Demonstrations against mega-basins in Deux-Sèvres, actions of environmental activists with these throws of soup on paintings in museums or on roads to denounce political inaction, in museums or in front of public places, global warming is causing actions and tensions that are increasing all over the world. It’s here social issue of the day with the sociologist Jean Viard, director of research at the CNRS.
franceinfo: Why is this question so divisive?
John Viard: First of all, the minister’s statement is a bit absurd, a spray paint can kill no one. When we see the violence of Islamist terrorism, of far-right terrorism in France in particular, but also in Europe, I believe that we must nevertheless leave words with their meaning and respect for the victims.
The second thing is that indeed, there is agit prop which has been the tradition of green movements for a very long time. They cut GMOs in the fields, they dismantled the McDo de Millau, they have the meaning of this kind of demonstration. The question is that today the world has understood the climate crisis. We have all understood that the great battle of humanity in the years to come is the fight against global warming. The problem is: does this type of action reinforce this awareness and the decision of politicians or not? That’s the debate. One might think that it tenses up part of public opinion, but I don’t find it very serious, honestly, but it tenses up.
Bedpans are a bit different because it’s a real short-term issue. Basically, the issue of farmers who panic a bit in the face of drought and lack of water, and therefore who set up water storage systems, is more about reserves than basins, without necessarily has done all the technical studies to see if it has consequences downstream and in certain places. I understand that farmers need water. I also think that many of the people who criticize them have never done farming. So there are all these subjects.
Whether it’s on this affair of the super basins or these paintings which are “vandalized”, it is ultimately a lack of dialogue between two worlds which do not necessarily know each other?
But that is fundamentally true. But it is above all that since the great pandemic we have entered a new historical period, we are in clashes that make sense. So I, as a sociologist, say: the common people of the world of tomorrow is the war on the climate, it is the climate that makes history, whereas before it was man who made history since the industrial revolution, always. And there, basically, we run after the climate that we ourselves have unleashed. So there are different ways of doing it and we’re going to discuss it, confront each other on the big TV shows – I think we’re under-informed about that – and so it’s going to be political confrontations. And after people vote, they vote for one policy or another, but somewhere, it recreates politics.
Extreme actions have taken place in the past, and there were also ideas, ways of protesting that were very violent?
I’m not saying that violence is never useful, but afterwards, it’s choices. We also assassinated Georges Besse, the boss of Renault, we assassinated Aldo Moro. In Spain, there have been a lot of terrorist attacks that have killed a lot of people, etc., so the objective is that there is no violence and at the same time that society can move. That’s why at the start, I was very critical of the minister’s statement because it’s not terrorism, there can be violent forms. Either way, whether there are demonstrations, whether people occupy the grounds, etc., but the question all the same is that before, we talked to each other and that people know how it works, which is not not always the case.
So on both sides, how do we save the farmers who feed us? And it is not a secondary subject to feed. And as at the same time, on the other side, fighting to protect ecosystems, that probably requires more discussion, but the truth is that we’re in a hurry because the world is heating up, so we’re going to be in permanence in these conflicts.