111 
25 
0 
0 
WHAT IS CLIMATE JUSTICE?
Climate justice includes a focus on the root causes of climate change and making the systemic changes that are therefore required,a commitment to address the disproportionate burden of the climate crisis on the poor and marginalized, a demand for participatory democracy in changing these systems which require dismantling the fossil fuel corporate power structure, and a commitment to reparations and thus a fair distribution of the world’s wealth.
The movement to fight climate chaos is shifting. Activists are re-defining themselves and changing their strategies. A growing number of people are turning away from the identity of “environmentalist” and instead are identifying as “climate justice activists.” Additionally, social and economic justice activists are joining the fight against climate change in increasing numbers. In the early 1980s some activists began focusing on the environmental destruction that disproportionately impacts low income communities and communities of color, which gave rise to the environmental justice movement. Now, many people from the environmental justice movement are widening their focus to the issue of climate.
This movement is new, and the concept of “climate justice” remains poorly articulated, while the need for clarity is urgent. What is climate justice? How is it different from environmentalism or social justice? How do climate justice activists understand the operations of power that are creating climate chaos? What are our theories of change in response to that understanding? What therefore is the strategy and trajectory of the climate justice movement?
Climate justice includes a focus on the root causes of climate change and making the systemic changes that are therefore required, a commitment to address the disproportionate burden of the climate crisis on the poor and marginalized, a demand for participatory democracy in changing these systems which require dismantling the fossil fuel corporate power structure, and a commitment to reparations and thus a fair distribution of the world’s wealth. Some articulate climate justice more loosely as the intersection of environmentalism and social justice, drawing on the intersectionality analysis developed by feminists and critical race theorists to understand the interlocked workings of race and gender.
Climate justice activists seem to draw heavily on the tactics and strategies of social and environmental Justice activists. As traditional mainstream environmentalist strategies fail, even the most consummate self-identified “insiders” are moving away from their policy and litigation strategies towards the tactics normally associated with social justice activists. Some, like James Speth, are arguing that the solutions to the climate crisis lie outside the environmental sector and focus on systemic changes to unbridled growth and plutocratic wealth disparities and the destruction of democratic possibilities that come with that. (See James Speth, Bridge at the End of the World. Also see Gar Alperwitz, America Beyond Capitalism). Connected with this is the increased focus on the human impacts of climate change. Organizations like 350.org put a human face on the world of suffering caused by the climate crisis. Some organizations, like Rising Tide, Mobilizing for Climate Justice and Peaceful Uprising to name a few, came into being in the last few years as climate justice organizations. Despite this fact, the concept of climate justice still remains murky even within our organizations. This is typical in the early stages of movements, especially those that seek systemic change.
When studying the history of social movements, we trace a movement’s trajectory as it defines itself. Successful movements develop a common language, strategy and tactics. Today as the climate crisis becomes more terrifying and we come to terms with the fact that what we have been doing so far is not working, it is more important than ever to move to that next stage, where “climate justice” becomes a household term like abolition, suffrage or divestment, and everyone knows what the goals of the climate justice movement are. I am hoping to contribute to this process of definition, and would like to hear from others as we move toward more clarity and a more thorough articulation of the concept of “climate justice.” Lets start the comments rolling!
111 25 0 0 
Support Climate Justice
We must stand together to demand justice & build a healthy world. Join our Regional Action List.
“[T]he solutions to the climate crisis lie outside the environmental sector and focus on systemic changes to unbridled growth and plutocratic wealth disparities…”
Yes to that, and there is urgent need to make such solutions much more specific. I do the following in the top 3 posts here: https://colindonoghue.wordpress.com/
To sum up the real solution: we need to recognize everyone as sovereign women & men (not subject to forced citizenship which funds the destruction), and each individual has a birthright to a fair share of free homesteading land & water (but no more than that) for the purpose of ending “unbridled growth and plutocratic wealth disparities” and establishing true sustainable living, namely zero-waste off-the-grid veganic homesteading, making up voluntary gift-economy communities of mutual aid.
This is thoroughly thought out, please read the complete essays before disregarding this for some reason you currently think makes sense.
Peace,
Colin D. Donoghue
I do think in the totality of what I have read on your website and listening to Tim on Bill Moyers that you have well-defined Climate Justice. It is in the symbol of his fist enclosing the fingers. Symbols, brevity, images are powerful communicators. They distill thought processes that have been delineated in words. Thinking is a matter of language.
The first efforts to define our environmental movements were under the rubric of Ecology in the biological sciences: “the branch of biology that deals with the relations of organisms to one another and to their physical surroundings.” That includes it all: biological organisms include human beings, physical surrounding include weather and climate. What PU is doing is connecting concepts in words that are already connected in reality: people (different cultures, different economic status’), policy (government acting on the people, hopefully by and for), and scientific realities.
One statement Tim made stands out: he spoke about the crisis being HOW we interact with each other to mitigate the dangers to come, that this is more to the point than the disasters themselves, for there will be tight competition for space and resources. Think about population growth dynamics. It has been predicted for decades how the world pop will increase. What keeps the population at bay: disease, war, famine. These are inevitable biological and social strategies. They come up when biotic communities rub shoulders who had not previously done so.
The pond or fishbowl example: A pond measuring 3’x5′ x a depth of 1.5′ will hold 5-7 goldfish. When they breed and create 9-10, the little ones get eaten or the old ones get beaten or starved out. When the pop drops to 3, they procreate quickly. All this points to human choices about what we do: war, medical research that keeps people alive, humane or not treatment of each other when resources are limited (think musical chairs – will you let someone sit on your lap?).
That is why Tim has chosen to go into Divinity rather than Politics. It is foundational to teaching morality and ethics to people before they can govern fairly. Our statesmen were called such because they exercised their considered philosophies in the molding of policy. The self-serving mentality that pervades a lot of government today is a far-cry away from our beginnings.
So, training and education on good think is paramount. Practical strategies will follow, but we have to be realistic that it is not all solvable at this point. For example, a practical strategy would be to change our level of physical comfort related to energy usage, i.e., not use electric lights after the sun sets; plan to work and live within walking distance of our homes or at a 2-5 mile radius; reduce our demand and usage for many of our non-essential material culture. Do you think anyone beyond a radical small group would comply? Why does belt-tightening work better in a European society than in American society?
We Americans need a lot of re-education on how to live together; we need to minimize the concept of Individuality which played a large role in our establishment. We need to modify our cultural personality to be more interdependent with others. We have another historical concept: For the greater good. This should pushed above the idea and ideal of the maverick individualist.
Climate Justice is the word formulation you have come up with because climate is now the controlling factor around which all of us must organize our actions. Basically we must do justice to the (climate situation on) Earth. And that puts all people on an even keel. Or so it should as the disasters of weather are leveling to all. National help response has to reach out to all equally. We are all vulnerable. We are in reactive mode here having lost out of the proactive stage. So, even while we must focus on re-educating the American psyche, we must realize the greatest strength is in what we can forge internationally. We are all too close now not to do so. Nations help nations. There must be Peaceful Uprising style groups in many places of the world. Know that we are not the only ones.
It is the biggest scientific challenge the world has ever faced. To save our civilization we need to develop other sources of energy than fossil fuels. We must force our governments to turn all our resources to research and solve this problem.
Dave
I also watched the interview with Bill Moyers and was impressed with Tim’s coherent grasp of the issues. I was most interested in the Citizen’s United issue, are there any groups or people putting together a constitutional amendment to define corporations as ‘other than people’, that is without the privileges which citizens enjoy? If there are no efforts in this direction, I would like to put out there this specific idea, to organize solely around an amendment to place citizens back into the ‘one PERSON, one vote’ category.
Comments, ideas. Tim Leifer
Tim,
There are a number of broadly supported efforts to produce amendments to, in effect, reverse the Citiizens United decision. They are readily found in a search.
IMHO, however, this path to reform is, at the very best, a long-shot. (Even drafting the language is a much greater challenge than many imagine.) At worst, it diverts energy from other strategies that may have a higher chance of working.
Terry
Are you familiar with Move to Amend? https://movetoamend.org/ They focus on ending corporate rules through participatory deomcracy.
Just watched Tim’s interview by Bill Moyers. It impressed me enough to search you out. Your focus on “the root causes of climate change and making the systemic changes that are therefore required…” is sorely needed. There’s way too much surface-level protesting activity and too little effort to really dig into the basic causes (which relate to the fossil fuel industries influence on politicians).
Over the years, lots of reform efforts have been launched to deal with this – but all have failed. There are various reasons, but the most important one is that such reforms face a stark Catch-22. They seek to constrain the activities of the same individuals who vote on the reforms.
I’ve concluded that political accountability – Real Accountability with Teeth – is the path to reform that has the potential to work, and to get at the root cause and systemic flaws.
I’ve done a lot of work on this and have developed a process for putting it into practice, and I’d like to make it fully available to you and your folks working on this critical problem.
Just let me know if you’re interested.
Terry Steichen
Hi Terry. I sent you my email to forward along your information, and I am looking forward to reading it. Personally I have come to the belief that direct action is our only hope, or at least it is where I put my energy and resources. I have done a lot of policy work in my life as an attorney. It was hard before but now it feels impossible since all of our governing institutions have been fully captured in our system of croney corporate capitalism.
To Rebecca Hall:
Would it be alright with you if this article was reprinted in Azcommunitypress.org?
We are an all volunteer local group in the Phoenix, Arizona metropolitan area which is trying to get local news and information not published in the mainstream media to people in Arizona.
Thanks,
Joe Murphy
Go for it! You may reprint it, just cite it with my name and Peace Up’s website.
I am uncomfortable with yet another modifier on the term justice, this time climate justice. I have always identified myself as an ecologist. I live within systems, not external to them which the term environmentalist has always meant to me. I consider myself a justice activist but I find that when you continually modify the term (racial justice, gender justice, climate justice…you set up the dynamic of privileging one aspect of a whole over another. For me, the root cause is consumerism and an ideology of domin-ion/ation. Mindless growth is the ideology of the cancer cell.