Can someone help me understand why they think XR distancing themselves from socialism is bad? There are plenty of platforms for socialism in this country, and, as environmental issues cross economic boundaries, surely building a broad political coalition to tackle them is good?

Even Stop The War Coalition, at its most effective point, was openly an alliance cobbled together of Liberals, Greens and Socialists. Actively saying that you're not looking for wide liberal support for a supposedly grass roots mass movement seems very counterproductive to me.

Also, given that the government you're trying to lobby for legislative changes is, by definition, politically opposed to socialism, I don't see how branding XR socialist helps you achieve anything other than, at best, attracting more people to socialism, not environmentalism.

We live in a world where eco-fascism is a thing & where Communism exists & made just as many failures with the environment as unrestrained capitalism. With all of this in mind, I simply don't understand why strategically anybody would think turning XR into Eco-Momentum is helpful

I guess what I'm asking is, on what grounds do you think rejecting support from people who have different economic positions will help you build a policy consensus on environmental issues?

(Caveat - eco-fascism is obviously indefensible, and there are clearly no excuses for extremists like that to be part of mass movements. Just trying to understand why you'd draw a line in the sand on economics to achieve something like carbon neutrality)