Soul-searching
Second, the idea that repression of the movement would act as a ‘backfiring tool’, stirring public sympathy proved overly optimistic. “If they lock us up, there will be an outcry,” some activists claimed. Repression and court cases did not trigger mass support. Instead, the crackdowns dampened the movement’s momentum.
Third, the rise of the far-right and of multiple overlapping political crises shifted attention away from climate action.
Finally, LG’s structural rigidity caused internal fractures. Its hierarchical model enabled efficiency but hindered grassroots innovation.
The need for change became undeniable even before a new direction was in view. Carla Hinrichs, an LG spokesperson, publicly announced the ditching of the name Letzte Generation vor den Kipppunkten (‘Last Generation before the tipping points’) – as LG was no longer sure that major climate tipping points hadn’t already arrived.
To this crisis, LG responded with a process of strategic soul-searching. The outcome: its dissolution in early 2025 and the formation of two new projects.
Protest
“Power to the people” and “another world is possible” – those protest slogans turned into a source of strategic inspiration.
Cyclists have noticed freshly-painted bike lanes, while SUV owners have woken up to deflated tires. These direct actions reflect WiK’s new strategy.
“We don’t want to focus on demands and then wait to see whether they are accepted or not,” explains one WiK member. WiK is about reclaiming agency by directly implementing climate action measures.
While LG avoided tactics that could harm individuals, WiK is questioning that boundary. Sabotaging private property, such as SUV tires, is seen by some activists as morally justifiable when targeting climate-destructive luxury. As one activist put it: “Just because it is legal [to own such an object] does not mean it is right.”
This orientation is a response to the worsening levels of repression, which have made traditional protest less attractive. According to a WiK activist, the police operations “show that we are doing something that [politicians] don’t want us to do.” The activists have therefore opted for actions where they avoid arrest.
Participants
However, WiK is not committed to one single set of tactics; it aspires to flexibility. With its grassroots democratic structure, local resistance groups choose the tactics most effective in their area.
The diversity of tactics serves as a toolbox, they argue: adaptable and designed to maintain public interest with unexpected methods. While WiK’s flexibility enables a wide application of tactics, choosing the right ones still requires strategic analysis and thoughtful discussion.
NG remains more faithful to LG’s original model of momentum-driven organising, NVCD, and centralised leadership.
But its vision extends beyond traditional climate action, which they frame as part of a broader misanthropic system sustained by right-wing and oligarchic forces. Given the inherent interconnection of current crises, one activist warns, if we don’t resist fascism, “we can forget climate action altogether.”
At the heart of NG’s strategy is the Parliament of the People: a citizen-led forum where randomly selected participants would draw up laws for a just society.
Strategic
If politicians fail to act even with the help of suggested measures, NG will apply pressure through NVCD. An example given by one NG activist is the suggestion that if the assembly “decided that politicians must cycle to the Bundestag, we’ll block their cars if they don’t.”
NG’s citizens’ assemblies will face similar difficulties to prior models like Bürgerrat Klima – which struggled to achieve political traction. Another concern is that NG’s call for participatory democracy clashes with its own top-down organisational structure.
To outsiders, LG’s split may look like failure – like giving up. But activists perceive it as a necessary evolution. It’s not a split – it’s diversification.
After all, an LG member asks, is it worse “to have a thousand discussions during which some people are always feeling uncomfortable, or instead two groups in which most people [engaged with each] are in agreement?”
That said, the fact is that LG’s activists, once unified in one group, are now divided. While members can contribute to both projects, their strategic differences will make close collaboration more complicated.
Emergency
But what are those differences?
One fault line is nonviolence. WiK sees property sabotage as legitimate – a way to, as one comrade puts it, “slightly harm individuals” without physical violence. NG rejects this logic, preferring tactics that “make people feel invited to the conversation.”
They also diverge on political strategy: NG prioritises reform through assemblies and NVCD; WiK seeks to bypass the state via direct community action.
Finally, their internal structures differ: NG upholds centralised decision-making; WiK celebrates member-led democratic deliberation.
In the face of multiple political and ecological crises, with fascism on the rise and global temperatures accelerating, WiK and NG represent two divergent, but potentially complementary, responses to the shared emergency.
Their methods may differ, but their message is the same: waiting is no longer an option. As WiK puts it: “We have nothing to lose but a world to win. Let’s begin.”
This Author
Lana Henzler is an undergraduate student studying a BASc in Global Challenges at Brunel University. This article is based on interviews with LG members conducted for her dissertation: Strategies, Tactics, and Visions: The Future of Climate Activism. A New Trajectory for Last Generation in Germany (2025).