Green Activists Attack 4x4s

By · January 14, 2011 at 15:09 pm · 18 Comments · Latest News · Report an error ·

Climate change activists targeted four-wheel drive vehicles in west London in a spate of sticker-posting over the Christmas period.

Stickers reading ‘CO2 KILL5’ were plastered over the vehicles’ number plates by members of pressure group Climate Rush in what’s described by the owners as an act of vandalism. Whether or not you approve of four-wheel drive vehicles being used in urban areas, the knee-jerk reaction by some environmental protesters against them smacks somewhat of a criticism of the choice of car rather than its impact on the environment especially when older, badly-maintained and uneconomical smaller cars seem to slip under the activists’ radar in favour of a campaign against 4x4s.

The Christmas stickering at least was a relatively harmless act which caused irritation rather than actual damage, but elsewhere the activists have apparently been more interested in mindless vandalism rather than promoting a message.


Photo by grange85

Tagged: , , , ,

Report an error

  • Guest

    Another warning for you: author’s opinions disguised as news.

  • Beth Torr

    Well, I could have just regurgitated the story from the Evening Standard, but we at Londonist like to add value. And I think ‘disguised’ might be a over-stretching it somewhat.

  • bongo

    “smacks somewhat of a criticism of the choice of car rather than its impact on the environment especially when older, badly-maintained and uneconomical smaller cars seem to slip under the activists’ radar in favour of a campaign against 4x4s”

    Really? That’s an impressively boring objection to have against this action! ‘there are other people who are as bad if not worse’…

    It doesnt take a genius to figure out that 4x4s are a gift to campaigners because they are so ostentatiously selfish. yes, sports cars are as bad and worse because they too have massive and unnecessary engine sizes. But Chelsea is the world centre of 4x4s – as revealed through a recent survey of car insurance details. Climate Rush are criticising the decision to drive a car which will never be an efficient form of urban transportation, which endangers pedestrians, cyclists and drivers of smaller vehicles, which produces a dangerous sense of invulnerability, and which is a completely unnecessary fashion accessory that belches out fumes – bad not only for londoners and our lungs, but for the planet as well.

    If there was a way of telling from the outside whether smaller older cars were similarly polluting, rest assured they would also come under fire. As it stands, the most obvious way to signal your car’s inefficiency and unsuitability to the Capital’s narrow streets is… to drive a Chelsea Tractor.

    I agree with the sentiment, and a sticker isnt exactly vandalism, is it? that’s going a bit too far, love.

  • Beth Torr

    I can’t particularly see the point of a 4×4 in central London either, but as far as I’m aware it’s still a free country and I don’t believe it’s the place of environmental activists to use their agenda to try and dictate what other people spend their money on, especially by means of damaging the property of individuals who have done nothing wrong except buy a slightly unsuitable car (in someone else’s opinion).

    The stickers (as I pointed out) are little more than an irritant and largely a peaceful protest, despite the reactions of the owners. Criminal damage is another matter entirely and that, as well as the bullying sentiment behind it, is what I dislike.

  • VASA

    Class war dressed up with a distracting moral agenda, as with the anti hunt campaign.

  • JSDorG

    Wow, I see Bongo has been transported here magically from the late 1800s where implicit, patronising sexism and ill-informed views scooped wholesale from the Boy’s Own Book of Big Opinions are still very much the “in” thing. Maybe if you took a minute to even listen to the words you’ve typed when read aloud, you might feel the crushing weight of disappointment that, for example, I feel when I see what you have tried to pass off as a comment. Freedom of choice only for the terminally self-righteous, perfect, just mind you don’t catch your organic sandals or your eco-yoghurt activity slacks on the door as you leave.

  • Dave

    This 4×4 and/or motorist bashing is just kneejerk intolerance from the hard-of-thinking. Dress it up as environmental protest, class activism, or whatever you like, it’s still blatantly ill-informed.

    For these ‘activists’ to be able to reliably target high-polluting vehicles, they would need to know the weekly mileages and driving habits of each of the cars/drivers in question, combined with emission statistics. But, of course, they don’t. This is presumably why the best contribution to the debate that they can muster is some juvenile (and pseudo-anonymous) defacement and finger-pointing.

    They’d be better off targeting fuel pumps at filling stations — after all there’s a *much* more direct link between the burning of petrol/diesel and environmental damage than there is between the mere existence of a large vehicle and any resulting negative environmental effects. But of course fuel pumps aren’t as easy/cowardly a target, or one that gets the implicit support of class-war morons either.

    I wonder how many of these activists have poorly-insulated houses? I wonder how many of them watch plasma TVs or boil kettles that are slightly more full than needed? Maybe we should all make uninformed judgements about their homes or appliances (in the name of saving the planet, don’t-you-know), then pop round and plaster them with stupid stickers. Then again, maybe we should act like grown-ups and make decisions based on fact instead of ignorant rhetoric. Now there’s a thought.

  • bongo

    ‘I don’t believe it’s the place of environmental activists to use their agenda to try and dictate what other people spend their money on, especially by means of damaging the property of individuals who have done nothing wrong except buy a slightly unsuitable car’

    It’s the place of environmental activists not just to lobby government endlessly, but also to raise awareness of the kinds of actions that individuals can take to reduce their impact on the environment. One such action is avoiding excessively polluting and hazardous modes of transport. Activists don’t dictate anything – they haven’t any power. That rhetoric ‘dictate’ is an exaggeration – as you say, it’s a sticker campaign. As with much activism and campaigning, it is designed to influence people’s free choices, not limit the choices available (though some might prefer that method).

    The question of whether these people have ‘done nothing wrong’ is interesting. I’m not sure it is as clear as you suggest. Certainly their crime is not simply ‘being rich’.

    ‘Freedom of choice only for the terminally self-righteous, perfect, just mind you don’t catch your organic sandals or your eco-yoghurt activity slacks on the door as you leave’
    :) cute image. But actually, nobody said anything about removing people’s right to choose. All this action is doing is holding people responsible for the decisions they make. The painful and annoying truth is that pretty much nobody lives a sustainable lifestyle in the UK at present, and it is likely that anyone living a busy, well-connected and interesting life has a level of consumption and energy use that is beyond the ‘perfectly sustainable’ level. Nobody has a solution to that at present, and to make everyone feel bad because we live beyond our means would be a stupid and unnattractive way of trying to change people’s habits.

    Some people, however, are taking the mickey, and I don’t think it’s ill-informed, patronising, self-righteous or authoritarian to point out that they have alternatives. they can make another choice. Perhaps they have never even considered the impact of their car on others and on the environment – perhaps they like to think that because they recycle their plastic bags, their 4×4 doesnt really count – perhaps they are thinking about getting rid of the big car already. This campaign gives them an opportunity to do some further thinking.

    Beth, I apologise for calling you ‘love’ – I am reliably informed that the expression is not an acceptable one, and admit to having rushed my first post.

  • bongo

    I change my mind, Beth.

    Someone who posts a link to a story from May 2009 about different actions taking place in a different city in order to smear by association does in fact deserve patronising. love.

  • http://twitter.com/nanayasleeps Gods & Monsters

    Really poor article, very tabloid in tone. I expect better from Londonist.

  • http://twitter.com/nanayasleeps Gods & Monsters

    How about sticking with the valid criticisms of Beth’s articles and dropping the gender-based insults, Bongo? You’ve got a point but you’re undermining it with the “love” business.

  • Steve

    “I don’t believe it’s the place of environmental activists to use their agenda to try and dictate what other people spend their money on”

    Please read that back and have a think about how stupid you sound.

  • http://waronthemotorist.wordpress.com Joe D

    “I can’t particularly see the point of a 4×4 in central London either, but as far as I’m aware it’s still a free country”

    It’s a free country where people are allowed to make stupid choices, therefore we should all shut up and not criticise people who make stupid choices?

    @Dave: “Motorist bashing” is about a lot more than CO2, and I would suggest that it is you who is doing the lazy thinking if you think the choice to drive in London is equivalent to the choice to heat your house in London, whatever the efficiency of your engine or quality of your insulation. If you think CO2 emissions are the only problem caused by car use, we must have another argument over coffee some time.

  • http://waronthemotorist.wordpress.com Joe D

    “I can’t particularly see the point of a 4×4 in central London either, but as far as I’m aware it’s still a free country”

    It’s a free country where people are allowed to make stupid choices, therefore we should all shut up and not criticise people who make stupid choices?

    @Dave: “Motorist bashing” is about a lot more than CO2, and I would suggest that it is you who is doing the lazy thinking if you think the choice to drive in London is equivalent to the choice to heat your house in London, whatever the efficiency of your engine or quality of your insulation. If you think CO2 emissions are the only problem caused by car use, we must have another argument over coffee some time.

  • http://tampalocators.com Dave

    Beth, I think your assessment was spot-on. I find 4×4′s annoying but I absolutely respect a person’s right to choose the vehicle they want to drive.

  • Gorvid

    The only thing “tabloid” here is the pathetic hand-wringing reactions of people who seem to bizarrely support the kind of unwashed mobs that perpetuate this kind of idiocy. The article is sound in both tone and content. It’s success, to me, measured squarely by the level of reaction it brings from both those of us informed enough to understand and comment on it. And, in contrast, those people who really only come here to shriek about kittens and icebergs and wool. Environmentalist radicalism and all associated borderline mental illness are just lovely, but when they get thrown recklessly into the real world, they do become somewhat tedious.

  • groover

    Typical motorist response: “I have a right to drive whatever I want” no matter whether it has a negative impact on the rest of society.

    The fact is that (however, you try to spin it) big cars take up more space in a crowded city, they pollute more than equivalent small-engined cars, and cause more death and serious injury when they hit someone.

    They also provide greater safety benefits for their drivers and passengers, detaching them further from the needs of vulnerable road users like walkers and cyclists – ie, they’ll be driven faster and more recklessly (and I speak from experience of cycling in London every day)

  • http://computerprinterratings.net/epson-workforce-840/ Alex

    Every person has right to drive whatever, but it must be inside the border of law.If it’s not doing too much damage to Ozon with CO2 and similar gases, then it’s ok. At least in my opinion.

←
→