Resistance, Social Change, and the Environment Introduction Environment is one of the key sites of global social change, with environ- mental activist groups seeking to draw attention to the effects of specific practices on the environment, and subsequently seeking to impact policy making and practices that shape the environment (Castells, 1996, 1997, 1998; della Porta & Diani, 2006; Rootes, 2004; Sklair, 1995). In our discus- sion of the politics of resistance in this chapter, we will specifically focus on global social change movements that emphasize local participation and processes of change, situated amidst the broader backdrop of claims making and presentation of arguments that seek to impact the realms of policy making and programming. Drawing upon examples from the global North as well as from the South, we will particularly examine the ways in which social change processes are constituted amidst policy frameworks and articulations across various global spaces. We will attend to the discursive pro- Chapter cesses and strategies through which resistive efforts Four of transforming environmental policies are played out. The voices of resistance weaved together in this 137 138 Resistance, Social Change, and the Environment chapter create opportunities for engaging in dialogue with alternative rationalities for organizing the environment and, more importantly, the knowledge about the environment. In the voices of resistance to the global politics of the environment, entry points are created for disrupting the monolithic narratives of global policies that are dictated by the powerful influences of transnational cor- porations (TNCs) in shaping global, national, and local environmental policies (Pezzullo, 2004; Rootes, 2002a, 2002b; Sklair, 1995; Smith, 2002; Yearley, 1994, 1996; Yearley & Forrester, 2000). The nexus between transna- tional hegemonic actors and the realms of policy making is foregrounded into the discursive space, being interrogated for the linkages of influence that ultimately shape global environmental policies, what gets configured within these policies, what gets discussed, and ultimately the kinds of policies that get made. Therefore, central to the voices of resistance is the re-articulation of the realms of decision making, redrawing out the pro- cesses of decision making, suggesting alternatives, and seeking to bring the realms of decision making more into the hands of communities at the global peripheries (Dutta, 2011). Therefore, the very sites of policy mak- ing and arbitration by global hegemonic actors also emerge as the sites of protest. Consider, for instance, the voices of youth activists presented in a YouTube video organized at the very site of the United Nations Climate Meeting COP17 summit: Youth trying to buy back. Youth organizing bake sale at the Durban Climate Conference COP 17 to buy back the influence of everyday publics with policy makers. Noting the inequities in decision making structures and structures of policymaking in the context of environ- mental policies, the youth participants in the resistance movement note that the policy makers only seem to understand the language of money and therefore the bake sale is an attempt to engage policy makers in their own language. (http://youtu.be/-KhTSqsb6-w) The notion of inequities in communicative opportunities for participa- tion becomes the center point of various movements of resistance against neoliberalism (Dutta, 2011; Dutta & Pal, 2010). That the paradox of the neoliberal principles of freedom and liberty are essentially caught amidst Voices of Resistance 139 Figure 4.1. Uploaded by “developmentreality.” http://youtu.be/-KhTSqsb6-w the consolidation of communicative resources in the hands of powerful global actors motivates processes of organizing. That policy makers under- stand only the language of money becomes the entry point for organizing resistance, with the bake sale serving as a symbol of resistance by raising money to engage policy makers. Voices of resistance are narrated in the backdrop of the material constraints on the symbolic and discursive sites of articulation. The three examples of social change that we will specifi- cally look at are 350.org, the campaign against the Keystone XL Tar Sands pipeline, and the International Campaign for Justice in Bhopal (ICJB). 350.org The 350 movement is built on the framework of organizing to set the safe upper limit for CO2 in the atmosphere to 350 parts per million (ppm), based on the findings of climate science. The website of the 350 movement opens up with the slogan: “We’re building a global movement to solve the 140 Resistance, Social Change, and the Environment climate crisis.” This teaser that articulates the voice of the movement within the broader context of social change then opens up into the question “Why?” which is hyperlinked into a new page that explains the broader goals and objectives of the movement. Offering the rationale for the move- ment, the website notes the following key points (http://www.350.org/): 1. The climate crisis is the biggest problem facing the world. Un- checked climate change means more natural disasters, more out- breaks of disease, more food shortages, and more sea level rise. 2. We need to make large-scale changes. The climate crisis is so big that we can’t solve it with small, personal actions alone. We need to think bigger and bolder. 3. Large-scale change means changing policy. We need laws that rewire the way the world produces and consumes energy so that clean power is cheap, dirty power is expensive, and people ev- erywhere can live sustainable lives. 4. Getting strong climate policy won’t be easy. It means fighting the wealthiest and most powerful group on the planet: the fos- sil fuel industry. 5. We can win with a people-powered movement. We’ll never have as much money as the fossil fuel industry, so we need to over- power them with our numbers and our determination instead. From the Civil Rights movement to women’s suffrage, social movements have changed the course of history—so we’re build- ing a movement of people to solve the biggest problem in the world. The problem of climate change is connected to other global problems such as food shortages, disease outbreaks, and rising sea levels. In con- necting climate change to the broader domains of other global problems, the movement highlights the large-scale scope of change that needs to be made, and drives home the relevance of changes in the realms of policy making. It is in this backdrop of setting up the broader problem of climate Voices of Resistance 141 change that the voices of resistance point toward the domains of policy making that are controlled in the hands of the wealthy. The concept of a people-powered movement is articulated in resistance to the top-down decisions and decision-making processes around climate change. This no- tion of people-powered politics of change seeks to dislocate the realms of decision making from the broader structures of power under neoliberal governance and instead place decision making in the hands of communi- ties, foregrounding the role of people in shaping policies around climate control. The monetary power of influence of the fossil fuel industry is re- sisted by the empowerment, solidarity, and determination of the move- ment. In doing so, top-down power is dislocated by bottom-up power that emerges from the participation and voice of people who have been placed at the margins of communicative systems of decision making. Examples of the Civil Rights movement and women’s suffrage are offered as examples of the influence of people-powered movements in achieving change and in solving some of the biggest problems of the globe. Along the lines of the voicing of grassroots resistance, entry points are sought for building solidarities of resistance with other movements across the globe, both along issue lines as well as across issue lines. For instance, solidarity-building with the Occupy movement is envisioned under the umbrella of the “Occupy and the Climate Movement” hyperlink that asks readers to join the 99% (the Occupy movement is discussed in greater de- tail in chapter three). The hyperlink leads the reader to a page that notes the linkage between economic injustices and the politics of climate change. Note, for instance, the following explanation (http://www.350.org/occupy): • Fossil fuels enable the current economic system to continue be- cause it is global and requires a lot of fossil fuels for production and transportation. Multi-national corporations won’t do well if we stop burning fossil fuels. • Failure to act will result in catastrophic and runaway climate change that will dramatically undermine the systems that make earth livable. Therefore the reality of the climate science and the call for climate justice are critical filters through which all con- 142 Resistance, Social Change, and the Environment cerns for the economy, education, healthcare and democracy should be considered. • We shouldn’t build the revolution on a dirty energy economy. Those who are concerned about the economy and jobs today, shouldn’t settle for short term economies based on fossil fuels which will undermine both the planet and economic opportu- nities and health for future generations. Linkages are offered between the global economic injustices and the poli- tics of climate control. The global economic system is connected to fos- sil fuels, pointing out how the use of fossil fuels supports the production and transportation systems of multinationals. The interconnectedness of issues is made salient when the effects on climate are interlinked with the effects on economies. The realms of education, health care, economy, and democracy are placed in the backdrop of the frame of climate science and climate justice. The articulation of an alternative economic system is interlinked with the articulation of an alternative energy economy. The sustainability of the planet is interwoven with the economic opportunities and health for future generations.