“Activist” Sam Allen has a way with words. Which is handy, given that she’s the spokesperson for the ‘No Tesco in Stokes Croft’ campaign. The campaigners have taken exception to the building of a Tesco supermarket, citing concern for local businesses, the environment and workers’ rights. Other concerns include deforestation and the selling of cheap food. Both of which are bad.
Our objections clearly outlined how opening this Tesco store would pose a threat to public safety. Our community is well known for having people who, if they are silenced, will act in a way that will ensure they will be heard.
Note the rhetorical sleight-of-hand. It’s quite bold. Being “silenced” is apparently indistinguishable from not being agreed with, and “being heard” now entails being obeyed. If the opening of a supermarket seems an unlikely cause of bomb-making, rioting and hospitalisation, those “public safety” issues can be seen quite vividly in the videos linked below:
Needless to say, Ms Allen’s view isn’t shared by all local residents, one of whom adds the following comment to the campaigners’ website:
Tesco was badly needed in Stokes Croft. There’s nothing even close in the area and most of the local silent majority welcomed its arrival. Those anarchists with their pseudo socialist ideology decided to ruin the area for everyone else trying to get on with their lives.
No-one’s going to force you to shop at Tesco; if the decision to open a store there is as unpopular as you say it is, it won’t be open for long.
Indeed. If the overwhelming majority of residents share Ms Allen’s piety, as she would have us believe, then there’s no obvious reason to set about destroying someone else’s property while expecting other locals to pay the subsequent bill for policing and repairs. If anything, the readiness to threaten and vandalise suggests a fear of being revealed as something much less edifying. However, such views aren’t exactly welcome on the campaigners’ website:
Tesco was of course founded by John Edward Cohen.