S6 Ep2 Bridging research and practice to save democracy: how academics can show up

Welcome to the People vs Inequality Podcast! In this season we dive into the question of how academics and practitioners can better collaborate at this time of great need. As more and more countries are facing democratic backlash, both civil society and academia are under attack. They are also in a unique position to defend civic space and human rights – especially if they find ways to come together. What can we learn from those working across these spaces on doing this well? How can academics show up for social movements and democracy alike?

In this second episode we have another great example of someone who is very effective in bringing together knowledge and practice, and with a sharp eye for power. Harriet Bergman is a philosopher, writer and researcher based in the Netherlands with a long history in social movements and therefore a unique position to bridge these worlds. What does climate obstruction have to do with democracy and what can academia learn from activists? This and more in today’s episode, after which we will also invite you to share thoughts and experiences.

So please grab a coffee or tea and listen in on the conversation!

Resources:

- Bergman’s reflection “Earth System Breakdown Does not Care about Tenure Track” https://krisis.eu/article/view/40990/37852

-  About the ‘climate and emotions project’ of Stroomversnellers:
https://www.stroomversnellers.org/nl/under-the-weather-reports-and-reflections-on-the-climate-and-emotions-project/

- (In Dutch): on anger, climate breakdown and whiteness:
https://www.wetenschappelijkbureaugroenlinks.nl/tijdschrift/winter-2024/lauwwarm-witheet and about Climate Obstruction NL https://www.trouw.nl/duurzaamheid-economie/waarom-wordt-de-wereld-maar-niet-duurzamer-en-eerlijker-machtige-partijen-houden-een-omslag-tegen~b6c859bb/

About this podcast: In a time of crisis and fast change, the People vs Inequality podcast is a space to reflect and learn with changemakers on how to tackle inequality. The show is a co-production between Barbara van Paassen (host, creator) and Elizabeth Maina (producer), and edited by Charles Rigga. 

This series was funded by the Atlantic Fellowship for Social and Economic Equity Programme at the London School of Economics as part of an academic-practitioner collaboration project. The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not necessarily reflect the position of the Atlantic Fellows for Social and Economic Equity programme, the International Inequalities Institute, or the London School of Economics and Political Science. 

More about the podcast: https://peoplevsinequality.blogspot.com/

More about the AcPrac project: https://afsee.atlanticfellows.org/academic-practitioner-collaborations 

Transcript

Welcome to the People vs Inequality podcast. In a time of crisis and fast change, this podcast is a space to reflect and learn with changemakers on how to tackle inequality. In this season we dive into the question of how academics and practitioners can better collaborate at this time of great need. As more and more countries are facing democratic backlash, both civil society and academia are under attack. They are also in a unique position to defend civic space and human rights – especially if they find ways to come together. What can we learn from those working across these spaces on doing this well?

In this second episode we have another great example of someone who is very effective in bringing together knowledge and practice, and with a sharp eye for power. Again from the Netherlands, but with a very different perspective. Harriet Bergman is a philosopher, writer and researcher with a long history in social movements and therefore a unique position to bridge these worlds. What does climate obstruction have to do with democracy and what can academia learn from activists? This and more in today’s episode, after which we will also invite you to share thoughts and experiences.

My name is Barbara van Paassen and I can’t wait to learn from all the work Harriet is doing. So please grab a coffee or tea and listen in on the conversation!

Welcome Harriet. How are you? 

Harriet: I'm fine. I'm, uh, sitting at a desk at the Nieuwe Meent, a really cool housing cooperative and working space. And I'm happy to have this conversation. I'm looking forward. 

Barbara: Let's start with you. you're active in both movements and academia, um, and you're working to bridge these. Um, and, uh, I mean I love all that and, and I, and I'm really interested in everything that you do. Uh, so maybe can you share a little bit for the listeners, What are some of the things you're, you're doing, and especially also what drives you in that, why, why both movements and academia and bridging these worlds. 

Harriet: I will start with what drives me and then I will maybe tell about, I think there are four ways in which I try to bridge academia and social movements. And I think what drives me within, yeah, within my activism or within social movement work is I really believe in the statement of Angela Davis that, uh, activism is the rent you pay for living on this planet. Um, but I also like to consider this idea of society we live in or the planet as a whole to, to be a friend, sort of that you, that you sit with, that you spend time with, uh, that you show up for, regardless whether that makes sense or is productive, but that it is something that you do when you love someone or when you like someone. Um, and in that sense, whether it's, uh, showing up at like a, a housing demo or at a squads or at a blockades or a direct action from the climate movement. So my activism or my social movement participation is really grounded in like a not necessarily productive or efficient kind of end school thinking, but more of a you show up for what you care for and that's period. 

My academic work is just really because I love research and I also, uh, so I'm a philosopher, so that's also a very specific kind of research, and I, I like the, the sort of the excitement of solving a puzzle or thinking about something and, uh, finding new ways to think about something. And when something clicks, I'm really happy. Starting from the world as it is, rather than how it should be. Um, and that's, I think also something I bring to academia because of my social movement participation. I see what's going wrong and I want injustice to be the starting point of organizing and also thinking rather than, uh, an ideal kind of justice that we might reach potentially. So that's for what drives me. 

Then what I'm doing, um, within my academic work, I really try to write things that are useful for the movements I'm part of. So I am, I do not fall for the idea that you have to be, that objectivity or neutrality means that you are not involved in anything and that you don't care. I think being able to care is a sign. Being able to not care is a sign that you're not doing your research well.  

Then another way in which I try to bridge these is with the climate obstruction NL network. So we host a, a research network and we, uh, facilitate, uh, a knowledge exchange. So it's, yeah, very specific about what this podcast is about. Um, and what we try to do is we really try to translate the insights that the academics bring to stakeholders within society.

So what the researchers in our network do. Is they research climate obstruction, so the intentional and sometimes unintentional, uh, actions of fossil fuel industry and other actors to, uh, stop, prevent and block, uh, yeah, good climate policies that could potentially save our planets. Um, and the knowledge that we gather both from the, the, the sort of the tobacco playbook that they follow, the tactics that they do, the science denial, but also intimidation of activists and NGOs. Also the legal aspects. All these things we try to bring together and translate to relevant actors. So we like to talk to newsrooms, talk to media and explain how they, um, unwillingly, and accidentally copy some of these tactics. So how they fall for some of the false narratives and how they could prevent this. Um, we go to municipalities to explain how they can spot climate obstruction, what they can do about it, how they can engage with it in a different way. Um, yeah, and I think this work really is this making a bridge between, well, not even necessarily social movements, but between academia and taking it out of the ivory tower and really bringing it to the places where it's relevant.

Then the other thing is of course Stroomversnellers, we are a trainers collective that gives workshops and trainings and coaching and advice to social movements in the broadest sense of the words. So NGOs, but also grassroots groups. Also sometimes artists, uh, collectives, uh, all kinds of places. And I think since that, the last year or so, we try both to have a more, uh, some of the lessons from academia right, to implement. So our workshops are sort of peer reviewed by each other and proved over time. Uh, so we think that the iteration makes it better. But also to be, we, we now try to be a bit more transparent about what are our sources. We try to update our material when new research is published on the things we write about. And to really make a translation from academic work to practitioners in a way that is useful and also to pick out. I think it's. Yeah. I think for, for this work, you also need to know what social movements needs. So that's a long answer. Sorry for that, but there's just so much. 

Barbara: Right, exactly. I mean, I dunno how you do it all. Um, that's really interesting and I wanna dive into a little bit into that climate obstruction and our, um, network, because I think it's a very, um, good example, of making those translations, of bringing together different types, even different types of researchers, I think. So it's also, uh, interdisciplinary, uh, transdisciplinary. And, and there is an interesting link with the autocratization that we're looking at in this podcast that I, yeah. I wonder if you can allude a little bit to, you mentioned already the fact some of the tactics that the fossil fuel industry, uh, and or anyone trying to obstruct, um decent climate policy is using, which includes like repression, misinformation, uh, which are all elements of, uh, of democratic recession and autocratization. Could you say something more about those links and why it's important to dive into, to better understanding basically the powers at play that there are affecting both climate policy and our democracies at the same time.

Harriet: So when we give, uh, workshops through journalists, they just like academics, they're very stuck on, uh, being neutral and being objective. And thereby they don't see that they're being played. So they don't recognize that protecting the status quo is in itself, not a neutral act. So often people don't recognize that the status quo is not the status quo because of natural forces and that we might be stuck in for quite some time is like this because people have an investment and are invested in maintaining it like it is and that's a question of power. 

Um, and even that we don't recognize this is the effect of power that some actors have in maintaining the status quo as it is. So I think the first thing is to recognize that the, the situation we're in is not natural per se, so some research has shown that 89% all over the world wants more effective climate policies. And that within the, the Netherlands, that's 80% of the Dutch people want a livable future and they want the people in other parts of the country to not die because of our weird choices, our politicians and multinationals weird choices. So that we are not having that effective climate policy is the result of obstruction of an obstruction of the wish of 80% of the people. So that's, that's enormous. And people don't seem to recognize that, that this is the case. 

So how this obstruction plays out is both on a ideological level. So the things we are attached to, the world views, we have the, the. The self image we have and how we see progress happening within our lives and within society is formed for a large part by, uh, yeah, narratives around progress that rely on fossil fuels. Why? Because both they have connections with people that are in important positions, uh, but also they have money. And money is an important thing for many of those places. Another part where this influencing or keeping the status quo happens is in the corridors of power where uh, people meet each other and have conversations, but who can be at which corridor is of course a question of power, right? Sometimes things look accidental. You just stumbled upon someone and now this is what happens. But who can participate at a conference of parties? Who is accidentally at the Hague in the right time, who used to go to a student association with the former Prime Minister, future Prime Minister. Those are questions of power. And they relate to privilege. They relate to economic background. They relate to ideas of who belongs where and of who deserves a seat at the table. So those are, uh, they're the, the sort of the structures of society that are already here with all the injustices and forms of oppression, et cetera, tie into the yeah, how the future is built and what we can expect and what decision makers see here and are influenced by. Uh, so that's part of the obstruction, who's where, uh, and there are many more.

Barbara: Thank you so much, and, and they clearly link to how our democracy is working or not. Um, but also, yeah, just to go back to, to that link, uh, I think now with Trump, it's, it's extremely clear that, um, there is a fossil industry behind, uh, really pushing it and benefiting. I mean, all the, all their demands are currently being, uh, fulfilled. Because sometimes these things may sound like a conspiracy theory people might think, ah, it's not that bad. Um, you know, they have faith in how things work, and I wonder if that's also not one of the reasons why having that kind of academic rigor and evidence, uh, behind making, you know, making these analyses and making these claims is, is helpful. Uh, can you say something about that? 

Harriet: I think what what really helped me was to have a term for what was happening, uh, so that the term climate obstruction or obstruction in and of itself, really suddenly I saw this umbrella. I saw obstruction as a sort of umbrella term, and I saw all these separate things, you know, I knew about greenwashing, I knew about lobbying, uh, I knew about all these separate things, but I hadn't connected them in a specific way under one kind of term. And once I heard the term, I saw it everywhere. And I think this is similar with, um, other sort of moments where having a term for what you described suddenly lets things fall into place. 

So on the one hand, so now I'm really, uh, rather than answering your question, I'm about like, what can academia bring? Sometimes academia can explain what is going on or give a term, like sexual harassment, and suddenly you can place what is going on and you can see it, and you can recognize it and you can act upon it. So I, I think this is similar to obstruction. Now that we have a word, we can recognize it, we can act upon it, we can organize, but also having, uh, obstruction as a academic discipline. 

Uh, so the, there, there is a network that, uh, connects all different social scientists who work on this. Within the Netherlands, we have the climate obstruction NL network and we connect astrophysicists to people who study the aviation industry, to people who work on disinformation, to people who are in social sciences, humanities, engineering, robotics.

To have all these people together and recognize that the the things they are doing are connected in some sort of way. Really, uh, yeah, gives the research a kind of push. But also when we go to, uh, newsrooms it makes a lot more impact than when we say like, oh, we have one action oriented researcher and a person who works at the NGO. So sadly, the, the status, uh, really helps sometimes, not even because the people don't believe it, but because they have to explain it to others and the other people, uh, yeah, they, they need to get this sort of extra confidence that what they will spread is really true.

Barbara: Yeah, that's really interesting. The first, the first bit you talked really about sense-making also, I guess, which I feel so many people are looking for, understanding what's going on. And I recognize it from the work I did last year on democratic recession and kind of having that academic framework of understanding what's going on, and of course we know about the authoritarian playbooks and that also tied into it, but it helped me a lot but I also noticed that the organizations, the  NGOs and others that we were working with in that process, it gave them language, as you're saying as well. And it helped give their claims more legitimacy at the same time because there was this academic, uh, evidence behind and, uh, names that they could refer to. And yeah, so that's, that's, uh, that, that's really important. Thanks. 

I'm wondering, um, I. Because I think we agree on, on the use of collaboration and, and trying to find each other, especially also at this time maybe. Um, I wonder what you think are some of the biggest obstacles for academics, researchers on the one hand and social movements, civil society and maybe other what they call practitioners, yeah. Where do you see the challenges in making this happen? 

Harriet: I see a few challenges. One is in different timelines. So often the social movement timeline is a bit more rushed. Uh, and the academic timeline is, where you wait two years to have your, uh, article published sometimes. So I think that the conception of time, um, is, is, has an impact on how you collaborate, uh, and also in terms of what you can expect from each other.

Another thing that really important it is trust, both from social movements to academics and academics to social movements. But trust is something you have to earn. Uh, and that again, takes a lot of time, uh, and often I've seen a lot of times that people just sort of show up and think that in half a year they can sort of bring something to a movement or that they can gather data and then disappear. And that really erodes a lot of trust, uh, and is also a very extractive, uh, and also sort of a, yeah, how would I say it? Like a sort of a, I bring the good things to you kind of mindset, you know, that I, I've met academics will really think that they can show up at the movement and explain them what's going on and that the people then will say thank you. 

I think if your aim is contributing, then you really have to think of how you're contributing and whether people asked for that contribution and whether it really contributes. Um, because often it just looks like a form of extraction in some sort of way. So, and I, attribution can also.. I had academics laugh at me when I said this, but like for example, making copies of the leaflets, which is not something you can officially do, right? Use your copy machine to make 200 copies, but it's also not, it's not a big deal when you do. It won't cost you your job. To do that sometimes or to book a room to give people a meeting space, often academics think that that's very little or not really contributing, or they don't recognize the, the extreme privilege in having a copy machine or the privilege in being able to book a room or the privilege in having access to all these sort of software systems that academics have.

These kinds of very practical ways in which academics could help, are a form of trust building and also are a form of meeting people where they're at, right? Like if you begin with making the copies, if you begin with making the space, if you begin with giving 200 euros for a guest lecture, then from there you can, adapt your research to something that is more valuable and more impactful than doing those small acts. But that will only happen once you've built the trust and when people know you and when you can, when you're part of the movement enough to see where you can contribute. 

Barbara: Yeah. This really resonates and it also relates a bit to what you started with of showing up, you know, of, of being there. Um, and to think beyond your actual formal research applications. Um, yeah, that's, so that, and that speaks to the challenge of trust and also ways in which you can actually build that. Are there other… I mean at specifically at this time, of course there is both civil society activists and academics are under pressure. A politics that's not necessarily favorable of either knowledge, protection, critical voices and all these things. So that you would think that maybe there is a renewed, uh, interest in finding each other in building solidarity. Is that something that you see happening? 

Harriet: I do see this happening a lot around me, but I don't know if that's because that's the thing I'm drawn to or whether that's a broader trend. Um, but I do see a lot of people, uh, yeah trying to build collaborations and, and finding each other.  

Barbara: We spoke about this before, there is of course the challenge of, um, austerity and, and yeah. cuts both for civil society that's increasingly under-resourced and, um, academia. How do you see that playing out? And is there something, is there something we could be doing, uh, together to address that? 

Harriet: you'll often see that the, the organizations with the most money are the most, uh, are, are often more mainstream or less radical in their messaging, but also in the kinds of actions because there's just a lot of people become more scared about what they speak out about, because there is more precarity, uh, that less, less research is done, that the more dangerous research is cut earlier. Um, that there's even more reliance on external funders, right? So if the government, uh, does budget cuts, then uh, the, the collaborations between, yeah. Uh, big companies and universities are more likely to happen, which I think the end is a bad thing in many ways.

Barbara: Yeah. Yeah. And actually the, the things you're mentioning now, I, I think a lot of them also at the moment at least go for most NGOs, uh, that there is more reluctance to speak out because you're already under a, a pressure. Um, so yeah, no, that's a real challenge. Um, what are some of the things you, kind of looking forward that you would like to see happening within this context? With some of the challenges that academics face, that activists face, how could we move forward in collaborating more or better? Um, what are some of the things we should be doing?

Harriet: I think academics can now really learn from social movements, um, who have been on under in more precarious or. Uh, more repressed situations more than academics have. I think especially in the US it's clear that academia can learn from social movements in terms of being strategic about what you say, in terms of taking care of each other, right? Like I think academia is a, the sort of standard example of how not to work with young people. I finished my PhD. It was a struggle, but, uh, I think I'm one of the lucky ones. If you look at the, I think more than 75% of the people who do a PhD get a depression or burnout or, [yeah, it's really staggering the figures.] And I, I think that also has to do with the sort of the internal culture that academia.

Sometimes has I, I also see many departments and centers doing it really well, right? So, uh, it's, it's very context specific, but within some activist circles, because I also see this, I see many activists doing this very wrong. But I think there are some principles from, uh, social movements like having affinity groups, uh, having buddy pairs checking in with each other, like making sure that the personal is also attended, like experiencing joys, celebrating victories, uh, having burnout, prevention plans, taking care of each other, that all these principles are something that could be implemented in academia or that you can also in a sort of a under commons kind of way, find like-minded people to, to take care of each other together. That that is something that academia can learn from social movements. And also the being prepared right to, to think about what if someone will attack, uh, what if, uh, and this might sound sound a bit farfetched, but I have to think, for example, of the UvA, the  University of Amsterdam, yeah, the University of Amsterdam, where a former employee suddenly started to send death threats and insults to a lot of the mostly female woke, uh, academics there within activist circles. I think this would've been taken up with more care for the people who were under attack, uh, that there would be, uh, uh, an. It would be recognized earlier how grave, uh, a threat this is. And also how detrimental to, yeah, being able to show up at work to do your work, uh, can be. I also think academics can learn in terms of how to circumvent repression, like have encrypted email, be careful about what you say, uh, those kinds of things.

And lastly, I think academics can really step up in their role to talk about controversial ideas because if you're in academia specifically, if you have a lot of privilege, so if you're a white, if you're mid, if you're a man, if you are tenured, like I wouldn't necessarily say everyone in academia has a lot of privilege, but you're privileged in the sense that you work within academia. And that academic privilege you can definitely use to speak out about things that activists cannot. in the same way. They will be read in a different way. They have a smaller audience, they have less credibility. And to amplify these things, especially when they resonate with your own research. You can be much more radical as an academic than as an activist 'cause as an activist, it will be seen as a threat and as an academic, it'll be seen as truth searching, truth finding.

Barbara: Yeah. Wow. These are such, these are such good recommendations. And, um, and they kind of speak for more feminist academia. [Definitely] I have to say. Uh, which, uh, I love. What's something that you think activists or civil society could do moving forward? What role? Can they play in trying to bridge these worlds?

Harriet: I think academic activists, social movements can also be a bit more, uh, a a bit less arrogant. So to try to find the ways in which they can collaborate or where they can be, uh, yeah, where they can learn, uh, from academics. I do think you always need to be careful about who you trust, uh, how you communicate with them, how, how, what kind of things you can share or not, but to recognize when someone shows up and does the work, uh, and then starts to do research or wants to contribute in the, to the movement by doing research to, to really take that. Because I often, I also sometimes, uh, I, I also think, uh, activists for example, when they send out a press release, they could add the, the contact details if the academic, uh, agrees with that of, a researcher who, who knows a lot about that topic, to give a heads up and say, Hey, we're gonna do this. Uh, can we, can we send journalists your way to, to be a bit more open or active to see where academia really can help their cause in some sort of way. 

Barbara: Yeah, really nice. So on both sides, there's more pro, more proactiveness, and also really like the example that I, I think, um, as strong for starters, you're also talking to, uh, academics or academic institutions about, um, workshops on how to deal with hatred, online hatred, right? So these are very concrete examples where there is so much experience, uh, being developed within social movements, that's all kinds of stakeholders being affected at the moment can benefit. Um, so yeah, thanks for these really, really concrete examples. 

I'm wondering looking at the, the whole playing field of, of social movements, um, and academics working on issues of both climate, democracy, um, and also related issues. There is, and we've talked about this before, there is also a lot, um, in seeing the parallels between different, kind of different, um. processes, I guess, that we see happening in society. So we're talking about, you're talking about climate obstruction. I've also spoken to Lisa Mugga works on, on gender and the role of patriarchy in autocratization and how that works. Um, of course there, there are, there are particular issues around racism and Islamophobia. Is there something you think we could do moving forward in. In leveraging almost the, the horrible, the horrible stuff that we see happening across these different themes at this moment in time, collaborating across issues.

Harriet: Yeah. I, so I, I think what, what I try to do at Stroomversnellers is really recognizing some of the things that are happening in different movements that are following the same sort of script, following the same, uh, process. And I think you can look at backlash, for example, uh, with the sort of the path towards racial justice. We also try to, uh, tease out what kind of mechanisms we see playing out in separate different movements. Uh, and I think terms like backlash, privilege, uh, becoming the problem, uh, obstruction, those kinds of mechanisms are at play at different movements. Um. So if we look at obstruction and the different ways obstruction play out, we can see that the transgender movements, the, the movement against Islamophobia, uh, but also climate, climate scientists, the climate movements all, um, suffer from the active obstruction that other actors are playing out and they might be Christian think tanks, they might be the, the sort of the, Andrew Tate related movements. They might be Shell, the fossil fuel industry and they might just be shareholders, but they are actively trying to obstruct and they're a word like that. And recognizing the ways obstruction plays out can really help movements learn from each other. 

Similar to backlash or, uh, this, this idea from Sara Ahmed that really comes from a, uh, anti-racist and feminist, uh, yeah. Sort of analysis that by exposing the problem, you become the problem. Right? She introduced this as the sort of the, imagine you have a family dinner and you're racist uncle shows up and says something racist or sexist or ableist or whatever the racist uncle does. Um, but this by exposing the problem, you become seen as the problem. You become the problem. This is of course, also what climate activists face when they, uh, join an action or when they, uh, call attention to the issue they're facing. Like I wouldn't say that the issues are similar, but the mechanism really looks, looks the same. And people can learn from each other in how, how to deal with this. And also, uh, not even learn, but just see that they are not the problem. So that how they bring the problem, how they commute, what they do, that's not the problem. It's the problem is that people resist change, that people don't want to see it. And that in itself is a form of self-care, or recognizing that you sometimes just have to give up responsibility of how people respond. That we can also learn across movements. You don't always have to feel responsible for how people respond, because pointing out to the problem inherently makes you the enemy.

Barbara: Um. Yeah. Yeah. So this is also really important for kind of the question, how do we keep going? Um, because that can be very demotivating and, and stressful. and I, I totally recognize that, that very often that the people that speak out about something or like even the speaking out about something becomes more of the topic than the actual thing you're trying to expose. [Yes, there's a lot] and it's really frustrating, but uh, it's also very good to have language for it and to see, you know, to find each other in that, in that frustration, I guess. So that's really interesting. And also how you're, by being involved in these different movements that actually you can also, you see those parallels, right? You see those playbooks and that really, that really helps and I hope we can, we can continue, well finding each other in that. 

I have another question before we're gonna round off, and that's because, um, also the conversation with Lisa, um, and my own work, I'm increasingly interested in finding kind of other ways of collaborating rather than only through the writing and the research. So can we use creative ways, uh, as well, um, which sometimes help to bridge. To bridge different worlds, and I'm wondering if you have experienced or if there's something that inspires you, if there's an example that inspires you when it comes to, yeah, doing things a little bit differently. 

Harriet: Well, my first, uh, answer is maybe very, uh, is not what you're looking for. So with this climate obstruction network, we had conversations also about NGOs and with with NGOs, and with action-oriented institutions. They were actually like, we really want your research. So this is specifically for climate, climate obstruction researchers. You know, like we don't necessarily want your opinion article. We want that academic credibility to sort of wave in people's faces and to have that legitimacy. And we know what's going on. We know the problem. You also know that the information deficit model is a lie. Uh, please stop trying to spread the words or do interpretive dance with your research. Please bring that research, but then also pick up the phone when a journalist calls, you know, so they are really like, your job is to, to, to bring legitimate knowledge or to, you know, we know that this does not really exist, but you know, your job is to write academic articles. Then please write the articles and speak about them when a journalist want to speak about them, rather than making it accessible because other people. Are more capable of making it accessible than you are. It's fine what you're doing, please continue. 

So that's on the one hand. On the other hand, um, I really liked, for example, uh, collaboration, uh, or, uh, a project by Selcuk Balamir. He, uh, gave a winter school at, um, uh, I think a design academy where, uh, design students, architecture students, and urban students, I think had to, uh, uh, think about dismantling existing Shell infrastructure in a just timeline. And I think that is really a sort of a prefigurative kind of work. That, uh, he as a scholar or as someone with a position within academia, uh, with other students who, who are the future, uh, can really sort of normalize this idea. Also stress the importance of thinking about abolition or transformation in some sort of way. Really use these skills to pre prefigure the world we see. But because it brought, it, brought it to a group of people who would not necessarily engage with this in and of themselves, or not, not all, 120 of them. If you are in front of a classroom, you, you have some power. Uh, and often people are afraid to use it for something else than protecting the status quo. And to, dare to not replicate the things that hurt us is I think really powerful in his example. 

Barbara: Mm-hmm. Yeah, really interesting. We also have a really amazing episode about that, uh, earlier episode where we speak to, um, Philippa Mullins about how she uses her education, her teaching. And how mindful she's also about the trauma in the room, for example. Um, thank you. Is there anything else you'd like to share before we close off? 

Harriet: Um, yeah, maybe, uh. I want to elaborate on this a tiny bit. So my thinking was really influenced by the financial crisis, uh, and how Greece was completely fucked over as a country, uh, because of the crisis. And I think that should be a warning for how we talk about the climate crisis. I don't like the word crisis. I think it's dangerous. And also when I see how in the past the western world has solved crises, I, I think we're completely fucked. 

Barbara: So on that hopeful note. Yeah, that impressive note, that famous last words. Yeah. Great. Great. Thanks. Um, yeah, now we're gonna close off. Thank you so much, Harriet. 

Harriet: Um, it's, uh, it was a pleasure. Thank you for asking these questions. Super interesting to start thinking about them. Yeah, thanks. You're welcome. You're welcome. All right. Bye-bye. Bye.

Thank you Harriet for sharing such valuable insights and your time. And thank yóu listeners for being with us today. As part of this series – we’d like to invite you to share ideas and experiences with us via our blog or email and bring this together in a piece. Please see the shownotes for details  on how to reach us ánd more about Harriets work. We’d also love it if you share a review of the podcast and share with others, so more people can join. Thank you all and ciao!