Direct action is not a new idea.

We've talked in previous episodes in this season

about how it was used by the suffragettes, by various civil rights movements,

and it's not new to climate or other environmental issues either.

Probably the best known organization when it comes to these sorts of tactics in the

environmental space is Greenpeace. From blocking whaling boats to locking onto offshore platforms,

Greenpeace activists have been putting their bodies in the way of environmental harms for decades.

Six Greenpeace activists are on trial in front of a jury at Maidstone Crown Court

for causing 30,000 pounds worth of damage to the King's North Power Station.

There was a very real danger calling to our lawyers that we would go to

jail. This is from a short video that was made documenting an action in the UK in 2008.

But when they got their day in court, the activists made a novel argument.

They argued their actions were justified because they were trying to highlight the dangers of climate change.

There was a lawful excuse that the harm... they were trying to highlight the dangers of climate change.

There was a lawful excuse that the harm we caused by the damage of painting was

insignificant compared with the emissions from Kings North for that one day alone.

And the moments when the jury became most engaged

was when the witnesses, the defendants,

or the scientific witnesses,

were talking about the effects of climate change on our kids and on our grandchildren.

And suddenly I think it put our actions into a different context that made them look

quite frankly proportionate and reasonable. And it worked.

...