Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
It's an interesting portrait. And it's true that "the ecological movement" in a broad sense is getting on for half a century old, for precious little result. Partly because we thought we were the spearhead when we were only a splinter (no, people will not willingly go for hitch-hiking and washing their hand-knitted woollies with bar soap; no, cavorting around dressed up as corn cobs does not strike people as an imaginative denunciation of GM crops; no, non-violent activism is not an unstoppable force, however much you quote Gandhi), and partly, more importantly, globalising corporate capitalism has become increasingly massively powerful over the same half-century, and is continuing to prove that it will pay no heed whatsoever to any environmental warning signs.

So you're left with the feeling that it will come down to the wire. A number of factors (inner contradictions, reliance on bubblicious finance, environmental constraints) may bring g.c.c. to its knees. More of a cataclysm than a crisis, probably (really) WWIII, and hugely costly to humanity. There might have been a more intelligent way, but humanity is collectively stupid.

This may sound complacent coming from someone who may not have to face the mess, but I do live with younger generations and care about what happens to them. So no popcorn.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Sun Apr 20th, 2014 at 02:56:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I was going to draft a diary about this article, and various responses, including that from a friend of his, Naomi Klein. So very glad it's made its appearance here, Danke, Marco.

A dear friend of mine (Mike Roselle, who started Earth!First, and is leading the charge against MTR) said, "Understandable, but we don't stop bailing until the ship sinks." Of course, he also believes the major environmental groups are at best hugging the wrong tree.

If i didn't have dear young friends, and dear friends with chillens and grandchillens, i probably would sit around playing music, taking visionary excursions, and chuckling at the evil blindness at the heart of "civilization."

But i won't, even though i see the total environmental condition as far too far over the border to save.

"no, non-violent activism is not an unstoppable force, however much you quote Gandhi"

let's discuss whether there are viable alternatives then, or did i misunderstand you?

"Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage." - Ana´s Nin

by Crazy Horse on Mon Apr 21st, 2014 at 09:14:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]
non-violent activism is not an unstoppable force

Subsumed into that was the idea (that I share), almost a sine qua non in environmental circles, that violence is improductive and doomed to failure. So I was not hinting that violence was the only thing left. I was making a comment on what I see as the overestimation of the strength of non-violent activism. People chaining themselves to trees or railway lines only slow the pace of application of anti-environmental policies. And, much as I admire the Arctic oil-platform invaders, the oil started flowing last week.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Tue Apr 22nd, 2014 at 02:22:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]


Occasional Series