“What is worth more—art or life?”  

Phrase repeated by activists performing in the London National Gallery in October 2022.

How come the more we protest, the less people seem to care? As of the time of writing, Cambridge music student and Just Stop Oil activist Cressida (Cressie) Gethin was concurrently entering the 10th day of her trial at the Isleworth Crown Court. Cressie was facing a charge of Public Nuisance for her stunt on July 20, 2022, during which she delayed 3,923 passengers from arriving at Heathrow Airport on time. Climbing onto a gantry above the M25 highway in West London, she hung a ‘Just Stop Oil’ banner above the road and refused to come down when police authorities approached her, causing a delay of over 4 hours for drivers and flights alike. The carefully coordinated act of disruptive activism came as a response to the UK reaching its highest temperature ever: 40 degrees Celsius. 

“If your house had just burnt down, would four hours in traffic feel serious in comparison?”

Those were some of the words Cressie used in defence of herself during her trial, alluding to the disturbing effects of rising temperatures, and, most importantly, the world’s apparent naivety and disinterest towards the incoming catastrophe.

Earlier this year, climate activists threw soup at the Mona Lisa in Paris, asking “What is more important? Art or the right to have a healthy and sustainable food system?”. These examples are only a small fraction of the activist shock actions that have taken place in recent years that seem to be replacing traditional protesting methods. New climate activists have resorted to shocking, viral and provocative acts in an attempt to ‘wake up’ the population and drive attention to the increasingly threatening effects of man-made climate change. 

Despite their continuous efforts, it seems that popular support for climate activism has not increased, while the UK government plans to grant new North Sea oil and gas licences almost unopposed. The world has sadly fallen out of love with climate action and, as it seems, accepted the impending doom brought by fossil fuel consumption and industrial pollution. This article will explore the causes behind what can only be characterised as “climate desensitisation”, including the changing face of activism and the government’s suppression of environmentally conscious thought. 

Empathy and Desensitisation

It has been more than four years since Greta Thunberg, calling out UN leaders and initiating major protests all around the world, became the youngest person to ever win the Time’s Person of the Year Award. The young Swedish girl who turned into a household name and a poster child for activism continues to be vocal about all social issues (including fervent support for Palestine and global human rights), but she has disappeared from the public eye as governments continue fossil fuel plan expansions uninterrupted. One may use Greta as an analogy for the entire climate movement, and its downfall since reaching its peak popularity in the years 2019 to 2021. There are two primary explanations for this. 

Firstly, Greta Thunberg and the climate action trend may have truly been just that: a trend. As public opinion swiftly swayed in favour of the poor child with autism spectrum disorder and looked in awe as she took on the world’s most powerful men, the world just as swiftly forgot about her. Empathy was a major driving factor behind support for environmental activism, and seeing young people express solidarity with each other created a knock-on effect where support for climate action kept growing and growing. As with all trends, however, it seems to have quickly died out. The most common interpretation is that protesting about the climate has simply been ‘pushed to the side’ as a priority, as more concerning, direct, and threatening issues have arisen. Activists are ‘split’ between protests against racial inequality and police brutality, the cost-of-living crisis, and the Palestinian genocide, as the number of issues that affect the daily lives of ordinary citizens increases by the day. A recent YouGov study showed that 29% of people considered tackling climate change to be a top-three priority for the UK government at the moment, a much smaller figure compared to areas such as the economy (65%), health (42%) and immigration and asylum (36%) which were the most popular choices.

A second explanation is that the climate action movement failed to achieve the necessary changes to continue its journey. The UK’s Net Zero by 2025 strategy is looking further away as the Tory government struggles to maintain the cost of everyday living, and the European Union has failed to implement many of its Sustainable Development Goals in line with the UN’s 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. While 93% of EU citizens continue to see climate change as a serious problem, only 82% of United Kingdom respondents considered climate change to be either very or fairly important, per a survey conducted by the University of Bristol. Climate protests have never regained their 2019 peak; instead, they are now the almost exclusive domain of radical climate activist groups that are largely disconnected from – and frowned upon by – the general population. Perceived as part of a failed movement, climate protestors are now seen as fighting a lost cause. 

The ‘Right Way’ to Protest

Another reason behind the alienation of climate protesters from the general population is the increasing use of radical means of protest to attract (both positive and negative) publicity. Art attacks have become the latest trend in protesting, pioneered by climate advocate groups such as Extinction Rebellion, Just Stop Oil, and the French Riposte Alimentaire. While successful in attracting media attention to their movement, this new trend has reduced the popular support for, and arguably the effectiveness of, the climate movement.

With regards to the general population that used to rally in the millions on Fridays for most of 2019 to 2022, the movement has simply turned too radical or disruptive for them to support. Research on popular attitudes to climate change provides counterintuitive results: even though 66% of people in the UK supported taking non-violent direct action to protect the country’s nature and the majority of residents still believe that climate change is ‘very important’ in 2023, attitudes towards these radical groups fall short of entirely supportive. In the same YouGov study, 68% were found to disapprove of the Just Stop Oil group, with 44% holding a ‘very unfavourable opinion of the campaign’. 

Researchers at the Stanford Graduate Business School have characterised this as “The Activist’s Dilemma“. 

As speculated, it appears to be empirically proven that extreme protest actions reduce popular support for social movements, especially when they involve causing public disruption and going against the traditional norms of ‘peaceful protesting’. Throwing canned food at one of the world’s most beautiful paintings doesn’t register as well as cute protest signs and bake sales. 

However, it would be a grave mistake to blame these radical action groups for their ‘extreme actions’. Rather, one must look into what makes these actions so unpopular compared to traditional protesting. From enhanced government suppression to increased worries about everyday living, sociological and political changes have made the climate cause less attractive; therefore, the disruption caused by protestors is much harder to overlook. Moreover, as the world is being ‘tamed’ through environmental marketing campaigns and superficial policy changes, a false sense of progress negates the need for radical activism.

Government Repression and Green Capitalism

The Conservative Party’s 2023 Public Order Bill seems like the perfect tool for dealing with radical protesters. Not only does it heavily repress the ability of groups to cause disruptions through locking on public property, defacing monuments, blocking streets and even peacefully protesting: it also helps perpetuate the negative perception of such protests in the media and the public eye. The Bill marked the start of an unprecedented crackdown on climate activists with over 470 peaceful protesters being arrested with the aid of the authoritarian measures. The Bill not only demonises those who take part in these ‘shock’ actions, but essentially prevents them from causing enough disruption to get people thinking about climate change. In the middle of several other social crises, the voices of environmental activism are silenced and outcasted, removing the charm of the early 2020s and replacing it with violent, repressive and disruptive images. 

The government’s best ally in pushing the climate movement away from the spotlight is no other than Green Capitalism. In repressing one form of climate action, the government (and global capital) seek to replace it with a more gentle, socially acceptable, and inherently much less threatening version found in green or ‘eco’ capitalism.  

Green capitalism works by giving consumers the satisfaction of contributing to the climate movement without actually challenging any of the underlying causes of climate change. The Tory government in particular has been known to hide behind abstract goals such as Net Zero and went from being the ‘greenest party ever’ to a fervent anti-environmental political voice. Green capitalism conceals this truth, using the well-known strategy of greenwashing to create a false sense of progress in a world that is being driven head-on to environmental catastrophe. As long as the masses are content with reusable bags, ‘eco-friendly’ cleaning products and superficial recycling campaigns, they turn a blind eye to the government’s plans to maximise the UK’s fossil fuel output. In the global campaign to conceal the climate catastrophe, green capitalism is a tool for preserving the capitalist status quo and the power of the fossil fuel industry. Together with the repression of protests in all forms, curbing fundamental freedoms and giving up plans for a green transition, the world is heading silently into a catastrophe–when it should be screaming. 

Conclusions: Activism, Climate and Individualism

There are three main conclusions to draw from this article, which together constitute an ‘environmental thesis’. The starting point is recognising the oxymoron that is the fact that the world seems to care less and less about climate change, despite its effects having a greater-than-ever-before impact on our daily lives. The three proposed explanations are the following. Firstly, the plethora of social and political crises from inflation to the rise of the far-right and the erosion of democracy has inevitably replaced climate change as the top priority for citizens and activists alike. Secondly, the internal changes of the climate activism movement have made it inaccessible to the wider public and have alienated its popularity in favour of more effective anti-establishment rhetoric. Finally, the government’s complicity in silencing calls for climate action while continuing to pursue anti-environmental policies at the cost of our planet’s livelihood has perpetuated a false sense of safety (or worse, nihilistic acceptance) within society. Together with the world’s acceptance of environmental doom, plans for a soft solution that does not upset the establishment and current social order have managed to masquerade the impending catastrophe. 

Those who don’t know will never care. And those who know simply don’t care anymore.

By Iason Kazazis

Cover Image Source: Just Stop Oil Activists Walking Up Whitehall by Alisdare Hickson (distributed via CC BY-SA 2.0)