In the conversations around climate activism there's often accusations of hypocrisy. I've been trying to think about what this is all about. I think it goes something like this:
People think that the message of climate activism to ordinary members of the public is “You're doing terrible things that are destroying the planet, you're a terrible person. We're protesting against you.” Ordinary members of the public, feeling defensive and attacked respond by saying, “Well, you're doing bad things as well.” And then look for things to prove this, find people wearing leather, or eating McDonald's, or using a car or air plane, and then say, “Well you're a hypocrite for attacking me for doing bad things to the planet while you are too.”
Of course this is a recipe for no one ever doing anything. So, what do we do about this?
Firstly acknowledge that anyone living in society, certainly in the UK, is contributing to the climate crisis. No one is perfect. We can do things to minimise our impact, but only to a certain extent.
Secondly be absolutely clear that it is only government systematic action that will make the necessary changes. We cannot do it by our consumer choices. The government is responsible for the systems of our society, not the individual citizen and consumer.
Thirdly be absolutely clear that therefore the target of climate activism is the government and the multinational corporations who are are creating and supporting a system that is creating the crisis.
Fourthly be absolutely clear that the target of climate activism is not ordinary people who are going about their lives. We want to recruit people to climate activism, not alienate them. The message should be clear, “Government action is creating climate genocide, join us in being angry with the government about this.”
People think that the message of climate activism to ordinary members of the public is “You're doing terrible things that are destroying the planet, you're a terrible person. We're protesting against you.” Ordinary members of the public, feeling defensive and attacked respond by saying, “Well, you're doing bad things as well.” And then look for things to prove this, find people wearing leather, or eating McDonald's, or using a car or air plane, and then say, “Well you're a hypocrite for attacking me for doing bad things to the planet while you are too.”
Of course this is a recipe for no one ever doing anything. So, what do we do about this?
Firstly acknowledge that anyone living in society, certainly in the UK, is contributing to the climate crisis. No one is perfect. We can do things to minimise our impact, but only to a certain extent.
Secondly be absolutely clear that it is only government systematic action that will make the necessary changes. We cannot do it by our consumer choices. The government is responsible for the systems of our society, not the individual citizen and consumer.
Thirdly be absolutely clear that therefore the target of climate activism is the government and the multinational corporations who are are creating and supporting a system that is creating the crisis.
Fourthly be absolutely clear that the target of climate activism is not ordinary people who are going about their lives. We want to recruit people to climate activism, not alienate them. The message should be clear, “Government action is creating climate genocide, join us in being angry with the government about this.”
Comments
So often the beginning of the Phariseeic argument can be phrased as, "well, you think you're so holy..." The Pharisees are constantly noting how Jesus and his followers, who claim to be so special, so often fall short - breaking sabbath observance, being unclean, not giving everything to the poor, etc. Rather than counter these attacks with "actually, we're pretty good...", Jesus turns it totally around, saying the poor, the broken, the contrite sinner, is more worthy than the pretentious "righteous one " who masks a lack of love for the radical call to action of the living God behind being "the right sort of person". So Jesus' critique of "hypocricy" is not really a critique of idealism at all, but of setting up verbal traps to justify cynicism and the status quo.
Steve H, Oxford Unitarians