Comment of the Week: Two perspectives on deflating tires

This post, other news coverage, and the tire flattening has brought so much attention to the very important issue of climate destabilization, without any real harm. So cool!

But it hasn’t. The action is so incredibly dumb and juvenile that the entire discussion is about the action rather than climate change.

Portland activists are just so beyond lazy that focusing on low-effort stuff like this just about all they are capable of. Go flatten the tires of Governor Browns car, that would actually make a statement.

Messing with random people based on your perception of their needs is incredibly short sighted. You’re bound, like in this case, to end up targeting people who are extremely sympathetic, which only makes the public dislike the “activist” group and care less about what they’re trying to say.

The reality is that Portland has a garbage public transit system and terrible bike and pedestrian infrastructure. The idea that there are realistic alternatives for most motorists is 1) extremely classist and 2) incorrect.

I don’t get how occasionally deflating some random stranger’s SUV tire is going to stoke a mass movement of normies to rise up and demand some vague, all-encompassing governmental action to hold back climate change.

It’s half-assed, lazy social disruption because the scale is so minuscule. Just Stop Oil in the UK are real disruptors because they get mass media attention and impact anybody and everybody who happens to be on the road when they strike. Slashing someone’s Volvo tires in the West Hills does not register.

Put a human blockade on I-205, and you’ll get real attention. Glue your hands to a Monet or Van Gogh at the Portland Art Museum, and you’ll get attention. Maybe if you slash 1,000 SUV tires in one night all across the city, without regard to class, race, disability, or geography, and you’ll get real attention. Trying to be a noble vandal by only striking a few supposedly well-off people ain’t gonna change squat. They’ll just gripe on Facebook or Twitter then replace their tire and go on their way.

But getting attention in and of itself is not necessarily productive. If you somehow convinced 1000 current SUV drivers to actually change their transportation choices without resorting to desperate, random acts of disruption and vandalism, then you may actually form a basis for a local movement of citizens that could grow and have a measurable impact. That would be hard work though, probably even in Portland.

It’s half-assed, lazy social disruption because the scale is so minuscule.

One thing I’ve always found entertaining about this forum is that it often acts like a real life version of the People’s Front of Judea — tiny scale actions like this tire flattening thing presented as tide shifting are case in point.

Messing with random people .. only makes the public dislike the “activist” group and care less about what they’re trying to say.

Exactly this. Also, using harassment as a way to get people to do what you want is a page straight out of the MAGA playbook. Most people have had enough of that.

Besides, if force and intimidation become the new way of doing business, the strongest and most privileged (i.e. not cyclists and people concerned with the climate) will prevail.

The response to Ms. Griggs’s article demonstrates that changing climate-destructive human habits is a very important and frustrating conversation –lots of strong opinions. The arguments against inconveniencing SUV drivers are well-reasoned, but unfortunately, they are aimed at an irrelevant target, rational human behavior. The majority of these wide-ranging arguments are based on the presumptions that disruptive actions should be rationally persuasive, that people behave rationally when facing existential threats, and that we will avoid ecosystem collapse by logical persuasion in an economic system and media environment that has been 100% devoted to driving off the climate cliff since it’s contemporary inception. To be fair some have argued that individual behavior doesn’t matter; only high level legislation or decisions by people with adequate power will cause change; so, be quiet and keep consuming and enriching the corporations destroying the planet.

I think that there are too many examples of widespread behavioral change causing substantial shifts in society to ignore individual action. But, to bring about change, we must take a close look at real human behavior, not the idealized rational human behavior. People respond to novel existential threats in both surprising and predictable ways. While the looming climate catastrophe has become clear to many, the response has not been to sit down and make a list of appropriate personal changes, or a list of actions that may affect those often-mentioned “100 corporations,” or even to assess the return on investment of individual action versus doing nothing. Instead, most folks have reacted emotionally to the immediate stress of impending climate catastrophe with internal coping mechanisms, but not materially to actually mitigate greenhouse gas accumulation.

For the most part, the reaction to gloomy climate predictions has been to quickly regain emotional equilibrium. Thoughtful reactions that ameliorate the stress of contemplating climate change can be found in the comments of Ms. Grigg’s original post: nihilism, what-aboutism, minimizing the harm of climate change while maximizing the harm of tire deflation, displacing worry away from climate change onto vulnerable people and most commonly, Goldilocks-ing every disruptive action. In fact, people are so bad at responding appropriately to unexpected threats that even with physical threats, let alone theoretical future threats, the reflexive unprimed response is often disbelief and hesitation. These coping mechanisms are completely understandable. Without them we would be paralyzed with stress or wildly overreacting to things that don’t matter. However, the way that people survive, even though they reflexively discount disrupting forces, is the key to sustainable behavioral change? People imitate others reactions to threats effortlessly. People will often notice quickly and respond strongly to the reactions of others. Likewise, if everyone is acting like nothing is happening, it takes a lot of energy for a single person to act differently.

Today, we are experiencing this disconnect on a massive planetary scale. The internal belief that “if climate change was really such a big threat, then everyone would be freaking out. No one seems to be freaking out, so… business as usual, I guess (shrug).” Should we all just freak out as if the meteor is out to make impact or the lion is about to pounce on the heard? Probably not. But, we can celebrate or participate in disruptive actions; actions that cause a break in the business as usual cycle that is driving the climate catastrophe. Are disruptive actions annoying? Yes, they are. Is it annoying when you want to keep sleeping, but your alarm is going off or someone is poking you? Is it annoying when your daily routine is unexpectedly altered with one more task or delay? Yes, these things are annoying, AND, most importantly, these annoyances or disruptive actions are not going to change the behavior of the individuals they are annoying. Nor are they intended to.

Disruptive actions are not effective because they change minds, they are effective because they inspire and consolidate people who already recognize the gravity of climate disruption. They are effective because they bring these people and their ideas into the spotlight, and people who share this perspective or who are inclined to imitate people with this perspective are activated. They are intended to create a critical mass from the people who are primed for change, so that eventually, those most entrenched in the status quo will simply follow along like they always do.

Currently, older people, who are invested ideologically or materially in the status quo will typically reject disruption, while younger people, who face the brunt of the future and are not wedded to the status quo will accept the cost of disruption for a better future. Rallying young people by creative disruptive actions is crucial to mitigating climate change. Not surprisingly, we see young people on the forefront of action, like tyre extinguishers, and old folks, like BP commenters, shouting them down, telling them their actions don’t matter, will backfire or should be done differently (also not suggesting any real solutions or making any effort, BTW.)

During a previous story on the climate strike, commenters brought the same Goldilocks criticism of the youth strike being not powerful enough to be effective but also so powerful that it causes irreparable harm and backlash. The majority of those comments revealed more about the commenters than the objects of their criticism. Ironically, despite BP being a bike focused media empire, a large number of BP commenters are dedicated consumers of the climate destruction economy.

As long as an action does not include violence or destruction of a valuable resource, I am all for it. In fact, tyre extinguishers go out of their way to create a targeted rationale that tries to create disruption while minimizing harm. Oddly, that rationale just provides more fodder for criticism. Ms. Griggs removed the descriptor “smart” from her title, but I will add it back. Tire deflation of SUVs and oversized trucks is a smart disruptive action. It is accessible, free and is appealing to people who don’t want to harm others. And, although there has been immense had-wringing about the off chance that this disruption could cause real harm to a vulnerable individual, statistically, it is highly likely that a tire will be flattened on a vehicle that is unnecessarily large and wasteful, and that individual could have made a less wasteful choice. Is it the only action? No, it is one of many that will come and go and should be savored and enjoyed by all.

In the end, transportation is a major contributor to green house gasses. Despite this, people are buying larger vehicles that consume more resources. Media about wise individual choices is no match for advertising and current social pressures. Time is short. Celebrate the people who are fighting for an appropriate response to the threat of climate destruction. If this action upsets you, no big deal, hopefully someone will come along that roll models an appropriate, effective response to climate destruction that you can blindly follow.