Activists or Suits?

Guardian Columnist John Harris notes that a 'deep attachment to fossil fuels is still locked into (the UK's) economy and political system' (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jul/24/climate-sceptics-protest-emergency-activists). Harris believes that the 'opinions' of climate sceptics and deniers have now generally been rejected by most informed folk. The requirement to 'balance' the views of climate scientists, with denier content, has now gone. Mainstream politicians, however, have been, at best, tentative in their attempts to reduce climate change. Some have even moved to effectively ban any direct action and protest, that can be linked to climate change. Sections of the right-wing media (newspapers and 'shock jocks') are also still more than willing to attack activists, for 'their disruptive and panicky behaviour'. Conversely, Harris opines that wanting net zero, well before 2050, is an entirely logical position. He feels that fearing activism and protest will simply alienate potential supporters, is wrong. Historically, Harris notes that activism and protest have often been necessary and do work. For example, in the UK, activism and protest achieved their aims, in campaigns to abolish slavery and to give women the right to vote. When a danger is great and looming (as is climate change), you can't wait for all the vested interests to slowly (and reluctantly) get on board! As Harris puts it 'Do you trust the people in suits, downplaying this emergency or the activists, lying in roads, in an attempt to ward off catastrophe?'. I know where my money is going!