Extinction Rebellion
By Chris Hedges
There is one desperate chance left to thwart the impending
ecocide and extinction of the human species. We must, in wave after wave, carry
out nonviolent acts of civil disobedience to shut down the capitals of the
major industrial countries, crippling commerce and transportation, until the
ruling elites are forced to publicly state the truth about climate catastrophe,
implement radical measures to halt carbon emissions by 2025 and empower an
independent citizens committee to oversee the termination of our 150-year binge
on fossil fuels. If we do not do this, we will face mass death.
The British-based group Extinction Rebellion has called for
nonviolent acts of civil disobedience on April 15 in capitals around the world
to reverse our “one-way track to extinction.” I do not know if this effort will
succeed. But I do know it is the only mechanism left to force action by the
ruling elites, who, although global warming has been well documented for at
least three decades, have refused to carry out the measures needed to protect
the planet and the human race. These elites, for this reason alone, are
illegitimate. They must be replaced.
“It is our sacred
duty to rebel in order to protect our homes, our future, and the future of all
life on Earth,” Extinction Rebellion writes. This is not hyperbolic. We have,
as every major climate report states, very little time left. Indeed, it may
already be too late.
In Britain, Extinction Rebellion has already demonstrated
its clout, blocking roads, occupying government departments and amassing 6,000
people to shut down five of London’s bridges last Nov. 17. Scores of arrests
were made. But it was just the warm-up act. In April, the group hopes, the
final assault will begin.
If we do not shake off our lethargy, our anomie, and resist,
our misery, despondency and feelings of helplessness will mount. We will become
paralyzed. Resistance, especially given the bleakness before us, is about more
than winning. It is about a life of meaning. It is about empowerment. It is a
public declaration that we will no longer live according to the dominant lie.
It is a message to the elites: YOU DO NOT OWN US. It is about defending our
dignity, agency and self-respect. The more we free ourselves from the bondage
of fear to throw up barriers along the forced march toward ecocide the more we
will be enveloped by a strange kind of euphoria, one I often felt as a war
correspondent documenting horrific suffering and atrocities to shame the
killers. We obliterate despair in our acts of defiance, even if our victories
are Pyrrhic. We reach out to those around us. Courage is contagious. It is the
spark that ignites mass revolt. And we should, even if we fail, at least choose
how we will die. Resistance is the only action left that will allow us to
remain psychologically whole. And it is the only action left that has any hope
of halting the wholesale extinction of the human race, not to mention most
other species.
“The times are
inexpressibly evil,” Daniel Berrigan wrote. “And yet—and yet … the times are
inexhaustibly good. In this time of death, some men and women, the resisters,
work hardily for social change. We think of such people in the world and the
stone in our breast is dissolved.”
“People have to go to
the capital city,” said Roger Hallam, the co-founder of Rebellion Extinction
and a researcher at King’s College London, who spoke to me from London. “That’s
where the elite is, the business class. That’s where the pillars of the state
exist. That’s the first element. Then you have to have a lot of people
involved. They have to break the law. There’s no point in just doing a march.
They have to literally close down the streets. They have to remain nonviolent.
That’s absolutely crucial. Once you get violent, police and the state have an
excuse to remove you. It’s got to be cultural. You make it into a sort of
Woodstock affair. Then thousands more people come onto the streets.”
“There’s a
fundamental difference between breaking the law and not breaking the law,” he
went on. “It’s a binary difference. When you break the law, then you’re
massively more effective in terms of material and psychological influence as
well as media interest. The more dramatic the civil disobedience, the better.
It’s a numbers game. You want people blocking the streets, but you need ten,
twenty, thirty thousand. You don’t need 3 million. You need enough for the
state to have to decide whether to use repression on a mass scale or invite you
into the room. The gambit, of course, particularly in the U.K., is that the
state is weak. It’s been hollowed out by neoliberalism. They’re going to find
themselves overwhelmed. We will get in the room.”
“We’re going to start
on that Monday [April 15],” he said. “We’re going to block several major
roundabouts in central London. We’re going to spread across the city—swarming.
When the riot police or the police come, we’re going get up and go somewhere
else. This is a tactic we innovated in November. We’ll give the authorities a
fundamental dilemma: ‘Do we allow these people to continue blocking the center
of a global city, or do we arrest thousands of people?’ If they opt for
arresting thousands of people, lots of things are going to happen. They will be
overwhelmed. The police force in the U.K. is underfunded, like most of the
public sector. There’s massive disaffection amongst the police. I won’t be
surprised if they form a union and say, ‘We’re not doing this anymore.’ I’ve
been arrested 10, 12 times in the last two years. Every time, police come up to
me going, ‘Keep it up, mate. What you’re doing is great.’ We’re disciplined,
nonviolent people. They’re not going to get pissed off at us. They also know
it’s over. They spend their days scraping mentally ill people off the streets.
There’s no glamour in being a police officer in a global city. The security
forces are something you want to subvert, not denigrate.”
The group has stressed what it calls a “pre-social-media
age” strategy for organizing. It has created structures to make decisions and
issue demands. It sends out teams to give talks in communities. It insists that
people who participate in the actions of Rebellion Extinction undergo
“nonviolent direct-action” training so they will not be provoked by the police
or opposition groups.
“Most of recent mass
mobilizations have been social-media-fueled,” Hallam said. “Consequently, they
have been chaotic. They are extremely fast mobilizations. Social media’s a bit
like heroin. It’s a high, but then it collapses, like we’ve seen in France. It
becomes chaotic or violent. A lot of modern social movements put stuff on
social media. It gets clogged up with trolls. There’s lots of radical-left
organizations arguing about different privileges. We’ve circumvented that and
gone straight to the ‘common people,’ as you might say. We’ve held meetings in
village town halls and city halls. We go around the country in a 19th-century
sort of way, saying, ‘Hey guys. We’re all fucked. People are going to die if
this isn’t sorted out.’ The second half of the talk is: There’s a way of
dealing with this called mass civil disobedience.”
“Nonviolent
discipline, as the research shows, is the No. 1 criterion for maximizing the
potential for success,” he said. “This is not a moral observation. Violence
destroys movements. The Global South has been at it for a few decades. Violence
just ends up with people getting shot. It doesn’t lead anywhere. You might as
well take your chances and maintain nonviolent discipline. There’s a big debate
within the radical left over the attitude towards the police. This debate is a
proxy for the justification of violence. As soon as you don’t talk to police,
you’re more likely to provoke police violence. We try to charm the police so
they’ll arrest people in a civilized way. The metropolitan police [in London]
are probably one of the most civilized police forces in the world. They have a
professional team of guys who go to social protests. We’ve been in regular
communication with them. We say to the police, ‘Look, we’re going to be
blocking the streets. We’re not going to not do that because you ask us not
to.’ That’s the first thing to make clear. This is not an item for discussion.
They know it’s serious. They don’t try to dissuade us. That would be silly.
What they are concerned about is violence and public disorder. It’s in our
interest as civil-disobedience designers not to have public disorder, because
it becomes chaotic.”
“You’re basically
holding the economy of a city to ransom,” he said of the shutdowns. “It’s the
same dynamic as a labor strike. You want to get into the room and have a negotiation.
Extinction Rebellion hasn’t quite decided what that negotiation is going to be.
We’ve got three demands—the government tells the truth, the carbon emissions go
to zero by 2025, which is a proxy for transformation of the economy and the
society, and we have a national assembly which will sort out what the British
people want to do about it. The third demand [calling for a national assembly]
is a proxy for transforming the political structure of the economy. It proposes
a different, concrete form of democratic governance, based around sortition
rather than representation. This has had a big influence in Ireland and
Iceland. The optimal transition is going to be from the corrupted
‘representational’ model to a sortition model in the same way aristocratic law
shifted to representational law at the end of the 17th and beginning of the
19th century.”
“The intelligent
people on the political left have woken up to the fact that we’ve got an
existential emergency that could destroy human society in the next 10 years,”
he said. “It’s in the cards. A lot of us have already gone through the grief
process. But these [newly awakened] people just had that enlightenment. They’re
in shock. They’re maintaining a veneer of ‘It’s sort of OK.’ This is what the
Green Deal [a United Kingdom government policy initiative] is about. It is an
attempt to pretend that industrialization can stay the same. We can all still
be wealthy. We can all still have great jobs. It is like Roosevelt’s New Deal.
But the New Deal was based on the idea that we can carry on plundering nature
and nothing’s going to happen. Maybe that was right in the 1930s. But it’s not
right anymore. It’s a matter of physics and biology. We simply cannot maintain
these levels of consumption. They haven’t reckoned with that. One of the main
reasons the climate debate has not gotten into a serious mode over the last 30
years is because people who are in charge of informing the public are terrified
of telling the public that they can’t have the high consumer lifestyle anymore.
It’s a taboo. But like any addiction, there comes a moment of truth. We’re
there now.”
“For 30 years we’ve
had one political metaphysic, reform,” he said. “You either reform or you are
irrelevant. But now, we have two massive, exponentially increasing structural
faults—the inequality problem and the climate problem. A lot of people—because of
path dependency dynamics—have worked for 30 years in this lost-cause sort of
space. They’re desperate for change. For 30 years they’ve been putting their
money on reform. The tragedy—and you can see this in the history of political
struggle going back hundreds of years—is there’s a flip where the reformists
lose control. They’re still living in the past world. The revolutionaries, who
everyone thinks are ridiculously naive, suddenly come to the fore. It’s usually
a quake. It’s not a gradualist thing. It’s a double tragedy because it’s a
quake and the revolutionaries usually aren’t organized. I think that’s what’s
happening now. It has very big implications for [resistance against] fascism.
Unless you have a clearheaded mass mobilization on the left which is connected
with the working class you’re not going to be able to stop the fascism.”
The mass actions on April 15 might fizzle out. The crowds
might not gather. The public might be apathetic. But if only a handful of us
attempt to block a bridge or a road, even if we are swiftly swept away by the
police, so swiftly there is not enough disruption to notice, it will be worth
it. I am a father. I love my children. It is not about me. It is about them.
This is what parents do.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please leave a comment.