How XR can win on climate
The protests focus on the science and the need for urgent action, as well as reminding us that “no one is too small to make a difference”. But can we really change the course of history?
Extinction Rebellion dramatises the climate crisis through direct action and courting arrest (1,400 so far), but are they diverting energy into battles with the criminal justice system, as the Stansted activist Ben Smoke argued in the Guardian (16 April 2019)? The global action on climate change is inspiring – but will it stop the climate crisis? Extinction Rebellion (XR), Greta Thunberg and school strikers have raised awareness of the climate emergency, but can they change the world’s most powerful countries? Or will they be sidelined – like Occupy, demonstrations against the Iraq wars, the global justice movement and other failed rebellions?
I’ve campaigned on climate change since 1994, lobbying for a global agreement based on equal emissions rights (Contraction & Convergence) with the Global Commons Institute, GLOBE, Action for a Global Climate Community and others. I’ve been in negotiations at international conferences since 1995, at meetings of high-level politicians and lobbying for the UK’s Climate Change Act 2008. I led a national charity’s attempt to cut emissions in the Guardian’s 2010 climate change campaign. Before that I coordinated a local council’s Agenda 21 group, worked on The Other Economic Summit and helped set up a solar energy coop with my local Transition Town. I’ve taken part in countless community events about renewable energy, sustainable development and climate. None of this was enough.
Since the Earth Summit in 1992 campaigns throughout the world have made some difference. Global emissions stabilised, but they are rising again and much more needs to be done. Direct action has increased awareness of the climate emergency. But is awareness and direct action enough to make climate the top priority for companies, communities and governments, so that emissions fall fast enough to prevent catastrophe?
The XR strategy
Roger Hallam, a founder of EX, describes their Civil Resistance Model in This is Not a Drill (Penguin), rightly pointing out that conventional campaigning has failed to bring about the necessary change. He argues that entrenched power can only be overcome by disruption (p.100). Breaking the law, day after day, to create a crisis and hit the authorities where it hurts is central to the strategy.
This strategy is inspired by great rebellions and social movements of the past – civil rights in America, Indian independence, suffragettes, the poll tax and a resonant dateline: 1848, 1918, 1968, 1989, 2012. There are important lessons in each of these events, but every one is different and the lessons complex. Campaigners turn history into heroic stories to mobilise support, but like the British retreat at Dunkirk, hero myths do not serve us well.
The suffragettes’ battle for the vote is celebrated as a great victory for direct action, but success was won through many channels, including decades of lobbying, support in Parliament and local organising. The National Union of Women’s Suffrage Societies had over 500 branches and more than 100,000 members across the country. We can argue over which strategy won the vote, but the bigger questions are about the outcomes for women. 100 years later women are still struggling for equality in almost every area. Just 497 women have been elected between 1918 and 2019, less than the total number of male MPs elected in 2010. Until the 1980s fewer than 5% of MPs were women. Today just 208 out of 650 MPs (32%) are women. Winning the vote was a significant step, on the foothill of a very long journey. We don’t have a century to stop the climate crisis.
Creating lasting change takes political skill, as well as passion, persistence and a strategy which suits our specific context, time and place. We can learn a lot from every campaign, but also need to think afresh every time.
Three point strategy
Extinction Rebellion’s strategy focuses actions on one of three aims (p109):
- Disruption – through mass civil disobedience
- Outreach – to tell the public the truth and bring people together
- Visioning – to demonstrate the future we want through creative collaborative action
It’s media messaging strategy aims to engage 3.5 percent of the population through strategic direct action. This is based on research by Erica Chenoweth and Maria J. Stephan in Why Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict, which showed that non-violent resistance is nearly twice as likely to succeed as violent insurgencies; that sustained, active participation by just 3.5 per cent of the population is enough to win; and the average time to victory was three years.
However, this research was based on societies with no democratic routes to change, ruled by rigid and repressive regimes, unlike the friendly policing of many XR demonstrations so far and the wiley, resilient elected politicians of the west.
From disruption to construction: more lessons from history
Post-industrial societies are immensely complex, utterly interdependent, rapidly changing and vulnerable to disruption. Power and wealth are extremely unequal, but not secure. They can be disrupted by new technologies, new entrants to the market, a financial crash, populist parties, rogue states, terrorist attacks, government policies – and climate. Powerful people and governments invest billions in identifying and mitigating risk. The fossil fuel industry has invested in lobbying and lying to protect their interests for decades (see Union of Concerned Scientists).
Climate protests could become just another risk to be managed by the powerful – or essential allies for people inside companies, governments and the media who know change is necessary but struggle to get the commitment needed.
In this context, EX can learn from political disruptors such as Scottish nationalists and Brexit supporters in Britain, the 5 Star Movement in Italy, Podemos in Spain, Syriza in Greece, Macron in France and even Trump in America. Like them or loathe them, they disrupted politics and created change.
❶ The first and most important lesson is that taking votes from mainstream politicians makes a difference:
- In Scotland votes for the SNP led to devolution and a Scottish Parliament, with its own government, distinctive policies and tax-raising powers;
- Votes for UKIP in England led to a referendum and decision to leave the EU, making Brexit the top priority for government;
- The Tea Party movement and Donald Trump seized control of the Republican Party and then the US government to shake up the country, global trading system and international commitments to tackle climate change.
The elections of Clement Attlee’s Labour Party in 1948 and Margaret Thatcher’s Conservatives in 1989 both brought lasting change across the country and in the world.
People who say voting changes nothing are simply wrong. But they are right that winning votes is not enough.
❷ Second, outsiders can win votes, but it depends on a combination of circumstances, persistence, leadership, a supportive press and often money.
Disruptive election victories usually follow a crisis, and are led by challengers with a compelling message. Europe was never a priority for more than 6% of British voters between 2003 and 2013 (Times). In 1997 multi-millionaire James Goldsmith funded 547 Referendum Party candidates and polled just 811,827 votes, averaging 3.1% in seats contested. Some Conservative MPs lost their seats, others felt threatened and long-time Eurosceptics were emboldened. Then Nigel Farage skilfully built electoral support for UKIP by tapping into insecurities created by the 2007/8 financial crisis and rapid rise of EU migrants. UKIP came top of the 2014 European elections, with 24 seats and 27% of the vote. Victory in the 2016 referendum followed six years of austerity, stagnant wages and the refugee crisis of 2015, as well as backing from wealthy donors and the largely foreign owned Eurosceptic media (Mail, Telegraph and Murdoch papers).
A supportive press and money are not necessary to win votes and disrupt mainstream politics. Italy’s 5 Star Movement, Podemos in Spain and Syriza in Greece all won power in national, regional or city governments a few years after they were launched, as the German Greens had done before. Outsiders can also win support within their political party, like Jeremy Corbyn or Donald Trump, defying the establishment through public rallies, targeted social media and a compelling message.
Political disruption usually takes leaders who can mobilise people and challenge the status quo, like Jeremy Corbyn, Donald Trump, Nigel Farage, Beppe Grillo or Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the Ukrainian comedian who won the presidency in 2019. Greens, Occupy, XR and other bottom-up movements reject the idea of charismatic leaders. They recognise that all movements are created by activists and supporters, and outstanding leaders can abuse their power. Movements are stronger when they have many leaders, power is shared and accountable. But movements also reach a wider audience through a Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Mandela, Lech Walensa, Wangari Maathai or Gretha Thunberg.
Authentic communicators give issues a human face, convey a clear message and reach beyond the inner circle. Some people have a talent for speaking in public, engaging journalists and rebutting opponents. We should celebrate and support people with the ability to win support (and votes) for the cause.
It is also worth noting that small, determined groups led the change in all these cases, much less than 3.5% of the electorate. Even in the mainstream parties just 0.7% of the electorate put Jeremy Corbyn in charge of 229 MPs. The current Prime Minister was elected by a mere 0.2% of the electorate. Even smaller groups developed the policies, messages and strategies to win power in each case. But ultimately their policies have to be put to the whole electorate.
❸ Third, winning power is not enough: rebel parties can gain power but lack the ability, vision or support to bring about lasting change, as Syriza and the 5 Star Movement discovered, and most professional politicians know.
To bring about lasting change we need effective policies and the ability to carry them out. For example, the US spends about $50bn a year enforcing the ‘war on drugs’ and has almost half a million people in prison for drug law offenses, yet the illegal global market in drugs is worth between $426 billion and $652 billion. Phasing out fossil fuels will take a battery of smart policies, carried out with will and skill. But it can be done much better than the ‘war’ on drugs, because the policies exist, based on evidence and experience.
It is essential to ensure that change becomes rooted and cannot be overturned by the next government, as Trump is doing in the US, by building cross-party support, as for the UK Climate Change Act. It is also essential to secure funding, institutions and public support to keep up the momentum.
❹ Fourth, voters can resist measures to tackle climate change.
Two of the most successful direct action campaigns this century were against measures to fossil fuels: the 2000 fuel tax protests, which abolished the fuel price escalator, and the 2018 yellow vests movement in France (les gilets jaunes) for lower fuel taxes and other measures.
Protest can also mobilise opposition to your cause: after two months of unrest in May 1968 in France, General de Gaulle’s party won a massive parliamentary victory, taking 353 of 486 seats (73%) in June. In 1969 Richard Nixon won the presidential election by campaigning to restore “law and order” in response to anti-war protests and rioting after Martin Luther King’s assassination. After Britain’s winter of discontent against wage freezes, people voted Mrs Thatcher into power in 1979. Although protests against the poll tax contributed to her resignation in November 1990, the Conservative Party was re-elected in 1992 by 14m people (3m more than Labour). The tax was replaced, but the problems with local government finance have still not been solved. Protest can shift the dial, but the direction is unpredictable.
Take heart, be smart
None of this should discourage EX or climate strikers. Protest movements have overthrown governments, replaced regimes and established representative democracies, such as People Power in the Philippines, Solidarity and velvet revolutions across Eastern Europe. Achieving system change in western representative democracies is more complex, but potentially easier because you don’t have to fight police to vote.
Extinction Rebellion’s three point strategy could use the power of elections, free speech and civil liberties to accelerate action on climate:
- Disruption – to catch attention, dramatise issues, attract support, get invitations into the corridors of power and communicate the truth about what needs to be done.
Disrupting corporate AGM’s, catwalks, traffic, press conferences, summits or financial centres can splash the issue across the press, but subtle actions can also grab attention. Greta Thunberg’s solitary school strike attracted the media, then a global movement of school students and invitations to spread her message. A Banksy mural, sportsmen kneeling in protest during the anthem, film stars speaking out – there are many ways to get attention and disrupt the status quo.
What matters is the purpose and effectiveness of the disruption, not its method. Civil disobedience is just one tool. Street theatre, stunts, vigils, school strikes, die-ins, boycotts, murals, billboards, music, social media and other innovative tactics can focus the conversation on specific aims (see Blueprint for Revolution for more ideas).
2. Outreach – once you have public attention, the most important task is to bring people together, tell the truth and turn awareness into action. Climate science is central to truth telling, but when the U.S. President describe climate change as a “hoax”, when senior politicians like Michael Gove dismiss evidence by saying people “have had enough of experts”, and millions dismiss official warnings as scaremongering, it is essential to change the narrative:
- Show people how going green is clean, safer and cheaper than the carbon economy, with its dependence on authoritarian regimes, oil wars and hidden subsidies;
- Keep pointing to the science, evidence of impact and tangible successes of a greener economy;
- Expose the annual $370bn in subsidies for fossil fuels and the IMF’s estimate that in 2017 the total cost was $5.2tn include damage to the environment and health;
- Work with alliances, local governments, professional associations and businesses to prioritise action on climate across society;
- Above all, encourage people to talk with their elected representatives, to get their personal commitment to prioritise the climate emergency.
There will be an election soon, when parties and MPs are at their most receptive. MPs pay attention to concerns raised by constituents’ throughout the year, paying attention to handwritten letters, personal emails and meetings, in their surgery or their patch.
- Get political parties and candidates to address the issue in their manifestos, and question those that do not;
- Support candidates and parties who stand for action on climate;
- Target marginal seats to make climate the decisive issue for the next Parliament and Government.
MPs said the environment and climate was the fourth most important issue facing Britain in 2018, far below Brexit, the economy and NHS, roughly equal to housing. Active outreach to MPs can make it their top priority and the number one election issue (See Influencing your MP on climate change).
Climate primaries
Anyone could shake up the election by holding open “climate primaries” of candidates standing in key constituencies to choose a Climate Emergency Candidate. All it needs is a website listing every aspiring candidate with a reasonably secure voting system and a ground campaign to generate interest. Voting could be open from the start, and show running totals for each candidate to create pressure and excitement. Voting should be open to children, and the results declared a day or two before official nominations close, to encourage losing candidates to withdraw and support a single Climate Emergency Candidate.
3. Visioning – painting a positive vision of the future and a sense of possibility is more powerful than fear of impending doom. Vote Leave won through a relentlessly positive vision of Britain outside the UK (widely criticised for dishonesty), against the dire predictions and statistics of the establishment campaign to remain in the EU. Martin Luther King attracted people with his dream of racial equality, not a nightmare fear of race riots and civil unrest.
Visions of a carbon-free future are necessary for every company, community, city and state, as well as the world, but to achieve them you need power, of the state as well as people.
Climate Politics
Extinction Rebellion says it is an “apolitical network using non-violent direct action to persuade governments to act on the Climate and Ecological Emergency”. Staying above conventional party politics is wise, but direct action can be a distraction and ignoring elections is folly.
All major UK parties supported action on climate change before it became an issue for the public. In 1988 the Conservative Prime Minister, Mrs Thatcher, warned of “a global heat trap which could lead to climatic instability”. A year later she pushed the issue up the UN agenda, in a speech worth reading now. She funded research and supported a framework convention on climate change (UNFCCC). The Conservative John Gummer and Labour’s John Prescott vigorously pursued an international treaty as well as domestic action. Prime Minister Gordon Brown commissioned the 2006 Stern Review, which made a powerful economic case for urgent action. Ed Miliband built cross-party support for the Climate Act. Politics made a difference. The UK cute emissions by 44 percent between 1990 and 2018, even as its economy grew 75 percent. Parliament declared a climate emergency. Green MP Caroline Lucas worked on a Green New Deal for years. It is now being taken up by Labour and some US Democrats. None of this is enough, but it shows change is possible.
Politicians made a difference when climate was a distant fourth on their collective priorities. Think what they could do if it was first.
Political solutions to the climate crisis can come from the left, right and off the wall. It would be a mistake to let any party “own” the issue – make them compete to be the best at addressing it collectively.
Direct action is a distraction when it diverts attention from the climate crisis to policing, courts and inconvenience to the public. It also gives campaigners against petrol taxes, for Brexit and any other issue a license to do the same. It can also attract protesters drawn to violence, as in France recently. And it could create a backlash in the following election, as after May ‘68, the anti-Vietnam protests or winter of discontent in 1978/9.
To appreciate the importance of electoral politics, imagine if Al Gore had been elected US President in 2000 instead of George W Bush. Gore would have made climate change a national priority, accelerated renewable energy and probably not have waged war on Iraq. America could have led a boom in solar power instead of fracking.
Climate is intensely political. If we want governments to act, we need to elect politicians with the commitment, policies and ability to make a big difference. The only way to do this for every candidate and political party to make it their top priority, or lose if they don’t.
It is not enough for governments to make climate their top priority. They can still mess up. The government’s top priority after the 2016 referendum was to leave the EU. They set up two new departments, spent billions of pounds, recruited thousands more civil servants, and struggle to deliver. Governments often fail to implement policies successfully, even when they passionately care about them – because of lobbying, administrative difficulties, political challenges, incompetence or policy mistakes (read The Blunders of Government for more examples). We need skilled, competent politicians to work with people to bring about change.
Cutting carbon from the economy is a bigger task than Brexit. It needs a relentless focus on every sector, investing in innovation and transforming finance, transport, residential, power supply, business, agriculture, public services. It will face a backlash from vested interests and sections of the public, but this can be overcome, by anticipating and neutralising it. Scilla Elsworthy’s strategy of decision-maker dialogue has lessons for reaching out to powerful people who resist change or are not doing enough.
Politicians will stand firm on their core beliefs, even in the face of opposition, but bend to the wind of public opinion if their seats are threatened. If we can convince them that climate matters and get public opinion to blow hard, we cannot fail. The science is on our side.
Our political system is archaic and not up to the task, but it can also be changed by electing politicians who stand for change. XR’s demand for Citizens’ Assemblies on climate is inspired, because deliberative democracy can build collective understanding and commitment to change round a positive vision of the future.
Carne Ross and other contributors to XR’s book are right to say that a zero-carbon society will require a different kind of politics (p176) – the question is, how to make it happen? Bottom-up movements like Extinction Rebellion, Transition Towns, The Alternative, Citizens’ UK, Locality etc., can build foundations and pre-figure the profound changes needed, but they are rarely enough. We need Parliament to give local initiatives power and support, change the voting system, set up Citizens’ Assemblies and instruct government to transform the economy.
Conclusion and next steps
More than half of all carbon emissions come from China, USA and the EU. Most emissions come from countries where people elect their governments. Emissions in the EU are now 20% below 1990 levels, in the US they are the same, and in China they have risen by 454% (see CO2 emissions by country). Small but determined groups can persuade politicians standing for election to prioritise action on climate change, and politicians can make governments act at scale.
To turn awareness into action, we need to talk to our elected representatives and ask what they will do about the climate emergency (asking questions is more powerful than making demands). If they are not willing or able to do enough, we must support candidates who will, so that the issue becomes decisive at every election, nationally and locally.
Where several candidates (and local parties) say they are serious about climate change, ask them to form a local Climate Action Alliance and stand aside to support the candidate most likely to win. If they are not willing to put the climate crisis before party, organise local primaries, to choose a local Climate Action candidate (whether they take part or not). Everyone should have a vote in the Climate Primary, particularly children.
Now that would be creative disruption.
We will soon have an election. The biggest issue is likely to be Brexit. But this is not the biggest issue facing the country and people are bored with Brexit. A Climate Action Alliance could focus on the priority issue for the planet. It would not be a new party, but a new way of doing politics, cutting across parties. Local climate primaries would let people, not parties, choose their climate candidate. It could be done online, like vote match and tactical voting websites.
In today’s turbulent politics, a Climate Action Alliance could cut through the noise and put the crisis at the centre of our politics.
MPs can ignore street disturbances, but not voters. Do not underestimate the power of the ballot.
Titus Alexander, is a cmpaign trainer, founder of Democracy Matters UK and author of Practical Politics: Lessons in Power and Democracy, and Unravelling Global Apartheid: An Overview of World Politics (Polity Press, 1996). Download free extracts from www.practicalpolitics.global. Contact Titus [at] democracymatters.info
