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.