· 7 min read
For years, I have rejected the idea that hope alone is a powerful motivator for action. From the moment I began making this argument, I have been met with resistance — called pessimistic, accused of undermining morale, and dismissed by those who believe that a positive vision of the future is enough to inspire people to fight for change. Again and again, I have argued that hope, when not coupled with urgency and clear action, does more harm than good. It creates complacency rather than engagement, passivity rather than movement, and delusion rather than transformation.
Despite the backlash, research continues to prove this argument correct. A global study across 30 countries (Baum et al., 2025) found that fear and anger are much stronger motivators of climate action and policy support than hope. The study confirmed that while hope can be inspiring, it often leads to inaction, as people assume that the future is on track to improve without their intervention. If hope is not tied to a clear call to action, it creates a false sense of security, leading people to believe that change is inevitable or that someone else will take responsibility for solving the crisis.
For too long, movements for change have relied on hope-based storytelling — painting visions of a better future and expecting that this will move people to fight for it. But this strategy is deeply flawed, and the evidence is clear: people do not act simply because they believe in a better world; they act when they feel urgency, anger, and personal responsibility.
The limits of hope-based narratives
The assumption that people will take action if they believe in a brighter future is fundamentally flawed. Many movements — from environmental activism to civil rights — have built their messaging around this idea, yet history and research show that it is not enough.
One of the core issues is that hope assumes people are future-oriented. Many individuals, particularly those struggling with economic hardship, social instability, or personal stress, do not have the luxury of thinking about a distant utopia. When people are consumed with surviving the present, a promise of a better future often fails to resonate.
Beyond this, utopian narratives create emotional distance. No matter how beautifully crafted, a vision of a better future remains abstract. People do not live in the future; they live in the present. When narratives focus too much on what could be, they risk feeling disconnected from the immediate struggles that define people’s daily lives.
The reliance on hope also reinforces passivity. When people are led to believe that positive change is inevitable, they feel less urgency to participate. Movements based on the assumption that progress will naturally unfold often crumble when change is slow, leading to disillusionment and disengagement. If the promised future seems increasingly out of reach, people may abandon their efforts entirely.
Finally, hope-based narratives underestimate the role of fear and guilt. Research has consistently shown that people are more likely to act when they are trying to avoid loss rather than achieve gain. Fear of ecological collapse, loss of autonomy, or stolen futures is far more likely to spark mobilisation than the abstract hope of a thriving planet. Guilt, too, can inspire action — but only when it is framed in a way that offers a path forward. The problem is not fear or guilt themselves; the problem is that they are often paired with shame or moral superiority, which leads to defensiveness rather than engagement.
Fear and anger can be powerful motivators—if used for good
If hope alone does not drive action, what does? The answer is emotionally compelling narratives that emphasise urgency, agency, and meaning.
The study found that fear and anger were the strongest motivators of climate action. Fear acts as a wake-up call, forcing people to confront reality and recognise the stakes. Anger fuels collective resistance, driving people to demand justice. The study also revealed that individuals who felt angry at government inaction or corporate destruction were far more likely to participate in activism than those who merely felt hopeful about future solutions.
History has shown that fear and anger are not inherently destructive — they are evolutionary tools for survival and transformation. Throughout history, movements for justice have harnessed these emotions to create lasting change. Fear of injustice has mobilised millions, and outrage at systemic oppression has fuelled some of the most significant social movements. The difference between destructive and constructive fear and anger lies in how they are directed.
Destructive fear and anger are used to divide, isolate, and entrench people in defensive postures, fostering radicalisation and tribalism. But when channeled effectively, fear and anger can be powerful forces for unity and action. Rather than rejecting these emotions as dangerous, we should strategically harness them to drive positive change.
This also means rethinking how we use technology to shape public discourse. The same algorithms that fuel division and outrage could be repurposed to promote engagement with pro-social content. Instead of allowing technology to dictate what captures public attention, we can design systems that encourage meaningful participation in movements for change.
A shift in perspective: Meaning as the driver of action
If hope alone is not enough, then what should replace it? The answer lies in a new approach that emphasises meaning over mere optimism. Rather than relying on the promise of a better future, we must shift our focus to why the journey itself matters.
Instead of asking people to act for a world they may never see, we must show them how taking action today makes their lives richer and more meaningful. This means highlighting the deep friendships formed in movements, the sense of empowerment that comes from fighting for justice, and the joy of seeing direct impacts in communities.
Key principles for meaning-based narratives
• Fear and guilt can drive action — but avoid shame. Fear is a wake-up call, and guilt can be a reminder of responsibility. But when paired with shame or moralising, they become paralysing rather than mobilising. Narratives should focus on what people can do rather than making them feel bad about who they are.
• Focus on the present, not just the future. Rather than asking people to fight for a distant utopia, show them how action today improves their lives. Activism should feel like a source of strength, connection, and fulfilment — right now.
• Make the journey the reward. Activism should not be framed as a burden, but as something inherently meaningful. A climate activist should not just be driven by fear or hope, but by the deep connections, empowerment, and personal transformation that come from collective struggle.
• Emphasise agency over outcome. People do not need to believe that victory is assured in order to act; they need to believe that their actions matter. The message should not be “we will win” but rather “this work matters because you are shaping the world through your actions.”
• Shift from crisis to care. While urgency is essential, messages that only highlight catastrophe can lead to paralysis. Instead of focusing solely on what’s at stake, we can craft stories that centre care — for communities, for the planet, and for future generations.
• Resist perfectionism. Many people disengage from movements because they feel they are not “good enough” activists. A meaning-based approach encourages participation at every level, whether through small acts or large-scale organising.
Conclusion: Toward a more resilient movement
Hope is not dead, but it has been overemphasised. We do not need people to believe in a perfect future — we need them to feel alive in the present.
By shifting our narratives away from distant utopias and toward deep, meaningful engagement, we create movements that are more resilient, more emotionally compelling, and more effective. People do not act because they are hopeful — they act because they feel urgency, anger, and personal responsibility.
We do not need to convince people that the world will get better. We need to show them that fighting for it makes their lives richer and more meaningful — right now.
illuminem Voices is a democratic space presenting the thoughts and opinions of leading Sustainability & Energy writers, their opinions do not necessarily represent those of illuminem.
