Radical Edges Exist On All Sides

The ‘radical edge’ is the extreme element in a movement. In climate terms, this is a group like Just Stop Oil. In their time, the Suffragettes were another example, and Malcolm X was the radical edge to Dr King.

The idea is that the radical edge makes less extreme demands more palatable to a wider audience. Someone who disagrees with Just Stop Oil’s tactics might consequently be more amenable to more moderate requests - “well, at least it’s not THAT bunch of idiots.”

With any controversial issue, there are [of course] radical edges on all sides - it works both ways. The ‘opposite’ of Just Stop Oil is the ongoing climate denial movement. Andrew Tate is a radical edge, as are the National Front in the UK.

I’m not quite sure what to make of this. Part of me thinks the radical edge is important - it increases awareness and pushes boundaries [opening the Overton Window], and little [if any?] significant change happens without some level of disruption. Maybe radical edges are inevitable?

But maybe they create - feed into and upon - each other? Do organisations like Just Stop Oil only exist because of the climate denial movement? And does the existence of Just Stop Oil perpetuate climate denial?

Do they reinforce and amplify each other, only resulting in increased polarisation?

What if we could quieten the noise at the radical edges?