Funding Disruptive Climate Protests - Margaret Klein Salamon (Climate Emergency Fund)

We are in a mass delusion of normalcy, like, humanity sleepwalking off of a cliff and the protesters are grabbing us by the shoulders and trying to shake us awake, right? And no one likes to be shaken awake. That is very uncomfortable. Welcome to the Regeneration will be Funded. I'm your host, Matthew Monahan. And in this series, we're having conversations about regenerative finance, technology, and our living planet. How can we build an economy that's in service to life brought to you by Ma Ear

th, you can find all of our conversations at maearth.com. Thanks for joining us. Today's guest is Margaret Klein Salamon from the Climate Emergency Fund. And we're talking about disruptive climate. protests. Now, I know this topic can ruffle some feathers and be uncomfortable, but it's exactly why I think it's important we discuss it and why it's so underfunded in the philanthropic space. Margaret is a clinical psychologist, a climate activist, and she's really metabolized What the science is te

lling us about our ecosystems and the future livability on planet Earth. She's arrived at the conclusion that distributing funds to frontline, disruptive, non violent protests is one of the most effective things that we can do for the climate movement today. So get ready, keep an open mind and enjoy this conversation with Margaret Klein Salamon. We are here today with Margaret Klein Salamon. Margaret is a clinical psychologist. She is a climate activist and the executive director of the Climate

Emergency Fund. She's also the author of Facing the Climate Emergency, How to Transform Yourself with Climate Truth. Thank you, Margaret, for being here. Thank you so much for having me. And I understand you were at the protest yesterday. The march was totally inspiring and uplifting, the largest climate march in the country since COVID. Um, and it really felt like there's thousands and thousands and thousands, tens of thousands of people who feel the same way, who understand the climate emergen

cy. And that felt great. Yeah. Initial reports were over 75, 000 people attended yesterday, but also this is happening globally. Is that right? Absolutely. Absolutely. There's. I mean, for this specific, uh, End Fossil Fuels Day of Action, there was, um, I don't know how many countries, more than 10 countries participating, potentially way more than that. But just in general, the climate movement is firmly back and, um, pretty spicy, um, more than before in 2019, before COVID, which, um, You kno

w, in 2019, the movement was on a tremendous upswing, Extinction Rebellion, the Youth Strikers, um, the Sunrise Movement here in the US, the climate emergency declarations were popping off all over the world. And then, and then COVID really, really put a wrench in things. So, Which was devastating. Um, so it is truly a joy to see, um, activists, yeah, back in the streets in the Netherlands. I think we're seeing the strongest climate movement. period, ever, um, with tens of thousands of people bl

ocking a highway for seven days. Um, more than 3, 000 people have been arrested. That, that level of mass participation combined with the willingness to be disruptive and risk arrest, like I said, I mean, we just, we just have not seen that. So that is also, um, incredibly inspiring and an example, right? Other countries and activists can look there and say, look, this is possible. You can hit that tipping point where it stops being, you know, 10 people blocking a road and starts to be 10, 000 p

eople. And yeah, just. Boom, everything changes. And I want to ask you about these protests and we're going to talk about, you know, why protests matter, why are they effective and also the funding aspects of them. But first, you know, your book references in the subtitle, this idea of climate truth and maybe we can start, just set the stage like what is climate truth in 2023? Um, so I'm a clinical psychologist by training and. therapy, at least the kind of therapy, um, psychodynamic, psychoanal

ytic therapy that I was trained in, that it's really healing through expressing truth and having it received in a, in a compassionate and nonjudgmental and helpful way. Just this. basic theory that if you don't face the truth and process it, that you have to spend tremendous energy, uh, repressing, avoiding, denying, distracting yourself. And then, so by looking at the painful parts of life, um, as they are, Uh, emotions that you might feel that are, you know, bad or inconvenient or whatever by

just acknowledging them that it gives the person, gives you, um, much increased, uh, agency to operate in the world, to make choices, to be in control of your life. So, that's, that's just truth, and the therapeutic value of truth. And the reason I am saying all that is because there's this whole idea in the climate movement and among like climate communicators that we shouldn't tell the truth. We should tell a narrative that Uh, you know, some kind of focused, grouped, focused, grouped narrativ

e that has, um, that is hopeful and whatever hits all the right notes. Um, not, not too scary and yeah, and I just totally disagree with that notion. I do think we have to face the truth and the truth is civilization is going to collapse. Um, the climate emergency is accelerating. It is exceeding. the forecasts that scientists and groups like the IPCC have made. And, but, but I mean, the predictions are coming true. I mean, on, on maybe not on the exact timeline, but in general, you know, if you

don't, if you don't change course, you eventually get where you're going and we are arriving at. So, I mean, the big picture is, Drought, leads to crop failure, leads to mass migration, internal, like, political, national instability all over the world, and, um, failed states, entire failed regions, I mean, it's, it's chaos. It's, it's, I mean, I talk about it as the apocalypse, because, I mean, yeah, we're just talking about the failure of, all of the systems, the natural systems and the econo

mic and social systems, which are totally dependent on those natural systems. We're just talking about collapse. And yeah, it's, it's horrifying. It's like living in a nightmare, um, to, to really comprehend what this is, but it is the truth. And personally, I'd like to, and I recommend to others that it's actually Better, better for you, better for the world to, to look at it, even though it's incredibly painful. And what would you say to the objection that like, well, you know, I'm thinking ab

out my three year old niece and I don't necessarily. You know, show her all the horrors of the world or bring full truth to every situation because developmentally, she's still, um, it's, it's like this feeling that it's too fragile. It's not appropriate. It's not time yet. And, um, and they are like, are we as a collective not ready to face? you know, the complete collapse of our natural systems and biosphere and everything else and that we're like, is there this, is there validity to this kind

of coddling instinct that we might face in the climate communication space? Certainly when dealing with children. I think it's appropriate. I have a three year old niece. I have a eight year old nephew that I still avoid talking to about the climate emergency. It's, gosh, I don't know how it's so painful. I don't, I mean, um, so yeah, I agree with it, with that, but I mean, Are we children? You know, do, can we, do we have the internal strength and, uh, reason to respond to this emergency with

maturity and, and wisdom and courage? I mean, yeah, maybe not. Um, but it's certainly our only hope. I mean, we're not, we're not going to solve it by coddling everyone and making them feel, you know, good for right now. Right. And decades of inaction, relatively speaking, kind of proves out the thesis. I think evidence is on your side that like, we're not speaking clearly and truthfully enough. And in your book, you talk about kind of what some of those psychological processes and barriers and

stages are, and I want to highlight what you reference in terms of grief and fear in particular. Can you share more on that? So once you face the climate emergency intellectually, and take a look at the science, take a look at, um, kind of the systems involved. And, and once, once you do that, the next step, which I think is even harder, is about emotionally processing that, taking that in. Climate has been a very intellectual scientific, uh, topic of conversation for many, many years, right? Yo

u could read about it in the science section of the newspaper. And it's, I mean, it certainly is a scientific phenomenon, but it's, it's also, I mean, This is our world. This is our, our lives. This is, um, it's a, it's an everything phenomenon. So we need to have an emotional reaction to it to actually live in truth. It's not enough to know you have to feel it, um, to make it real. So there's many emotions that people feel about the climate emergency. including rage, guilt, um, alienation is a

huge one. But yeah, grief and fear, I think, are the most critical. Fear, because it's our self protective instinct telling us that You know, this is not okay. The way things are going now is very scary. And that's, that's accurate. And, um, can be motivating, should be motivating. That's the point of fear. And with grief, There's several layers. There's grieving the people and species that have already been killed by the climate emergency, and grieving, I mean it's this huge grief if you are wi

lling to do it. feel the suffering of, of the world. And, you know, hundreds of millions of people who, whom you've never met and species that you might not have even heard of. Um, but it's also about grieving for, for yourself. I mean, grieving the future that you thought you had. I think this is really, really, really critical in order to move into action, in order to really kind of metabolize what's happening and come to a new way of thinking about yourself and, and the future, your future, b

ecause yeah, you, you just have to realize that the future you thought you had. is not going to happen. It's, it's, it's going to happen in a very, very, very different, worse, more chaotic, more violent way. And I mean, personally speaking, I'm a millennial and we, I mean, growing up, you know, we were, we were promised the world, right? The future is bright. There's going to be progress, political pro progress, technological progress. Um, it's yeah, whatever. Write your own ticket. And yeah, j

ust to realize that that was not true. And. Yeah, personally, personally, I went through a process of thinking, um, thinking about bringing my extended family and friends into some kind of subsistence farm in Ohio where my relatives have some land. And I played out the scenario in my mind, you know, I was like, well, I don't know. We would, we would need machine guns, right? Like, I mean, if you're gonna, if, if everyone's going hungry and you've got a farm, even if it, everything's working like

you, you know, and so it was going through this process of like, okay, first I had to grieve, you know, I can't just be a therapist and have a family and write books and be, be happy. That's not gonna work. Okay. I can't even like go start a. subsistence farm with the people that I love to, to ride this out. And then, so then you get to this place of, okay, well, I have to work with others through a collective process of transformative change. That's it. And, and so, And in that way, all this a

ctivism that I do and work that I do for On Climate, I actually view as like self interested, um, or self ish. But just in the sense that, I mean, it's, it's, I, I want to have a good life. I don't want to be killed in a famine and chaos induced by that. And, but the, again, the only way. that I can effectively work towards that is by trying to trying to change the world. And how has it been personally, like out the other side after going through years of grieving and bargaining and denial and a

ll of those stages to, you know, being firmly rooted in the movement, being firmly planted in the work? Like, are you finding more joy, more purpose in the, in the moments that we have in this life? How has that been? Yeah, absolutely. No, I'm much, I'm much more happy as a climate activist or you know, you can say like a mission driven person. It's much more happy than when I was, you know, Just, I mean, as almost all Americans are, almost all people it, you know, under capitalism are just like

out for myself and my resume and my career and my apartment and it's just, um, yeah, all, all of that, all of that is, feels pretty empty compared to, um, what I've been doing for the last 10 years and I, yeah, I would never go back. Um, yeah, it's so much better. And also just on the like personal curiosity, before we get into some of the like. Theory of change tactics like sometimes when I get to the what feels like the edges of really accepting and grieving. I'm, I'm somewhat left with the c

osmic question of like, well, you know, the sun's going to burn out in however many tens of thousands of years. And so like, whether life on this planet persists for another few hundred or a few thousand, whatever, like it doesn't, really matter? Does it? And like, how to, how do you think about identification within human form and like across time and the grandest of scales that we can fathom? Um, I think that living in climate truth does demand, uh, looking at the kind of questions that you're

talking about. I mean, this, the scale of this is so huge that I mean, I think calling it biblical is, is appropriate, right? Like, the flood that wipes off everything, you know, that, that, um, so, yeah, what does it, like, how do we make sense of this on a spiritual level, I think, is, Uh, really, uh, critical question and I have, yeah, I've become very identified with life and like, like the life force if, um, that humanity absolutely yes, but also I feel more connected to, um, plants and an

imals and, um, Yeah, I think I also come out. Most of the time in that same vein of like being identified with life and almost just this feeling of like, play the hand you dealt, you know, like I'm in this form, I'm like, my consciousness is currently navigating in this body in this time. And so now what, you know, and. There's still choice there, but like, given the context and the scale and the enormity of what's happening, like, why would we do anything else? Right. Yeah. And I feel I agree w

ith that. And it reminds me of also how I feel when people say, are we fucked? You know, is there any chance? Um, and because the truth is, I don't know. I mean, um, and, but why, why would you decide that that means we shouldn't try, right? Like the only way we can find out, um, whether it might be possible to avoid collapse and protect humanity and the living world is through Giving it everything that we've got. 'cause I mean, let's be real, we have not tried. Mm. Like as a species, as a count

ry, I, I mean, it's, it's pathetic. I it's not, I mean, so if we, yeah. If we refocus human brilliance, which I deeply believe in, towards. that mission of protecting life rather than, um, you know, basically making money, um, capitalism, uh, who knows what we could do. It's, I mean, when we, when we mobilized for World War II, We changed our civilian economy to a wartime economy in just a few years and took measures that would never be accepted under any circumstances other than a war. that thi

s is an existential crisis. This is not a choice. This is something that we. have to do or else we will die. Um, and they, I mean, for example, meat was rationed, gasoline was rationed, the top corporate tax rate was 94%. I mean, these are, um, yeah, these are not normal times. So why don't we try to meet them? And so roughly speaking, or to summarize, you know, you go from this clinical psychologist background to going through this experience of really grappling with what's happening on the pla

net from an ecological perspective. Um, you, you focus on this work, you, you write, books, you do a lot of different activities to try to bring awareness and to help people through the psychology of this. Um, and then it feels like then it shifted to, okay, we have to declare emergency and you were a part of those efforts a few years ago. Can you share a bit more about that? Yeah, absolutely. Um, right. So how do you start injecting the truth into the conversation. Um, and the kind of tactic th

at we used at, uh, my former organization, the Climate Mobilization, was these climate emergency declarations, which first some passed Uh, like non profits, uh, declared climate emergency, but then cities did and, you know, we, we were really focused on like the first, the first city and then the second city. But then once you start to de risk something and have models for it, then the next 10 cities were pretty easy. And then we partnered with Extinction Rebellion and, uh, It just, I mean, it t

ook off and over 2000 global governments have declared a climate emergency. And I, I, I used to be the only one talking about climate emergency and people, people were like, what, what's going on? Is it really an emergency? And, and, and now it's, it's in the language. I mean, it actually, in, in 2019 climate emergency was Oxford's word of the year because it had gone up like 10, 000 percent in terms of emissions. Just general use. So that, so I mean, so that's great. That is making that kind of

intervention into language and try perspective. I mean, yeah, I'm very proud of that. But, um, you know, Canada declared a climate emergency and approved a new pipeline the next day. Um, really providing a great example of also the limitations of that kind of approach and why, and that, you know, Like, again, it's kind of saying it, knowing it intellectually or, or saying it is actually insufficient to, um, create the kind of response that we need. Yeah. A doctor can give you the diagnosis, but

that doesn't automatically mean that you'll change your behavior. So, okay. What's next? Where, where's the tactic to create the change and how do we go about this, Margaret? I think there's only one way, and that is through people power, the, the power of social movements, which have in, throughout history, uh, been the fastest way to create transformative change. The civil rights movement, women's suffrage, abolition of the slave trade, um, uh, most recently gay rights, Black Lives Matter. Th

ese movements, um, yeah, they can, they, they turn history and turn society in a way that like incremental policy, uh, changes, you know, the, just can't. And we need a movement that is so strong, so large, so disruptive that it's more powerful than the fossil fuel industry, which is currently basically controlling the government and governments all over the world. Um, It's the most profitable industry in history, um, and to, to, uh, wrest power from them and take back governments on behalf of p

eople and people who are interested in avoiding collapse. I mean, it's, it's just, it's a huge thing, but social movements can do huge things. Um, yeah. So, yeah, as I was talking about in the Netherlands, once you start to get thousands of people who are willing to not just go on a march, which is great, but actually put their bodies on the line to shut down normal functioning or, or otherwise, you know, disrupt normal functioning. That is when you put the government into a real pressure positi

on. Yeah, that's, that's just what we need. It's, um, we're just so past time for incrementalism, gradualism, uh, polite climate activism that, you know, doesn't bother anybody or, you know, ask for too much. It's, I mean, this is it. So let's, let's, uh, let's go as hard as we can. And it's hopeful insofar as movements, historically, there's this idea that only takes three and a half percent to tip. Can you share more about that? That, uh, statistic comes from Erika Chenoweth's work regarding n

onviolently overthrowing dictators. Um, and one of her most important findings is that nonviolent movements overthrowing dictators were more successful than violent movements. And like you note, it's not, you don't need, uh, all of the country. Once you get that, um, that core base of activists who are giving, active support to the movement, not just like, Oh yeah, I support, I support that. Sure. But, you know, going to meetings or writing letters or getting in the street or giving money, right

? Once you get that, then the rest of the public feels comfortable to come along that, um, yeah, it's, you know, Margaret Mead said, um, never doubt that a small group of concerned citizens can change the world. Indeed. It's the only thing that ever has that this is, Yeah, so these movements start small, truly with a group of people sitting in a living room or something like that, and then grow and become, you know, maybe locally significant and then grow. And then yeah, once they hit this 3. 5

percent of the population, it's a, I mean, it's just a total game changer. And so are you of the belief that nonviolence is a core part of this? Absolutely. And, um, I was very interested to see recent research from the social change lab that interviewed, um, I think about 50 experts in social movements and movement history and sociology. And they actually said that willingness to non violently disrupt was the single most important factor in a movement success. And that makes sense to me. becaus

e well, for several reasons actually. But um, one is just if you're not willing to do that, you're, I mean, you're, you're. You know, fighting with one hand behind your back, you're not using your full strength and power. And so like, of course, movements that are willing to break rules and take risks and um, are, are more successful. There's, there's that kind of just like basic tactical approach, but there's also a very symbolic element that is, um, so important regarding, um, symbolic communi

cative, uh, in terms of. Like, for example, in a hunger strike, what you're communicating is, this issue is so important that I'm willing to do this thing to starve my body because that is how much I care. So there's a, there's a demonstration effect that's going on of, Oh, there's the climate activists are, are sitting in jail, um, all over the world and they. are willing to do that because That's how important this is. They're, they're willing to do anything that can be effective. So I, yeah,

I think, and then both of those, um, factors that I named are, uh, for any social movement, but for climate, I think there's even a increased level of understanding that, um, all we need to do is continue on as normal. And we will collapse, right? It's, um, that, so kind of understanding that normal functioning, normal tennis match or museum visit or, um, whatever, whatever it is, drive, drive to work, normal functioning will kill us. is killing us. So, um, yeah, I think that it's very appropria

te to disrupt normal life, um, of the powerful, but also the public because everyone needs to wake up. Okay. So we've, we've kind of acknowledged face the truth and the truth of the situation is very severe and stark, you know, witnessing the collapse of The life support systems and natural processes and ecological functioning on our one planet that's spinning around the sun. And this affects all life on earth now and into the future and presents potentially irreparable damages for thousands and

tens of thousands of years in terms of our climactic systems. And it's on our watch, it's like all happening in the hockey stick that is the last hundred years. Um, And we have to face the grief and we have to feel the anger and we have to go through the emotional processes. And then as we digest that and get into what are the most important leverage points, you said that really the answer is people power and it's, it's movement building. And it's, you know, we have to approach it like that. Um

, I want to get a little bit. Deeper on that link from movement building to disruptive protests and how those two go together or where they're distinguished. Yeah, thank you. Social movements, uh, should best be viewed as ecosystems with many parts and complimentary parts. For example, Electoral work, primarying candidates, um, getting out the vote for candidates, et cetera. That's part of the movement. And that's why we have some politicians who are willing to talk about climate emergency and t

he need for transformative world war two scale or new deal scale change, right? So there's many elements in a social movement ecosystem, but disruptors are the tip of the spear. I'm dedicated to supporting them, that approach, part, I mean, there's, there's, there's really two reasons, one, because I think it's so effective and so necessary and so, uh, called for at, at, at this time. But the other reason is also so important, which is. They're, they get virtually no money. They're, they're, the

y're broke. Um, and so as a funder, it's, I mean it's an incredible opportunity. It's uh. You know, giving 100, 000, making a grant of 100, 000 to a group that wants to yell at politicians while they're giving their speeches, or shut down Citibank, right, these are, I mean, I'm referring to, you know, real groups that we're supporting. Facilitating that just goes so far, um, and so much farther than giving to a, like, traditional non profit. So, I, yeah, I just really think that it's needed and

should have our support. We wrote a, uh, An op ed in Chronicle for Philanthropy, which we're gonna put at the top of the show notes. I think any funder should read it I think it's very clear succinct and spells out these arguments and you talk about why protests work and you cite You know that it helps shift public opinion that, um, changes the discourse that influences policy as well as voting behavior. And then of course, you get into this part of the argument, which is that we have a very pal

try sum of funds going towards this tactic. And so it's enormously effective, particularly at this moment in time. Um, so just to set the stage a bit, we know that climate in general gets a very small amount of. Philanthropic dollars, you cite in that, um, article one and a half percent as per the study from Climate Works, there's studies that range two to four percent depending on how much of, you know, other forms of nature and animal rights and so forth that we include in these numbers. But e

ither way, it's tiny, especially considered the dire circumstances that we're in. Um, how much do protest movements really get out of the funding in the climate space? Thanks. Uh, so it's so low that it's not measured. It is not considered a category by any of the, any of the, um, people who aggregate philanthropy and that I'm even talking about broader social movement ecosystem is not counted as a category grassroots organizing. Um, and then so for disruptive protests, I mean, It is, it is real

ly shocking and obviously corporations and governments aren't going to fund the protesters, right? You have many categories of philanthropy where the funding is coupled with other sources of grant money from governments or other incentive dollars from the, from the private sector. But here you're basically saying this is the tactic that we need the most. In this moment of time, and it's so far off the radar that it's not even counted. Yes, that's, that's right. No corporations. I mean, I wish, u

h, some of the renewable energy companies or regenerative agriculture companies would support, um, disruptive activism. The fossil fuel industry certainly supports grassroots activism on its side, um, and has done incredibly successfully. I mean, like the Tea Party, right, in the United States was Totally bankrolled. And generally speaking, there's not government giving, there's not corporate giving. And what makes these movements work? is people power and like specifically volunteers, volunteer

activists who come from all walks of life and give amazing amounts of time to the movement, like, and, and make, and make, rearrange their lives, you know, move in with their parents, take, take three years off school, whatever, whatever it is, because I mean, they're, they're just absolutely filled with with righteous passion. And so really philanthropy towards these movements is pretty different than, uh, again, if you look, if you give money to a nonprofit that then uses that money to pay th

e salaries of people who will do work to implement change. Right? That's, that's one way. And sometimes that can be effective. But this is a model in which these people will do this whether they get funding or not. They're, they're certainly not asking for our permission to disrupt normalcy and to do everything they can to change the world. The money just allows them to do it better. larger and, and, uh, and just facilitates their success. And, and so I think that, yeah, I just think it's really

important to realize, yeah, that what people power means is. one after another, these activists who are, they're, they're fighting for all of us and they're, and they're doing it with really giving so much of themselves. And I think on that level too, I mean, I, I think it's practical and effective and has a return on investment. And I think there's also like a moral case that these activists are giving everything and they deserve to be funded. They deserve to be able to, they deserve to be abl

e to And if anyone listening to this is still not convinced of that, these are effective tactics and strategies. Can you give an example or set of examples where, yeah, disruptive protest has, has driven real discernible change? Yes. So there's, uh, the many historic examples that, um, you know, most, most people are aware of. I get challenged as I constantly am on whether, um, these tactics go too far or are counterproductive or whatnot. One bit of pushback I give is, you know, what tactics fro

m the civil rights movement went too far? What tactics from women's suffrage that, um, these movements are so important, so much bigger than, than, um, Yeah, like whatever, a painting or a tennis match or whatever it is that I mean, of course they did. They don't go too far. Um, so Insulate Britain, I think, is a great example of a winning movement that, um, in the United Kingdom. Climate Emergency Fund is proud to have given them seed funds as well as some ongoing support, a total of 175, 000 i

n grant making in 2021 and 2022. And they blocked roads for about six months in the United Kingdom, a group of just a few hundred people, but who were willing to get arrested, willing to also risk being assaulted by drivers. Um, and. With this just high disruption approach, they were covered extensively by the UK press. Suddenly, um, people are talking about home insulation and thermal insulation and how wasteful, uh, leaky buildings are. And it's turns out that this is actually a very popular p

olicy. Vast majority of Britain's support, uh, government run insulation program. And then the Labour Party made it part of their platform. And then, uh, just last year, the UK government dedicated 1 billion, 1. 2 billion, um, into the Great Britain insulation scheme. Um, and, yeah, what, how much of that do you give the protestors credit for? I, I give it them like 90 percent of, of the credit. I mean, they, home insulation, thermal insulation was not, on the table. It was not part of the polit

ical conversation. And then it passed. Like, I, I mean, if you look deeply into how historical changes happen and even contemporary changes such as this example, you'll see that movements are absolutely critical. They are critical. As, as the public, as the democrat, democratic citizens, um, they are our chance to counteract and overcome the forces of capital and, and lobbying, uh, corporate lobbying, which otherwise will be totally dominant. Are there, are there other contemporary examples that

you can point to? Sure. Um, I was mentioning the Netherlands and how amazing they're doing. Um, one of their, uh, key targets for protest last year was private airports and private air travel. And they were just, So, uh, creative and, and joyful, they, they had these protests where they would ride their bicycles on the airport tarmac, right? Which I mean, it's totally disruptive, right? You can't have flights going, like landing or taking off when you, you have protesters biking around, but, an

d it, but it also tells a story, right? It tells a story of the, what the, you know, incredibly oil intensive, fossil intensive, uh, transportation systems that we need to move away from. So the, like the private air travel, that's, that's gotta go, that's the past. And then the bike, this is the future, right? This is, this is transportation that, uh, yeah, is, is, is joyful. And. Uh, you know, non polluting. So anyway, after about five months of those kinds of protests, oh, Amsterdam's largest

airport says it will no longer be servicing private jets, um, starting in 2025. And you know, the airport didn't say, and the government will, I mean, they will never say that. We're doing this. We're capitulating to the protesters. The protesters won, right? So do not expect that. But it's, I mean, it's like, what, what, what was the other cause? Like, this is, yeah, put two and two together here. Yeah. Yeah. So, okay. So the disruptive protests are the tip of the spear strategy to get importa

nt ideas, campaigns. You know, changes onto the agenda, and then we see them percolate through the system, through the policy, through the voters, and so forth, but no one likes those protesters when the act is happening, right, like those bikers were probably not very well received by the general public, people in the UK blocking roads. demanding insulation for homes and those, you know, silly hippie, you know, dirty protestors out disrupting things like go get a job. Like, so let's talk about

the psychology of like the general distaste for these tactics and how that is part of the reason they're not being well received in the philanthropic context. Yes. I think, I think this is a Honestly, the number one question, um, because without this kind of almost, uh, instinctual, uh, revulsion. that many funders have towards these protestors. If you, if you took that away, then the cause and effect and the return on investment that you get from supporting these protestors would be just totall

y clear. Um, but, yeah, they're, they're very unpopular. Um, And part of that is just being in a social movement. Uh, they are, by definition, a small group of people telling a much larger group of people that we all need to change. And, you know, uh, that's, that's never the most welcome message. Um, and I mean, they are disrupting normal life, right? People, you know, want to just have their, have a nice day at the museum that gets, you know, something got changed, um, in that. But I, I like t

he metaphor of, um, we are in a mass delusion of normalcy, like humanity sleepwalking off of a cliff. And the protesters are grabbing us by the shoulders and trying to shake us awake, right? And no one likes to be shaken awake. That is very uncomfortable. That I mean, you know, like, sure, you wake up feeling pissed off at whoever's doing that to you, right? And so climate truth is incredibly painful. I think that's really at the core of why these protesters are so unpopular is because if they s

ucceed. and make us talk about climate change and make us think about climate change. And that also makes us feel, uh, small and helpless and scared and guilty. And, um, so yeah, I just think it cannot be our expectation protesters will be popular. Honestly, I think that, uh, Greta and the school strikers, um, were like, definitely our best shot at having a, you know, well liked. movement, but it can't, you can't expect that. It's not, that's not, um, the norm to have, uh, like teenagers leading

the way. It's, it's not, it's also not fair to expect of young people. And I think adults really do need to act like adults. Um, so yeah, it's, it's, it's, It's not popular. It won't be popular until, until it is. I, I mean, uh, Mother Jones said, uh, you know, this is a famous quote, but most people don't, don't hear, don't hear all of it is, you know, first they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you and then you win and then they build monuments to you. That's, so, um, Yeah.

And Martin Luther King is an example that is kind of an epitome of this effect. Is that right? Absolutely. Uh, Martin Luther King was very unpopular during his career as an activist, uh, until he was assassinated. Um, yeah, I mean, I, he was, he was hated as a dangerous radical, um, and yeah, it's only in retrospect that we can. look back as a society and see, Oh, right. It would, it, he wasn't wrong. They weren't wrong for disrupting normalcy. It was the normalcy that was wrong. And, and so, y

eah, with that kind of historical perspective, uh, it becomes clear that brave activists who, you know, uh, Sometimes go as far as giving their life to the cause that they are, um, there are the truest heroes, um, but putting themselves in enormously uncomfortable physical conditions in the moment with unknown consequences, often jail time and severe consequences to their livelihoods and their, their lives. And that social context of being disliked for even doing it for, you know, you call it th

e shooting the messenger effect, you know, we're just like, we're judging the folks that are doing that, making them wrong, partly as you say, because we don't want to acknowledge the truth of what they're trying to show us. Yeah, I really do think part of the heroism that activists show is their willingness to be unpopular. When an activist disrupts a sports game or a symphony or whatever, they are booed. It always happens. They are booed. And who wants to be booed by a stadium full of people,

right? This is very stressful. Right. And, you know, I mean, our social wiring is like, we honestly. Do not make everyone hate you, you know, and, but, but some things are more important than that. When you then add philanthropy into this, right, the civil rights movement had funders. Just a few because the vast majority of funders were afraid and it was too controversial and it was too radical and you know Etc, etc, all of the same things that we're hearing now. But what an opportunity, right?

If you're willing to get past that people will complain and criticize and boo But this is the correct path, this is an effective path, this is a righteous path, then, I mean truly, funders have an opportunity to shape history and to, I mean not just shape it, to protect history, to continue history, right? Yeah, yeah, it's really a question of what are you in service to, you know, are you in service to, you know, Being comfortable moment to moment in the, in the funding because she chopped, um,

you know, or are you in service to the work? Are you in service to the protection of life on this planet? And if so, yeah, this is a natural conclusion. So for folks who are in that funder space, you know, I, I feel like there's the, Um, fear of being disliked is part of it, but also the fear of reputational damage. You know, if, if an article comes out and says that our foundation was responsible for funding something that, you know, maybe at best was soup thrown at a painting that didn't even

hurt the painting, whatever, and gets a lot of negative media coverage, or at worst that something actually, you know, happens in one of these protests and someone's hurt, someone's killed, like, like real damage is done, um, to, to people and lives, then, um, does that, does that come back to me and does that bite us? And so, yeah, like, how do you think about creating a degree of safety and comfort for funders to know that when they're putting their capital to work, um, that, reputational effe

cts or worse don't, don't occur? Great question. Um, Climate Emergency Fund provides a safe, legal, tax deductible way for people to give to the climate movement. As a non endowed fund, we raise all of the money that we grant. So this, this is an invitation for funders to just join this, uh, movement generally, which of course it also is, but to, that this is a specific way. We do take anonymous donations, so that sidesteps to some degree the issue that you're talking about. Um, and it's, it's t

rue. I mean, it's real. We are constantly hounded by the right wing press. And they, they're, they're horrible. I mean, they, they, uh, they write about our, they write about the funders who has given to us publicly. They, I mean, so there's, I mean, yeah, there are, enemies of climate activists and people who fund them. So that's, that's one thing. I mean, that, that it's true on that level. It's also true on the level of, um, just among your friends, right? Funders and their, in their social c

ircle, um, being thought of as, uh, extreme or Uh, wrong for, for taking this on. You talk about the radical flank effect. Yes. And it's, it's by having this, um, action or aspect that happens in the, on the radical side, it gives permission and it invites kind of the moderate majority to move. Can you share more about that? Yes, so let's say, um, I'm a normal non political individual who sees protest or, you know, reads about it in the media. Wow, look at this. Look at these kids throwing soup.

Look at this. Look at this disruptive thing that happened. I don't like that. That makes me uncomfortable. But I do agree that we need to end fossil fuels. They are right about the scale of the emergency. And so in, in this, in this way, you can have someone, I mean, and this is, this is a very common, you can have someone who dislikes the activists and is still changed by them. And because maybe this person says, you know what, let me get involved. in this local organization that's working on

solar panels, or let me call my congressperson that it's, um, you know, like I said, the tip of the spear that it, um, it's not the whole thing, but it, it wakes people up, it engages them, and it, It, um, yeah, forces the issue and, and poses the question, whose side are you on? Are you, you know, this is, there's, there's a choice that needs to be made. Um. I think about the friends I have who don't fly anymore. and how that affects my psychology because I still get on planes. It moves me to s

ee them making the sacrifices that they're making. Um, or I think about like this friend who is very hardcore about, you know, traveling with their own, um, reusable food containers and It moves me when I then am wasting plastic and throwing things away in my consumption lifestyle. And I think about the extent to which he goes to carry stuff in his backpack and take it out and scrape it off and da da da da like, and yeah, it's like, because I, agree fundamentally with the impulse, protect agains

t waste, protect against fossil fuel usage and consumption, um, that it, it helps shift me more. And I guess that's kind of a bit of a personalized version of what you're describing. Yes, I, I think that's right. And Unfortunately, at this point, most people don't have a lot of friends who have given up flying or who have made that kind of commitment. And so where, what, what, where are they going to see a model of that level of commitment and passion? It's, it's the activists and I think, I thi

nk they're heroes and I think they inspire heroism in others. Okay, so Climate Emergency Fund is really an intermediary that is helping to channel the funds that you receive then into these different protest movements and these disruptive protests. And so, in that way, you create a degree of. Um, organization for the capital, um, you help to ensure it's getting to the right people and you're staying close to those front lines. Can you describe more of also, you know, the value proposition or the

problems that having this type of intermediary organization helps address? Yes, so a lot of funders worry about legal repercussions of funding activists. Maybe they could get sued. Maybe their 501c3 status would be threatened. These kinds of concerns. So the Climate Emergency Fund takes on that risk. We would be the ones who would be sued that and and we protect ourselves legally in a lot of different ways and Nothing has happened to us so far knock on wood and I for a lot of different legal re

asons I feel we're in pretty good shape, but our funders are fully insulated. And so that's a very concrete, um, element. And the fact that we can receive and pass through 501c3 dollars from, you know, family foundations or daft, is also important. Generally speaking, um, a lot of these, it can, it can be challenging to try to give directly to activists for, for that reason, the tax issues, but also, I mean, just logistically, it's hard. Climate Emergency Fund supports movements in their very ea

rly stages were seed funders it in a model kind of like venture capital except just full on philanthropy that some of our most successful grantees such as just stop oil in the United Kingdom or last generation in Germany become. so successful, um, that, you know, they, they raise a million euros through crowdfunding, right? This, this kind of, uh, level of success that then gets, they, they've outgrown us, you know, and that's like the ideal scenario that we provide seed funding and then the gro

up just becomes a runaway success and, uh, can then fund itself. That doesn't always happen and we, you know, often provide ongoing support as well. So, how to find and I, I mean, identify and evaluate. these activists, it was actually pretty difficult. I mean, we, we're, we're, we have strategy meetings. We, we look at the literature, we know the strategic operating environment and, which allows us to make, you know, really strategic choices with our limited funds. And I don't think that That i

s within the capacity of the vast majority of funders, um, to, to just be that close to. the action. Our program officer is himself an activist, um, both in past and, and present, and that is just critical also for just understanding how these movements function. Yeah, so if, if you're a philanthropy that's interested in funding movements, yeah, the number one thing is to hire an activist or at least have an advisor. Um, because it's just, it's, um, it's a really unique thing to, to get together

with a bunch of strangers and decide to like, demand change and do these actions. And so, for example, just one example, activists don't always get back to you in a timely manner. Sometimes they're in jail. Sometimes, sometimes, uh, their computer has been taken away because of a police raid, right? Like it can be chaotic. It generally is chaotic. And so as, as a funder to not view that as You know, unprofessional, or I mean, it is actually unprofessional, but not in a pejorative way. Like, the

se people are not professional fundraisers. Right. They're not trained up in coming through, typically speaking, the institutional contexts in which a lot of philanthropic. Absolutely. They've I mean, in terms of the fundraising, they've generally speaking, never done it before. They're just willing to give it a try. And, but I mean, just in terms of the whole movement, this is not people's career. This is their, this is their passion. This is their mission. And so, yeah, it's just, it's just a

very different, different thing. Different. from from generally speaking the philanthropy that funders are used to. And change is hard. Adjusting, adjusting your perspective in terms of what's a successful grant or what metrics do you use to measure a successful grant? Um, and how to Interact with grantees and all of this is it's hard. Another thing I want to mention is um, because this is a, this is an important lesson that I've learned and I would like to share it out is um, you really can't t

ell the activists, uh, You should do this or you should do that. I tried. I had what I thought was a great idea, which is to protest media companies for their failure to tell the climate story. Um, and we had some activists take that on. Um, it was okay. There was a couple of good protests, but it didn't take off. And I, I really like in retrospect, of course it didn't take off because it was my idea where. for activism to work, the leadership, the needs to choose needs to bring the base along.

They need to be excited about it. They need to be so excited about it that they're going to give tremendously of their time and energy and You know, risk for this cause. So it, it, it has to be more organic of a decision. Um, so yeah, so I think funders, um, have gotten a little bit used to being like an advisory partner to organizations. And I mean, you know, it's okay to share your idea or whatever, but you can't, I, I think it's. It's always a mistake to tell activists, uh, what they, what th

ey should do and make, and make the money contingent on that. Um, it's totally appropriate to set boundaries, like most importantly, nonviolence because it's a different model. It's not a salary model. It's a passion model. You can, you can only choose what, which people powered initiatives you want to facilitate or, or don't. Well, it really resonates with me. I mean, it feels to me like the perfect example of venture philanthropy, you know, in, in venture capital, there's this, popular phrase

of you want to be contrarian and right. Oh, I love it. Because if you're contrarian, then that's where all the returns are and return on investment. And, but only if you're right. And that this disruptive protest tactics, um, being both a, an effective way to drive change. And on the right side of history, so to speak, um, but also being quite contrarian and you know, the evidence shows very tiny sums of money going into these types of movements. Um, on top of already a very paltry sum of funds

going towards climate philanthropy and, and yet practically speaking, It makes perfect sense that there is a real need for the type of intermediary organizations like Climate Emergency Fund to help make sense of the space to help provide the pipes and the infrastructure and the scaffolding for 501C3 Capital to move into it. for the legal reasons that you cited, uh, for reputational reasons and so forth. So, um, yeah, hats off to you for having that courage, um, to, uh, yeah, navigate and not alw

ays be liked for the work that you do. Um, I like you and, um, yeah, I'm curious, any other final closing thoughts or messages that you'd like to share? I think the most important thing is to recognize the failure of What we've been doing, um, as a philanthropic sector, as a, you know, in terms of climate policy, but, uh, you know, uh, as philanthropy, climate philanthropy has been going up, which is great, but emissions have also been going up. So to grapple with that failure, which is really i

n itself a grieving process. Right? Because many, many funders have tried incredibly hard and have given generously and thoughtfully and recognizing, Hmm, it didn't work and greatest risk by far. is not going fast enough. Like one reason I'm okay with people, many people not liking me is because I'm so scared of the climate emergency. That it's, that's my greater fear, right? So just with a recognition that, um, if you're, if you continue on with the same basic approach to philanthropy as 20 yea

rs, That's a serious problem. That's, that's, um, you're still operating in normal mode. The alarm bell is going off and you're just going about your day, right? So I think spending down is really core part of this. Uh, giving away 5 percent a year and keeping the rest in your endowment is insane. What good is the endowment going to be in 20 years? If we don't solve this emergency, so philanthropists, I mean, having wealth is like having a superpower, right? It literally gives you the ability to

enact all kinds of change. And it's so important that philanthropists rigorously assess what they're going to do differently. Given the accelerating climate emergency. And, yeah, I, I think about, I think about Harry Belafonte, uh, driving down to Mississippi with 70, 000 in a duffel bag, uh, you know, funding social movements is different. than funding, uh, non profits. And yeah, it, the, the impact is, can really be historic. Margaret Klein Salamon. Thank you so much. Thank you. Okay. What'd

you think? Leave us a comment. You can learn more and make a contribution at climateemergencyfund.org You can also check out Margaret's book, Facing the Climate Emergency, which is a succinct and powerful read. And together, we can make these conversations less taboo and really move the discourse towards more radical and important changes in service to life on the planet. For more great conversations like this one, go to maearth.com Thanks for tuning in, and I'll see you next time.