In the last couple of years, we have seen more frequent extreme weather phenomena haunt the globe. When extreme heat, wildfires, extreme rainfall, and hailstorms are repeated in the news, the warnings of climate change to come, quickly shift to a catastrophe that is already here. Håkan Thörn’s and Carl Cassegård’s book Post-Apocalyptic Environmentalism is a timely contribution to the understanding of how the environmental movement(s) have developed along with the development of the environmental issues, why they have failed, and how contemporary post-apocalyptic narratives still provide space for action despite living the catastrophe.
The book provides a critical, historical account of the environmental movement, as well as offering an outlook of what possibilities environmental activism is left with when there is no hope to avoid the consequences of climate change. It shows how, historically, the environmental movement has been driven by the warnings of future threats, but at the same time by techno-optimistic reassurances that these threats can be averted. However, now that extreme weather phenomena become more frequent, these threats seem to be already here. Based on this, the authors present two puzzles that they attempt to address. First, what implications does this have for environmental activism? Second, what can be done and what remains meaningful to fight for when the hope that the catastrophe can be averted is lost? In addressing these puzzles, the book poses the guiding question: how is it possible that the catastrophic trajectory of the system has changed so little despite over a century of environmental protests?
The authors attempt to develop a theoretical and political argument that the environmental movement has failed due to an, often, instrumental understanding of nature, and working within a capitalist framework despite needing to be anti-capitalist to be able to stop environmental degradation. This argument is built partly on the authors’ empirical research through different research projects conducted during the last decade; their critical participation in environmental movements; and key texts published by key environmental movements and activists over the years. This base enables the authors to offer a sound, trustworthy theoretical proposition.
The authors demonstrate that the environmental movement is not ‘one’ movement but rather a ‘movement of movements’ and that there is heterogeneity within these narratives as well. Analytically, the authors use the key theoretical concepts of second nature and nature interests to identify and elaborate on three meta-narratives characterising the development of environmentalism: green progress, the apocalyptic narrative, and the post-apocalyptic narrative. The latter is given particular attention in the final discussion. The three narratives have developed over time, but the authors argue that this is not a linear development, nor that the narrative replaces each other. Rather, they argue that the three meta-narratives are an integral part of the articulation of experiences of environmental destruction brought about by industrial capitalism.
The authors point to the issue of how the environmental movements (at least the green progress narrative) historically have aligned with a neoliberal economic system. This alignment, the authors argue, has become a straitjacket for environmental thinking by keeping it within capitalist forms and categorizations, which prevent the movement from negating essential features of capitalism. This has led to depoliticization of environmental issues, and, therefore, the movements’ failing to prevent more severe environmental degradation.
The apocalyptic narrative started to break the alignment with neoliberalism, and the postapocalyptic movements are turning to alternative ways of living to counteract the systematic failures of capitalism. The authors argue that this is successful because acknowledgement of the catastrophes enables thinking beyond capitalism. The narrative embraces the dissonance and utilizes it to illuminate the problems created by, but cannot be solved by, capitalism. The authors emphasize how this narrative is driven by emotions connected to loss, such as grief and anger, and morality, and further argue that this shows how these emotions and moral reflexivity can be as mobilizing as ‘hope’. Another important aspect of the post-apocalyptic narrative is its focus on inequalities and power relations instead of the threat to the globe as a whole, pointing specifically to Global North and South relations.
The book highlights several important themes, such as power relations and colonialism, temporality, and the local-global scale relation of these types of movements. A particularly important contribution is the attention given to the relationship between Global North and Global South movements in the book. While, as the authors themselves also admit, the book lacks examples of Global South movements, they are making efforts to highlight the importance of including these perspectives to avoid a Global North bias. This becomes particularly crucial for the post-apocalyptic narrative as the Global South have already been living the environmental catastrophes often painted as a dystopian future in the Global North. This only shows that this is a topic that has not been exhausted yet and that further research should continue to explore.
This book is an important contribution not only to the field of social movements but also to scholars interested in understanding the political climate when developing environmental policies. The book contributes a deeper theoretical understanding of the workings and developments of environmental movements. It also offers explanations to (what seems to be) the internal conflicts around issues such as farmland and nuclear power that sometimes hinder successful actions. Overall, while this book breeds an underlying depressing tone when showing the failures of the environmental movement in preventing anthropogenic climate change, it still ends on an optimistic note of the possibilities to achieve change despite (or because) the post-apocalyptic time we are entering. The authors show how today’s environmental activism remains meaningful even in a time of catastrophe, and that there is still space for action. This argument is important for education for sustainable development. It enables us to talk and teach about the current catastrophes without leaving our students in a state of hopelessness. This is important if our students are going to be able to become the agents of change that our world needs.