The end of social movement theory, the beginning of climate breakdown revolutionary theory - Roger Hallam https://www.facebook.com/100003329775307/posts/4475886602532288/As the UK XR rebellion moves along in a slightly repressed and underwhelming way it is worth revisiting the notion of “emergency” and the related idea that “this changes everything”. “Everything” presumably includes the way we see social movements and the whole process of political change. If we want the state to force industry to “jump to it” World War Two style then surely it is right that we to apply the same challenge to ourselves.
When I started doing research on this field at King’s College I was initially very excited by the rich literatures on social movement theory. But when it came to advising climate activists and doing the strategic framework for the setting up of XR, I quickly realised it was not fit for purpose, to put it mildly.
“This changes everything”. Does it or are we just saying it?
The main point here is that social movement theory has this idea of the “radical flank”. I was told for instance at the end of 2019 by those “in the know” that I should “go off and set up a radical flank to XR”. The implicit assumption here is that the “herd” – that is the centre of the radical opinion are the sensible guys, and then there are a few pesty ultra radicals who every now and again pull the space to the Left.
This makes no sense when you are dealing with a physical crisis – such as the melting of the Arctic. This is an objective threat not a social construction – like someone pushing your kid off a cliff, or gassing your community in a sealed room. This means that the required response is objective – you have to stop the Arctic melting and therefore have to stop the emission of carbon emissions. It is a binary situation. You either stop it or you lose it for hundreds of thousands of years and humanity goes extinct. This is what is means to be facing tipping points – it’s an absolute emergency. It’s a pushing the kid off the cliff or gassing people to death type of thing applied to the whole of humanity.
In this situation there is no “radical flank” – there is only action which is deluded, or at best performative, and then there is action that gets the job done, that actually forces the government to decarbonise. So we have to get into the ballpark of creating mass civil resistance or you fail. “Radical flank” does not come into it.
The reality is that if we don’t have thousands of people ready to go on hunger strike, engage in open criminal damage (with lawful excuse) and repeated actions which result in prison we simply won’t catch the ball before it races away down the hill.
Social movement theory is based upon the meta assumption that conflicts are linear and limited. If you don’t sort out slavery this year you can have another bash at it the following year – it’s still obscene but no one is claiming it will be ten times as obscene next year. Hitler was just plain evil but once you have defeated him things go back to normal. With the climate crisis you have three to four years to completely change the economy or you are done for – everyone and for ever. That’s a beyond the imagination totally different situation. You cannot go to nature in ten year’s time and go sorry we are ready to go to prison now – your chance has gone. Nature does not give a damn.
That changes everything.
The theory then is totally redundant. As I often say this is not a political observation any more than the observation that ice melts when it’s warm is “political”: no one wants the collapse of their societies unless they are a nihilistic psychopath. Stopping collapse is the number one priority whether you are a radical or a conservative. It’s not a question of politics it’s a question of being able to face reality. The problem is the whole complex of reformist and gradualist ideas that underlie social movement theory which then determine what we are told, and tell each other, about how to change society. In other words we look at the future with our eyes fixed on the rules of thumb or “heuristics” which worked in the past.
But the past has gone forever.
A core redundant notion here is the idea that “you don’t have get arrested”. This is pure false compassion. The situation is you get arrested now (in numbers to get to critical mass) or you watch your kids die of starvation and social collapse in a decade or so. You often get an implicit racist reaction when you say this to people – meaning they don’t think it will happen to them but to those black lives in Africa who they secretly consider as disposable and they think that is, well, okay. If the dead bodies were in the home counties they would be lining up around to block to engage in civil resistance.
Of course you have to get arrested. If for no other reason than self interest. There are always exceptions like with everything – don’t do it if your mum has just died, but they are the exceptions that prove the rule. If you have to transform society in three to four years, engaging in nonviolent resistance to the point of getting arrested is the least you have to do.
Social movement theory then is just a posh phrase for whole bunch of delusionary ideas of people in the environmental and “progressive” movements who don’t want to face reality. They become self-fulfilling prophecies – you don’t need to get arrested and so it’s not surprising that people decide they can’t be.
The alternative theory I would call climate breakdown revolutionary theory. The core idea is: “whatever it nonviolently takes”. And again this is self-fulfilling. If you tell people the only way you are going to get in the ballpark of stopping the arctic from melting is to have thousands of people in prison then you get people stepping up. I have just done around 40 public meetings in the past three months saying this so I have plenty of evidence that it is the case.
And the good news (there is good news) is once a critical mass of people adopt this new theory of political change then the transformation will happen– and very fast. No one knows if it will happen in time of course, that will be determined by how fast we give up on redundant ideas. But that it will happen is inevitable. Humans being don’t just lie down and let themselves be killed. As the elites will soon find out.
People stepping into civil resistance email ring2021@protonmail.com