Climate movement’s strategy isn’t working. What could save it? Going beyond protesting for ethical politicians — into social work/mutual aid that grows the movement
With a good part of Europe hiding at home to survive heatwaves of 40 degrees, the US suffocating in Canadian wildfires and flash floods dealing destruction all over the world — It’s a good time to reflect if the climate movement — particularly the XRs & Last Generation(s) — has any chance of winning.
TL;DR*: Climate protest has peaked: it won’t be able to lead a lot more people to the streets. Since the strategy depends on numbers, it’s doomed. As it is, the strategy is merely an overcomplicated way of asking politicians to do the right thing — so it’s dependent on them. What then? Going beyond protest and tackling social crises — growing the movement through supporting other struggles and developing mutual aid networks that can handle the inevitable exponential cost of living increases. Across history, temporary mobilizations of people led to great works that stood the test of time. Can the climate movement mobilize to build the structures that to allow us to outlast our suicidal system?
Has the climate movement peaked?
Millions have marched on the streets, many experiencing nonviolent civil disobedience for the first time, thousands regularly put themselves in front of the tools of our self-destruction, stretching police budgets and sustaining many legal jobs. But it remains toothless: climate strikes are far less disruptive than, say, truckers, school teachers or nurses — no chance at paralyzing society.
Optimists would say that we just need more people on the streets, protesting or doing direct action. But are there really many more people in the privileged position to be able to put themselves on the line? And more importantly, to do it only for achieving media views and impassioned demands to the government?
A predominantly middle-class, intellectual, privileged movement might be sufficient for ensuring the scientific truth about the climate predicament is acknowledged — but it has not produced the numbers necessary to achieve the revolution needed.
Clearly, the silent majority that also wants a livable earth doesn’t have the capacity to take to the streets or engage in the movement — or simply doesn’t believe this is the way.
Whether they are disabled from participating or their active choice, the result is the same.
Does the climate movement even have a strategy?
It is a recurring frustration — what are we actually fighting for?
Looking at the German example, excellent work is done by multiple groups, with some small wins here or there — but a strategy uniting the movement is lacking.
Perhaps the issue is that whenever a winning strategy is needed — it always ends up being some version of asking the government to do the right thing. Is the government even able to do it?
Looking at the COP theater (fittingly being hosted by one of the largest oil companies in the world in 2023), there is ample ground to realize that “international governance” or democracy is not acting in the interest of the majority of people. Do “we” have time to fix it? Or do we actually have to move ahead without it?
There’s ample writing on how governments are corrupted by growth-ism ideologies and neocolonial mentalities — it remains unclear how so many climate activists still make it their main strategy — and their weakness.
The degree of change needed then seems to be beyond the current capacities of existing democratic structures. In other words, the current forms of government “don’t work” for implementing the needed change. So depending on it or waiting for these to evolve doesn’t seem very productive.
What then? Blowing up pipelines?
Well… there’s a lot to love about it: dramatic visuals, directly targeting the source of the problem and what allows it to keep working — but I’d subscribe to Monbiot’s opinion and argue that this is also a doomed strategy. It accelerates exponentially the repression efforts towards the climate movement (which includes giving fodder to mainstream politicians to tend to fascism) and while resistance is noble and just — the movement can not handle it. It is already burning out while engaging in actions that are much easier to recover from.
To everyone that gets pumped up about the idea of property destruction, I’d encourage a little bit of realism (check the story of the Earth Liberation Front, with actual activists reflecting if it was worth it).
One of hardest parts to watch in the “How to blow up a pipeline” movie is when they succeed… and then sit and hope the market adjusts and politicans behave accordingly. Is that really a viable strategy? Is that the endgame? Is it not just entering a war of attrition against the fossil fuel economy?
Is there a way forward towards a decentralized strategy that doesn’t depend on persuading politicians?
Maybe the climate movement is not able to have a grand united strategy that everyone rallies under. Maybe it is okay that each group works on its own corner and their own priorities. Maybe the strategy has to be as decentralized as the movement. A mosaic of alternatives, creating visions of a plural future with multiple worldviews coexisting.
But even decentralized strategies need a road towards impact (mass mobilization) and justice.
The following inputs towards this are some ideas for individuals and groups to consider. They are heavily inspired by the story of the ZAD de Notre-Dame-des-Landes (which potentially also inspired the recent Battle for Lutzi). It has been beautifully told in the We are Nature Defending Itself book and tells the story of building a common vision out of very different groups and worldvisions. It is not a fairy tale but it shows the power of place based struggle.
So as key questions for future (decentralized) strategy processes of the climate movement, I’d focus on these questions, from the book Degrowth in Movement(s): what are the conditions, goals and strategies for us to work together, to build the mosaic of alternatives to advance social-ecological transformation?
Growing the climate movement
First: mobilizing due to ethical arguments — to do the right thing — to rise up for the future of your children.. has shown its limits.
These tend to be too abstract, debatable or too distant (eg: biodiversity loss, oceans warming, floods in Bangladesh…).
Let’s learn from the far-right: appeal to self-interest
One interesting growth tactic from far-right groups in the US is to move quickly into disaster areas to help with relief efforts — spreading fascist ideologies and recruiting members in the meantime. While mutual aid groups such as Occupy Sandy also often find a place in these tragic situations —there is an opportunity to offer/co-develop alternatives that go beyond relief and temporary support structures.
The question I propose to explore: what are the gaps where climate goals intersect with social needs?
1) The easy, obvious one, would be supporting other movements, labor being a high priority for degrowth intellectuals. Particularly those that have disruptive capacity and can add the needed “teeth” to the movement. France is a great example, from the Gillet Jaunes to les Soulevements de la Terre. Germany’s climate movement is officially picking up the topic, results to be seen (check upcoming conference in Berlin “Allied Grounds”).
The potential is high, as the labor market becomes “less flexible” (as in, less people accepting shitty conditions) and essential workers like truck drivers demand more, migrant farm workers reach their limit (eg Almeria’s Plastic Sea) or request the right to not die of heatstroke.
Supporting Amazon or Big Oil workers (also called batshit jobs) might sound counter-intuitive: after all, should these industries even exist? Some counter-arguments: 1) you’re supporting real people to get better living standards. decent living standards are a requirement for political work, good long-term decisions, etc; 2) better living standards for workers means lower profits; 3) supporting other movements is mobilization: you’re recruiting and gaining support for climate people; 4) high level organizing allows for real “just transition” campaigns which includes making political demands for retraining workers for “green jobs”; 5) on the previous point, one way to support precarious workers is to provide them (eg training or contacts) with more ethical jobs somewhere else..
Think of the larger picture: Supporting anti-gentrification campaigns (eg Berlin expropriation of big landlords) can then enable anti-car campaigns to stand a chance (otherwise, workers are forced to drive from the cheaper suburbs).
Labor movements achieved many of the social victories of the last century. For that, they have been punished — with most unions either co-opted or defanged.
Leftist political parties have, at best, struggled to remain relevant.
Not much of this is good, but it’s what we have. The climate movement can still focus on the existing opportunities: there is a resurgence in unionizing (eg dock workers, Amazon, delivery services) and the vaccuum left by the left needs to be filled. What will be the role of the climate movement?
Even fighting for the normalization of remote work and 4-day work week would be major wins for the climate — and easy political fights.
2) Focus on intersections of cost of living relief with climate action
One good example is the renovation movement. It ticks all the boxes: benefits the poorest most (if done right), provides jobs, quickly provides return on investment and a potential major ecological win.
Turning private companies into communal property is another great demand (eg excellent current example of Maine, US), much used for establishing energy communities — as often the main reason individuals can’t make profit off of their solar panels are laws protecting the large energy companies.
There is a large protest campaign for Sep’23 on Their Time to Pay — and an upcoming Global Climate Job Conference in the Netherlands to follow up.
3) Connect crises with culprits: Climate criminals have names and addresses. And, quite often, yachts and private jets.
Eg.: We’re in for a lot of water restrictions (a topic allegedly still untouched by the far right). It shouldn’t be difficult to point out that most of that water goes into fossil fuels, big ag (ensuring tasteless winter tomatoes in exchange for dead soil), nuclear and the occasional Tesla factory.
Food prices will also keep rising — but it’s important to remember that most inflation is just an excuse to keep profits steady. Shut them down. And promote your local CSAs in the meantime.
4) Going beyond the climate bubble — responsibly
There are topics, like food security, where climate activists might find common ground with nationalists (eg Brexit). I’m not suggesting to make an alliance with fascists — but rather with those who have real concerns. This is what distinguishes a neoliberal green party from a climate-minded leftist group. But what makes the difference between a book club and a social movement is what its members do for the most oppressed: nice words or actually working together.
5) Rural struggles: as a better future likely necessitates a major shift from urban to rural. Supporting “forgotten” geographies through initiatives like Alle Dorfer Bleiben, peasant movements (La Via Campesina, Gathering of rural and peasant struggles) or the network of Zukunftsorte can open up doors to growth.
Rural struggles might not always add political power, but certainly hold power over resources (land, water, etc) that will be relevant for future political pressure.
And while the climate movement clearly isn’t able to win on the traditional political fields - probably because of a lack of convincing leftist green parties — it can instead foster the development of alternative politics — inevitably more local, filling in the gap that the large left political parties have come up with. And the objective isn’t necessarily to find and nurture political candidates that win. Political actors that can be depended upon once everything goes to shit would be the perfect counterbalance to the far right.
Going beyond protest
The crucial component that supports all the above — is to go beyond “raising awareness” and actually help the people it needs to win over.
One way of achieving this is to transform the movement into a network of mutual aid initiatives with a clear political agenda.
Solidarity kitchens for workers in unionization processes. Community energy enthusiasts who volunteer at poor neighbourhoods to ensure transition at the lowest price. Renovation professionals that move to post-disaster areas to professionalize self-organized reconstruction efforts (eg Open Architecture Collaborative)
Every political demand by the climate movement needs to be accompanied by action: to embarass the government on how easy it would be for them to implement the solutions — and to directly provide benefits to its membership base.
This is the key difference: not depending on politicians to do the right thing — instead demonstrating/enabling the achievement of climate+social goals through self-organization and mutual care.
Social organizations that already have do similar work can be well positioned and open to make a political leap (Berlin example).
Besides food, how to handle migration will be one of the key topics for Europeans. The far right is essentially trying to strengthen borders — without having it clear who is actually going to do the work that is now sustained by migrants. Will migrants become a force of their own? Can leftist-minded groups truly empower them to become part of a future society? Or will they be left in this grey area, needed but not desired?
Does the climate movement have the right skills to provide such ambitious support? Maybe yes, maybe not, but if a few thousand activists mobilize to create life in a village at risk of disappearing, then they certainly can mobilize to feed incoming migrant waves or come up for a weekend to tear down concrete and build greenhouses instead.
This work is crucially important as what’s always missing from activism is the demonstration of an alternative that is desirable. It is urgent to start building the eco socialist revolution we need - not with words, but in actions - and justly benefiting the most needy (eg re-normalizing community work practices like the Minga, re-emphasized by Buen Vivir).
However, social work without the activism lacks future visions that can topple an unjust system. Both are, then, essential ingredients to the transition.
Getting future-ready
As the climate crisis deepens, different skills will be needed — possibly changing jobs and careers even more than AI could ever imagine.
For extreme weather events, certainly first aid and relief organizers — as well as emergency technical skills.
For a collapsing food system, anything related to understanding soil, water, plants and animals better.
Food preservation. Foraging & medicinal herbs. Fixing bicycles. Decommissioning failing infrastructure (and salvaging what’s useful). Community organizing — to be able to mobilize a group to respond effectively to where governments come short. Visualizing a future and how to implement mutual aid at large scale (eg Cooperation Jackson).
Building skills and training others on these skills can be as satisfying as selfish — after all, you’re ensuring more people around you are actually useful when shit gets tough.
There are some centers (eg Pachaland, Black Mountains College) popping up where you can train on relevant future skills. The earlier the better.
Will this be enough?
Not sure. But it feels a lot better if my climate activism involves feeding people and building community (eg Koch Kollektiv, food saving or volunteering at CSAs) — worst case, I’m building a support network for the worst scenarios to come.
Maybe this your own individual resilience plan. Maybe you do it with your partner or with your friends. Whichever way, it helps to do something.
This is a quick and dirty opinion piece, by someone who dares to describe himself as an European climate activist based in Germany. It carries all my biases and will most likely be useful to those who are interested or already a little bit involved in activism — but are not going to every conference or keeping up with all the news.
