Green Privilege: Climate Activism's Class Problem

Why Australia's climate movement struggles to connect with working-class communities

There's an uncomfortable truth lurking at the heart of Australia's climate movement that few activists want to discuss openly: climate activism has a class problem. And until we confront it honestly, we'll keep wondering why the urgency of climate action doesn't translate into broader political support.

Walk through any climate rally in Sydney or Melbourne, and you'll notice something. The crowd is overwhelmingly middle-class, university-educated, and concentrated in inner-city electorates that already vote Green. Meanwhile, the communities most vulnerable to climate impacts, outer suburban families, regional workers, Indigenous communities, are often notably absent from the spaces where climate policy gets debated and decided.

This isn't an accident. It's the predictable result of a movement that has unconsciously organised itself around the assumptions, language, and priorities of the privileged.

The Luxury of Climate Consciousness

Consider the typical climate activist's day. They might bike to work (because they live close enough to the city to make cycling viable), grab a $6 oat milk coffee in a reusable cup, shop at the local farmers market on weekends, and spend evenings attending climate action meetings or protests.

Now consider a family in Western Sydney. Both parents work shift work, one in logistics, one in aged care. They drive 45 minutes each way to jobs that don't pay enough for them to live closer. Their old car is a necessity, not a choice. They shop at Aldi because every dollar counts. They can't attend evening meetings because someone needs to be home with the kids, and weekends are for catching up on housework and family time.

Which of these lifestyles allows more space for climate activism? Which person has the time, energy, and resources to attend rallies, follow complex policy debates, or experiment with low-carbon living?

The climate movement has built itself around the assumption that everyone has the luxury of making climate concerns their primary political priority. For many Australians, that's simply not realistic.

The Tesla Progressive Problem

Nothing illustrates climate activism's class disconnect quite like the electric vehicle debate. Climate activists celebrate every new EV on the road as progress, whilst completely missing why a $70,000 car doesn't represent a solution for most Australian families.

The government's electric vehicle policies reflect this blind spot perfectly. Tax breaks and subsidies that primarily benefit people wealthy enough to buy new cars, whilst doing little to make EVs accessible to the families driving 15-year-old Commodores because that's what they can afford.

Meanwhile, public transport, which would actually reduce emissions for ordinary families, receives a fraction of the political attention or funding that EV subsidies attract. It's easier to sell climate action that makes wealthy people feel good about their consumption choices than climate action that requires serious public investment.

The Language Barrier

Climate activism has developed its own vocabulary that inadvertently excludes working-class participation. Terms like "carbon footprint," "sustainable consumption," and "net-zero transition" might be second nature to university graduates, but they can feel like foreign language to people whose immediate concerns are paying rent and keeping the lights on.

Worse, much climate messaging carries an implicit moral judgment about people's choices. The focus on individual responsibility, drive less, fly less, consume less, assumes people have choices they might not actually have. When you're working two jobs just to make ends meet, being lectured about your carbon footprint feels tone-deaf at best, condescending at worst.

This creates a vicious cycle. Working-class people feel unwelcome in climate spaces, so they don't participate. Climate activists conclude that working-class people "don't care" about the environment, reinforcing the middle-class character of the movement.

The Jobs vs. Environment False Choice

Perhaps nowhere is the class divide more apparent than in debates about fossil fuel industries. Climate activists call for rapid transitions away from coal and gas, often without seriously grappling with what that means for the communities dependent on these industries.

In regional Queensland, coal mining isn't just an industry, it's the economic foundation of entire towns. When Brisbane-based climate activists call for immediate coal phase-outs, miners and their families hear a threat to their livelihoods. And they're not wrong.

The climate movement's response has often been to dismiss these concerns as fossil fuel propaganda or to offer vague assurances about "just transition" without concrete plans. Meanwhile, the coal industry offers immediate employment and pays wages that allow working-class families to buy homes and build futures.

This dynamic played out perfectly in the 2019 federal election, when Labor's climate policies contributed to their loss of traditional working-class, regional seats. Climate activists blamed a Murdoch media scare campaign, but that missed the deeper issue: the party's climate policies felt like a threat to working-class economic security because, in many ways, they were.

Environmental Justice vs. Climate Action

The focus on carbon emissions, whilst scientifically necessary, has crowded out environmental issues that directly affect working-class communities. Air pollution from freeways that run through working-class suburbs. Toxic waste facilities located away from wealthy neighbourhoods. Lack of green space in outer suburban areas.

These environmental justice issues have immediate, tangible impacts on people's daily lives, but they receive a fraction of the attention that global carbon targets attract. A family in Fairfield dealing with asthma from poor air quality might care deeply about environmental issues, but they're unlikely to see carbon pricing as their primary concern.

Climate activism's focus on global, long-term issues over local, immediate ones reflects the privilege of people who aren't directly affected by environmental racism and classism.

The Privilege of Climate Anxiety

Even climate anxiety itself has become a form of privilege. The luxury of lying awake at night worrying about 2050 temperature targets assumes your immediate needs are already met. When you're worried about this month's rent, next decade's climate seems like someone else's problem.

This creates a cruel irony: the people most able to worry about climate change are often those best equipped to adapt to its impacts, whilst those least able to engage with climate activism are most vulnerable to climate consequences.

Working-class communities and communities of colour will bear the brunt of extreme weather, rising sea levels, and economic disruption from climate change. Yet our movement often struggles to engage them as full participants rather than victims to be saved.

Beyond Performative Inclusion

The standard response to critiques like this is to add more "diverse voices" to climate organisations—recruit some working-class people for advisory boards, hold meetings in different suburbs, translate materials into community languages. These efforts are well-intentioned but often tokenistic.

Real inclusion requires rethinking climate activism's fundamental assumptions about how change happens and who gets to participate in making it.

That means prioritising policies that improve working-class lives whilst reducing emissions: massive public transport investment, green social housing programs, publicly-owned renewable energy that reduces power bills rather than increasing them.

It means organising around immediate environmental health issues in working-class communities, not just global carbon targets.

It means acknowledging that asking people to sacrifice economically for climate action is a class privilege—those who can't afford the sacrifice aren't morally inferior, they're just living with different constraints.

The Path Forward

Australia can't achieve meaningful climate action without working-class support. That means the climate movement needs to evolve beyond its middle-class origins.

The most successful climate campaigns have been those that connected environmental goals with economic security: campaigns for renewable energy manufacturing jobs, for retrofitting public housing to reduce energy bills, for clean transport that makes commuting cheaper and easier.

These approaches don't ask working-class people to sacrifice for the environment—they position environmental action as a path to economic improvement.

Climate activism doesn't need to abandon its urgency or scientific grounding. But it does need to recognise that privilege shapes how people experience both climate impacts and climate solutions.

The climate crisis affects everyone, but it doesn't affect everyone equally. Neither should climate activism.

---

Have you noticed class dynamics in environmental movements? How do we build climate action that works for everyone, not just the privileged? I'd love to hear your thoughts.