What do you think?
Rate this book
Climate Radicals: Why Our Environmental Politics Isn't Working
The radicalization of climate politics is here
Democracy works by compromise, but climate change is precisely the type of problem that seems not to allow for it. As the clock on democracies’ own self-imposed climate timelines continues to tick, a structural mismatch between politics and science is becoming increasingly exposed. And those concerned by climate change—some already with political power, others grasping for it—are now searching for new ways to close that gap, by any means necessary.
As politicians in Germany and the United States try to rally the public in support of ambitious climate policy—each in their own, very different ways—climate activists are expressing their desperation using ever more radical methods. In Climate Radicals, journalist Cameron Abadi reports on the West’s most embattled frontiers of climate politics, from the legislative struggles in the halls of U.S. Congress to strategy sessions among climate activists contemplating the use of violence.
Democracy works by compromise, but climate change is precisely the type of problem that seems not to allow for it. As the clock on the direst climate timelines continues to tick, this structural mismatch is becoming increasingly exposed. Those concerned by climate change—some already with political power, others grasping for it—are now searching for, and finding, new ways of closing the gap between politics and science, by any means necessary. Climate Radicals is an examination of the democratic dilemma that climate policy finds itself in—and asks whether there are any plausible ways out.
Democracy works by compromise, but climate change is precisely the type of problem that seems not to allow for it. As the clock on democracies’ own self-imposed climate timelines continues to tick, a structural mismatch between politics and science is becoming increasingly exposed. And those concerned by climate change—some already with political power, others grasping for it—are now searching for new ways to close that gap, by any means necessary.
As politicians in Germany and the United States try to rally the public in support of ambitious climate policy—each in their own, very different ways—climate activists are expressing their desperation using ever more radical methods. In Climate Radicals, journalist Cameron Abadi reports on the West’s most embattled frontiers of climate politics, from the legislative struggles in the halls of U.S. Congress to strategy sessions among climate activists contemplating the use of violence.
Democracy works by compromise, but climate change is precisely the type of problem that seems not to allow for it. As the clock on the direst climate timelines continues to tick, this structural mismatch is becoming increasingly exposed. Those concerned by climate change—some already with political power, others grasping for it—are now searching for, and finding, new ways of closing the gap between politics and science, by any means necessary. Climate Radicals is an examination of the democratic dilemma that climate policy finds itself in—and asks whether there are any plausible ways out.
192 pages, Paperback
Published September 10, 2024
2 people are currently reading
71 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
May 16, 2025
I feel like a lot of contemporary political books I read that aim to address why certain movements fail to generate results keep ending up the same way. I go into them thinking, "I wonder if there are more nuanced factors at play that I didn't realize and that it's not just leftist infighting and unrealistic purity tests again." But then I read it and the culprit is leftist infighting and unrealistic purity tests. This has happened like four times now.
The subject of climate change and how different countries respond to it does have unique problems though, like how addressing it is just a supercharged Tragedy of the Commons (countries who make no effort to curb emissions will still benefit if others do, so no one ends up wanting to go first). The "macro" portion of this book looking at the big picture honed in on how Western democracies are hamstrung by short-term political gains and electorates who either can't or don't want to make long-scale investments. This naturally begs the question: are authoritarian states having an easier time/better equipped to deal with the climate crisis? Besides a brief mention of an individual protestor laying out a self-proclaimed "ecofascist" idealized state (where his ideology is conveniently the one that emerges from the ashes on top), this isn't explored, which felt like a missed opportunity to me.
The bulk of this book focuses on the climate activist scene in Germany specifically from the late 2010's through to 2024. It (I think unintentionally) painted Angela Merkel as an extremely shrewd politician who took credit for policy wins that she personally opposed just by stepping in and giving a well-timed push when public sentiment tipped over just the right way. This eventually resulted in a frustrated movement who wanted more substantive action at a faster pace, which in turn led to a series of different organizations getting progressively more direct and extreme. The discussions of the psychology of the most fringe activists who suffer from the worst cases of climate anxiety were really interesting; people who are most concerned about the future are more willing to accept intense dogmatic principles and chastise anyone who doesn't match their energy. It genuinely reads like cult behavior at points.
There are also mentions of how "adaptation" has become a dirty word among the climate movement. The idea that some level of climate change is inevitable and that we should be pivoting to harm reduction is apparently very contentious because it's seen as a preemptive admission of defeat. The True Believers maintain that there's still time to reverse course, but most people aren't willing to make the necessary concessions and will have to be made to do so. I consider myself a slightly better than average-informed normie, but I've never heard of anything like this.
There's also a brief section on the Inflation Reduction Act in the US and lobbying around Joe Manchin specifically, but this is primarily a niche look at contemporary German society. Which is not something I typically read about, but damned if it wasn't interesting.
The subject of climate change and how different countries respond to it does have unique problems though, like how addressing it is just a supercharged Tragedy of the Commons (countries who make no effort to curb emissions will still benefit if others do, so no one ends up wanting to go first). The "macro" portion of this book looking at the big picture honed in on how Western democracies are hamstrung by short-term political gains and electorates who either can't or don't want to make long-scale investments. This naturally begs the question: are authoritarian states having an easier time/better equipped to deal with the climate crisis? Besides a brief mention of an individual protestor laying out a self-proclaimed "ecofascist" idealized state (where his ideology is conveniently the one that emerges from the ashes on top), this isn't explored, which felt like a missed opportunity to me.
The bulk of this book focuses on the climate activist scene in Germany specifically from the late 2010's through to 2024. It (I think unintentionally) painted Angela Merkel as an extremely shrewd politician who took credit for policy wins that she personally opposed just by stepping in and giving a well-timed push when public sentiment tipped over just the right way. This eventually resulted in a frustrated movement who wanted more substantive action at a faster pace, which in turn led to a series of different organizations getting progressively more direct and extreme. The discussions of the psychology of the most fringe activists who suffer from the worst cases of climate anxiety were really interesting; people who are most concerned about the future are more willing to accept intense dogmatic principles and chastise anyone who doesn't match their energy. It genuinely reads like cult behavior at points.
There are also mentions of how "adaptation" has become a dirty word among the climate movement. The idea that some level of climate change is inevitable and that we should be pivoting to harm reduction is apparently very contentious because it's seen as a preemptive admission of defeat. The True Believers maintain that there's still time to reverse course, but most people aren't willing to make the necessary concessions and will have to be made to do so. I consider myself a slightly better than average-informed normie, but I've never heard of anything like this.
There's also a brief section on the Inflation Reduction Act in the US and lobbying around Joe Manchin specifically, but this is primarily a niche look at contemporary German society. Which is not something I typically read about, but damned if it wasn't interesting.
January 6, 2025
Personal Book Notes
The book delves into the dynamics of activism and policy-making, highlighting several critical insights:
Lack of Clear Policy Proposals:
The author critiques some German activist groups for their lack of specific policy recommendations, often focusing solely on advocating for the Paris 1.5-degree target. While this vagueness limits their effectiveness, it also contributes to their success in attracting large numbers of participants. Educated but naive young people can more easily rally around a clear main message than engage with the complexities of policy processes.
Western Democracies and Climate Commitments:
The book points out the failure of western democracies to meet their climate commitments. This failure inevitably leads people to question the efficacy of democratic systems.
Democracy and Political Antagonism:
A particularly striking quote from the book reads:
“Electoral democracy doesn’t preclude political antagonism. It simply insists on an institutionalized way of managing it: disagreements are channeled through public discourse, the electoral contests between political parties, and the resulting oppositions in the legislative bodies tasked with changing the law.”
This quote underscores a critical point: the failure to align with personal beliefs does not equate to the failure of democracy. Democracy guarantees a process, not specific outcomes. Resorting to violence or terror in response to perceived governmental failings risks undermining democracy itself. However, this requires a reciprocal understanding: the state must build a system that genuinely represents its citizens, as unmet legitimate needs can lead to unrest or revolution.
The Green Party and Activist Movements:
Chapter 4 explores the transformation of Germany's Green Party under Robert Habeck. He emphasized actionable goals over ideological purity, distancing himself from the self-reproach and moral superiority that alienates broader audiences. He notably said, “I hate moral rigor and ideology.” Habeck’s approach focused on patriotic messaging, showing that progress is achieved by working within the democratic system and appealing to shared values.
This shift brings to mind the Democratic Party (DNC) in the United States. Leaders like Barack Obama successfully used patriotic messaging, framing their platforms as a commitment to improving the country because of a deep belief in its potential. Since 2012, however, the DNC’s messaging has leaned more self-reproachful, alienating average voters. Returning to a more inclusive, optimistic message could help redefine the party.
Compromise vs. Ideological Purity:
Activists often reject compromise, viewing it as failure. In contrast, lawmakers understand that compromise leads to incremental progress. The author captures this tension with the observation:
“A [group] liberated from any expectation of success, embracing the purity of failure.”
Activists can afford to make uncompromising demands because they bear no responsibility for implementing solutions. Paradoxically, activists and policymakers need each other. Activists push for urgency and keep policymakers accountable, while policymakers work within democratic constraints to enact gradual but tangible changes. This cycle, while contentious, reflects democracy in action.
Infiltrating Activist Movements:
The author demonstrates an ability to immerse himself in Germany’s largest climate activist movements. His balanced perspective highlights the naivety, arrogance, and ignorance that can come with unwavering ideological commitment, while also acknowledging the passion and drive of these groups.
Academically Addressing Climate Change:
The author advocates for a more nuanced approach to climate change, steering away from black-and-white thinking. A key takeaway is:
“It’s the climate activists, by contrast, who fail to understand that purity is not the sole criterion for truth in democratic politics.”
Adaptation legislation and pragmatic actions should not be dismissed as normalization. Instead, they represent a smarter, more effective way to address the problem.
The book delves into the dynamics of activism and policy-making, highlighting several critical insights:
Lack of Clear Policy Proposals:
The author critiques some German activist groups for their lack of specific policy recommendations, often focusing solely on advocating for the Paris 1.5-degree target. While this vagueness limits their effectiveness, it also contributes to their success in attracting large numbers of participants. Educated but naive young people can more easily rally around a clear main message than engage with the complexities of policy processes.
Western Democracies and Climate Commitments:
The book points out the failure of western democracies to meet their climate commitments. This failure inevitably leads people to question the efficacy of democratic systems.
Democracy and Political Antagonism:
A particularly striking quote from the book reads:
“Electoral democracy doesn’t preclude political antagonism. It simply insists on an institutionalized way of managing it: disagreements are channeled through public discourse, the electoral contests between political parties, and the resulting oppositions in the legislative bodies tasked with changing the law.”
This quote underscores a critical point: the failure to align with personal beliefs does not equate to the failure of democracy. Democracy guarantees a process, not specific outcomes. Resorting to violence or terror in response to perceived governmental failings risks undermining democracy itself. However, this requires a reciprocal understanding: the state must build a system that genuinely represents its citizens, as unmet legitimate needs can lead to unrest or revolution.
The Green Party and Activist Movements:
Chapter 4 explores the transformation of Germany's Green Party under Robert Habeck. He emphasized actionable goals over ideological purity, distancing himself from the self-reproach and moral superiority that alienates broader audiences. He notably said, “I hate moral rigor and ideology.” Habeck’s approach focused on patriotic messaging, showing that progress is achieved by working within the democratic system and appealing to shared values.
This shift brings to mind the Democratic Party (DNC) in the United States. Leaders like Barack Obama successfully used patriotic messaging, framing their platforms as a commitment to improving the country because of a deep belief in its potential. Since 2012, however, the DNC’s messaging has leaned more self-reproachful, alienating average voters. Returning to a more inclusive, optimistic message could help redefine the party.
Compromise vs. Ideological Purity:
Activists often reject compromise, viewing it as failure. In contrast, lawmakers understand that compromise leads to incremental progress. The author captures this tension with the observation:
“A [group] liberated from any expectation of success, embracing the purity of failure.”
Activists can afford to make uncompromising demands because they bear no responsibility for implementing solutions. Paradoxically, activists and policymakers need each other. Activists push for urgency and keep policymakers accountable, while policymakers work within democratic constraints to enact gradual but tangible changes. This cycle, while contentious, reflects democracy in action.
Infiltrating Activist Movements:
The author demonstrates an ability to immerse himself in Germany’s largest climate activist movements. His balanced perspective highlights the naivety, arrogance, and ignorance that can come with unwavering ideological commitment, while also acknowledging the passion and drive of these groups.
Academically Addressing Climate Change:
The author advocates for a more nuanced approach to climate change, steering away from black-and-white thinking. A key takeaway is:
“It’s the climate activists, by contrast, who fail to understand that purity is not the sole criterion for truth in democratic politics.”
Adaptation legislation and pragmatic actions should not be dismissed as normalization. Instead, they represent a smarter, more effective way to address the problem.
December 4, 2024
More of a general history than analysis of climate movements focusing on Germany and bits of the US.
March 31, 2025
A good breakdown and comparison of the different climate movements in Germany along with some comparisons with the climate scene in the US. Clearly, there is no comparison between the two countries in terms of policy and actions and commitment to combat climate change but including the US does help the US reader gain perspective.
180 pages split into 7 chapters with useless headings Chpt 1, 2, ....
Some 'further readings' and Notes but no index.
A good read if your news is primarily US based and you wish to better understand how seriously climate change is seen in Europe.
The chapter explaining Sen. Manchin's successful obstruction, the revised energy bill and its new name (Inflation Reduction Act) was very helpful.
Notes:
- good look at how democracy and its incremental change tied to compromise is not well suited to address an issue like climate change. Climate change fixes are outside the normal 2-4yr political cycle; it requires international effort; there are powerful groups who will lose immense wealth if we switch to renewable energy.
- German groups
-- Green Party (GP) attempts to bridge the big gap between the truth of what is needed and the political limitations of a democracy
-- FFF (Fridays for Future) youth led group attempting to work thru mass public demonstrations to influence Green Pary
-- letzte generation (similar to XR in England, US) feel compelled to up activism b/c GP-FFF is stalling
-- ende gelände: stop coal mining; uses civil disobedience
-- other more radical groups debating what more extreme actions may be needed
One chapter speculates on the psychological needs of one young activist. Are we suppose to believe based on this anecdotal data pt that there is a cult-like attraction for some or many in the youth climate groups?
Abadi understands the science and seems to sympathize with the young activists who are facing a bleak future b/c the older generation is choosing short-term comfort over a viable, sustainable future for the planet.
But his concluding criticisms of the movements w/o offering alternative suggestions left me cold.
Note, as of Dec 2024, Letzte Generation decided to change its name and tactics. Let's give credit to Abadi for foretelling this.
"The group will work on social cohesion and help establish connections between people to help each other deal with climate change, Hinrichs said. She added that the group will continue to organise protests, but road or airport blockades will no longer be the focus."
180 pages split into 7 chapters with useless headings Chpt 1, 2, ....
Some 'further readings' and Notes but no index.
A good read if your news is primarily US based and you wish to better understand how seriously climate change is seen in Europe.
The chapter explaining Sen. Manchin's successful obstruction, the revised energy bill and its new name (Inflation Reduction Act) was very helpful.
Notes:
- good look at how democracy and its incremental change tied to compromise is not well suited to address an issue like climate change. Climate change fixes are outside the normal 2-4yr political cycle; it requires international effort; there are powerful groups who will lose immense wealth if we switch to renewable energy.
- German groups
-- Green Party (GP) attempts to bridge the big gap between the truth of what is needed and the political limitations of a democracy
-- FFF (Fridays for Future) youth led group attempting to work thru mass public demonstrations to influence Green Pary
-- letzte generation (similar to XR in England, US) feel compelled to up activism b/c GP-FFF is stalling
-- ende gelände: stop coal mining; uses civil disobedience
-- other more radical groups debating what more extreme actions may be needed
One chapter speculates on the psychological needs of one young activist. Are we suppose to believe based on this anecdotal data pt that there is a cult-like attraction for some or many in the youth climate groups?
Abadi understands the science and seems to sympathize with the young activists who are facing a bleak future b/c the older generation is choosing short-term comfort over a viable, sustainable future for the planet.
But his concluding criticisms of the movements w/o offering alternative suggestions left me cold.
Note, as of Dec 2024, Letzte Generation decided to change its name and tactics. Let's give credit to Abadi for foretelling this.
"The group will work on social cohesion and help establish connections between people to help each other deal with climate change, Hinrichs said. She added that the group will continue to organise protests, but road or airport blockades will no longer be the focus."
December 4, 2024
I liked this. More of a general history, but relevant for me as an immigrant in Germany, who is moving to the US soon. I found it quite funny.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews