0:10

What

0:15

is worth more? Art

0:18

or life? Is it worth

0:20

more than food? Worth more

0:23

than justice? Are you more

0:25

concerned about the protection of

0:27

a painting or the protection

0:30

of our planet and people?

0:32

The cost of living crisis

0:35

is part of the— On October 14,

0:38

2022, two young people approached Van

0:40

Gogh's famous Sunflowers painting

0:42

in the National Gallery in London.

0:45

They unzipped their jackets to reveal Just

0:48

Stop Oil t-shirts, opened

0:51

cans of tomato

0:52

soup, and chucked it at the

0:54

painting. You can hear the shock

0:56

of some of the other museumgoers in that video

0:58

there. What?

1:00

Security! Oh my gosh!

1:04

But the immediate response was nothing

1:07

compared to the onslaught of media

1:09

coverage and commentary

1:11

that followed. I can't think

1:13

of another protest in recent history

1:15

that was so immediately the central

1:18

focus of the discourse.

1:24

It's worth

1:24

noting that the painting itself was

1:26

not damaged. It was behind glass,

1:29

and the soup only hit that glass display

1:31

case. The National Gallery later

1:33

reported that the painting's frame had sustained

1:36

minor damage, but that's it.

1:38

That did not stop many commentators from

1:40

referring to the action as destruction

1:43

or vandalism.

1:57

in

2:00

the UK, started doing more and more acts

2:02

of wanton vandalism. We got a little mashup

2:04

of their antics in the last few days.

2:09

Those were conservative commentators, Ben

2:11

Shapiro and Piers Morgan. But

2:13

it wasn't just the usual suspects weighing

2:16

in on this protest. People

2:18

in favor of climate action also

2:20

chewed on it for weeks, debating whether

2:22

or not the climate movement should be engaging

2:25

in such polarizing protests.

2:28

Here's leftist commentator Hassan

2:30

Piker weighing in.

2:32

I find a lot of these activists

2:34

to be, you know, I mean, they're doing they're

2:37

right for their anger. Their

2:39

frustration is correct. I

2:42

feel like that kind of protest oftentimes

2:44

is just like very

2:46

almost like self-defeating. It's performative.

2:49

It's cringe.

2:51

Even climate scientist Michael Mann got

2:53

in on the action, commissioning a survey

2:55

and pointing to the results of

2:58

it as proof that the action was alienating,

3:01

a claim that lots of social scientists

3:03

who study protests aren't rather

3:05

alienating themselves. Soupgate

3:10

fueled Twitter

3:10

debates for weeks, and yet

3:13

just six months earlier, right in

3:15

the middle of Earth Month, another big

3:17

piece of climate news had happened in

3:19

the UK that generated almost

3:22

no response. It's been two

3:24

rounds of criminalization of protests in the

3:26

UK. Dr.

3:31

Oscar Berglund is a researcher at the

3:33

University of Bristol. He focuses on

3:36

social movements and he spent the last few

3:38

years particularly focused on extinction

3:40

rebellion and then its spinoff

3:42

groups just stop oil and insulate

3:45

Britain in the UK.

3:47

He's talking there about the Police Crime

3:49

Sentencing and Courts Act of 2022 and

3:53

the Public Order Act was just

3:55

went into effect in May 2023.

3:58

Together, the two seriously curtailed.

3:59

protest rights. They give police

4:02

the right to impose time, noise, and

4:04

location restrictions on protests,

4:07

to arrest anyone deemed to be causing

4:09

a public nuisance, and

4:12

to stop and search anyone they

4:14

want near a protest with no need

4:16

to justify the stop.

4:18

They can also bar people they suspect

4:20

will make a serious disruption

4:22

from being in particular places

4:25

or around particular people. The law

4:28

even curtails how activists are allowed

4:30

to defend themselves in court. Climate

4:33

activists have not been allowed to explain, for

4:35

example, that it's the urgency of

4:37

the climate crisis that drove them

4:40

to commit particular acts.

4:42

Judges in wanting to uphold

4:45

the law, as it is, have

4:47

tried to, you know, limit what

4:50

the jury is allowed to hear

4:52

and that, you know, you weren't allowed to give

4:55

certain kinds of evidence that you weren't allowed

4:57

to mention climate and so

4:59

on, that the context wasn't allowed to be

5:01

heard in court.

5:02

It's a restriction

5:05

that could reverberate well beyond the

5:07

climate movement. It's absolutely

5:09

the case that, you know, if you grant

5:12

certain powers to the state to

5:15

deal with one problem, they will use it to

5:17

deal with other problems, so they cease it.

5:20

The passage of those laws got nowhere near

5:22

the amount of attention as the tomato soup

5:24

incident, particularly outside

5:26

the UK. We've

5:29

covered in previous episodes how the framing

5:32

of climate activists as uniquely disruptive

5:35

or annoying, which is how the lion's

5:37

share of media page of the tomato soup stunt,

5:40

helps justify laws that criminalize

5:42

activism. In a future episode

5:44

we're gonna get into the details of how things

5:46

shifted so quickly in the UK.

5:49

But for today, we're gonna look at why tactics

5:52

like the tomato soup protest and the many

5:54

art and sport protests that followed it

5:56

strike a nerve. We're gonna talk

5:59

about what they're intended to. accomplish, whether

6:01

they accomplish those goals, and

6:03

why activists have been making a point

6:05

of annoying people and getting arrested

6:07

for the better part of a century.

6:09

That's coming up after the break.

6:12

I'm Amy Westervelt and this is Drilled, the

6:15

real free speech

6:16

threat.

6:23

There's

6:23

a bit in the UK policing bill

6:25

that you could miss the significance

6:28

of entirely if you didn't

6:30

happen to be obsessively reading everything you

6:32

possibly could about the criminalization of

6:34

protest over the past few years. It

6:37

talks about damage to memorials

6:39

and how the sentence for this crime

6:42

has been increased from three

6:44

months to up to 10 years

6:46

in jail.

6:47

Those

6:52

cheers

6:53

you're hearing are from a Black Lives Matter

6:55

protest in Bristol, England

6:57

in 2020. People

6:59

are celebrating the fact that a statue of

7:01

the slave trader Edward Colson, that

7:04

once occupied a prominent position at

7:06

Bristol's port, has been pulled down

7:08

and thrown into the harbor. The

7:12

increased criminalization of protest recently

7:15

is certainly a reaction to disruptive climate

7:17

protest, but it's also a reaction

7:21

to the Black Lives Matter protests, which

7:23

began in the US but quickly spread

7:25

to other countries. Both movements

7:27

bring something that powerful interests have been

7:30

fighting against for the better part

7:32

of a century, multiracial,

7:34

cross-class solidarity.

7:39

Nick Estes is an assistant professor

7:42

of American Indian Studies at the University

7:44

of Minnesota, co-founder

7:46

of the Native Advocacy Group with the Red Nation

7:49

and an enrolled member of the Lower Bruges

7:52

Sioux Tribe. He says the recent racketeering

7:54

charges against activists protesting

7:57

the proposed police-trading facility

7:59

known as COPS. city in Atlanta is

8:01

a clear example of how much various

8:04

protest movements are being lumped together.

8:07

That's a very kind of clear example

8:09

that they're seeing, you know, the Black

8:11

Lives Matter movement, Standing

8:13

Rock,

8:14

all these other sort of social justice movements,

8:16

climate justice movements as connected.

8:19

And the best way to contain them is

8:21

to basically slap a broad

8:24

label on all of it. And

8:27

I never anticipated that happening

8:29

at Standing Rock. I never anticipated

8:33

exploding the way that it did

8:36

in

8:37

my own personal experience. In 2020,

8:41

during the

8:42

George Floyd summer, I

8:45

saw a water protector, a white

8:47

kid who I sort of knew get

8:50

gunned down. And he got shot four times in the back

8:53

in broad daylight in

8:55

front of hundreds of people in

8:57

Albuquerque, New Mexico during an event

9:00

to take down a really

9:02

racist monument.

9:07

And I was just thinking that it was a sort

9:09

of demonization, not just of

9:11

native people and Black people, now it

9:13

was a demonization of any

9:16

white kid

9:17

who decided to stand on the

9:20

side of history with those

9:22

very sort of marginalized groups

9:26

and an active campaign,

9:28

not just by law enforcement, but by the

9:30

media to sort of break that

9:33

sense of solidarity.

9:35

Reese and class critiques are consistently

9:38

levied at the climate movement. A recurring

9:40

theme in conservative commentary about various

9:42

climate protests is that these are spoiled

9:45

rich kids out of touch elitist with

9:47

nothing better to do than throw mashed potatoes

9:49

or soup at fancy paintings or

9:52

block a road where normal people

9:54

are just trying to get to work. Don't

9:56

get me wrong, sometimes those critiques are

9:59

absolutely valid. Historically,

10:01

the climate movement has not been great on race.

10:04

Here's Rev. Lennox Yearwood, president

10:06

of the Hip Hop Caucus and a longtime activist

10:09

on that history.

10:11

The modern-day climate movement, meeting

10:13

around the creation of EPA, right?

10:16

Around between 1968 and 1972. Most

10:20

of the large, the big green organizations were

10:22

created within that four-year timeframe.

10:25

What's also important is that the people

10:27

were in the streets. So you had

10:29

the black people with the black power movement was

10:32

in the streets. And that wasn't a part of this

10:34

process. You had the women's movement

10:36

that was emerging, the gay rights movement

10:38

that was powerful in New York City.

10:41

You had the anti-Vietnam movements, even

10:44

young white kids who were putting out street heat. They

10:47

weren't engaging. The climate movement literally

10:49

said at the very beginning, we are

10:51

not going to be a part of that kind of movement.

10:54

So even with the anti-war movement

10:57

or the gay rights movement or

10:59

the strong feminist and womanist movement

11:01

or the black power movement, they immediately

11:04

pulled back from the inception. And

11:07

they coasted along. So then you

11:09

go 10 years and then when black

11:11

folks are saying don't put landfills in our community,

11:14

that was their moment. And

11:16

even then they pulled back. So

11:19

this is not just for the Achilles heel.

11:21

This is who the movement is

11:24

from its inception. And then at some

11:26

point in time, they realized that

11:29

some have some happen is that we

11:31

can't do this alone. We're

11:33

not big enough or strong enough to

11:35

beat the history industry as a Birkenstock

11:38

movement. That's on the east

11:40

coast on the west coast. So

11:42

now they're in a point where they're literally

11:45

trying to do a crash course on racism.

11:50

Class has also been a blind spot

11:52

for the climate movement at various points.

11:54

Here's Oscar Bergland on how that's played

11:56

out in the UK.

11:59

not be protected.

12:00

And as the climate crisis

12:03

worsens, and what you have here is

12:05

actually a lot of working class people getting

12:07

really angry about these climate

12:10

protesters so that you get actual clashes

12:13

between them. I don't think that that's good for

12:15

the climate movement. That has a potentially

12:18

long term damaging effect.

12:20

I think

12:22

if your enemy

12:23

is the fossil fuel industry,

12:25

if you're being dragged away by shareholders

12:28

in the Shell shareholders meeting or whatever,

12:30

I think that's a good fight to take.

12:33

But if you're being dragged away by people

12:35

trying to get to work, I don't think that's

12:37

a good look.

12:39

But researchers and activists agree

12:41

that these historic weaknesses

12:43

are starting to be addressed.

12:46

And as that happens, the movement

12:48

is becoming a threat.

12:51

This is the attitude that

12:54

we're seeing in general with this attack

12:56

on woke,

12:57

it's become a culture war

13:00

tagline for anything

13:02

that is considered liberal or left

13:05

or something that can be dismissed. And I

13:08

think that it's fascinating because in

13:10

my mind, it's actually just trying to create

13:13

lines of division

13:14

between people. And I think

13:16

this is just the longer trend of

13:20

the aftermath of Standing Rock in

13:22

many ways.

13:24

Some people who would rather

13:26

not

13:26

see a cross racial cross class

13:29

coalition fighting for justice

13:32

have been singling out white allies

13:34

for critique or punishment, just

13:36

like Nick Estes saw at Standing Rock.

13:39

An extension of the outside

13:42

agitators accusation that gets thrown

13:44

at protesters regularly. Scientist

13:48

and activist Rose Abramoff says

13:50

she got a lot of this when she was protesting

13:52

the Mountain Valley pipeline in West

13:54

Virginia.

13:56

There was a lot of sort of you're not around here, are

13:58

you? Which is interesting because

13:59

You know, I mean, I would argue

14:02

that the Mountain Valley pipeline is not around here,

14:04

and that

14:04

the main resistance against the Mountain Valley

14:06

pipeline is primarily local, is locals

14:09

who don't want this pipeline going through

14:11

their land. So that was

14:13

an interesting line of argumentation. When

14:16

people across the country went to Standing

14:18

Rock to stand with the

14:19

Lakota and Dakota people defending

14:22

their land and water rights, fossil

14:24

fuel industry spokespeople and police

14:26

highlighted a number of people from out

14:29

of state in an attempt to delegitimize

14:32

the protest. Not only was that

14:34

narrative false,

14:34

it was ignorant. The

14:37

thing about Indigenous movements, in

14:39

contrast to modern sort

14:41

of political movements or political

14:43

parties, is that they're not sort of movements of strangers.

14:46

They're movements of relations. A lot of people are

14:48

familiar with each other or

14:50

they're organizing according to their

14:52

clan system or the societies

14:55

that are created within traditional

14:58

governance systems. There's male

15:00

societies, female societies, warrior societies,

15:02

all kinds of different societies that exist.

15:05

In the case of Standing Rock, the

15:07

Sioux or Ochete, Shacoin, Oeyate

15:10

people are located in what

15:12

is today Montana, Minnesota,

15:14

Nebraska, North Dakota, South

15:16

Dakota, and Manitoba

15:19

and Saskatchewan and Canada.

15:21

So after the defeat

15:23

of Keystone XL, the Northern Leg, there

15:26

was a lot of people in Standing Rock were paying attention.

15:28

But it wasn't until I first went

15:30

up to the camps there and a lot of

15:32

the people

15:34

back home

15:35

that we had worked with on

15:38

the Lorberal Reservation were

15:40

already there. Members of the Ochete

15:42

Shacoin would have their own little camp system set

15:44

up. It was actually just uniting people on

15:47

the ground. Our

15:49

nation, the Ochete Shacoin, the nation

15:51

of the Seven Council Fires, it

15:53

was all proof that these things

15:55

had never gone away.

15:59

If they're hard to get right and guaranteed,

16:02

sometimes even engineered, to piss

16:05

off the public and ratchet up policing,

16:07

why engage in more disruptive

16:10

tactics?

16:15

I did Sam Phelan.

16:17

They covered the U.S. Open and

16:20

it was so funny because they both started out being like,

16:22

Dana, can you believe this? Keeping people from watching

16:24

tennis.

16:25

This is social scientist Dana Fisher.

16:31

Professor Fisher, welcome to TMZ

16:34

Lots. Thank you for having me. So give

16:36

us your take on what this did

16:39

for the climate movement, other

16:42

than extending the match. The movement

16:44

is much broader than what

16:47

we call the radical flank, which is people who

16:49

are engaging in civil disobedience, like gluing

16:52

themselves at events and throwing food.

16:55

But the importance of this kind of tactic

16:57

is that it's getting us all talking about the climate crisis.

17:00

Well, that makes it sound like you're saying it succeeded then.

17:02

Oh, absolutely. I'm on

17:04

TMZ long for the first time. We're like, I don't support

17:06

doing this, but

17:09

I do support doing something on climate. So

17:11

it was just funny because I was like, look, you guys are textbook.

17:13

This is perfect, a perfect example of why the

17:15

radical flank happens. Because you're talking

17:18

about it and it's actually encouraging

17:20

sympathizers like you who care about the issue

17:22

to do something about the issue, but not that.

17:25

Nobody's asking you to glue yourself to anything.

17:28

Fisher heads up the Center for Environment,

17:30

Community, and Equity at American University

17:32

and has spent her entire career researching

17:35

social movements. She says the

17:37

incident, both the protest itself and

17:39

the reaction after it, not only from

17:42

the TMZ guys, but also from one of the tennis

17:44

players, Coco Gough, who had a similar

17:46

reaction, is an example of what

17:48

people call the Overton window

17:50

effect. The idea is that basically

17:53

if you see someone engaging in a radical

17:55

disruptive act of civil disobedience

17:58

or even suggesting a radical

18:01

idea or policy. It's

18:03

likely that your initial reaction might be

18:05

shock or even dismay, but

18:08

a lot of people, especially if they're already

18:10

somewhat sympathetic to the cause,

18:12

will think, you know,

18:14

we really do need to do something about

18:16

that. In the context of climate

18:19

protests, maybe gluing yourself to a road

18:21

or throwing soup at a painting is a bit much,

18:23

but people might think those activists are

18:26

right and we do need to do something. That's

18:29

the entire purpose of what movement

18:31

scholars like Fisher call the radical

18:34

flank, the segment of a movement that's

18:37

willing to risk arrest or

18:39

cultural backlash or even violence

18:42

to grab attention and rile people

18:44

up. The suffragettes did it,

18:47

the civil rights movement did it, and

18:49

the anti-war movement did it too. And

18:51

it worked in all three cases. The

18:56

Overton window is referenced a lot

18:58

by progressives these days, but it's

19:01

actually a term that was conceived of to

19:03

understand how to shift the public

19:05

towards more conservative views. In

19:08

many countries, you could argue that far-right

19:10

ideas have shifted the entire political

19:12

spectrum to the right much more

19:15

than civil disobedience has shifted things

19:17

to the left, particularly in

19:19

recent years. In Australia,

19:22

it's mostly been left-leaning labor

19:24

governments that have passed state

19:27

laws criminalizing protests,

19:29

which might be unexpected. Researcher

19:32

Liz Hicks says that's the Overton

19:34

window

19:34

at work. It's meant to

19:37

change that framework

19:39

of what is seen as kind of normal and

19:41

the middle ground and the mainstream base

19:43

by dragging one edge that's really far

19:46

out to the other side. You actually see

19:48

that a little bit with the way these

19:51

laws are being passed by state labor governments,

19:54

but the conservative position is so extreme

19:56

and ridiculous. And also what

19:58

the mining companies want.

20:00

that suddenly

20:01

it doesn't look like it's a repression on speech

20:03

because that is the moderate position between

20:05

the representatives that you have in parliament

20:08

and these industry stakeholders. It

20:11

makes sense. The concept of the Overton

20:13

window was introduced by a guy named Joseph

20:16

P. Overton, who was a senior

20:18

vice president for the Mackinac Center

20:20

for Public Policy in the 90s

20:23

when he developed this idea. And

20:25

the Mackinac Center is, yep,

20:28

you guessed it. A longtime

20:30

member of the Atlas Network

20:33

of Conservative Think tanks.

20:36

The link between the climate movement and previous

20:38

social justice movements is becoming stronger

20:41

as more

20:42

people directly experience

20:44

what Fisher calls climate shocks. At

20:47

the March to End fossil fuels held in New

20:49

York during Climate Week in September 2023, Fisher

20:53

surveyed participants to find out what had

20:56

brought them to the protest. He asked

20:58

whether they had engaged in other big climate protests

21:00

previously, how they felt about

21:02

the activists participating in direct action,

21:05

and about their direct experience

21:08

with climate impacts. She

21:10

says she was shocked to find that a majority

21:12

had experienced either increased exposure

21:15

to storms and floods, extreme

21:17

heat, or wildfire smoke.

21:20

We asked people if they had experienced

21:22

the following items in the past six

21:24

months.

21:27

Extreme heat, 87% said they had. We

21:31

asked them if they experienced wildfire

21:33

or smoke from wildfires, 85% said they had. And 60%

21:39

said they had experienced more frequent and powerful

21:41

storms, including hurricanes, typhoons,

21:44

tornadoes.

21:48

Activists who participate in direct

21:50

actions aren't necessarily thinking

21:52

about the Overton window or the radical

21:55

flank or civil rights history

21:57

or what the media or other

21:59

climate activists will think of them. Oftentimes,

22:02

they just want to feel like they're doing something

22:04

tangible

22:05

and directly impactful. We're

22:08

trying to stop this pipeline. And this

22:10

is one of the most effective ways to do it, is

22:12

to just get in front of and literally

22:14

stop work

22:15

the pipeline.

22:17

That's scientist Rose Abramoff again.

22:20

She was recently arrested for locking

22:22

herself to a drill at the Mountain

22:24

Valley

22:24

Pipeline. We stopped

22:26

construction for about half a

22:28

day.

22:30

The vast majority of activists don't start

22:32

out doing direct action. Instead,

22:35

they show up to organize protests, maybe

22:37

campaign for a politician they like, or

22:39

call elected officials. In

22:42

an earlier episode, we heard from Joanna

22:44

Altman Smith, who was arrested earlier

22:46

this year for smearing finger paint on the

22:48

display case protecting a Degas statue

22:51

in DC. She walked us through

22:53

the years of activism that she participated

22:56

in before risking a serious

22:58

charge.

22:59

So yeah, I've done a lot

23:01

of on the ground organizing.

23:04

And

23:05

part of that has been rallying

23:08

and protesting. I've done a fair amount

23:10

of diem and picket

23:13

lines and blockading

23:15

of buildings to raise awareness

23:19

on different issues. What I just

23:21

did with declare emergency

23:23

in Washington, that was

23:26

my first time stepping

23:28

up as an individual, putting

23:31

myself on the line with my

23:33

partner, Tim, to

23:35

really do something that we knew

23:37

would raise the alarm.

23:41

Tim is Tim Martin, a fellow

23:43

climate activist from North Carolina.

23:46

In May, the two were charged with conspiring

23:49

against the United States government.

23:52

That's a charge that carries a possible sentence

23:54

of five years in prison and

23:56

a fine of $250,000 for

23:58

each of them. those cases are still

24:01

pending. If

24:05

the idea that all attention on climate

24:07

protests isn't necessarily good attention

24:10

holds any water, it may

24:13

be more in the sense that opponents

24:15

of the movement can and do try

24:17

to leverage certain moments to

24:19

discredit activists, and

24:22

that the more disruptive each protest gets,

24:25

the more aggressive police and security

24:27

are getting in response. Again,

24:29

those who study social movements are not

24:32

terribly surprised by the lock-step

24:34

escalation of both protest

24:37

tactics

24:37

and backlash.

24:40

I think it's worth remembering that, like, the

24:42

radicalization of the civil rights movement, for

24:44

example, happened over a very

24:47

prolonged period of time, and

24:49

it happened as activists,

24:51

which started out with young people, mostly.

24:54

Youth-led groups basically decided to

24:56

start being more confrontational, and

24:58

they were confrontational but nonviolent, sit-ins,

25:02

you know, boycotts, and what we saw happen

25:04

was there was this increasing frustration

25:07

and violence from law

25:09

enforcement and others,

25:11

you know, and we generally

25:14

think of as counter-movements, but it was really

25:16

white supremacists in that case, but

25:18

we're seeing a similar process happen

25:20

where non-violent

25:23

civil disobedience is becoming more common,

25:25

and there are more people engaging in it, and

25:27

we're seeing citizens and law enforcement

25:30

getting increasingly confrontational response,

25:33

which basically is a way that this

25:35

kind of protest escalates from non-violent

25:37

to violent, because most of the

25:39

time, the violence starts with the

25:41

response. You know, and I mean,

25:43

you've been watching any of the videos of climate

25:46

defiance where law enforcement or

25:48

security, we'll call them, security

25:50

folks of all sorts are becoming more and

25:52

more aggressive in response

25:55

to the nonviolent civil disobedience we

25:57

see from climate defiance or from,

25:59

you know, know, the folks in Germany who are

26:01

getting like punched and pulled and yelled at and

26:03

we see videos of that in the UK

26:06

too. That's this

26:08

is all classic escalation of

26:10

skill in response to so disobedience

26:13

and response to a social movement that is frustrated.

26:16

And I actually think this is like a necessary

26:19

next step.

26:20

Fisher has a new book coming out on

26:22

the climate movement. She looks

26:24

at its place in history, the tactics

26:27

it's used and how those relate to previous

26:29

movements and what's probably

26:32

going to be necessary for the movement

26:34

to succeed.

26:36

As more people are disruptive, even engaging

26:38

in nonviolent civil disobedience, law enforcement

26:40

and counter protesters are going to emerge who

26:43

are going to be violent against those protesters.

26:46

It happened very clearly during the civil rights

26:48

movement. And that was one of the reasons

26:51

that a number of people who wrote about the movement

26:53

say that the government started to

26:56

respond because sympathizers

26:59

who were paying attention may have not supported the

27:01

civil disobedience, but they absolutely

27:03

were repulsed by the violence

27:05

against these young black Americans

27:08

who are getting beaten up for sitting at a countertop

27:10

and refusing to move, for example, that

27:12

kind of violence initiates what we call

27:14

moral shocks. Moral shocks

27:17

are wonderful motivators to get people to do stuff

27:19

absent of organizational ties and embeddedness

27:22

and movements. People care about the climate

27:24

crisis, all of a sudden seeing these young

27:26

people being harmed is going to motivate

27:28

them to do something because they are going to

27:30

feel that it is unacceptable.

27:33

And that is the kind of pressure that will be needed to

27:35

actually get the kind of changes that are necessary.

27:40

That's a bitter pill to swallow. This

27:43

idea that backlash to the point

27:45

of violence is what may ultimately

27:47

catalyze a response, or

27:50

that anyone might be asked to sign

27:52

up for getting punched in the face to

27:54

get people to care. Meanwhile,

27:58

the concern voiced

30:00

Our artwork is by

30:02

Matt Fleming. Our theme song

30:04

is Burt in the Hand by Four Known. The

30:06

show was created

30:07

by me, Amy Westervelt. I

30:10

also reported and wrote this episode.

30:12

You can find a corresponding print story

30:15

on our website at drilled.media.

30:18

You can also find documents there related to this

30:20

season and sign up for our weekly newsletter

30:23

to get a curated list of the week's top

30:25

climate reads. If you'd

30:26

like to support the show, you can give us a rating

30:29

or review wherever you listen to podcasts.

30:32

Share links to our stories

30:32

or upgrade to a paid newsletter

30:35

or podcast subscription for access to ad-free,

30:37

early release episodes and more info on

30:39

this. Thanks for listening and see

30:41

you next time. you