2026/03/02 by Thomas Zeitzoff
Arts and Humanities · Environmental Science · Social Sciences · #American Environmental and Regional History #Ecocriticism and Environmental Literature #Environmental Justice and Health Disparities
paper · doi:10.1080/09546553.2026.2624374
openalex publication_date 2026/03/02 · openalex created_date 2026/03/07 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/29
Why did the U.S. radical environmental movement shift away from tactics like arson and sabotage in the mid-2000s? And given the rising threat of climate change, why haven’t these more contentious tactics made a comeback? This puzzle is particularly significant to scholars of terrorism because radical environmental groups like the Earth Liberation Front appear in major terrorism databases, and faced heavy repression from the government, despite causing no fatalities. I argue that repression and recruitment networks play a central role in shaping tactical repertoires. To test this theory, I combine original data on eco direct actions (1995–2022), surveys, and interviews of activist experts. I find that repression sharply reduced the pace of direct actions—particularly sabotage and arson—and disrupted the punk and anarchist recruitment networks that had supported them. In their place, the climate justice movement emerged, favoring civil disobedience and mass protest over clandestine tactics. Repression thus altered the movement both directly (by targeting high-risk actors and their tactics) and indirectly (by reshaping recruitment pipelines). I conclude with a discussion of how climate politics, activist subcultures, repression, and the contested boundary of what constitutes terrorism may influence the future trajectory of radical environmentalism.