This article proposes that the Western world faces a stark choice: truly embrace “free, prior, and informed consent” (FPIC), or else face the possibility of large scale shutdowns from a growing alliance of Indigenous Peoples, environmentalists, and concerned citizens.ĭespite renewed efforts to combat climate change, it remains uncertain how economies will achieve emission reduction by 2050. This policy will not work regarding climate change. Up until now, the policy of most colonial nations has been to deal with Indigenous blockades by force or at best with localised solutions. This myth is used as a lens to reflect, from a settler perspective, on the potential for future Indigenous-led blockades, which could reach the point of mass economic shutdowns, in response to a lack of action on both Indigenous rights and climate change. He tells them he could turn them to stone, but he will not. The Secwépemc First Nation of British Columbia, Canada, has a myth where a character, Sk’elép, encounters strangers who try to “transform” him, but fail. Indigenous Peoples in Canada and around the world have, for years, used blockades and direct action when alternative means of asserting their rights have failed.
Further, points of overlap and departure in the framing and narrative of prior movements may be instructive for the contemporary climate movement. Comparing this recent mobilization with earlier struggles, this article explores the following questions: First, what are the characteristics of the climate movement and what tactics and narratives does it employ? Second, how are the moral questions and legal and policy goals of the climate movement similar to, or distinct from, the social movements that many climate activists invoke? Third, given the distinct moral and legal questions posed by climate change, what lessons could the climate movement glean from other similarly poised social movements? The preliminary conclusions note that extra-legal actions and non-violent civil disobedience were ostensibly indispensable in the past and appear relevant today.
This article examines a topic largely ignored by the legal academy, the emerging climate movement, to assess the usefulness of its persistent reference to prior movements. In so doing, activists make explicit references to the storied past of defining social movements in American history-notably the anti-slavery movements of the 19th century and the civil rights movement of the 20th-and draw direct comparison to the moral failure igniting the relevant social movements. In sharp contrast to the flurry of legal and policy-oriented efforts of years past, climate activists today employ protest and nonviolent civil disobedience to advance their agenda for rapid and ambitious mitigation and adaptation.