COP26 took place this year in Glasgow from Sunday 30th of October to Friday 12th of November. The idea behind COP is that 127 countries spanning from all across the globe come together in a meeting set up by the UNFCCC to discuss how they might go about increasing their targets for decreasing emissions.
The hope is that emissions are reduced so that we meet the 1.5℃ Paris target. This meeting is important as it is when countries revisit their climate pledges made under the 2015 Paris Agreement. If they succeed in accomplishing their goal, we will be on track to resolving Global Warming. Needless to say, this meeting is one of the most important meetings in an environmentalist’s calendar, and this year was set to be the most inclusive COP ever.
It comes with no surprise that this year’s COP was much anticipated particularly by marginalised groups and young activists. This comes in the wake of the Social Conscious movement gaining traction in recent years where people, are looking at the bigger picture in regards to social change. People are starting to consider a wider array of voices and thoughts that have gone ignored for the longest time. Finally, the focus is less on the straight white middle-aged man, and more on people living in the global south, black, brown and ethnic minority voices, and young people. Essentially, those most affected by climate change. However, COP26 did not do enough to tackle climate issues or even fully incorporate this new socially conscious ideology. Mainly, because it did not fully acknowledge the marginalised groups that it sought to represent. It seems like simply giving these groups “a seat at the table” is not enough to guarantee them even being heard, and this is an issue. This speaks to our more socially conscious society at large as performative activism becomes rampant in social justice spaces, specifically environmentalist spaces.
Lauren Ashe defines performative activism as ‘activism that is done to increase one’s social capital rather than because of one’s devotion to a cause. A person who is taking part in performative activism would rather let it be known that they are not racist rather than actually seeking to change the racist structures within our country.’ This can be seen in the rise of ethically sourced clothing and accessories to combat fast fashion.
People are choosing to buy brand-new clothes they are very selective about not choosing fast fashion and only looking for brands that are ethically sourced. They are trying to take responsibility and ownership over where their money goes. For example, if they believe that a certain brand or company may be directly impacting the environment in a negative way they withdraw their support from them by not shopping or publicly supporting them. Buyers now have no excuse but to put their money where their mouth is.
The most popular form of this is “thrifting”. More and more people have started thrifting which means buying second-hand clothing either from charity shops, vintage boutiques, and stores online such as eBay or Depop. It allows buyers particularly of a lower income to purchase good quality clothes at affordable prices without contributing to fast fashion.
In an interview I had with Avril, a buyer and seller of thrifted clothing, we discussed some of the problems she has encountered as a marginalised person given the recent rise of thrifting.
"I had been very reliant on charity shops (…) but now I have to shop at AliExpress or (like) PrettyLittleThing because (…)if you want to be sustainably shopping it’s now expensive"
She said in the interview that, “if you want to be sustainable and actually benefit the environment you have to put the money in, especially now that charity shops are trying to capitalise off of this. It’s so hard to shop sustainably” and that “I feel like this is affecting the lower class in a really bad way (…). Where are you going to go for your clothes if the charity shops’ prices are going up?”
Avril highlighted that as soon as people excessively started shopping at thrift stores they ended up exploiting the very people it was supposed to help. “(...) now the market has become a bit corrupt. (…) people were just selling for the sake of just selling good pieces to (like) share. But now I feel like people sell clothes because they know they can get money off it (…) I feel like now everyone is capitalising off of Depop '' she goes on to say how even the fees the platform are charging for sellers have increased due to popularity.
“People understand you can buy (like) vintage good quality clothes for cheap, the prices have gone up, and now charity shops are not as authentic as they used to be. (…) all the good pieces that you could find in charity shops now are being taken by the middle class, upper-middle-class sellers on these apps and being resold on the app for (…) five times the price.” When I asked her what she felt was attracting these new buyers all of a sudden she responded with “clout” “really and truly no one back in the day used to shop at charity shops. People used to find it embarrassing (…) I’ve been wearing clothes from the charity shops since I was a child. (…) they’ve become gentrified”.
When I raised the issue of shopping ethically and its correlation with activism she responded with, “I just feel like these conversations are (very like) two dimensional and fake. People are very fake ‘woke’ these days. Everyone’s a fake activist and I think (…) only because now the environment is trendy, people want to speak about it.” “If you really want to be sustainable, why are you putting the prices up? Let’s be realistic, no one can afford to shop sustainably if you’re going to be raising the prices. And those same people go to the charity shop and buy a bunch of cheap clothes (…) and sell it for £30, £40 each (…). I think they’re fake woke. If you really were an activist you wouldn’t be doing that because it is not ethical”.
It almost seems as though the movement is taking two steps forward and three steps back because of performative activism.
COP26 partially fed into this issue this year when we look at how marginalised groups were pushed to the wayside. A good example of this would be hearing about the experiences from attendees about how they felt they were treated and also how they felt marginalized voices were represented or the lack thereof.
"Cop26 was frenetic, chaotic. It was disorganised, but there was an urgent message there (…) which is that we have 10 years to try to (…) move the needle on climate change"
In another interview, I spoke to an attendee of the event, Sangeeta Waldron who said that “Cop26 was frenetic, chaotic. It was disorganised, but there was an urgent message there (…) which is that we have 10 years to try to (…) move the needle on climate change”.
This is hopeful at least. There is change starting to happen, which is something Waldron makes sure to note. However, she does state that “COP26…26! We should have done all of this at COP1! (…) I don’t know, I just feel a lot of these UN events are talking shops, we really need change. We talk the talk, we review things but we don’t really as a global community, really come together to make the change that’s needed. (…) we’re so slow, and we don’t have the time”.
I then enquired about an indigenous group of people who were brought to COP this year but were said to not have been treated with respect. Waldron confirmed that COP26 partially fed into this issue of performative activism this year when we look at how marginalized groups were pushed to the wayside. A good example of this would be hearing about the experiences from attendees about how they felt they were treated and also how they felt marginalized voices were represented or the lack thereof.
"COP26 was frenetic, chaotic. It was disorganized, but there was an urgent message there (...) which is that we have 10 years to try to (...) move the needle on climate change," said Sangeeta Waldron, an attendee of the event, in an interview. This statement carries a glimmer of hope that change is starting to happen, which Waldron acknowledged. However, she expressed frustration, stating, "COP26...26! We should have done all of this at COP1! (...) I don't know, I just feel a lot of these UN events are talking shops, we really need change. We talk the talk, we review things but we don't really as a global community, really come together to make the change that's needed. (...) we're so slow, and we don't have the time."
Waldron's words highlight the perceived disconnect between the grand promises made at events like COP26 and the lack of tangible, swift action to address the climate crisis. This disconnect can inadvertently fuel performative activism, where organizations and nations make symbolic gestures or commitments without backing them up with substantive policies and measures.
Waldron's concerns were further validated when I inquired about an indigenous group brought to COP26 but reportedly not treated with respect. She confirmed the mistreatment, shedding light on how the conference's supposed commitment to inclusivity and amplifying marginalized voices fell short in practice.
The experiences shared by Waldron and others at COP26 underscore the need for a genuine shift from rhetoric and tokenism to meaningful, equitable, and urgent climate action. Without addressing the systemic barriers and power dynamics that contribute to marginalization, events like COP26 risk becoming platforms for performative activism rather than catalysts for transformative change.
Comments
Post a Comment