The sticking and smearing actions of climate activists cause an uproar. Some warn of radicalization and eco-terrorism. However, researchers emphasize that the groups are characterized by their non-violence. But they warn that this could change at some point.
With roadblocks and smear attacks on famous paintings, climate activists cause a stir, but also outrage. The debate in the media and in politics was heated up by the accidental death of a cyclist in Berlin last week. This had been run over by a cement mixer and later died. Activists from the group “Last Generation” had previously stopped traffic with a blockade protest, so a special vehicle from the fire brigade that was on the way to the scene of the accident got stuck in the traffic jam.
A possible contributory negligence of the climate activists in the death of the cyclist has not been proven, but the methods of the protesters are sometimes heavily criticized. CSU politician Alexander Dobrindt spoke of a radicalization of the climate movement and compared the “last generation” with the left-wing extremist terrorist group Red Army Faction (RAF). But are concerns about radicalization justified?
“When there are complaints about the radicalization of the movement, it’s usually about the means,” says Robin Celikates, professor of social philosophy at the Free University of Berlin. However, he emphasizes that protest practices such as school strikes, road blockades or blockades of coal mining – such as the forest occupations in the Hambacher Forst in 2012 and in the Danneröder Forst in 2019 – are still “relatively moderate” in historical and international comparison.
According to Celikates, the impression of radicalization is mainly due to the fact that there are more blockages in road traffic or high-profile actions in art museums that are designed to disrupt and provoke. “The strong and sometimes aggressive counter-reactions from politics, from some media and also from parts of the public certainly also contribute to this impression.”
According to Celikates, the specter of a new form of eco-terrorism or a “green RAF” is a completely exaggerated attempt at discrediting in the current situation. This is intended to criminalize legitimate protests, even if they are of course not always justified in individual cases. The scientist emphasizes that all forms of climate protest so far “explicitly and as a matter of principle exclude violence against people”. And that is what clearly distinguishes them from violent resistance or even terrorism.
Political scientist Sebastian Haunss from the University of Bremen knows “at least three reasons” why it is exaggerated to speak of a radicalization of the climate protests. “For one thing, there is no general tendency towards more confrontational forms of protest in the climate movement.” On the other hand, the forms of protest of the “last generation” are only very limited violations of the rules, with at most minor damage to property. Attacks on people did not take place. “The level of violence and presumably the amount of damage to property on every Saturday in the Bundesliga is likely to be significantly higher,” said Haunss.
Thirdly, no radicalization can be observed at the level of demands either. “There is a great deal of agreement here between the various groups in the climate movement,” says Haunss. Above all, they all called for compliance with the Paris climate goals – ultimately compliance with an international treaty that had already been agreed and thus a “quite moderate demand”.
Simon Teune, founding member of the Institute for Protest and Movement Research, also emphasizes that the willingness to use violence cannot be observed in the climate justice movement. “There is neither a current in the movement that sees the use of violence as legitimate, nor is there a milieu that would be willing to use violence.” A position that distinguishes the movement from previous social movements.
But whether it will stay that way is not certain, warns Teune. Because the fight against the climate crisis is “a fight against the clock” – previous actions from court cases to large demonstrations to civil disobedience have not yet led to a rethinking of climate policy. “It is quite conceivable that the frustration and fear of the threatening development of a climate collapse will change the calculations in the movement and that individual or even smaller groups will renounce the consensus on non-violence.” So far, however, there is no sign of this, emphasizes Teune.
Social philosopher Celikates also emphasizes that the potential for radicalization increases if politicians continue to be unwilling or unable to find adequate answers to the crisis and to initiate the necessary changes quickly enough. “The responsibility lies primarily with politicians to ensure that there is no escalation.”
