Climate change activists target Stonehenge, Taylor Swift's jet. Do these kinds of stunts make a difference?

“The 360” shows you diverse perspectives on the day’s top stories and debates.

What’s happening

Over the past week, climate activists have carried out a series of high-profile protests aimed at drawing attention to what they believe is the urgent need to phase out global fossil fuel consumption.

On Wednesday, a pair of activists from the environmental group Just Stop Oil were arrested after spraying orange paint on the ancient Stonehenge monument in England. The next day, more Just Stop Oil activists attempted to do the same to Taylor Swift’s private jet at a London airfield, but apparently settled for painting two other planes after being unable to find it. Protesters from a different group, Extinction Rebellion, disrupted the final round of a PGA golf tournament in Connecticut on Sunday.

Incidents like these have become increasingly common as some climate groups have shifted tactics away from more common protests like street marches in favor of disruptive actions. In recent years, they have “souped” Vincent van Gogh’s “Sunflowers” painting, defaced a wax statue of King Charles, shut down freeways and interfered with a prominent politician's wedding.

Why there’s debate

As long as social movements have existed, there has been debate — often among those who share the same goals — over what are the most effective ways to disrupt the status quo and whether outlandish protests help or hurt the cause.

Supporters of activist stunts say bold acts are needed to shake the public and lawmakers from their complacency about the extreme dangers of climate change. To some observers, the inherent absurdity of throwing soup at a classic work of art — an act one protestor herself called “ridiculous” — is crucial to break through the noise in a way that more traditional forms of protest often fail to do.

There are, of course, plenty of critics who deny that dramatic action is needed to curb climate change. But a lot of people in the climate movement also oppose direct actions like the van Gogh protest.

They argue that, as attention-grabbing as they might be, viral stunts can make all environmentalists look like fringe extremists detached from the mainstream. The way to truly create a green energy revolution, they say, is to work within the system to push business and government into systemic change. Others make the case that a huge share of the public already supports plans to reduce carbon emissions, so flashy protests aimed at raising awareness are wasted effort and can even be counterproductive.

Perspectives

Bold action is needed to shake the public from its complacency

“It is only well outside centres of power that you can find the answer to a question that power and politics are dodging more than ever — how to live as if the truth is actually true.” — John Harris, the Guardian

Attention on its own does not equal persuasion

“Research shows that this kind of tactic doesn’t work to change minds and hearts. … It’s working to get attention, but to what end?” — Dana Fisher, protest movement historian, to the Washington Post

Protests succeed when they draw attention to major problems that are being ignored

“Acts like this may be controversial. … But they are important acts of civil resistance that force the public to consider why we are allowing the wealthiest governments, often controlled by corporate interests, to ignore the science that we need to end our dependence on fossil fuels. … To that extent, these protestors are working in an important tradition of non-violent protest (protest that does not harm other people) and raising the most important questions facing humanity.” — Amy Woodson-Boulton, historian, to the Independent

Science and public policy, not viral protests, are what will ultimately curb climate change

“We need more climate-conscious young people to dedicate themselves to tackling the technological barriers to decarbonization and formulating industrial policies that erode the political ones. For the moment, it is less clear that we need more people to obstruct London traffic or throw soup at paintings. Philanthropists should allocate funds accordingly.” — Eric Levitz, New York

Outrage should be directed at the people who are destroying the planet

“There is no art on a dead planet. If we continue to spew billions of tons of carbon dioxide into the Earth’s atmosphere each year while further destroying its ecosystems, then cultural icons such as Sunflowers risk becoming worthless because there will be no one around to value them.” — James Dyke, iNews

Lack of awareness isn’t what’s holding back the green energy transition

“Just Stop Oil’s strategy rests on the assumption that if only more people understood the truth of the climate emergency then we would all act. But more people than [ever] understand the climate crisis and support action to address it. The problem is not an absence of knowledge, but a lack of popular political power.” — Chris Saltmarsh, Common Dreams

Any protest that draws attention to the climate fight is worth celebrating

“Art demands that we think, and challenges us to question the status quo. And nothing demands challenging more right now than the world’s continuing reliance on fossil fuels. It would be wonderful if every protest could be a masterpiece of its kind, yet at this time of rising emergency, well-meaning and peaceful acts of expression should surely be applauded not stamped out.” — India Bourke, New Statesman

Wacky viral moments make the climate movement look out of touch and petulant

“Everyone who is committed to climate action should utterly repudiate ‘activism’ of this sort, and the broad organization that is carrying it out. It reduces climate concern to something perceived as a mere point of view expressed by privileged brats throwing tantrums, a pretension that is at best annoying and at worst dangerous, and in any event not to be taken seriously.” — Ben Kritz, Manila Times

Bizarre protests lack the clarity of vision needed to make a real impact

“Policy-makers need strong incentives to change the status quo, and disruptive protests can make the difference by reducing the likelihood of a voter backlash while placing direct pressure on those in power. However, for civil disobedience to be effective, protesters need to have clear, positive and constructive intentions.” — Alistair Walsh, Deutsche Welle

Is there a topic you’d like to see covered in “The 360”? Send your suggestions to the360@yahoonews.com.