Prof. Aseem Prakash and colleague Prof. Nives Dolšak in a Forbes article argue that climate protests disrupting the public right-of-way or damaging works of art do a disservice to the climate movement, and do the opposite of gaining supporters with the general public.
...blocking highways and trains, disrupting cultural and sporting events, and vandalizing museums? While such actions—often undertaken by a small number of activists and carefully choreographed over social media—attract media attention, they have two downsides.
First, they lack public support – and may even invite public scorn. In a recent paper coauthored with Jana Foxe, we asked British respondents to choose between hypothetical environmental organizations that adopt disruptive tactics (specifically museum and art gallery protests, sport event disruptions, and traffic stoppages), as opposed to mainstream tactics (such as litigation, lobbying, research, and education). We found respondents are less willing to support groups adopting disruptive tactics. Much to our surprise, this negative reaction was widespread, irrespective of whether respondents voted for...
Second, these disruptive actions allow governments to crack down on climate advocates. In the UK, courts have awarded harsh sentences to protesters who disrupted traffic. In Germany, members of Letzte Generation group have been charged with “forming a criminal organization.” About 35 U.S. states have passed laws (or are considering passing them) to criminalize such behavior.
Please link here for the full article.