Why Extinction Rebellion is laying off the disruptive protests — for now

Extinction Rebellion co-founder Clare Farrell wants to make it clear that her organization is not done being a thorn in the side of the governments and corporations that perpetuate the climate crisis. 

Instead, she says the famously disruptive climate change organization is temporarily shifting its tactics in an effort to “build a broader, bigger base.”

The U.K. group announced on Saturday that it will stop doing things that interfere with the lives of ordinary citizens — like blocking traffic, and gluing themselves to buildings — at least for the next few months.

But that doesn’t mean Extinction Rebellion doesn’t stand by its previous actions. Rather, Farrell says the group has chosen to focus on boosting its public support and rallying 100,000 people to surround the U.K. Houses of Parliament in London to demand action on climate change on April 21.

Farrell spoke to As It Happens host Nil Köksal about the change. Here is part of their conversation. 

Why is 2023 the year to change your approach?

In Britain, we’ve got huge numbers of people on strike, lots of people struggling to pay their bills, lots of people very concerned about nature [and] private companies pumping raw sewage into our rivers and our oceans. The government isn’t acting on any of it, and it’s backpedalling on climate.

And so we think there’s an opportunity to invite way more people into a push for more democracy.

How much of this has to do, Clare, with the recent laws … passed in the U.K., criminalizing disruptive actions and some types of protests?

The legislation that’s gone through in the U.K., I think, has alarmed not only people in this country, but also people around the world. It’s quite frightening what’s gone through.

And we think that in this context, building broad popular movements and collective power with them, is a radical act in itself. So we’ve said that we’ll apply ourselves to that for the next few months and see if we can make a show of far greater numbers than we’ve ever done before.

Were you losing … support because of the tactics you used before January 1st?

I don’t think we’ve been losing people because of the tactics. What I do think is there’s a huge number of people in Britain today who are very, very worried about climate change … and a lot of those people haven’t yet been part of Extinction Rebellion. 

The work so far has been really successful in raising the alarm. And I think actions are required to constantly keep raising the alarm because people don’t find it very easy to stay focused on that.

But we do have a suggestion for a political mechanism to include ordinary citizens in decision making, which we know can lead to more just and more compassionate outcomes. And that runs across the board, whether you’re looking at progress on people’s rights or progress on workers’ rights or progress on the cost-of-living crisis or progress on climate action. Ordinary citizens are way ahead of the people that are in power in this country right now on most of the crucial issues of our time. 

Your group certainly does not shy away from controversy. But was it controversial within your group to make such a radical shift in a different direction?

Yeah, I think in some areas, people have been asking questions about whether it’s going to work and whether or not it’s the right thing to do.

But I think it’s important to note in the statement it says this is a temporary call to try and broaden and expand the base.

We get patted on the head and told “well done” a lot by certain people when we do things like close down a private airfield or take a protest to the finance sector or to the fossil fuel industry, because that makes sense to people.

But a lot of those people, we’re saying to them now: OK, if you agree with action that takes the argument to power and to where power lies, then come with us this time. 

We haven’t said we’re never going to do anything that annoys anyone ever again.– Clare Farrell, Extinction Rebellion co-founder

So no more gluing, no more blockades, that sort of thing. But what will your new tactics look like?

The big focus is on is on mobilizing and bridge-building and helping people to connect the dots between all of the issues that I’ve mentioned and more, and to encourage people to come up and show up in numbers in April. 

There have been legal consequences for your team members. Gail Bradbrook, one of the co-founders, [is] currently awaiting trial for smashing a window. Another co-founder, Roger Hallam, was incarcerated for a time. You’re facing [prosecution for your involvement in a protest] and a possible jail sentence as well. Did all of that, Clare, factor into this decision as well?

I don’t think that the idea of people going to prison has been … a cause of the change of course at all. And I hope that people don’t see this statement in a kind of one-dimensional sense — which some of the media have reported it — which is to say: “Oh, they’re saying it doesn’t work and they’re going to stop doing it.” It’s not what we’re saying at all.

What we’re saying is that that work has a place. It does a certain job. It has worked a lot to raise the alarm. It has worked a lot to build a mass movement so far. 

But what we think is there’s a unique kind of possibility before us in Britain today, where nobody has, I don’t think, seen as much barefaced, kind of brazen corruption and ignorance from the government as we’ve seen in recent years. And so the main focus is to draw people together and say: This is obviously not OK.

The fact that, as you’ve said, people seem more receptive to your message, and now you want to open up and be more inclusive of people who want to participate in different ways than you have in the past — what does that say to you about where we’re at in terms of the climate crisis?

Very little has changed globally in terms of, like, curbing emissions or dealing with the crisis. But everybody now knows that it’s extremely serious. It’s very, very big. And a lot of people say: We don’t know what to do, though.

To put it in a sentence, we’re calling for a citizen-led democratic end to the fossil fuel era. We don’t trust the people who are holding the levers of power today to make the decisions about how to move into the next phase. 

Last year … we spoke to one of the young people who work with the group Just Stop Oil. And there was a lot of controversy. As you know, they threw soup on a Van Gogh painting, and it was a contentious thing to do. What would you say to activists, young ones in particular, who still think that kind of tactic is necessary?

I really celebrate those people who took action. And in all honesty, a lot of people reflected on that … at the time, and said this is a remarkable action that gets [on] the front page of the newspapers, and yet didn’t disrupt the public.

It turned a lot of people off, too, though, didn’t it?

Perhaps some. But that’s not what we’ve said. We haven’t said we’re never going to do anything that annoys anyone ever again. We’ve just said what we’re going to do is we’re going to avoid getting in ordinary people’s way.