Inclusivity and Diversity in Extinction Rebellion

XR is a young movement and is still in the process of developing and learning. One of its 10 principles, to me one of the most significant principles, is “we value reflecting and learning”. This principle is vital to bear in mind when talking about inclusivity and diversity. Also, XR has grown a lot in the past year and is composed of many different individuals and groups, in a decentralised fashion. Thus, there are inevitably going to be many contradictions of views and many disagreements. We should be careful not to pick the negative views or inclinations of some and apply them to the whole movement.

Disagreements and even conflicts can be positive, as long as we promote healthy dialogue and discussion. However, disagreements can become toxic when certain views and positions are shut down and people fail to truly listen. This is why XR needs to put a lot of focus on receptivity, connection and listening.

From my perspective, all forms of oppression are interconnected. Racism, patriarchy, classism, ableism, nationalism, animal cruelty. XR Scotland’s messages during the October rebellion demonstrated this point. One of them read “Climate Struggle = Class Struggle” and another “Decolonise XR”. These messages show the interconnections between different forms of oppression. 

All forms of oppression derive from the same toxic mentality and, analytically speaking, are based on the psychological process of “othering”. Oppressive people fail to perceive the interconnections of the world and only see groups and things as separate. When we “other” the outside world and see it as separate from who we are, when we fail to see that nature is an extension of our bodies and that all people are family, we start to feel small and insecure. Then, to make ourselves feel more important, we start oppressing the outside world. 

Here, we are onto some very significant points when talking about XR. As a movement, we need to understand that the destruction of nature represents the destruction of all groups of people. If we can understand the source of all oppression, which derives from a toxic mentality based on othering, then we can arguably help alleviate the oppression of every mistreated group.

I feel XR is potentially one of the most important social movements in history. XR is based on the clearest science and is concerned with the survival and health of all life on Earth. For me, the oppression of nature is the ultimate oppression. I say this because it is the most existentially threatening and encompasses the destruction of all groups of people. With climate and ecological collapse, an aggressive natural world isn’t going to make distinctions between black and white, rich and poor. However, the Global South, as we speak, is already facing some devastating effects of climate and ecological breakdown. For example, as our seas are warming, tropical storms are intensifying. Families are being violently torn apart and communities destroyed.

Our globalised economic system, one could call it unregulated capitalism, is creating deep injustice and oppression across the world. In countries in the Global North, we see widespread poverty and homelessness. In the Global South, we also see widespread poverty and the effects of corporate hegemony are felt in even more negative ways. 

Last year, Global Witness estimated that 164 environmental activists were assassinated, in countries such as the Philippines, Honduras and Brazil. Many of these activists were local indigenous people defending their ancestral lands and communities from corporate takeover. The fight of these indigenous communities is highly symbolic and globally important, for numerous reasons. Their fight outlines to us the unconscionable injustice of corporate hegemony and it is these very communities who are often safeguarding the vast carbon sinks, tropical rainforests, vital to the health of our planet. Also, these indigenous communities often hold a relationship to nature which is based on connection and respect. In this sense, their ancestral knowledge is essential to us in the Global North, who have largely lost this connection and respect. This particular point is probably worth expanding on in some detail, but this can be saved for another time.

XR shows awareness of various forms of oppression, though it could do so more. For example, during our April rebellion, our pink boat was named Berta Cáceres, after the Honduran environmental activist who was assassinated by hired gunmen. Also, if you look at XR’s 10 principles, we see statements such as “working actively to create safer and more accessible spaces” and “breaking down hierarchies of power for more equitable participation”. For me, at the heart of XR is participation, justice and connection. I hope XRs many members are able to always remember and embody these values.

As stated earlier, XR is a young movement and is still developing. Thus no one should be quick to disparage XR or dismiss it for not being flawless. Why not focus on the positives and help develop this movement for the better? One of the major things I have taken from XR is its participatory nature.

From my experience, XR listens. Thus, if one feels there are things wrong with XR, why not try joining your local meetings and voicing concerns? Another thing to state, on this point, is that XR was born in Britain to a group who are arguably doing the best with what they’ve got. Every group and individual is necessarily situated and flawed. As long as XR members always strive to be receptive and open to change, then we can develop positively and connect with more communities.

Interestingly, it is the failure to perceive how all forms of oppression are interconnected that represents the downside of a lot of social justice movements. For example, the Suffragist movement was permeated by racism and the Black Panthers were brought down by sexism. I hope XR as a whole doesn’t fail to perceive these interconnections and strives to include and listen to all oppressed groups. Now is the time for total connection, community and love. The climate and ecological crisis presents an opportunity to overcome the failures of history and come together like never before. It is now or never. In the face of catastrophe, humanity may finally discover its potential.

Extinction Rebellion on TV During the October Rebellion

My primary aim when I write and think about the world is to be as honest, sensitive and evidence-based as possible. To me, the opposite of this is being ideological. Thinking ideologically equates to blind, unempathetic and self-interested thinking.  

The stark, naked truth of a situation is often hard to bear, especially when one looks at things broadly and in context, but this is essential in "growing up" and becoming a well-rounded person who has a positive effect on the world. 

Skeena Rathor on Good Morning Britain

I am impressed that Skeena was able to remain calm when being aggressively attacked by Piers Morgan on Good Morning Britain. Healthy dialogue was completely absent from the segment, as Piers, a news host, steered the discussion in a circle, deflecting the actually important issues at hand. Examples of important issues are the rate of ice-melt in the arctic, "biological annihilation via the ongoing sixth mass extinction" and how the assassination of environmental actvists is tied in with global corporate hegemony.

In so far as Piers is a human being, I love him and I believe he is capable of positive change. But as it stands, he is a manifestation of deep, deep ignorance and the unconscious proponent of a toxic, globalised system that is rapidly destroying the health of our planet and all life within it.

As a news host, it is Piers' job to inform and educate. It is shameful that he displays no knowledge of climate and ecological science, or the history of civil disobedience, and not only this but attacks people who are doing all they can, with what they’ve got, to avert climate and ecological collapse. 

Piers does not provide any mature or evidence-based arguments, but, in a highly ideological manner, blindly defends a system that is destroying life on Earth. Piers promotes trivial discussions about whether the protestors are hypocrites. By doing so, he actively evades vital discussions about the environmental devastation now occurring around the world, that is killing thousands upon thousands of poor people, mostly in the Global South, and destroying indigenous communities.

I think the reason truly vital issues are actively deflected by people like Piers is because such issues challenge the dominant system we live in and signify a desperate need for system change. Perhaps people like Piers are too weak and scared to face this fact? Maybe it is psychologically easier to go along with what we’ve been taught is normal, even though what we’ve been taught is normal is destroying our planet?

Zion Lights on Andrew Neil Show

Andrew Neil cherry picked a few comments made by Roger Hallam to disparage XR. One of them is that "our children will die in 10-20 years", as a result of climate and ecological breakdown, and another is that there will be "billions of deaths in the next century". He used these comments to question XR spokesperson Zion and asked what scientific validity they had. Andrew tried to equate these comments made by Roger with XR itself and used this false pretence to disparage the movement as alarmist.

So a few points to make on this. One is that the comments Andrew refers to were made by one member of XR and do not represent XR’s overall position on climate science. This already renders his argument invalid. Second is that Roger’s figures are actually held by numerous climate scientists and are based on clear scientific studies, for example the effects of arctic methane release. Arguably, Roger's comments are not exaggerations. Roger bases what he says on scientific study and the implications of social collapse. 

During the interview Zion reminded us that XR is simply reponding, in a proportionate way, to what climate scientists are saying. We are not ideologues promoting a biased agenda, but are basing our actions on very clear science and are asking for governmental policies to be made based on the science.

Qualified climate scientist, Jem Bendell, has written “collapse is inevitable, catastrophe is likely, extinction is possible”. If you read his paper, Deep Adaptation, you will see a highly extensive collation of climate studies and a very detailed, sober discussion of their implications. Jem's paper is detailed and well-rounded. Another well-rounded paper is What Lies Beneath, which looks at the limitations of the IPCC.

A Comment on the Conservatism of Science

Jane Morton, who has done a lot of research into the communication and messaging of climate and ecological science, points out that the scientific community is often prone to reticence and conservatism. Thus when David Wallace-Wells published an article, which painted a worst case scenario of climate and ecological breakdown, it was swiftly attacked by climate scientists. David then had to go through every statement he made, outlining his argument. 

Surely it makes sense to prepare for a worst case scenario? This is what risk-planning is. For if we prepare for the least-worst scenario, and the situation gets really bad, we will be completely unprepared. Preparing for the worst case would be a rational and humane approach, especially measured against the suffering of climate and ecological meltdown. But when people are indoctrinated from birth by the ideology of a toxic system, rational, humane and evidence-based approaches are hard to come by.

The reason people don’t want to prepare for a worst case scenario is that this will mean even more system change and will question the way we do almost everything as a globalised society. I think people are often very scared of deep systemic change. But the reality of climate and ecological chaos is far scarier.

Roger Hallam - BBC Hard Talk

On BBC Hard Talk, I didn’t think Roger Hallam was exaggerating or being untruthful. It is important to make a distinction between the basic scientific evidence, such as rate of ice-melt in the arctic, and the framing and projections of such evidence. Thus there is the science, which is pretty indisputable and agreed upon, and the projections of such science. It is the projections that vary a lot.

There is a diversity of views within climate science. Scientists shouldn’t be too confident in thinking they have a stable notion of future events and thus shouldn't be so quick criticising certain climate projections as extreme. When it comes to climate projections, I think it is difficult to say who is exaggerating and who isn’t.

I feel it is arrogant to think we have a clear notion of what is going to happen when we push global temperatures too high and our ecological systems collapse. This is because we are going into  domains of nature we have little knowledge of. “We are climbing rapidly out of mankind’s safe zone into new territory, and we have no idea if we can live in it” (Prof Corell 2007). In light of this idea, it makes sense to talk about and prepare for the worst possible projection of climate breakdown and ecological collapse, because we don’t have a stable idea of what is going to happen.

I understand the position that middle-ground projections of the climate and ecological crisis are bad enough, this is clear. But I also don’t like the idea of patronising the public and underestimating them. We need to include the public as much as possible. We need to empower people and not hide any information from them. This is connected to our demand for a Citizen's Assembly, which reflects XR's vision for a genuinely participatory society and a well-informed, empowered citizenry. I feel, when possible, XR's Media and Messaging team should present the spectrum of scientific interpretations and be clear about what each section of the scientific community is saying.

It is worth noting that XR’s success is in large part due to breaking away from the conservatism and reticence of the scientific community. Of course, scientists are trying to do their jobs and earn a living. But they have undoubtedly operated within a corrupt socio-political system and their communication and interpretation of the science has largely reflected this system. It is this corrupt system that has led to the sixth mass extinction and the climate and ecological crisis.

It seems to me Roger’s approach is one of jolting people into awareness and action and it must be recognised that his interpretations of the science are based on clear evidence and are the views of experienced scientists. It could also be noted that Roger has done exhaustive research into the history of social collapse and mass mental breakdown, which a lot of scientists don’t have or don’t talk about.

Many people are quick to criticise Roger. While some of his actions may be worthy of criticism (no one is flawless after all), I think we have to respect what he has done in co-creating XR and the massive amount of work he is currently doing for the movement. We need to look at things broadly and in context.

The Climate and Ecological Crisis - Tell the Truth

In order to properly understand something, it is essential to put it into context. Today, across the world, we see violent military interventions, staggering wealth inequality, destruction of indigenous communities, mistreatment of minority groups, starvation, homelessness and the destruction of nature. These phenomena are not new.

A clear pattern of human behaviour emerged with the invention of agriculture and writing. This pattern is largely characterised by greed, cruelty and colonisation.

But in spite of thousands of years to learn and reflect, humanity, as a whole, hasn’t woken up from “the nightmare of history”. In other words, we haven’t learned from history and evolved.

But time is running out. The oppression of nature is the final and ultimate oppression. If we toxify our natural environment enough, it will eradicate us.

I feel we need to globally overcome the unhealthy mentality that has led to such oppression and transform ourselves. This may sound like a complicated and impossible task, but it doesn’t have to be.

To begin with, it takes telling the truth. As Rupert Read puts it “telling the truth underscores everything else”.

We need to tell the truth and keep on telling it. This is why Extinction Rebellion’s demands are so resonant and why Greta Thunberg is having such an impact.

Greta speaks in plain and honest words. She doesn’t manipulate. She isn’t bought by corporations. She doesn’t have vested interests.

Only by speaking honestly can we raise awareness and consciousness, then appropriate action will ensue.

Extinction Rebellion addresses the destruction of our natural world in an honest and appropriate way, thus people can meaningfully connect with it.

Unfortunately, our politicians and main media outlets are bought and controlled by corporations, with deeply vested interests. The truth of the climate and ecological crisis threatens such interests. Thus, it is either ignored or distorted. In the words of George Monbiot:

"Because the dirtiest industries attract the least public support, they have the greatest incentive to spend money on politics, to get the results they want and we don’t. They fund political parties, lobby groups and think tanks, fake grassroots organisations and dark ads on social media. As a result, politics comes to be dominated by the dirtiest industries".

The essence of unregulated capitalism, or neoliberalism, is directly challenged by environmental awareness. This is because environmental awareness prioritises respect and consideration over profit, greed and short-term gain.

Widespread truth telling is what we need most in alleviating the climate and ecological crisis, but doing this represents a direct challenge to our fundamental societal system.

Widespread truth telling means questioning the way we do almost everything, particularly, in my view, the way we relate to nature.

This is our final chance.

The Climate and Ecological Crisis - An Oppurtunity

Nature's clock has struck twelve, ominous chimes resounding through a godless night..

History is replete with violence, oppression and colonisation. Now is the time for total solidarity and inclusion, the fight for nature is the fight for all groups.

All forms of oppression are interconnected and derive from the same toxic mentality. The oppression of nature is the oppression of humanity and life on Earth. Due to this oppression, we are in the midst of a human-wrought mass extinction event. Repeat, we are in the midst of a human-wrought mass extinction event.

During history, there have also been times of meaning and love. The climate and ecological crisis presents an opportunity to overcome the atrocities of history and transform our societies, and our identities, into something beautiful and worth living for. This transformation is alchemical, for in the darkest moment, from the basest material, something positive and unimaginable could be forged.

Industrial, neoliberal society is profoundly disconnected from nature. This society lacks community and meaning and our well-being greatly suffers for this. This society is sustaining itself by exploiting nature and poor people, breaking point is near.

Corporations and a small amount of individuals hold the majority of the world's wealth. Indigenous people are brutally assassinated by hired killers, an estimated 3-4 per week in 2018, for defending their communities and lands from corporations. Indian cotton farmers are committing suicide in high numbers, an estimated 1 every 30 minutes in recent years, due to toxic, corporate practices. Coral reefs are vanishing before our eyes, due to rising global temperatures. Industrial fishing is destroying the health of our oceans and stripping away the livelihoods of small-scale fishermen. Our great forests are being destroyed at an alarming rate. Droughts, wildfires, floods, crop failures and air pollution are killing people and wildlife around the world, at increasingly high rates. Even conservative scientists are predicting a future for humanity and life on Earth that will be catastrophic, due to climate breakdown and biodiversity loss.

Echoing throughout history, among the ominous midnight chimes, are the names of indigenous land-defenders, colonised communities, extinct animal species and all who've been oppressed.

To honour their names is to honour who we are.

We are Nature Defending Itself

Industrial society, spread across the world through globalisation, has reached a phase of profound disconnection from nature. 

Disconnection from nature means disconnection from who we really are.

Resulting from this disconnection, many people lack emotional intelligence and undergo mental health struggles.

Resulting from this disconnection, humanity is destroying life on Earth.

In the face of climate and ecological catastrophe, some people have undergone deep, personal transformations.

Such personal transformation is interwoven with the development of the climate movements, particularly Extinction Rebellion.

Extinction Rebellion represents personal as much as societal development, where the individual and the collective are linked.

In the face of climate and ecological catastrophe, some people are finding wisdom and courage buried deep at the core of their being, and are mobilising.

Extinction Rebellion are facing up to the toxic, corporate powers engendering climate breakdown, ecological collapse and mass species extinction.

Extinction Rebellion have declared our social contract null and void, for allowing corporate hegemony to destroy life on Earth.

We are in the midst of a human-wrought mass extinction event.

This is not a drill.

In failing to protect us from the most significant of dangers our governments are delegitimised.

"Dwindling population sizes and range shrinkages amount to a massive anthropogenic erosion of biodiversity and of the ecosystem services essential to civilization"

When we face the destruction of life on Earth.

When our social contract has been declared null and void.

When we have been through the dark night of the soul.

There is only one option left.

Rebellion.

"We are the ones we have been waiting for" (Hopi Elders)

My Response to Criticisms of Extinction Rebellion

Here is a list of criticisms of XR I have come across on various news channels. Following each criticism are my comments.

The movement is mainly comprised of white middle-class people

Firstly, during the London rebellion I came across many working class people.

Secondly, our movement is not remotely exclusive, it is the opposite. All groups are welcome and we are very aware of representation. Our cause concerns Mother Nature and thus welcomes every single group and individual, literally, on Earth.

Thirdly, if we do fall into a certain category, “white middle-class”, why should this stop us from doing what we think is right? And what even conservative scientists think is right? A number of the Suffragettes were also wealthy and white, should this have deterred them from doing what they thought was right?

This observation is yet another used to divert attention from the actual issue. The main reason for such diversion, I feel, is a deep fear of genuine societal change.

The movement doesn't have a mandate and is thus undemocratic and shouldn't be negotiating with the government

It is highly debatable whether we live in a fair democracy to begin with. Our “democratic” elections are funded by the super-rich and our media outlets are owned by the super-rich. The super-rich, by the way, have deeply vested interests.

All other means have been tried by many people to address the catastrophic issue of climate breakdown; bringing out studies, writing to MPs, signing petitions. These have not worked. 

The chief strategist for XR, Roger Hallam, has studied the history of protest and civil disobedience for many years. He has taken his methods directly from Ghandi, the Suffragettes and other movements, were these movements also invalid?

I'm not sure many people are aware of the severity of climate breakdown and ecological collapse, the actual issues at hand. Our democratic system is not adequately responding to these issues.

We were “having a jolly” during the international rebellion

Yes, we had fun doing what we were doing. This fun was intentional and based on love and togetherness. By no means did we have fun frivolously, obnoxiously or meaninglessly, I can testify to this. I witnessed first-hand each protest site with a very open-mind and observed nothing but creativity, beauty, togetherness and hope.

During the rebellion we discouraged public transport, disrupted people's livelihoods and thus alienated people

The concept of civil disobedience isn’t grasped by the minds of many commentators. 10 days of disruption compared with climate breakdown and ecological collapse, which by the way we are in the midst of, is what we are talking about.

We were in no way discouraging people from using public transport, buses happened to be affected by our temporary protests.

We aren’t protesting to get people to like us, we are sounding an alarm and raising an issue. Genuine change isn't easy and always entails some kind of confrontation.

We are sorry to have affected people’s day to day lives but, again, our protests are temporary and are motivated by the desire to protect nature for everyone.

A few streets away from Oxford Circus, a local independent business operator noticed my XR badge and asked if I was part of the protest. I said yes. He said although our disruption was affecting his business, he fully supported our movement. He said we were responding to the climate crisis appropriately.

On another day, a man approached us at Oxford Circus, looking over his shoulder. He told us he was on off-duty police officer and said, very passionately, that he wholeheartedly supported our movement. After dealing with so many police officers throughout the week, this moment in particular moved me.

On top of this, many members of the public declared their appreciation for what we were doing frequently on a daily basis.

Seeing as though I was at each protest site everyday, in other words I was connected to the reality of what was actually happening, I think this notion of "public alienation" is yet another manufactured opinion that has little basis in truth. Thanks mainstream media :)

During the rebellion we diverted police from other matters

Sports games.

Why don’t we protest in China?

We are British protestors.

Carbon emissions began in this country with the industrial revolution.

Carbon output and ecological collapse is inextricably bound to neoliberalism (unfettered capitalism), which, again, began in this country, as well as the United States. Thanks Thatcher and Reagan :)

Air-travel, shipping and embodied emissions in Britain have increased since 1990.

Britain is not nearly acting in accordance with even the most conservative scientific consensus on climate breakdown.

Why can’t we lead by example?

This argument against XR is another way of diverting from the actual issue and disparaging a movement that advocates genuine societal change, even if that movement is perhaps the most positive in human history. XR is literally concerned with the survival of life on Earth.

We are the Boat: Rebellion Day 5

It was April 19th, Good Friday. Like almost every night that week, I had slept on a cardboard mat on the floor of Oxford Circus, at one of our road blocks. I was feeling positive as I awoke. I was incredibly inspired by the events of the week and the public response we were getting.

Throughout the week, many members of the public declared their appreciation for what we were doing and were asking how they can help. People were bringing fruit, pastries, cups of coffee and tea. So supportive and eager to help, I felt such people were an intrinsic aspect of our protest. Many people were also signing up to join XR. I was told by a fellow protestor that across all protest sites around three thousand were joining everyday.

Witnessing first-hand the public support, passion and admiration for what we were doing highlighted the toxicity of the mainstream media and their unfounded portrayals of events like these. It reminded me of how mainstream media constructs, time and again, deeply ignorant narratives that have little to no basis in reality.

Around 11.15am, Emma Thompson began giving a speech in support of XR, standing on the symbolic pink boat which stood at the centre of Oxford Circus. The boat symbolised different things. For one, it was named after Berta Cáceres, an environmental land-defender from Honduras. With the support of her indigenous community, Berta organised resistance to the production of a dam on their sacred river, which would have displaced the community from their homes. After effectively resisting the production of the dam, Berta, in March 2016, was brutally killed in her home by hired gunmen. Also, on the boat was written “Tell the Truth”, one of XR’s prominent slogans and one of their 3 fundamental demands. This slogan was particularly fitting, as the boat was located a few streets away from the BBC HQ. The boat also represented our potential need for such crafts with rising sea levels.

Some of the organisers of XR informed us that Good Friday was to be a calmer day of reflection, with less disruption. About 10 minutes after Emma started speaking, however, a fellow rebel warned me about many police vans entering the surrounding area. I put a word out on Signal, which is a more encrypted version of WhatsApp. With Emma Thompson there and a very strong public presence, I didn’t feel the police would do much.

Hundreds of police gradually filled the area and encircled us. They let the public out but cornered us protestors in the information tent. They “kettled” us. Kettling is blocking the area and not allowing protestors to leave or enter. As I moved around the area filming the police, I soon found myself on the outside of the encirclement, and I was unable to get back in.

The sun beat down hard on us, as tension and energy increased. It was hard to say who were protestors and who were members of the public, but over 500 people filled the Oxford Circus area in support of us. The energy that filled the area was electric and powerful. A clear blue sky sat above and the sun remained strong throughout the day.

The police took many hours removing protestors, "the barnacles", from the boat, who were attached to it with glue and lockons. As the police were doing this and preparing a route to take the boat away, hundreds of other protestors set up at least three road blocks along Regent Street toward the BBC building. I ran excitedly from blockade to blockade, to see where I was needed and to observe what was going on. At this point my phone had died so I couldn’t film or photograph, though in a way this was good, as I was so involved in what was going on.

Along a particular blockade, I saw police officers dragging two protestors aggressively across the street. Thankfully this act of force didn’t escalate to anything else, for the protestors didn’t retaliate. This situation emphasised our completely non-violent approach.

I was at a road block that faced squarely down Regent Street toward Oxford Circus. To see this huge street completely drained of the public and filled with hundreds of police officers, and to hear the protestors in the distance at Oxford Circus, their chants resounding through the streets, was incredibly dramatic and powerful. The way the events of the day unfolded was very film-like.

Suddenly, a number of protesters and police started sprinting away from us toward the BBC building. I missed what street the boat had been taken through, but it had avoided the road blocks. We all sprinted to follow the boat and create another blockade. I feel at this point, after the long day of electric energy and strong sunshine, everyone was driven by ferocity and passion. Things were getting pretty heated, though I saw no violence from the protestors. Around the back of the BBC building, about 100 protesters, including me, created a road-block on Great Portland Street, as police approached with the boat.

Gail Bradbrook, one of the co-founders of XR, suddenly appeared in front of us, explaining her position on how we should proceed with the stalemate. Again, the way events progressed made me strongly feel as though I was in a film. I had never felt so energised, alive and connected to the people around me. Gail said XR’s Rapid Response Team had discussed the matter of the boat-removal the night before. They decided that wisdom should take precedence over ferocity and that the boat should be released from us with dignity. Many of the protestors at first disagreed with this decision. Gail had to explain her position twice until most of us agreed it was the best thing to do. Gail explained that at a certain point some things have to be let go and energies need to be focused on other matters. Roger Hallam, another co-founder, was also present.

As day transformed into night, we spent a long time deciding the best way of saying goodbye to the symbolic boat. Many beautiful things were said by many people. Everyone seemed energised by the day and all were very articulate and emotional. We were asked by one person, for example, to remember who the boat was named after, Berta Cáceres, and the plight of many other environmental land-defenders in the Global South.

I wanted to say what was on my mind, but couldn’t muster the courage. I wanted to say that in the past 5 days I had never before observed and felt such a high degree of creativity, beauty, organisation, passion and courage. The small communities existing at each protest site represented what humans could achieve in days to come. I wanted to thank everyone and tell them I loved them. With the intense events of the day still emblazoned on my mind, these words stirred within me, but weren’t shared with the crowd.

It is difficult to convey the feelings that circulated within me on this day. The unforgettable experiences and drama of the previous days had reached a climax. I think because of this, and because of the shared, meaningful experiences of everyone present, the boat took on a highly charged and emotional presence. The boat represented the essential cause of our movement, of our rebellion.

After much deliberation, we decided on a way to bid farewell to Berta. We all decided to march toward the Energy Institute a few streets away, where I believe Shell have an office, and here we would say goodbye. A Scottish lady in the crowd taught us a Shetland mourning song, which we would chant as we marched.

Around 9pm, we marched under glowing street lamps. Our mourning song filled the streets of the country’s capital and silhouetted families waved at us from their windows. Tears rose to my eyes. I think most of the public understand that our cause is theirs as well. Our cause is in support of Mother Nature and all future life.

Lovingly chanting, marching and talking, with the ineffable emotions of the day swirling within me, I vividly felt we were at the epicentre of history. In years to come, when climate breakdown and ecological collapse become even more apparent, these days will be looked back on and honoured. I thought of the many hundreds of people arrested earlier in the day and how I wanted them to be here, to witness the farewell of Berta Cáceres.

When I returned to Oxford Circus, after saying goodbye to Berta, the energy was much calmer. People had created signs that said “We are the Boat” on them. This filled me with deep emotion. There weren’t many people left, but the road blocks were still in place. I didn’t feel like staying. I wanted to be alone for some reason.

I managed to find my sleeping bag at Marble Arch and made a bed in Hyde Park. As I looked up at the polluted night sky of London, I felt free. I felt the whole city was ours, reclaimed by Conscientious Protectors. Lying there alone, deeply content, I'd discovered a part of myself I'd lost for a long time.

Hiroshima Mon Amour (1959)

The end of Hiroshima clearly indicates that the french female protagonist is an embodiment of Veners, her hometown in France, and that the Japanese male protagonist is an embodiment of Hiroshima. In each place a tragedy had occurred at a similar time. In Veners the female had lost her lover 10 years before, holding him in her arms as he bled to death from a bullet wound, leaving her with a deep emotional scar.

The film is mostly set 10 years after the atom bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, news of which reached the female protagonist after her grieving period. The painful effects of the bombing are evident in the male protagonist, but the film also illustrates it's collective social effects, by showing anti-nuclear strikes in Hiroshima and in the significant opening scene, where we are shown the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum and found footage is displayed of the aftermath of the bombing. The female's individual plight and suffering is thus paralleled with the collective plight and suffering of the bombing of Hiroshima. Subtle connections between the individual and the collective are here addressed and the film may, on a very important level, be seen as an exploration of such connections.

I admire the way in which, wanting to address the atrocity that occurred in Hiroshima, Alain Resnais did not direct a film about the actual bombing, but directed a film set 10 years after the bombing, detailing the event's emotional effects on individuals. It is also sensitive and intelligent, I think, that the film is primarily from the perspective of the french. Both protagonists speak french and the film is mostly from the perspective of the french female protagonist; it is she who provides the main narrative impulse. The plot is largely about her, with the help of the male protagonist, trying to come to terms with a personal trauma. Resnais is a french director giving his culturally and geographically relative account of the situation in Hiroshima, showing how it is connected to similar situations in other places.

Resnais was certainly occupied with the horrific atrocities of his time. Previous to Hiroshima, he made Night and Fog (1956) and Guernica (1950). Night and Fog is about the Holocaust and Guernica about the 1937 bombing of Spain. Resnais aimed to address and remember such events; he did not want them to be forgotten, repressed, misunderstood or repeated.

In Hiroshima both the female and male protagonists state that they are happy with their partners and yet still have a romantic affair together. This is because they, being embodiments of different places where tragedies have occurred, feel an illimitable magnetism, regardless of whether they are happy in love or not, and this magnetism assumed the form of a romantic affair. They are two countries, two groups of people, two tragedies, two individuals involved in a complex form of deep copulation and connection. Again, this point is demonstrated in the opening scene, where a male and female are shown embracing in extreme close-up shots with only their limbs showing. Such close-up shots also indicate the film's opposition to the style of classical narrative cinema, where long shots are commonly used, reminding one of it's influential position in the history and development of art cinema.

The fact that the protagonists embody larger social groups and geographical areas is significant for it expresses the idea that we have all grown from and invariably express our environments. The film also shows that such environments, and thus our individual selves, are linked to other environments and individuals too. It expresses the idea that we are all, ultimately, neighbours and relatives, and that we should thus stop warring with each other. There is a deep experience of poignancy and profundity with Hiroshima that is derived from such insights. As individuals and societies it's lessons are still desperately relevant today.

Wings of Desire (1987)

Wings of Desire is nothing short of life-affirming. There is something raw and deeply emotional in the way it recognises and values the most basic aspects of everyday life. The film overcomes many of the distractions and concerns of superficial adult life and returns to the initial, essential questions of a child coming to terms with the world.

“When the child was a child it was the time of these questions: Why am I me and why not you? Why am I here and why not there? When did time begin and where does space end? Isn’t life under the sun just a dream?”

As with many great stories, the film dramatises different realms or levels of existence. The film is about angels, specifically Damiel (Bruno Ganz) and Cassiel (Otto Sander), who are watching over Berlin, often in a caring capacity. The angels occupy another realm, which is communicated to us by slowly gliding camerawork (courtesy of cinematographer Henri Alekan), aerial shots of Berlin, an orchestral soundtrack (by Jürgen Knieper) and black and white imagery.

Damiel faces a dilemma. He is an angel but wishes, as we find out early in the film, to “enter the history of the world”, to live and be finite, to sense and love and feel pain. We learn that as angels they live eternally. They can observe every facet of the world and are all-knowing, but are disconnected from the limited, sensual and profane world of manifested life.

In an early scene, the angels Damiel and Cassiel are in a stationary car, calmly recounting their observations of Berlin, as though they had done this many times before.

Cassiel:

“Today, on the Lilienthaler Chaussee, a man walks slowly, and looks over his shoulder into space. At post office 44, someone who wants to put an end it to it today has stuck collectors stamps on his farewell letters, a different one on each, then he spoke English with an American soldier, for the first time since his school days, fluently. In the hills, an old man was reading The Odyssey to a child, and the young listener stopped blinking his eyes.

And what do you have to tell?

Damiel:

“A passer-by, in the rain, folded her umbrella, and was drenched. A school boy described to his teacher how a fern grows out of the earth, and astounded the teacher. A blind woman who groped for her watch, feeling my presence”

During the next lines of this scene we learn of Damiel’s dilemma, as he states:

“Sometimes I’m fed up with my spiritual existence. Instead of hovering above, I’d like to feel a weight grow in me, to end the infinity and tie me to earth. I’d like, at each step, each gust of wind, to be able to say “now”, and no longer “forever” and “eternity”.

No, I don’t have to beget a child or plant a tree. But it would be rather nice, coming home after a long day, to feed the cat, to have a fever, to be excited not only by the mind, but, at last, by a meal, by the line of a neck, by an ear. To lie, through one’s teeth! As you’re walking, to feel your bones moving along. To guess, instead of always knowing. Or at last to feel how it is to take your shoes off under a table, to wriggle your toes barefoot”

The realm of manifested life is characterised, prominently, by desire. Desire arguably shapes most of what humans do and think. The desire to love and to be loved. The desire for carnal pleasures. In most Buddhist thought, desire creates suffering and life is defined as suffering. Thus desire is viewed negatively and something to avoid. But desire, for me, is not something to avoid, but something to be apprehended accurately. Desire is multi-faceted and beautiful; pain, love, happiness, longing, connection, suffering. I think this point is expressed in the film too.

Essential to Wings of Desire is romantic love. Part of Damiel’s wish to enter history is his longing for a woman, a trapeze artist named Marion. This longing is expressed in the film, structurally, by the transition from black and white to colour. Black and white represents the eternal angelic realm. When we find Damiel observing Marion, there are moments where the film shifts to colour. The full shift to colour occurs when Damiel emerges into the world of life.

Marion, like Damiel, is also longing. When she finds Damiel in a dream she knows that she belongs with him. Her need for him and his need for her helps the film define human life, which is based on desire (or need) and connection. Marion says to Damiel “You need me. You will need me”.

Marion’s words to Damiel near the end of the film are very telling:

“At last it’s becoming serious. We are now the times. Not only the whole town, but the whole world is taking part in our decision. We are now more than us two. We incarnate something. We’re representing the people now. And the whole place is full of those people dreaming the same dream. I am ready”

After longing and thinking, Marion is ready to take her decision, to be serious, to embrace life. In doing so, she incarnates the world and its capacity to create. Her's and Damiel’s union encapsulates all unions; they are embodying and expressing every act of love, “We are now more than us two”.

A lot more could be said about Wings of Desire, in terms of its historical references, use of music and its connections with other films and styles. Maybe another time!

“Why am I me and why not you? Why am I here and why not there? When did time begin and where does space end? Isn’t life under the sun just a dream?”

David Bowie's Quicksand

Recorded in 1971, Bowie’s song Quicksand represents a desperate striving for knowledge and from it derives a resonant, sophisticated and accurate conception of our place in the world. The song demonstrates Bowie’s eclectic learning at the time. He references Nazi history, Mysticism, Buddhism and Friedrich Nietzsche.

Quicksand brilliantly expresses how humans can drown in their thoughts and lose sight of reality. To me, this is the most significant and common human phenomenon, that can grip people in delusion throughout life, until "death's release". This is what makes the song so emotive and affecting. Using quicksand as a metaphor for this is perfect, because the more you struggle in thought, the deeper you sink. Thus the song also addresses the necessary resignation that one must achieve in light of this, “And I ain’t got the power anymore”. To achieve clarity, the desperate striving must at a certain point cease.

Bowie realises that he is limited by his animal mind “I’m tethered to the logic of homo sapien”, an insight particularly prominent in Nietzsche’s thought. There is a limit to which we can consciously grasp the world, which is why Bowie feels true, full knowledge will come with death, the ultimate transformation, "knowledge comes with death's release". Aldous Huxley explains such human limitation very clearly in The Doors of Perception. As biological entities surviving in the world, we must filter our experience of the universe, we must set limits.

I can see why one would interpret the lines “don’t believe in yourself, don’t deceive with belief, knowledge comes with death’s release” as nihilistic. But, I think, this would be a superficial and simplistic interpretation. These lines are saying that only when we abandon naïve belief will we start to live genuinely, fully and in accordance with reality. They are saying we must humble ourselves to the mystery of the world and realise our own limitations, and only by doing this can we live truthfully. 

The fact that Bowie could perfectly express these deep and mystical insights at the age of 24, with such a beautiful song, is impressive. I knew there was a reason I intuitively loved this song from an early age.