Climate change is a global crisis that requires a mix of national and international solutions. All nations need to be in agreement on the issue and committed to doing the most they can, but the specific plans for decarbonization and moving towards a sustainable economy are to be made at the national level, with each nation deciding how it can use its renewable resources to lessen and soon eliminate dependence on fossil fuels, how infrastructure can be redesigned to support a green grid, what policy changes will accomplish their climate goals, and how they can incentivize their citizens to reduce their impact on the environment.
It is no secret that many nations are nowhere near making the changes that are necessary for the world to hold global warming to 1.5° Celsius over pre-industrial levels.
Dirty industries are resisting the transition to clean energy, and, at least in the US, are buying politicians to take their side against the planet’s and to smear efforts to move the country in a seriously sustainable direction. Other politicians are concerned about political liabilities, and want to avoid radical change that may upset certain constituents. Trump and the Republicans have committed themselves to an all-out assault on the Green New Deal and have yet to come out with a reasonable alternative that would at least meet the goals of the Paris Agreement (which Trump has vowed to pull us out of, anyway). The “Green Real Deal” proposed by Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz seems to offer little other than deregulation and an opening up of federal lands for “renewable energy experiments” that is likely just going to open them up to fossil fuel interests, as Trump has been doing in a number of recent environmental rollbacks. A number of states are moving forward on plans that will accelerate their transition to clean energy, but in many cases, like that of New Jersey, their energy plans for the future do not seem likely to succeed in making the rapid, drastic reduction in emissions that is required.
For many of these politicians, business continues as usual, and climate change (if they even believe in it) is something to be handled a little bit at a time, with more attention being devoted to issues that somehow seem more pressing. The most effective means of getting their attention and forcing them to deal immediately with the climate crisis is a nationwide strike. These strikes need to be national in their goals, as policy change can only really be affected within one’s country—the citizens of Senegal can’t change US policy, or vice versa—but must be carried out within countries all over the world, with strike leaders sharing goals and ideas across borders.
We are already seeing symbolic strikes from students around the world. These tend to be symbolic, one-day strikes, or in Greta Thunberg’s case, a one-day-a-week strike. These have captured some media attention but have not yet compelled national or international change. What students need to do—and this is a big ask—is to initiate a massive, unending, national strike, refusing to go to school until their demands are met. High school students seem the best suited for this, figuring that college tuition is so expensive these days that university students are not going to pay to not go to classes, and that students of middle school age and lower are too young (but if middle school students want to join in, by all means, they would be welcome).
Why students? For a number of reasons.
- They are already in the vanguard on this. We aren’t seeing many symbolic strikes from adults, only the youth. They are the mostly likely, then, to be willing to engage in a prolonged strike.
- Youth strikes have a strong historical precedent. Walkouts, strikes, and sit-ins were common in American universities in the 60s and 70s as students fought for civil rights and an end to the Vietnam War, and university protests triggered a near revolution in France in 1968. Young people are passionate and often looking for a way to get involved and make a difference, and these kind of direct actions offer that chance.
- The young do not have the responsibilities of the old, and are relatively unencumbered. Yes, we know what today’s high school students are “going through”—they are certainly dealing with far more pressure about college than previous generations faced, and are sometimes made to feel like every test is a life-or-death matter—but they do not have rent, a mortgage, or a family to take care of, the responsibilities that often make adults shy away from speaking out or taking a stand. Students’ immunity to serious consequences frees them to act in the way we should all be acting. They may get grounded, and they may incur their parents’ anger, but if it is a truly massive strike, they will be in good company, and will be able to commiserate with their friends. In terms of school discipline, they will be protected by their numbers, and will be able to say, “They can’t suspend us all.” Besides, they are voluntarily suspending their education—what then does the school have to threaten them with?
- It is their future that will be most affected. They will outlive their parents (assuming climate chaos doesn’t jeopardize that) and will be left dealing with a destabilized climate for themselves and for any children they may have. Logically, they will take the issue more personally than older generations, and should be acting to gain a saner future.
- Going through the motions at school doesn’t make sense when the future they are to inherit is actively being undermined by the ecological devastation that continues to get worse on a daily basis. The Earth continues to warm, and emissions continue to rise, and working one’s way through high school to get into a good college so one can get a good job and provide a good life for one’s family years down the line means running on a straight course like a racehorse with blinders on while a tsunami sweeps toward the track. Adults are pushing students to continue through their studies as if nothing is amiss, as if the future they are headed for will not see a spike in catastrophes, destabilizing population shifts, and competition for scarcer resources, and it is time for students to call them out on it. A nationwide strike would show that students will not allow themselves to be led like docile animals to the slaughter.
- Students are better at calling out B.S. Young people, having not yet become fully a part of the adult system, are not yet corrupted and restrained by it, and are better able to see its absurdities. While adults—worn down by years of drudgery and acceptance of life in what they inevitably call the “real world”—worry about repercussions in their careers, or what the neighbors will say, and so often keep their heads down and their mouths shut, or rationalize their absurd situations to themselves, the young (being apt to rebel and be discontent anyway) are keen to point out the flaws in the system the adults in their lives are trying to groom them to inherit.
- Students under 18 are cut off from most political participation, and direct action is their only means of shaping the societies they are a part of and the nations that are making decisions that will affect their futures. When a system acts against their future and denies them even a token chance of fixing it in the official political process, they have the right and the incentive to launch into angry, purposeful action on their own terms.
- The voices of the young can have a powerful impact on the conscience of the old. To tell one’s parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles, teachers, legislators, governors, heads of state, “You are not leaving a future for me. You are destroying the planet I have to live on,” is a raw, powerful statement that has the power to shame them into acting rightly. Telling one’s leaders, “Your cowardice and corruption are robbing children of the hope that is their birthright” is a ringing statement they ignore at their own peril. The young have the power to make the heavens echo the truth of their elders’ shame.
- A resolute strike carried out by students long enough will either a) force adult leaders to meet their demands, or b) force adults who genuinely have the students’ best interests at heart (such as parents, other relatives, and teachers) to advocate vociferously for their demands to be met, or to go on strike themselves until students’ demands are met. Half-heartedness will die beneath a sustained student strike.
The logistics of the strike are up to students. They may wish to go to the school building every day and demonstrate outside. They may wish to “occupy” the school, entering the building and having “sit-ins” in common areas, without going to class. They may wish to demonstrate elsewhere, perhaps outside local or state government buildings. They may want to plan trips to flood the state or national capital with protesting students.
While on strike, students should do a number of things:
- Reinforce one another and remain strong in their solidarity.
- Present a serious public image. They must not allow the inevitable claim of the public that the students “just want to get out of school” to have any shred of truth.
- Create a list of demands for making their schools sustainable, and spend time fundraising to help meet these demands. They may wish to consider: solar power installations, renewable energy credits, waste reduction and composting, greener transportation, and more efficient energy usage, among others.
- Clean up their communities, whether on the school campus, on local streets, or in parks and nature preserves. This work will make a positive difference on the local environment, strengthen bonds between students and nature, and convince the public of students’ sincerity.
- Students should hold themselves accountable environmentally in their personal lives, at school, and at demonstrations. They should be walking, biking, taking public transit, or carpooling where possible to school and to demonstrations, and should make sure that any demonstrations leave no litter behind.
- Educate themselves on ecological ethics, environmental issues, and activism. Special attention should be paid to local environmental issues that may tie into climate change.
- Carry on relevant studies where possible or desired. Continuing coursework outside of school would be wise, especially if students intend to take an AP exam (or similar) at the end of the school year.
Students who take part in a successful strike for the climate that changes public policy will have much to be proud of. They will know that they will be on the right side of history, and hopefully the history of the future will be brighter for their actions. Their single-hearted action will be the wake-up call the world needs. They are the only hope for initiating larger strikes among adults, or bringing forth the necessary changes before adult strikes are necessary. Also, if students go on strike and receive promises that their demands will be met, they must make sure those promises are kept. Students must make it clear to the authorities that they will go on strike again if the authorities fail to carry out promised plans, and will hold up the evidence of those broken promises for all the world to see. If a second strike is necessary, students will already know the ropes and will be seasoned veterans, but they might also find themselves fighting against “strike fatigue.” Some students may not want to go through it all again and would prefer to regain a sense of normalcy in their lives. They must fight through it so that their initial efforts will not have been in vain. They must show the adult world, which has largely been content to maximize short-term profits while laying waste to the Earth, that they will not be placated with false promises and will not allow a return to “business as usual.”