Rebutting Criticism of Extinction Rebellion
“Why don’t you get a job?!”
You hear variations on this theme surprisingly often, whether on the ground, in Daily Mail comment sections, or anywhere in the vast cultural chasm between the two.
I’m self employed. I work four days a week usually, and when I attend XR it’s just a case of making the time up elsewhere.
The friend who introduced me to XR works full time. They attend planning meetings in the evening after work, and they have taken two weeks of annual leave this year — one in April, one in October — to perform their organisational role during the protests.
Other XR members and protesters represent an enormously wide cross-section of society. They are not a homogeneously unemployed bloc.
It’s tempting to ask people expressing this criticism why the nature of your work matters at all. When their question comes from a place of malice or judgement, it’s tempting to tell them to mind their own business. Or to f*ck off.
But in line with the non-violent, dialogue-seeking nature of Extinction Rebellion, here are some more reasonable responses:
- “I work full/part time, I’m using annual leave to attend. Employment law guarantees me a certain amount of leave, and I am choosing to use it to attend this protest.”
- “I work full/part time, I’m here outside work hours. These protests continue outside 9–5 hours so I’m here [before work / after work / on my lunch break].”
- “I’m self employed so I can structure my time how I see fit. I’m a [freelancer / business owners / sole traders], but many people are in this position.”
- “I’m retired! I’m making the decision to use my well-earned rest at the end of my long career to protest for a better future.”
Note: It’s not just retired hippies that attend, either: A former Detective Sergeant for the Metropolitan Police is one of many ‘credible’ retirees. - “I’m a student, attending [between lectures / on a day off/ outside of term time].”
Note: If you use this response, prepare for a secondary barrage of questioning. - “I’m a child, and because [I’m below 13 I’m not allowed to work except in very limited circumstances / I’m 13–16 I’m not allowed to work full time].”
Note: There are tons of kids at XR protests. - “I’m a baby. Goo goo ga ga.”
And here’s the kicker:
- “You’re right, I don’t have a job. Thankfully, not having a job does not exclude me from protesting. Employment is not a requisite for exercising my [democratically mandated right / moral obligation] to protest.”
Note: The right to protest is, in fact, a human right, enshrined by the UK Human Rights Act of 1998.
Where does this question come from?
Just as protesters aren’t a homogeneous unemployed bloc, people who ask questions about protesters’ employment status aren’t homogeneously ignorant or hostile.
Sometime’s the question is inquisitive: “Shouldn’t the protesters be at work?” The implication being that a job — the role it serves, the system it serves it within — is more important than protest. Explaining that work and protest can co-exist, and that participating in one doesn’t exempt or disqualify you from the other is an effective response.
Sometime’s it’s accusatory: “Get a job!” Here the implication is that you don’t have one, and that this somehow diminishes your right to protest. See above points for attempting to defend your position and talk them around, but be aware you may be wasting your energy.
Sometime’s it’s judgemental: “Bunch of unemployed loonie lefties!” This is one stem more insidious than being accusatory. Here I find myself more tempted to remove myself from the conversation than try to defend myself. See previous point about resisting the urge to tell them to piss off.
