Two years ago, you saw us blocking Lisbon’s Second Ring Road. We did so because we decided to be radically honest with ourselves and with everyone: the climate crisis is a premeditated and coordinated act by governments and companies against people, and we must all stop consenting to it. Since then, we have carried out actions never before seen in Portugal. We have held hundreds of debates, conversations, and presentations. We launched the Disarmament Plan and the Peace Plan. We organized two mass actions. We organized a boycott of the COP and participated in dozens of international and national spaces and meetings. Today, we want to tell you what we have learned after these two years, what we celebrate, and where we have failed, in a vulnerable and honest conversation.
Perhaps our greatest celebration is the increased commitment, honesty, and courage of the hundreds of people who stopped consenting and took action over the last two years to break the normality and stop the attacks. Many of us took risks that would have been unthinkable a few months earlier, especially the new people who joined.
And those risks were worth it. In the beginning, in 2023, it was almost a binary: on days of action, there was news about the climate; on days without action, there was no news about the climate crisis. Conversations in cafes and at home also changed their “normality” in the weeks when we acted. It is true that many of the conversations were more focused on the tactics used than on what we were saying and defending. It is also true that many people who were neutral ceased to be so, and we saw an exponential increase in supporters of the cause and even of Climáximo. With our insistence and determination, we achieved a more profound impact: we managed to force the conversation about the climate crisis at the time of the 2024 legislative elections; coverage of the forest fires in the summer of 2024 was drastically different and much more politicized than in 2017; and coverage of the floods in Valencia and the forest fires in Los Angeles was much better than all previous coverage.
We are under no illusions; we know that despite these small victories, we have not managed to make a permanent impact on the discourse on the climate crisis. With the decrease in actions in 2025, there was also a drop in coverage of the climate crisis in the media and in conversations among family and friends. Society has not stopped normalizing the violent acts of companies and governments. A prime example of this is this summer’s fires and heat waves: the climate crisis was rarely mentioned as a cause and exacerbating factor, let alone mitigation measures. Society has not stopped normalizing the climate crisis.
There are two reasons that have been pointed out to us several times as mistakes that damaged the fight for climate justice, but reality has not provided us with evidence of this: I) that we were alienating people with our tactics; ii) that we were alienating people by saying we were at war.
It is true that upper-middle-class columnists have repeatedly said that “these actions alienate ordinary people.” What we know is that they bother the financial sponsors of the media outlets they work for. Over the past two years, we have received support from thousands of people who, while not comfortable with the tactics we used, understood why we did so. It is true that by forcing neutral people to take a stand, we led to the activation of opposition, and more people expressed hatred—exacerbated by the general growth of the far right. On the other hand, there was no evidence that people changed their opinion negatively regarding the climate crisis, the climate justice movement, or Climáximo’s specific political position.
Regarding the presentation of our analysis of the climate crisis as a declared war on our lives, we were surprised that our strong statements in press releases about the state of war and the violent attacks underway, were almost always reported in the media, and that society and public opinion did not find such statements new or shocking—it remains to be seen whether this was because they did not hear them or because they agreed that governments and corporations are actively killing us and leading to social collapse. In a frightening way, society reacted as society in Germany and several European countries was reacting in 1937.
In terms of short-term impact, we concluded that explaining the climate crisis as war leads to changes in perception and opinion when used in face-to-face conversations, such as debates and direct conversations, becoming almost empty when repeated in media interviews. We failed to find ways to communicate on a large scale and to use accessible language to engage in dialogue and mobilize society in the face of the current level of attacks and the fact that the responsibility for stopping the collapse lies with ordinary people, since it is the political and economic decision-makers who are consciously attacking us all.
It should be noted that one factor we did not count on, and which had a major impact on the full transmission of our message was the fact that we were excluded from the mainstream media in terms of interviews and opinion (in contrast to experiences in other parts of Europe). We have not appeared on television once in the last year—unlike in previous years when we went to the studio several times to comment on the climate crisis and related events such as fires or the COP—we are no longer invited to studio interviews, and our opinion articles are being systematically rejected. Even so, our support has grown exponentially.
*
This is another great celebration we want to share with you. In the last two years, we have achieved an increase in visibility and active support that is unmatched compared to the previous eight years. Active and visible support for the climate justice movement is increasing. Active and visible support for Climáximo is also increasing. We have recorded many indicators (followers on social media and on the website, new forms and number of participants in public events, popular topics on social media, people issuing statements of support on their own initiative, immediate reaction of support from passersby during actions, etc.) in this regard. There came new contacts from artists, scientists, unions, neighborhood associations, and professional associations, in numbers we had never seen in Climáximo, not even during 2019.
However, this exponential support did not translate into participation in actions or membership of the collective. We hypothesize that the leap to join and act was too risky for people, given the type of actions we were carrying out. Therefore, in the last year, we focused on mass actions that were accessible and low risk, mobilizing society to act side by side: in November, we achieved the largest mass action in the last five years of Climáximo—‘Parar Enquanto Podemos’ (Stop While We Can)—, although it did not reach thousands of people; five months later, with the action ‘Parar os Aviões’ (Stop the Planes), we had the lowest participation ever. We did not effectively manage to make last year a turning point in the fight for our lives. Practice thus ruled out the possibility we had. In reality the weight of the risk of an action is measured according to the risk of what happens if you do not act. We failed to anchor people in the risk of not acting and/or the possible gain if they act.
If we recall the Grand Strategy and look at some of the audiences we wanted to provoke change in, this is the information we currently have:
Neutral people: the break from normality led to a decrease in the number of people who were neutral about the climate crisis, leading to an unprecedented increase in sympathizers. Part of the passive opposition became active.
Sympathizers: there is a greater willingness to talk, help, and collaborate. However, there is also greater timidity and public distancing from climate activism, as well as fear of participating publicly in our actions. The reasons for this include people not wanting to be seen as “too radical,” fear of repression in the workplace, and fear of police repression during actions. There are signs that supporters have become more alarmed and aware of the problem but still think it is a problem that will affect “others” in the “future.” They do not consider it their responsibility to act, often seeing themselves as accomplices/part of the problem. They think that doing something is for ‘others’ who are “the brave ones.”
We failed to break the dichotomy between activists and ordinary people. Road blockades and the Stop the Planes action were sometimes interpreted as placing the blame for the climate crisis on people who have ever flown or who are driving, reinforcing a sense of individual guilt rather than responsibility to act. Despite active efforts to counter this interpretation, it was quite visible, particularly in relation to aviation.
People active in social and/or climate struggles: there has been a normalization of new ways of acting, and there is enthusiasm to apply them; there is a general recognition of the discipline, integrity, and capacity of Climáximo and the struggle; However, we have not broken through the despair and lack of vision through the disarmament plan and actions to stop the destruction: they continue to believe that it is impossible to stop social and climate collapse and/or do not consider themselves responsible for it; coupled with this, legal repression has led to the demobilization of many of these people.
To tell you about the state of the other two social categories in focus in the Grand Strategy, we must first tell you a little more about what we did and what happened at the national level.
*
We celebrate having contributed greatly to the normalization of civil disobedience in Portugal, and that today the movement is more resilient and capable, with various resources to face repression.
In the broader ecosystem of the movement, we hoped to bridge the gap in ambition. We hoped to contribute to a reconfiguration of social movements in Portugal, where everyone would recognize the climate emergency as the context in which we live, fight, and strategize. We were unable to do so, nor did we find partner organizations with whom to collaborate, apart from Greve Climática Estudantil Lisboa (Lisbon Student Climate Strike). We were unable to build strategic alliances that went beyond tactical agreements.
Since 2022, we have not missed a single mass protest. Housing, anti-racism, and social justice have been the main drivers of mass mobilizations in Portugal (it is also worth mentioning the march for the centenary of Amílcar Cabral). We are present. We are available. We are committed. During 2023 and 2024, we scheduled and participated in more than 100 conversations with organizations and organizers in Portugal, being radically honest about strategy and plans. We reviewed the Disarmament and Peace Plan based on changes proposed by various organizations twice. In 2024, we realized that we were becoming bitter towards other organizers due to the lack of a response compatible with systemic change in climate deadlines. So, we added another dimension. We approached organizations and movements with intention, openness, and honesty. This took various forms (informal meetings, joint events, in-depth discussions, joint actions). This allowed us to clarify our position. Today, we are perceived by most organizers as courageous, serious, ambitious, and capable of analysis and reflection. However, despite our efforts, we failed to demonstrate the climate crisis as a social problem. We failed to demonstrate that it is not an issue, but a deadline. We have failed to create the agreement that is lacking among organizers and to make the disarmament and peace plan visible as a plan capable of offering a cohesive response to the attacks, on various fronts, by governments and companies against the people.
Today we are witnessing the dismantling of all basic services, with the housing, health, and cost of living crises. We are witnessing barbaric policies against migrants, misogynistic policies, and policies against working conditions. With the general degradation of capitalism and the worsening climate crisis, authoritarianism and scarcity are pushing for the opening of new conflicts, both locally and regionally. The big blocs are entrenching themselves and seeking armament as a response to large-scale industrial investment. In a headlong rush, the technological elites have launched Large Language Models, called them Artificial Intelligence, and are trying to automate all areas of activity, ignoring the social impact and environmental destruction that increased processing power entails. If the struggles of each and every one of us on these fronts of attack on people are not anchored in climate deadlines, not only will authoritarianism and the attack on basic living conditions intensify on a scale never seen before, but barbarism will be inevitable, already witnessing its beginnings with the rise of fascism and the atrocious genocide in Gaza.
For all these reasons, we know the importance of having a strong anti-capitalist movement in Portugal anchored in climate deadlines. This is our assessment of the changes in the remaining two categories presented in the Grand Strategy for these two years:
Climate organizations: they showed nominal solidarity, without any substantial internal debate on the state of war in which we live and without any substantial change in their own modus operandi. We expected more internal debates, deeper reflections, perhaps the emergence of new groups. There was also no visible increase in these against police and legal repression. Despite the emergence of some groups—such as Jornadas pela Democracia Energética (Days for Energy Democracy), Ebulição (Boiling), Alvorada pela Floresta (Dawn for the Forest), Alecrim (Rosemary), and Encontros Locais Pela Justiça Climática (Local Meetings for Climate Justice)—no agreement was reached on the fact that halting the climate crisis currently implies dismantling the capitalist system. The results we obtained were residual. They largely see us as “the rebels” doing our part, while they have a different role. We failed to show that the generals in this war will not stop the attacks of their own accord, and that it is everyone’s role to stop them (even if using different tactics and strategies to do so).
Left-wing organizations: for an adequate response, we have separated them into parties, unions, and social organizations:
Starting with the left-wing parties, their response was one of fear, resignation, or apathy: in the general elections in 2024 and in 2025, virtually all parties proposed policies that would increase emissions (such as a new airport), and no party presented plans to shut down fossil fuel infrastructure. Not only is the parliamentary left currently very weak, but no one is presenting a real and credible anti-system response on the left.
By divesting from the Jobs for Climate campaign and focusing on the Disarmament Plan and Peace Plan—which encompasses all the campaign’s measures—we have diminished our relationship and direct contact with unions, which we have been unable to recover through other channels.
A few days after the launch of the strategy in 2023, a brutal escalation of the genocide of the Palestinian people took place, starting on October 7. These two years have thus been marked by joint action in different forms with the movement for a free Palestine. This is one of the strongest movements, being in a constant state of emergency. In recent months, it has lost its ability to mobilize the masses and is very disjointed and lacking a strategic vision, which makes any agreement beyond the tactical impossible. We will be attentive and available for forms of collaboration that are not disconnected from the systemic change necessary for us all to get out of this hell together. At the same time, we have followed the anti-fascist movement, which is agile and quick to respond, but without plans. On several occasions, we have been on the anti-fascist front line in Lisbon. We will continue to be present, knowing that the only way to stop fascism is to stop the climate crisis. In the last two years, Vida Justa has emerged and managed to occupy a central role on the left, with an organized base and the ability to mobilize around anti-racism, the right to housing, and transportation. Despite its focus on incremental change, its references to past revolutionaries, its consistent presence on the front lines, and its novel approach to action and organization indicate that it is a promising space. We have also witnessed several mobilizations in defense of migrants’ rights, led by migrants themselves. Finally, we are excited and hopeful about Habita and Stop Despejos because they are reflecting internally on the practical implications of deadlines for all struggles. We are aware that today in Portugal there are several organizers and organizations that are much more competent and capable of mobilizing and organizing society than we are, and we are deeply concerned about our failure to reach an agreement with them on deadlines and our lack of concrete plans to get out of capitalism before we collapse ecologically and socially.
*
Let us now tell you in a slightly more summarized way what we have been doing these past two years at the international level, since this is a global struggle. We can tell you that we celebrate the different attempts, with creativity and flexibility, while recognizing that they have not achieved a satisfactory result.
Well, let us explain a little better.
On the one hand, we have not managed to get any new groups to form based on the state of war or any existing groups to declare a state of internal climate emergency. Nor have we reached an agreement for joint action against weapons of war in the spring of 2025. On the other hand, we have managed to get some groups to use part of the war framework in their actions (e.g., XR Spain and the Oil Kills actions). Through the attempt at international action with the war narrative, we opened deep and urgent conversations about change theory, leading to questioning and internal changes. We are attentive and curious about the reconfiguration of A22 and the new space for articulation that they are creating, as well as the various economic disruption actions that connect the weapons of the fossil fuel industry with the weapons of war for Israel.
Similarly, although we were unable to secure a permanent boycott of the COP or build international coordination for a break, we secured the Earth Social Conference with Boycott in November 2023. The change in the choice of COP locations, from countries where any social mobilization is impossible to countries considered progressive and where the government has great power over social movements, presents new challenges. Today we follow the Eco-Socialist Meetings in Belém and the Anti-capitalist Meeting for the climate and for the end of genocides in Brazil, both in response to COP30 in Brazil. We have also been present and available in the main spaces for international coordination on climate justice and in all spaces at the European level, being recognized and respected by different organizations. We also follow the housing movement at the European level, in particular the European Action Coalition for the right to housing and the city, being part of the organizing team for the next meeting of this coalition, at the invitation of Habita and Stop Despejos.
We are alarmed by the lack of ambition and commitment in most international forums, the general lack of coordination within and between movements at the global and European levels as well as the growing tendency to “adapt to collapse” in the European movement, abandoning mitigation. We have taken it upon ourselves to revive the movement in Europe focused on climate deadlines.
We are curious and attentive to the new reconfiguration of the movement, the various uprisings taking place around the world, and international spaces not led by Europeans. We highlight the Global Campaign to Reclaim People’s Sovereignty, Dismantle Corporate Power and Stop Impunity, Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty, The Peoples Want, and the People’s Platform Europe.
*
To be honest with you, moreover, the truth is that fatigue weighed heavily.
The state’s repression in response to our honesty had the impact of stealing thousands of hours, euros, and energy from the struggle. This slowed us down. We were unable to adapt to early elections in 2025 and to understand the impacts of joining the actions of the growing far right. This past summer, we lacked the necessary preparation, energy, and flexibility to ensure an adequate rapid response to heat waves and devastating fires.
Let us explain a little about what has happened internally over the past two years.
We have made a leap forward in our capacity for action, communication, and internal resilience. The internal agreement on the state of war was crucial in enabling us to maintain our focus and political and strategic cohesion and to withstand the increased risks and repression.
On the other hand, we expected to have new organizers after these two years, which did not happen. In fact, by mid-2024, we had fewer people than in the summer of 2023, and more people than ever were unemployed or studying (although almost half of the coordination functions were still performed by people who had jobs). So, in the last year, we put emergency measures in place to break down barriers to integration and ensure that we remained a collective of working people. We have now managed to become more people than we were two years ago, and most people currently have a full-time. We are still learning how, in the face of repression and the unity that the actions created among those active in 2023 and 2024, we can counteract the internal trends that place barriers to our growth.
Today we face three challenges:
At the communication level, for the first time, the name Climáximo and climate activists have a direct association in the minds of thousands of people in Portugal.
At the organizational level, the strategy of the last two years has meant that we have been compartmentalized into teams, specialized in tasks, and with a rigid approach. We have thus lost our agility, our ability to argue and organize, to manage relationships, and to lead spaces with different cultures.
In terms of transformation and discipline, we have all taken a giant leap in our commitment and the risks we take individually and collectively, being willing to go to jail. On the other hand, the focus on actions distracted us from “doing what is necessary,” making it clear that we were neglecting deadlines and not putting the necessary energy into growing our personal organizational capacity, which is essential for growing the movement. We also took actions where we failed in internal and external accountability, which we are still repairing and mitigating.
We continue with honesty, discipline and hand in hand, knowing that we must build a movement capable of changing everything in the coming years.
*
We started from the assumption that if we showed determination and integrity, the people of Portugal, the vast majority of whom are concerned about climate change and want better political decisions, would eventually join us. On a broader social level, we must acknowledge our profound failure: there is no social consensus on the state of climate emergency we find ourselves in, and on the responsibility we all share to stop the attacks. We refuse to conform to blaming people (or other actors in the movement). We also refuse to accept living in a climate collapse. This means we must be able to show how the attacks are happening in Portugal; have a diversity of people organized to act and take responsibility for stopping the attacks; and show that not only is a world without fossil fuels possible, but that it is much better than the hell that lies ahead. Read our new Declaration of Climate Emergency in 2025 to understand our next steps.