Across the Channel, her departure from the environmental organization Extinction Rebellion (XR) caused a stir in 2019. A fierce defender of the environment and the fight against climate change, Zion Lights left her post as spokesperson for the movement of civil disobedience after a deep disagreement on the nuclear issue. Three years later, the one who founded the Emergency Reactor movement draws a bitter observation of the functioning of certain environmental NGOs.
L’Express: What was the trigger for your departure from Extinction Rebellion?
Zion Lights: I just want to clarify that Extinction Rebellion does not consider itself an NGO compared to other more institutional organizations. I left after an appearance on the show The Andrew Neil Show in October 2019. An episode seen by millions, as it was set during one of Extinction Rebellion’s lockdowns in London. The presenter asked me what XR thinks should replace gas as an energy source. Personally, I already considered nuclear power as a relevant solution. I had already left the Green party, very vocally, because of their anti-nuclear dogma, years before. But as the organization’s spokesperson, it was impossible for me to publicly support nuclear energy. I felt frustrated, and I realized in the studio that I could no longer speak on behalf of this group.
Three years later, what conclusions do you draw from your experience within this organization? You raise the idea of a taboo or things that cannot be debated. A form of ideological blindness.
In my experience, all environmental organizations indulge in ideology culpably. I’ve been a member of several of them, and I’ve always found that to be true. I left the Green Party after an event where one of my questions to a speaker on nuclear energy was censored by the organizers. At XR, when I voiced my views on nuclear, I was severely attacked. Debate on certain topics was simply not allowed. To attempt it was to expose oneself to bullying and the risk of exclusion.
On subjects such as nuclear power, some NGOs convey fake news. Is it because of a lack of scientific culture on these subjects, or again in a very conscious way to stick to their ideology?
There is a mixture of people who believe and repeat what they have been told – I myself found myself in this position using the anti-nuclear arguments for many years – and some people who do not hesitate to deceive deliberately their audience. These voices are very powerful, but they are not so numerous today. Furthermore, you cite the fake news, but other methods exist to establish the arguments of NGOs, such as the cherry picking. XRs, for example, always cite IPCC reports. It is through these reports that we know that climate change is man-made. I pointed out to my fellow XR activists that the 2018 IPCC report contains a section on mitigation, authored by Working Group III, which outlines four pathways to decarbonization, all of which involve a substantial amount of nuclear energy. Systematically, I was told that these scientists had been paid by the nuclear industry to lie. I answered that these are the same scientists who signed the entire report. Ideology can make people blind to reason.
Looking back, would you say that NGOs are still a useful tool for democracy? And if so, what needs to change in their operation?
Environmental groups have accomplished a great deal. But I think they failed on the biggest environmental problem there is: climate change. By protesting and lobbying against nuclear power, they have contributed to global warming. There are also other examples of projects where well-meaning ideas, like planting trees, actually backfired because they were species unsuited to the environment or unable to survive due to lack of water, etc. More than anything, these groups must now rely on scientific evidence. That’s why I created Emergency Reactor, a pro-nuclear climate action group committed to pro-science discourse. Having good intentions is not enough when it comes to fighting climate change. If these groups do not change their ideology to focus on science, they risk doing more harm to our planet than they are helping to save it.