The environmental activist group Just Stop Oil has been in the news again over the last week due to their latest protest – in this case, spray-painting the US embassy orange in response to the election result that has named Donald Trump as President. This is just the latest example of a high-profile protest act carried out by the group, of which they are known for. Particular media attention was given to the group over the summer months of this year, with actions such as the spray-painting of Stonehenge and their blocking of departure gates at Heathrow airport. Since the group was established in 2022, Just Stop Oil has caused high levels of controversy – as well as receiving significant ridicule amongst news outlets and on social media. It is this derisive response to the group, however, which misses the point of their protests and dangerously undermines the urgency of the climate situation we are in.

The group’s demand is for the UK government to sign a treaty to halt fossil fuel usage by 2030. Their website is very clear: “Our governments must work together to establish a legally binding treaty to stop extracting and burning oil, gas and coal by 2030 as well as supporting and financing other countries to make fast, fair and just transition” (Just Stop Oil). Their motivation for this is also very clear: “Without an emergency plan to cut fossil fuel use, we face:  floods, droughts, and wildfires like we have never seen before, crops will fail, billions of people will be exposed to unliveable conditions, hundreds of millions will face starvation and ultimately death” (Just Stop Oil). The immense flooding in Spain in the last week is only too indicative of this, with more than 200 people killed. This, of course, is not new knowledge, the increasing occurrence and severity of these events and their link to climate change is well established in public discourse. So why are the groups that are trying to challenge this, like Just Stop Oil, facing such backlash?

One of the biggest complaints that seems to be levelled at the group’s tactics is the sentiment that their protests are unrelated to the cause of climate action, or simply examples of mindless disruption. Looking at the example of their spray-painting of Stonehenge, or even at one of their most notorious acts when soup was thrown at Van Gogh’s ‘Sunflowers’ in London’s National Gallery in 2022, these acts gained a great deal of media attention.  Van Gogh’s painting, one of the most famous examples of a depiction of the natural world in existence, as a target for this protest gave people the visceral reaction to nature being destroyed that we have otherwise become detached from. Similarly, by having to reckon with such a culturally and historically iconic monument, as Stonehenge is, being under threat, people were asked to reflect on what climate breakdown will truly mean and result in. Aside from the fact that neither the painting or monument were actually damaged, what precisely underpins these actions is the question posed by one of the Just Stop Oil activists after throwing the soup: “what is more important: art or life?”. In this sense, these protests by Just Stop Oil activists get to the heart of the real-world impacts that we will be subjected to if not intervened by the action they are demanding.

Another critique directed at the methods of Just Stop Oil is that their protests are not targeting the real culprits of the fossil fuel industry. This is an understandable concern but also one which is easy to explain. This is because the ‘real culprits’ are, in fact, being targeted by environmental activists, but these are rarely shown by mainstream media. Only 4 days prior to the Just Stop Oil ‘Sunflowers’ protest, the windows of Schlumberger’s fossil fuel research centre in Cambridge were smashed by a different protest group, This is Not a Drill. Schlumberger is one of the world’s largest fossil fuel services companies. Yet, the news story did not go wider than a handful of articles in local news providers. In comparison, the BBC news report on the Just Stop Oil ‘attack’ on Van Gogh’s ‘Sunflowers’ was the second most read news story on their website after its release. This is the problem. Climate activists have to play to what will be picked up by news outlets.

The last major point of contention that people appear to have with Just Stop Oil, especially on social media, is the belief that what they are doing is ‘performative’ and simply raising awareness, when what we actually need is action. What this fails to take into consideration, though, is that the act of protesting is inherently performative but that does not negate its effectiveness in encouraging progress. By performing these protests, activists are trying to persuade the people who hold the power to take action, as previous attempts to signal change through normal political channels have proved unsuccessful. The continual failings of the UK government, as well as other international governments, in regard to their climate response has meant that the responsibility has fallen to these groups. It is only through more radical methods that they are being noticed.

It is nonsensical that these groups are being labelled as extremely radical and dealing with as much ridicule as they are, when they are the party acting most logically in the face of the current global situation. Surely we must ask how it has come about that the group simply attempting to combat the absolute destruction of the planet are the ones who are being deemed militant and fanatical? Why is the inaction of our governments not seen as the objectively absurd stance to be taking?

Ultimately, you do not have to agree with the methods of Just Stop Oil and if you feel as though there are better ways of counteracting the dire climate circumstances we are in then, of course, continue with those. The more noise being made the better! However, if you are doing nothing except criticising those trying to make a difference, maybe reflect upon that.

Image: Markus Spiske on Pexels