The Rolls-Royce exec and the oak tree
Josh | 27.12.2009 07:52 | Culture
The Petersfield Post has reported that a senior Rolls-Royce executive, Avery Duff, has had an ancient oak tree cut down to allow him to build a new tarmac drive for his property. It was felled despite local protests, a deal to ensure its survival and even protesters standing underneath it.
http://www.petersfieldpost.co.uk/news/Felled-despite-protest.5935084.jp
This story says a lot about the type of people who run Rolls-Royce.
http://www.petersfieldpost.co.uk/news/Felled-despite-protest.5935084.jp This story says a lot about the type of people who run Rolls-Royce.
Josh
Comments
Hide the following 10 comments
Incorrect
27.12.2009 13:18
No it says nothing of the sort. Look up 'Ad hominem abusive' (argumentum ad personam).
Stating that a man cuts down a tree and thus Rolls Royce is run by bad people or is somehow bad in itself is an example of flawed logic and does not stand up to critical examination.
The act of cutting down an ancient tree whilst it may be bad in itself is not a reflection upon the 'types of people who Rolls-Royce'.
Need to re-phrase things...
Correct
27.12.2009 20:42
This person is a senior and influential person in a large company. They showed no respect for the tree, its historical significance, the views of others or even the safety of those below it as the branches were being cut.
Rolls-Royce is a company that is happy to be a part of the arms trade and is involved in the manufacture of nuclear weapons. It is any surprise that a senior person in the company should display such an attitude?
This is not a case of ad hominem abusive. Josh is belittling neither him nor the company by pointing out an irrelevant characteristic. All he seemed to be saying is that his behaviour is symptomatic of a company that is equally dismissive of peoples’ rights, freedoms and even their lives. It is not necessarily a powerful point but it not incorrect.
Dave H
rolls royce in rotherham
28.12.2009 12:04
action needs to be taken this manufacturing park is bad bad news no one locally seems to give a monkeys or am i wrong?
pixie
ad hominem fallacy means something else.
28.12.2009 23:41
However, the proposition is that cutting down this tree was selfish and unconscionable. The implication is true is that A) Rolls Royce is partly run by a selfish bastard and B) he is amongst the sorts of people Rolls Royce promotes. Anyone who reads Indymedia for any reason other than trolling it believes this is the case and knows in a larger sense why its the case. Car companies are in the business of environmental destruction, period.
anon
Rolls Royce
29.12.2009 09:09
" Car companies are in the business of environmental destruction, period."
Rolls Royce is MORE than a car campany:
Avery Duff is Head of Human Resources for Rolls Royce International.
Fuk the Arms Trade
Kill All Hippies
29.12.2009 09:51
Bad people do bad things in the name of profit.
Maybe people should look at what rolls royce produce and who they sell to when considering the 'badness' of their actions.
A clue: Guess who supplies the engines for all britian's nuclear submarines? Guess who supplies military hardware (ie stuff for killing people) to 109 countries worldwide?
The hippification of indymedia is complete.
Rolls Royce kill trees, but they kill more people
capitalist = scum
29.12.2009 13:40
This story just reinforces what most of us already knew about the executives of RR (that they have little regard for anything other than profit & their own enjoyment and that people, animals AND the planet are pushed aside so that they can get their way.
{A}
Loving animals and trees is not enough
30.12.2009 10:17
It's a kind of enraged moral objection enforced by the committment of angry individuals (a kind of renegade 'digusted of tunbridge wells') that has little or nothing to do with the political opposition to capitalism.
Cutting down a tree says no more about the people who run rolls royce than the selling of jet engines to israel that devastate gaza.
Kill All Hippies
Don't kill hippies, use them as shields.
30.12.2009 12:02
I didn't see anyone claiming that the cutting down of the tree said more about rr execs than the selling of jet engines.
As an anarchist I understand the need for total liberation (but I'm no primitivist idiot, we can all be liberated without the need to go back 10,000 years).
We won't all suddenly become free once we have rid ourselves of capitalism - the freeing of ourselves IS the revolution that will bring it to an end.
Not that I don't agree with you that there are a few of the oh-so-shocked middle class "concerned of kent" types.
{A}
@ anti-primitivist or (A)
03.01.2010 14:37
no need to distinguish primitivist anarchists as idiots - they are not the ones fucking the earth up, and if they "had their way" the world would be far better off than under pretty much any other "system" you'd care to put forward. however, that is not even what being a primitivist is about. I was merely pointing out that primitivists dont wanna fuck the world over. it has nothing to do with returning to 10,000 years ago, thats just secterian bullshit. stop it, its not clever, you make yourself out to be a daft anarchist who hasn't read primitivism except on wikipedia. It is a progressive idea, about changing and utilising "primitive" factors that we know and can see working. ie. working with fuels that do not allow for any exploitation of land or animals. Land that is stewarded correctly, not owned or stolen, yet stewarded, can provide fuel and not damage the eco-stability - unlike the capitalist version of fuel usage.
thats just one example.
please dont write off primitivists as hairy ape men living in the wild reading just ted kazcynski literature all day, banging on pots and pans with rocks and sticks. ffs, we're in this together, i thought.
fran