates me most about threads like this is that people seem to be quick to criticise campaigners based on their own personal behaviour, while seemingly ignoring the fact that those campaigners are pretty much the only ones that are really putting themselves out to help achieve what's needed. Yes every little helps and there are many ways that we could all be more environmentally responsible on a personal level, and yes many of those campaigners may not have all the answers. But the important thing for me is that they're actively trying to bring about some major rethink and policy overhaul, without which all the personal sacrifices by concerned individuals in the world won't be enough. That, to me, is far more important than whether or not they go to Starbucks occasionally or eat burgers.

I don’t disagree with you I just get a bit exasperated as the focus (particularly of the media) on one person’s hypocrisy when you’d think the focus should be on doing something about the crisis we’re in.

Also I’m as shit at making significant,  environmentally beneficial life changes as anyone but I feel morally obligated to at least try irrespective of what others are doing.

Then again, why do we need more figureheads?  I don't put someone being shouty in the same league as someone adopting an environmental footprint for us to follow but all I seem to see is people doing the former and very little of the later.  That's before we even getting on to the subject of meaningful solutions.

It smacks of glorious communist regimes, where austerity and sharing is demanded of the masses while the leaders become wealthy and seem to always have justifications for their exercising privilege.  

What exactly are XR or protestors achieving?  I'm probably no different from most people, being well aware of global warming for decades now.  Our willingness to act has waxed and waned more dependent on scientific evidence and feasible activities, than activism. 

Being badgered by others, anything from "how dare you?!" to AOC flying to Copenhagen to cry about her unwillingness to have children due to their environmental impact (no doubt she still will though), does f*ck all to make me think they're actually proponents of anything.  If anything it's making me rethink if the side I always supported has any credibility at all.  Especially when their solutions, which they demand, are so full of holes as to be laughable.

You might know what has affected your willingness to act but  not sure how you know what has affected ‘our’ willingness to act. You can’t just extrapolate from what you think to cover the rest of the population. You don’t represent everyone.

In fact I don’t think there’s good evidence either way of what affects our willingness to act but concern about the the crisis seems particularly high at the moment - https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/climate-change-fe...

Which solutions are you thinking of?

XR aren’t proposing for specific solutions other than a citizen’s assembly which will recommend actions based on the input of a panel of experts. It’s not something we’ve really had in this country but other countries have successfully used this model to resolve  particularly intractable issues.

At the risk of reigniting our previous discussion, XR are proposing a citizens assembly "with the goal of carbon zero by 2025".

Not just a CA to give us a bit of a steer to do things better.

And given their remit of seemingly everything with an impact on that target (a substantially broader problem and a CA with significantly more power than many other CA), what do we expect first - a one baby policy?

Although the recommendations are supposed to be binding it’s not like it actually trumps parliamentary authority. The act setting up the citizens assembly has the same authority as any other act, it can be revoked or modified with further acts as parliament sees fit.

If they propose a one baby policy (By ‘they’ I mean a random selection of your fellow citizens) and parliament doesn’t like it then it won’t happen. In the end parliament has the power to do what it likes. 

The CA act that XR demand would mean that a one baby policy, as it doesn't involve "disbursement of public funds" or "charges on the people", would have to be incorporated by the Secretary of State.

What happens when the terror wears thin, people get sick of worrying, or discover that the predictions they were given (by the likes of XR) were known to be unlikely and outside those of the IPCC?  Don't you think there might be a backlash and the credibility of the environmental movement takes a hit?  People don't like being deceived.

If kids are spending their youth thinking their futures don't exist, if adults decide not to have children because they're told there is no hope, I reckon we'll have a fair number of pissed off people when the exaggerations come home to roost. 

In the space of a couple of decades, we're seeing combustion engines relegated to history.  Solar, fusion, tidal, all becoming viable.  XR think capitalism is the problem.  I see it as the solution.  At the very least, the tax those very rich people pay is what allows us to live the lives we have.

I like the sound of it.  But we couldn't even seem to cope with the concept of proportional voting system and a LibDem-Tory coalition, with people still seemingly keen to keep the LibDems out of power on account of the concessions they made.  I don't hold much hope for citizens assemblies given the partisanship and conservatism of the UK political culture.

Again, I don’t see how that would work. Who cares if it’s incorporated, parliament can simply enact another law that says something else, no laws are above parliament right?

Well this journalist seems not to agree with you:

'If capitalism’s accumulated wealth does not successfully trickle down, its climate miseries certainly do'

https://www.newstatesman.com/world/2019/03/who-gets-survive-climate-change

Our principal enemy is inertia and we should be grateful for folk who put their necks on the line to draw attention to the problems defined by several decades of scientific research. Otherwise we'll find ourselves bickering over 'who goes first' while knocking at the closed doors of The Ark. 

I agree, I'm not sure how it would all work. Nevertheless, that's the demand, and that's how it's spelled out to work.

It just begs the question - what's it all for?

And that is a seriously predictable response. Attack the messenger for not being perfect. Rejecting the message until the messenger eats grass and wears clogs, and then reject the message because the messenger is wierd. 

youtube.com/watch?v=onM8qVZT0bk& 

Isn't that all a bit misanthropic? Bordering on the eco - fascist? Or just plain grumpy and a dislike of communal action when whinging on a forum is easier. 

Get down to the next protest. With your knowledge and environmental interests you would be warmly welcomed. You may find it heart warming and leave you with a sense of optimism observing the daft hope at the heart of this human race.  

I'm not sure the messenger is imperfect, it just appears that she is more faithful to the political element of her rebellion than the ecological.

Which is a criticism of XR - that it is a political movement, looking for a cause as a useful accelerator.

Except hardly anybody is rejecting the message. While Global carbon emissions are increasing, the UKs emissions have been declining for the last 50 years and climate change has been firmly on Westminster's political agenda for at least as long.

What I don't appreciate is being patronised by globetrotting middle class hypocrites attempting to bring London to a stand still to deliver a message we're all well aware of. 

As the three roots of the problem are population, population and population some policy of population reduction will have to happen over time.   How to do this humanely and fairly will be the problem of all problems to solve this century.   

I personally would never enforce childlessness on anyone - perhaps it has to be done by nudging, cash and benefits?

Where population is not growing so fast  then consumption is the greater enemy

Because it's utterly pointless without pressure on the USA and China. Or investment in future tech, because soon India will catch up as well. So even if the UK was carbon neutral tomorrow, what would actually change? The eu won't change its goals, nor the USA... China will just use any opportunity to become the new super power. 

I'll keep doing my bit in how I personally live, my purchasing choices, travel, voting etc... but I won't be wasting anytime protesting..  life's to short. 

The climate has enormous momentum, it's a slow ship to stop and personally I'd rather risk slamming on the brakes too heavily now and then having the space to ease up later than sailing on as we are then realising too late we're going to hit a wall (I apologise for the terrible mixed metaphor).

I'm pretty agnostic as to how we fix this, I'd like a well thought out comprehensive plan made with the help of experts.

Well citizens assemblies are supposed to help with partisan issues and I think people are pretty sick of the politics we have now but yes, change is always difficult.

With all due respect, I think you misunderstand how politics can work and underestimate the power of social action. 

Many people have been 'doing their bit' for the environment for 50 + years whilst pulling their hair out over the pace of government and international action. 

Long in the tooth environmentalists see something different going on with XR. Politicians like to use the word stepchange. 

You underestimate soft power. For example, the powerful influence the UK has, still, with its social attitudes and its exporting of those attitudes. The EU and the UK are still seen as leading the way on many important issues. The XR protests are one important part of changing global attitudes to fossil fuel use and biodiversity loss. 

The XR protesters are not going to save the world, or limit the destructive impact of much human activity on their own, but they are pushing in the right direction, as you are too with your own personal decisions.  

I suppose the key question is, do they need to be getting arrested and disrupting London to have the impact of "pushing in the right direction", or is that push already there?

I appreciate that "long in the tooth environmentalists" may be talking in terms of a step change, but is that driven by what they can do for the climate, or what they can use the climate to do to the political system. 

It'll be interesting to see what impact (other than 1500+ criminal charges) this protest has.

Being a public nuisance and stretching already over stretched poloce forces isn't highlighting or persuading anyone in the uk or globally to reduce their fossil fuel use. 

At present this is not directly an issue in respect of footprint as the top 10-5-1 % have the greatest impact on emissions - they are the biggest consumers, a fact well noted by XR.

We and even the criticised XR leaders are well out of this class of such spenders; they ultimately are the ones behind government who maintain the status quo - the greatest resistance to change (along with the too-comfortable masses !)

The fact an activist can spare a few weeks of their time, travel to London etc.would place them in the top 10% percent, without even looking at their individual lifestyles between various protests. 

It's easy to tell the world they need to do x and y when you aren't hungry, cold, without a roof and not in poverty. 

How can you speak for everyone? That's a nonsense statement. 

I doubt this true

The inverse truth within your statement - is that the hungry-cold-homeless haven't got the time and energy to improve their circumstances - raise these issues with western governments, so again I would argue they too are lucky to have someone protesting for them.

It depends what you mean. Top 10% in the UK? Some are some aren't, it's more of a cross section of society than I think you realise. When I was down I met a homeless guy protesting, also nurses, a tree surgeon, a CEO, a chef, retirees, plenty of students. People take time off their studies, are retired, or take annual leave.

I don't know how many times I can say this but XR advocate no particular solutions, they aren't saying you need to do x and y and they certainly aren't saying that to the poor of the world. 

No the world. Climate change is a global problem. You think the poor in China working long days for little money making plastic crap for UK markets really care about XR. They just want a job that puts food on their table. 

Going carbon neutral by 2025 is easy to say, but requires massive change, even if XR don't want to consider how it might happen, it's impossible to achieve without first targeting solutions.

That's what makes their ranting all the more pointless... anybody can chant for free cake, a trip to the moon for everyone by 2027 or stop using fossil fuels... but it's only viable solutions that will solve these global climate problems. 

The answer is yes, they do need to be getting arrested and disrupting London. It is a deliberate, well thought through political strategy. 

Political decisions are made by people. These often derided leaders have friends, relatives and colleagues. They follow the news. They are not immune to social pressure. That pressure lifts this issue up the news agenda. This news agenda is chosen by people.

Who decides what is important news today? By disruption and social pressure, by using powerful social tools such as shaming, the issue of climate change and biodiversity loss is pushed up the news agenda and it becomes more visible and urgent to the people we have voted in as decision makers.  

I know that one technological breakthrough by a scientist working for BP can be very important to this issue. Equally, millions of people want governments to act more rapidly. The XR protests reflect these people. 

The impact of these protests will be immeasurable. We will never really know what their impact is. But they will be seen in 50 years as totemic. 

Are you telling me that those in London aren't in the top 10% globally.. probably 5. 

A bigger problem is much of the wests needless consumption of cheap crap, which is causing so much of the pollution and resource use, is precisely what is keeping food on the table for a billion plus people. Even worse though is the fact that they'll suffer first and most as the climate changes. 

How does glueing yourself to a pavement actually educate and persuade somebody that climate change is a real 99.9% scientifically proven fact? 

That is simply untrue. On a personal level, many of us are finding ways to reduce fossil fuel use. People make decisions because of other people's actions. Millions of people buy things today because of 'influencers'. Companies are changing tack on fossil fuel use. Many companies are disinvesting in fossil fuels because of this growing sense of enough is enough. 

You underestimate the power of social movements to change society. 

Maybe I am. But because of your support for XR you are also likely over estimating their impact.

A well thought out XR campaign could by now(a week plus of direct action) have brought every UK oil refinery, chemical plant and coal power station to a grinding halt. Instead of central London. 

When they final leave London most people will be glad they've gone, not celebrating their actions. 

You're very certain of yourself for someone who seems to have absolutely no evidence that's the case.

A lot of the people there won't be gone because a lot of the people protesting are in fact Londoners themselves, they are protesting in their city for something they believe in.

XR are advocating for a citizens assembly that will be the body that is informed by experts and will make recommendations on solutions (See https://rebellion.earth/wp/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/The-Extinction-Rebell...). 

They are pushing a political process that will lead to solutions because actually a lot of the solutions are already out there it's the political engagement that's lacking. 

I suppose you can say it as often as you like but XR aren't just advocating solutions, they're making demands, including zero net carbon emissions by 2025. So yes, they are saying that we need to do X and Y, and the fact that this has passed you by underlines how bad XR have been at getting across their message, despite the enormous amount of disruption they've created.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/08/what-are-extinction-reb...

And now I think about it, hang on here, weren't you just moaning that "It's easy to tell the world they need to do x and y when you aren't hungry, cold, without a roof and not in poverty. " and now you are moaning that they are not doing that? Jesus wept...

Oh how lovely a citizens assembly... who gets to represent their local population on said assembly? How do you know their own credentials and influences?

Perhaps folk who wish to be on the citizens assembly should publish some information on themselves and then everyone residing in the area votes who they'd like on the assembly?  

It's not passed me by, in fact I think that's likely to be one of the best known demands and personally I don't think it's particularly realistic, nor do I think it would ever end up enacted. It's more like a negotiating position that puts political pressure on act sooner rather than later.

No i just don't think a bunch of fortunate people in London will have any influence on the Chinese or USA government in the long or short term. The eu aren't interest either. Most countries are on the brink of recession and even modest reductions in production or consumption will have dire consequences, job losses and poverty. 

We are pretty much screwed. All we can do is plan slightly longer term, reduce pollution without completely killing economies and planning in measures for the inevitable climate changes. Science can solve many things, but it won't stop human greed and over population. 

Perhaps read this - https://rebellion.earth/wp/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/The-Extinction-Rebell...

It explains what it is and I'm sure you can work out why it's an important addition to our current political process and why it's got important differences to our current process that helps us make good decisions on divisive issues.

I completely understand that position and have a great deal of sympathy for it. 

Personally I'd like things to change quickly because the slower the change the higher the impact, a 2 degree increase in temperature instead of a 1.5 degree increase has much greater implications and there is also a lot of uncertainty about tipping points which could be catastrophic.

Facilitation team, oversight panel, advisory group and on it goes.... how many layers... could only have been written and designed by a consultant! 

They've got more bees on that document than I have in my hives, so it must be good. There'll be a world shortage of yellow ink if folk start printing out that massive and not especially straightforward or simple document. 

Of course. But with youth unemployment barely recovering, recession never far away... what concerns many people now is not what occurs in 30 years time.

Of course it is possible we can do it All, but it would require a massive change of lifestyle on a scale most supporting XR have no comprehension of. There certainly won't be regular weekend travel to just climb a bit of rock and go home again. Or most other outdoor sports. Sport will be something you do from your doorstep. 

It's certainly detailed. I'm guessing it's based on how other citizens assemblies have worked but I'm not really sure.

It's not straightforward or simple but then that document is the details.

There are a variety of other resources at https://rebellion.earth/act-now/resources/citizens-assembly/ if you want to understand the proposal at a different level or in a different way.

Correct, people aren't rejecting the message, but on the other hand they're not doing anything about it.  without government intervention to force people to change their ways people aren't going to change them because it affects their lifestyle.

The UK was the first country in the world to commit to becoming carbon neutral by 2050 in line with the Paris climate agreement. I'm not sure any other country has made a commitment so far although they are not required to publish their plans until 2020. These plans must be revised and re published every 5 years after that but I guess you know all the Paris agreement and which countries were the most pro active and which were the most reluctant.

It is not commitment to a target that is lacking rather what that target should be. The Lib Dems have committed to 2045. This weekend Labour committed to banning the sale of cars with internal combustion engines by 2030, thus implying an earliest date for carbon neutrality *in the UK* of about 2040.

In my opinion your a serial grumbler. Extinction rebellion man was on Question time last Thursday and again, in my opinion, spoke very well. The first question addressed the actions of ER people. Tonight's Panorama is 'What can we do about climate change'. Just two events that have come from individuals putting themselves out in London, sticking themselves onto roads and different surfaces etc. 

No. voting for action, action in how we shop, action in how we live changes things etc... the professional front in the media is arguably a week late. Yes I know better late than never. 

The serial complainers are the professional activitists just travelling from one protest to another. 

I don’t agree. Recycling is now just part of daily life and for many people (most even?) day to day decisions, from travel to home improvements to how many kids we have,  are all coloured  by environmental concerns.

Intentionally grid locking the capitals roads doesn’t add to our sum of knowledge on climate change, it’ll certainly be adding to the capitals air pollution though.

I'd disagree, folk get excited because plastic cotton buds or straws are banned. These are minuscule proportions compared to our global consumption of resources and the bans are near meaningless. Companies should pay a tax based on the weight ratio of packaging and same for those delivering goods. One ridiculously packaged item is likely the equivalent of hundreds of straws. 

You’re disagreeing with my belief that people are making individual lifestyle changes with assertions about corporate behaviour. Not the same thing.

Our local council declared a climate emergency back in the spring and a few weeks ago we went to a council meeting to ask about what actions or plans for actions or consultations had come since that declaration. The short answer was 'none'. 

The head of the environment subcommittee then went on to explain (apparently with a straight face) he had been refuse collection for 40 years and the recycling rates were now 60% so things seemed to be progressing nicely!

There is a complete lack of action at local authority and governmental level and people are worried because this is an urgent issue, we can't keep pushing things down the road because of the long lead time for actions to translate into meaningful change to the environment.

You've highlighted perfectly how worthless the phrase climate emergency is. Just like the government claiming they have set the most ambitious goals in the world..  All irrelevant, words alone won't change anything, only our own consumption. 

Councils yeah. Many working in them still seem to think it's 1960 and if they put in a 2km cycle path they are deserving of a medal for saving the planet.

.........in your opinion.

Thank you for this reply,  distressing time.

I stood on a drawing pin once and thought that hurt.  Nailing  yourself is a whole bigger thing, and yes I do wonder if today protesters would ever consider such a action. [I sincerely hope not]   but then  people have set themselves on fire for there course. funny old world

How do you nail your own hand to the floor?

Do you knock the nail in with your forehead?

That would make it twice as painful.

Sounds like a sketch from the young ones. 

Looks like it's just got serious.

http://news.met.police.uk/news/arrests-in-connection-with-extinction-rebell...

ETA : Trafalgar Square is now being cleared.

Trafalgar Square is getting cleared now - https://www.facebook.com/watchparty/395859191342911/?entry_source=NOTIFICAT...

Yeah, watching that stream.

Not particularly convinced by the MEP's interpretation of the law though.

The cameraman is very good though. Calm, clear, fairly objective about it all.

The rationale for the change of condition of the Section 14 would appear to be that the protestors have ignored the previous restriction on protest under section 14 and carried out further protests and disruption in the city and elsewhere today. (At a guess)

No idea about the law, it'll be interesting to see how that plays out.

It does seem to disallow people's right to peaceful protest (as well as stopping the illegal disruption), which seems like it might be a bold move legally speaking.

Oh, and I had a question I thought you might know the answer to - What's the definition of an assembly? I mean more than one individual but then what? How closely assembled do you have to be for it to constitute an assembly? Right beside each other? A few meters? Do two people 10m apart constitute an assembly? 100m? 500m?

Assembly of 2 or more people. I don't think there is an area specified just "public place".

I know much is being said about "peaceful" protest, but "peaceful" does not mean "lawful" - eg lock-ons, road blocks etc. There isn't a right to peaceful direct action, hence why people eventually get locked up.

True but the majority of the people actually are lawfully protesting the arrestables are a minority, mostly people move if asked to.

Blocking the road isn't actually lawful. It's just that, generally speaking, you will be offered the chance to move prior to arrest.

Unfortunately the camp was clearly  being used as the base, as the New Zealand lad indicated when he was interviewed, hence presumably why the s14 got altered.

There were a bunch of people in Trafalgar Square not blocking the road though. Actually it was a bit hard to keep up with what was happening, the roads were blocked at various times but not everyone was involved in that, I imagine there were lots of people keeping on the pedestrian area as per the original S14 notice.

Yup. As I say I'll be interested to see if something happens legally over it.

I just heard a green MEP's just been arrested. There were a bunch of MEPs in Trafalgar Square tonight giving support.

Ellie Chown MEP got arrested. Sounded like she refused to move and demanded to speak to the person in charge.

Edit to add. The original s14 restricted the Extinction Rebellion to Trafalgar Square. Obviously that didn't happen.

"On Tuesday, 8 October 2019, the Metropolitan Police Service imposed a condition upon the ongoing Extinction Rebellion demonstrations in central London.

The following condition was imposed under Section 14 of the Public Order Act 1986:

"Any assembly linked to the Extinction Rebellion 'Autumn Uprising'…who wish to continue with their assembly MUST go to Trafalgar Square and only assemble in the pedestrianised area around Trafalgar Column.”"

How do you go about proving beyond reasonable doubt that they are linked with Extinction Rebellion 'Autumn Uprising'? If they don't have any banners etc and are just a mass of people.

You could ask them?

So if the protests started saying "No gov, we are just chilling out here" then that would be that? Interesting how the tactics are changing to a more spread out approach. I wonder if the police have shot themselves on the foot. 

If the protestors denied that they were protesting about climate change might that not kind of defeat the object of the protest?

I'm not sure that the tactics are changing significantly, I've seen the hashtag "water" being used through the week. Perhaps what makes them seem more spread out is that there are now many fewer protestors?

I just saw a YouGov poll on whether people supported or opposed XR's attempts to shut down London.

54% oppose

36% support

Don't know how representative it is but I think it illustrates that support from them is by no means universal.

Though to be fair, the police action should be taken on an impartial basis.

Quite a good video explainer on action taken - https://twitter.com/MetPoliceEvents/status/1184160814296641537?s=19

He's a big unit, and I'd move along swiftly if requested to do so!

It’s clearly going to go to court, will be interesting to see what happens, I wouldn’t be surprised if such a blanket ban turns out to be a mistake (from the police’s perspective).

Be interesting to see what happens.

Grounds would appear to include, insufficient notice of s14 change, and then arguments about whether there is a power to effectively ban under s14 - the conditions may be considered too draconian. Having said that, the fact that XR totally and repeatedly disregarded the first s14 notice, might not go in XR favour.

The rationale is covered fairly well in that video, and the fact they indicate they would continue to work with and facilitate legal protest might work in police favour. I would imagine that the thought processes and escalation of enforcement will be clearly documented in the log of the protest.

Not sure if anyone has volunteered to take the case yet.

And there we are... https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/16/extinction-rebellion-ju...

To be expected really. The police rationale will be documented, and a lot of it appears to have been explicitly provided in video format.

Hopefully some of this nonsense spouted about banning protest will be knocked on the head. Apart from anything else there is a pretty large march planned for Saturday regarding Brexit.

Incidentally I hope anyone who intends to carry out unlawful protest on the underground tomorrow has a decent understanding of the additional police powers available under railway byelaws and the potentially more serious legal consequences to their intended actions.

Banned but doesn't seem have made much difference. Trafalgar Square now - <link deleted>

Well, that didn't seem to work. Trafalgar Square seems to be full of protestors however...

Looks like George Monbiot is getting arrested - https://www.facebook.com/ExtinctionRebellion/videos/531156137645873/

I mean he can be a bit annoying but...

Not to worry.  Lewis Hamilton is now ready to take over as a figurehead

https://www.countypress.co.uk/sport/national/17970261.lewis-hamilton-feels-...

Yep. Not being arrested either. Wonder how long they'll stay there. 

As you say - a few others across the capital disrupting traffic, obstructing roads and getting arrested. 

Saw the Monbiot arrest, should have arrested him for obstruction, rather than breach of s14.

It doesn't get any more moronic than this:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-50079716

Why would you target the, arguably, most environmentally friendly way of getting around London (no, with the size of London you can't just walk or cycle everywhere!)? People need to get to work - would XR prefer if everyone on the Tube drove instead?

All stunts like this do is alienate even more people against the cause. What are these idiots thinking???

There was huge opposition to this action from members of XR but unfortunately it only takes a few people to do it anyway and it looks like XR as a whole is doing it.

I think this is when the reality of aligning with pretty hardcore eco-activists starts to bite.

The question for protestors now is "Are you part of XR, or aren't you?".

It's getting ridiculous if everyone involved keeps going "Well, I'm with XR, but not for that goal, or not for that activity".

How do you know there was huge opposition to this within XR? They've posted in support of this action on their Facebook site.

Instead of stopping normal working people from getting to work on environmentally friendly electric mass transport, how about picketing the first class check in at BA or glueing themselves to a few private jets? Oh, wait...that'd piss off all their hypocritical celebrity supporters wouldn't it. 

From the ratio of comments opposing/supporting this action on the post giving info about it, it was notably different to any of the other actions (although personally I wasn't too thrilled about the Billingsgate thing).

I think that's a great idea. The actions at the start of this were targeted at parliament and government departments, I think actions targeted at the people who can affect change are the thing to do. People getting on the tube to get to work generally aren't those people.

It's certainly an issue. I think this "you're either with XR or not with XR" is nonsense though. It's a failure of organisations when they close ranks and refuse to acknowledge the many differing opinions within them, what's wrong with being critical of the strategy of some of your own organisation?

From the linked article:
Extinction Rebellion said the disruption was "necessary to highlight the emergency".
Extinction Rebellion co-founder Clare Farrell defended the Tube action, saying "the public, I don't think, realise quite how serious this situation is".
Speaking to BBC Radio 4's Today programme, she added: "It is still peaceful, and it is still non-violent.​​​​​​​
"It makes them vulnerable, and that's what people are there to do when they put their body on the line."​​​​​​​
 

It's extremely hard to disown your own people when they are being attacked but you can judge the support from within the organisation by the size of the group doing this, 4 people have been arrested over this, 1500 people have been arrested over other actions.

1500 members of XR are willing to block roads around parliament but only 4 are willing to stop people getting to work on the tube.

Why don't XR just ask people not to disrupt Public Transport?

This is where the rubber meets the road in idealism. 

These movements seem to think the status quo is all some dastardly creation invented to cement hierarchies and privilege.  Yet their own alternative fall at the first hurdle, when they prove unable to demand some basic standards of behaviour.  It's like the hippie communes that fall apart into mayhem and anarchy.