In a piece on Wednesday, the online editor of The Monthly, Nick Feik, declared that the Green movement has been an abject failure. Drawing comparisons with the civil rights movement, Feik argued that recent reports of growing greenhouse gas emissions showed that the environment movement has fundamentally failed to achieve its goal of solving climate change. As he says:
“IF THE civil rights movement were as unsuccessful as the environmental movement has been, Rosa Parks’ granddaughter would still be sitting in the back of a segregated bus.
She might be secure in the knowledge that a global consensus had formed against racial discrimination, but she would still be sitting there.”
It’s interesting the Feik decides to use the parallels of the civil rights movement to frame his argument. In doing so he has shown very little understanding of the history of the civil rights movement, nor the reality of the successes of the 30 years of the Green movement.
To understand modern social movements, there is one key thing to know; change takes time. Whenever you are facing an opposition who has the status quo on their side, making change is always going to be difficult.
Let’s have a look at the civil rights movement for example. If you were to read Feik’s piece you would probably come under the impression that the movement simply began when Rosa Parks sat at the front of the bus one day. What this ignores though is the long history of struggle; one that lasted hundreds, if not thousands of years. It was this history of struggle that lead to the moment where Rosa Parks sat on that bus, and the many other similar moments that formed the modern civil rights movement.
With that context in mind, when you look at the environment movement, you can actually see a pretty impressive history of achievement.
Let’s have a look at climate change in Australia for example. In this country alone, environmentalists have achieved a legislatively mandated renewable energy target, a carbon tax on the country’s largest polluters, and billions of dollars in investment into renewable energy. We have seen a population that now takes the environment seriously, and climate change is firmly on the national agenda. The Green movement has also seen the rise of the Green Party, who have now become, and for the time being look cemented to be, the third largest force in Australian politics. Environmental action is now also a major consideration for both major parties. And to think that all of this has happened only within the last 30 years really points to an amazing turn around.
Look around the world and you will see example after example just like this. Put it all together, and one thing becomes clear; the world would be in a much more perilous situation if it wasn’t for the global environment movement.
This record is particularly impressive because of the complex situation climate change presents, and the opposition the movement has faced. Addressing climate change involves dramatically rethinking our economic and energy system. And in doing so it has meant coming up against some of the biggest economic powers in our world – fossil fuel companies that have had no desire to change their practices.
And this is where Feik’s criticism really falls down. In reading his post you could easily come away thinking that if only the environment movement had changed their tactics everything would be fine by now. The reality is however that action on climate change was always going to challenge the power of the fossil fuel companies. Because of this, no matter what tactics the movement employed, change was always going to face stiff opposition. This is the inherent nature of a movement that is challenging power structures.
Now, could we have done a better job taking up the fight up to these companies? Could we be in a better position? Yes, of course we could. There is a lot that environment movement can do better and I don’t think I know of one environmentalist who is happy with our current situation.
But to blame the environment movement for where we stand not only ignores the achievements that have occurred, but also deflects the blame from those who deserve it; the fossil fuel companies who are the real enemies of climate action.