2024 will be the biggest election year in history. More than half of the world’s population will have a chance to vote. National elections are expected in at least 64 countries, as well as in the European Union. 2024 will also be a year of ever more intense heart-waves, droughts, floods, storms, hunger, displacement, social conflict, violence, and death due to the climate crisis – which is an act of extreme violence premeditated and coordinated, by the governments and the corporations to the people and the planet – a declaration of war on life.
In the run-up to recent Portuguese elections, last March 10th, Climáximo carried several actions to ensure the climate crises was part of the debate, and to make it visible that this elections were in fact deciding who the next executors of the war declared on the people and the planet were. This text reflects the analysis that made us act the way we did, and seeks to explain how we interacted with the reality of an electoral period which ignored the biggest emergency humanity has ever faced. The pictures were taken during some of the actions we did during the electoral period.
What to expect from this electoral year? And how can the movement use this historical election year?
There is an overwhelming global trend of rise in the far-right (in parliament and on the streets), and a general consolidation and move of the parliamentary landscape towards the right, while there are no realistic climate justice programs in the ballots.
The climate justice movement should by now be more than sure of the lack of intentions from governments and institutions to properly address the climate emergency, and to put forward a program for climate justice that can secure dignified and just living conditions for all. More than that, we know the climate crisis is a premeditated and coordinated act of violence of governments and corporations against people and the planet. We know that governments and corporations are guilty of the climate crises, and hence we must not delegate the responsibility of avoiding humanitarian collapse to them – they are well aware of what they are doing, and have no intention to stop it. We must not consent with the ongoing level of violence they are condemning us to. The responsibility to stop them is on us.
People all around the world will vote to elect governments which will have mandates during the most decisive period in the history of humanity so far. This electoral year – which depending on the elections in question, will elect governments and parliaments with mandate until 2028 or more – does not set the climate crisis as the main priority and key debate. Elections as such are hence, not only unacceptable, but also anti-democratic, as they are happening in an institutional and media framework which completely dismisses any plan for halting humanitarian collapse.
Although, regardless of electoral results, there is no hope to solve this crisis in the ballots – on the contrary, this historical year of elections will most likely have a catastrophic effect on the current institutional and governmental climate agenda of institutions and governments, which is already one of climate collapse – the climate justice movement must not dismiss the disruptive and narrative opportunities that the elections enable.
The climate justice movement can use this moment to show the absurdity this moment represents, to show that those perpetuating this level of violence against the people and the planet are not the ones who will save us, and hence to build the power we need to stop them.
Elections and electoral debates offer breeches (even if small) in hegemony, that can and should be taken as opportunities. This is a time in which a large part of society is much more attentive to the political arena and in which issues that are often left-out can be pushed into the agenda, and/or in which mainstream framings can be contested and alternative framings can be shoved. (In the EU-member states, further advantages can be taken, by the climate justice movement, from this moment, at it presents possibilities of coordinated actions and shared disruptive narratives due to the common electoral period.)
Then if avoiding climate collapse isn’t on the polling station, what shall the climate justice movement do?
Use elections to force the right polarization. The current polarization in mainstream politics in regards to the climate crisis is one in which both sides agree on climate collapse. The polarization between “denialism” and “greenwashing” must be refused. The first pole is pushed by the far-right and conservatives under the claims that “climate change isn’t real”, there is “no science to prove the need for emission cuts” and/or that “it is just to expensive to act”. The second pole is dictated by the corporate agenda claiming “technology will save us”, and “the markets are capable of solving this” and is pushed by the greens, left and center parties. There is no possible struggle against climate chaos or the far-right without breaking this false polarization.
The movement must expose – via direct action and via a push for space in media outlets – the inadequacy of the political programs presented for elections, and push for the necessary polarization: end of capitalism and global emission cuts of 50% by 2030 vs the collapse of earth and social systems and a death sentence to billions of people.
Furthermore, by making an analysis of the electoral programs, and comparing them with what a real climate justice action plan would look like, the inadequacy of the proposals presented in the ballots can be make visible. For Climáximo, such an analysis was possible because we have launched a Disarmament and Peace Plan which describes the exact logistics of the war that the governments and the corporations declared on the people and the planet and explains how to stop the ongoing violence and put a stop to climate crisis.
We could then use that analysis to make a much needed statement – there is no way out of collapse by pressuring government and corporations to do the right thing. As previously mentioned, they are well aware of what they are doing. The climate crisis is a premeditated and coordinated act of extreme violence. We do not pressure those planning to attack, and kill us – and that is what new fossil projects, fossil investments and fossil markets mean. It is time we make it clear that the responsibility to stop them stands with the people.
Plan impact-full mobilization actions and direct action to coincide with the electoral period, and use elections to challenge fake debates. The breaks in hegemony can be used by the climate justice movement to expose the absurdity of the debate which is being led; and to bring up the fact that elections which do not discuss the climate crisis as a priority and discuss serious plans for emission cuts, are in reality by definition undemocratic. An electoral dispute framed, by media and institutions, under a false normality, and disregarding the biggest threat humanity has ever faced is a perversion of democracy, as in current terms, it compromises any possibility of democracy, social justice and most basic rights.
Through direct action and disruptive communication tactics you can refuse to consent and expose the illegitimacy and complete inadequacy of the institutional and parliamentary landscape in regards to protecting people and stopping civilization collapse. You do not have to call on people not to vote. You do not have to call on people to give up on democracy. Quite the opposite. Make a call for radical democracy via public disruption. Make a call for people to fight for their right – and that of others – to thrive on a viable planet. Use elections to recruit, train, act and build a stronger movement.
How will the rest of “the left” react?
It is likely that left-wing parties, the greens and other left-wing activists, as well as even folks who would consider themselves as part of the climate justice movement will want to contest your actions, claim that they are alienating, that you and your organization are supporting the rise of the far-right and that green and left-wing party’s programs are still better than those on the right. There is a lot to debunk here.
1. The argument that actions alienate people might be valid if the people before the actions weren’t alienated, but these elections have shown the level of alienation from reality even of the green and left-wing parties themselves. So disruptive actions aren’t alienating anyone, they’re just making widespread alienation visible. To think that we’re going to get around this alienation without confronting it is illogical.
2. The climate crisis means fascism. This isn’t a brilliant insight, its just physics. In rising material scarcity, authoritarianism and violence to maintain capitalist order, privilege and property will always push into fascism, even if that wasn’t the plan. The failure of the parliamentary left to present and defend a real program of climate and social justice, to meet these crisis head on, to be the anti-systemic and confrontational alternative that people are looking for, has actually been a key factor in the global rise of the far-right. Proposals for keeping everything the same, and seeking for consensus with moderate policies leave up a vacuum in the political space. This vacuum will be filled. Either by a true alternative or by false solutions.
3. No, political parties are not all the same. There are parties that admit that climate change exists, and others that don’t. Within the parties that admit there is climate change, there are parties proposing more measures to reduce the asymmetry of the consequences of the climate crisis on the population. Some have plans for 4°C of warming by 2100, and others have plans for perhaps 3°C of warming. However, if no party has a plan that is compatible with staying below 1.5°C to 2°C of warming, then we must be honest about that and, contrary to other, the climate justice movement must not accept collapse as the only alternative.
And what about after the elections?
Before, during and after the electoral period call on society to stop consenting with the extreme violence imposed by this system. Call on people to take their responsibility to stop the ones that have declared war on people and the planet, and remind society that regardless of the results of elections over the year of 2024, we as society face two options: the next four years could go down in history as the period in which everyone knew for decades about the existence of the climate crisis, and the associated social collapse, and still decided to continue heading towards climate hell; or as the turning point years in which society had the courage, that current politicians lack, to accept the historic responsibility that falls to those alive in 2024 – to resist the collapse of civilization as we know it and fight for our lives and those of the next generations.
Whether we choose one or the other option has nothing to do with electoral cycles and all to do with revolutionary action. Use the electoral period to disrupt, to refuse to consent, and to be heard. We shall not be used by the elections, but instead we can use them.
