On October 7, environmental activists Extinction Rebellion ("Rebellion against Extinction"), in order not to die out, blocked the streets and bridges in the center of Berlin, Madrid, Amsterdam, London and Paris.
In itself, a violation of the usual measured life is a well-known way of social struggle. The same Paris is regularly put on the ears by transport strikes, and in the 1950s it happened even cooler: electricians regularly went on strike and the Council of Ministers met at the Matignon hotel by candlelight. There are pogroms for the purpose of social struggle: see at least a list of catering and trade enterprises that were destroyed during the “yellow vests” protests.
But these measures were previously accompanied by requirements for power, which the government was at least theoretically able to fulfill. To abolish the annoying tax or law, to raise salaries and allowances, to allow bulk in the elections, to expel the hated ministers, etc. Even the demand “Get the Gang!” Is in principle feasible: the current gang, in accordance with it, self-abolishes and flees to Rostov-on-Don, giving way to a new gang.
As a result of the fulfillment of these requirements, a loaf seldom sets in, eating is more likely to take place on the principle of “from the fire, but into the fire”, but we are not talking about utility, but only about feasibility.
Whereas the current blockade of urban centers is accompanied by such requirements that it is impossible to satisfy with all desire. First of all, because the climate is not in the hands of governments, no matter what the girl Greta and grandfather Soros speak against. "Kings cannot control the element of God."
That is, you can, of course, take palliative measures (governments, by the way, do this - it’s not necessary to block traffic on the Paris Bridge), but the green-faced ones require something else. So that immediately and immediately there comes the air of peace, but here the authorities are powerless.
At the same time, specific requirements are not feasible. Even if the authorities agree to abolish nuclear and hydrocarbon energy, as well as cattle breeding, this will require considerable time. Power plants cannot be switched off at once - there will be man-made disasters.
In the same way, it is not clear what to do with abolished edible cattle. Arrange a hecatomb? This takes time, effort and, by the way, a large number of crematoria that will emit the same vicious cursed carbon dioxide.
And so they have it all. We will eat the bread, and we will burn the bakeries. Let the governments branded by us think about what to do next.
The year 1968 was called the "trio of revolution" - and deservedly so. But compared with the girl Greta and her supporters, equal to her in mental development, the leftists of 1968 are some kind of Platonians and quick-witted Nevtonas with their minds. Whereas today it’s just a “revolution of the laps”.
If this were some spontaneous insanity, this is not so bad. Events took place in fatty countries, and with fat, as you know, rage. But the synchronicity of demonicity confuses.
It is possible that in a particular city N activists suddenly came up with the idea: “What would we, gentlemen, take a whip, go pedestrian passers-by on the bridge?” It happens. But it is more difficult to believe that this creative idea suddenly and simultaneously overshadowed Paris, London, Berlin, etc. activists.
The fact that the events, which are practically meaningless in relation to officially declared goals, but at the same time very harmful, took place in different capitals at the same time, suggests that it was not without leadership and directing power. Otherwise, there would be no such uniformity. The living creativity of the masses is, as a rule, some in the forest, some for firewood. Then here - “Equalization nale-e-woo! Around! Step march! ". Let me not believe in spontaneity.
Most likely, it was only a rehearsal, a test of strength. Moreover, the rehearsal is successful, demonstrating coherence and training. Now the losers will rebel against extinction regularly and on a large scale, for the authorities are in an embarrassing position.
- To disperse this booth to hell?
“But we are not satraps of any bloodthirsty kind.” In addition, we ourselves swore and swore adherence to the ideals of the green world, and it was somehow not our hand to disperse the playful losers. They just do not want to die out.
“Well, do we want them to die out?” Well, that is, to ourselves we may be ready to bravely endure this misfortune, but we cannot talk about this out loud.
Therefore, the booze will be long. Why not rebel, if there is nobody to calm down.
Unless the losers themselves get tired.
The author’s point of view may not coincide with the position of the publisher.