This is the final posting for the Big Thaw blog. Five weeks ago, at the start of the course, I considered myself a committed activist in the Global Warming movement. Now, over the course of the semester and after much research and writing on the topic, I am more convinced than ever of the need for society to change its behavior, in order to reverse the dramatic results of climate change.
I was convinced back in 2007, when the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, made up of climate scientists, concluded for the first time that “global warming is ‘unequivocal’ and that human activity is the main driver, ‘very likely’ causing most of the rise in temperatures since 1950.” Although many climate scientists had been warning of the effects of climate change for years, this was the first time that the expert Panel stated with near certainty that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from human activities have been the main causes of global warming. Furthermore, unless societies shift away from their reckless and basically unregulated burning of coal and oil, the main sources of carbon dioxide, experts predicted continued increases in global warming, with resultant drastic consequences. Rosenthal, E. & Revkin, A. “Science Panel Calls Global Warming ‘Unequivocal’”, The New York Times, February 3, 2007, retrieved July 2, 2009 from http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/03/science/earth/03climate.html?_r=1.
Accordingly, it would seem abundantly clear to most rational people that the time to argue about whether science has proven the existence of climate change is long over. But not some politicians, who, it could be argued, are neither rational, nor people concerned with the future of our planet. Just the other day, in what has been called the defining moment of the recent debate regarding the recently passed climate change legislation, Republican Representative Paul Broun of Georgia stated that climate change is nothing but a “hoax” that has been “perpetrated out of the scientific community.” Worse yet, his declaration was met with applause. Needless to say, I do not agree with Broun, but heartily agree with Paul Krugman’s assessment: this is nothing short of “treason against the planet.” Krugman, P. “Betraying the Planet”, The New York Times, June 28, 2009, retrieved on July 2, 2009 from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/29/opinion/29krugman.html.
Maybe citizens like Representative Broun will start believing in climate change science when it starts having a direct impact on something he and every other American does every day, and likely take for granted: drink water. Scientists have now proven that climate change is directly responsible for the shrinking of glaciers worldwide, which can have devastating effects. Glaciers store 80 percent of the world's fresh water for people in many countries, including the U.S. In order to receive the water we need, the glaciers must melt, but slowly, and not nearly as fast as they are now doing. Furthermore, if glaciers continue melting at such an accelerated pace, the sea-level will rise significantly, resulting in world-wide destruction of coastal communities and the displacement of millions of people. Tyson, P. “Vanishing Into Thin Air”, NOVA website, retrieved July 2, 2009 from http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/mtblanc/vanishing.html. Maybe if more folks would think about where their water comes from, they would wake up and stop wasting water and continuing other harmful behaviors that are directly causing the loss of a life-sustaining resource.
Other noticeable effects of climate change are already occurring across the U.S. like shifting migration patterns of butterflies in the West and heavier downpours in the Midwest and East, according to a recently released government study. The study also mentions an increase in drought here in the Southwest and more powerful heat waves in the Northeast as a result of climate change. Findings such as this certainly help support and reinforce my belief that climate change is real, but also provide some hope because “[o]ur destiny is really in our hands”. Broder, J. “Government Study Warns of Climate Change Effects”, The New York Times, June 16, 2009, retrieved on July 2, 2009 from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/16/science/earth/16climate.html
Furthermore, as I stated in an earlier posting, I am still persuaded that although the current climate change legislation is not perfect, it is both long overdue and necessary. “After all the years of denial, after all the years of inaction, we finally have a chance to do something major about climate change.” Krugman, P., The Perfect, the Good, the Planet, New York Times, Published: May 17, 2009. Retrieved June 4, 2009, from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/18/opinion/18krugman.html?_r=3. And it’s about time.
I believe that more people are now seriously thinking about the importance of reversing climate change. Unfortunately, one result of our very highly technological society is that people have come to expect immediate gratification and immediate solutions to our problems. But after more people see and learn about the devastating effects our actions are having on the environment, I am hopeful that they, like me, will be willing to step back a bit and realize that the answers to Global Warming, and most other environmental and conservation issues for that matter, need careful thought and consideration and cannot be solved overnight.
I also think that the science surrounding and proving climate change has finally been accepted as fact and, therefore, there is no reason for further debate on the issue. As a result, I see the Global Warming movement correctly moving into a type of second phase, where it seeks to connect with folks on an emotional level. Emotional appeal is a great way to engage folks and I think the Repower America TV commercials, referenced earlier in this blog, are very effective and I hope they are connecting with a large audience.
While the concept of Global Warming is disconcerting, to say the least, I prefer to look at the positive side. As stated by Paul Hawken in the movie "The 11th Hour", "What a great time to be alive because this generation gets to essentially completely change this world." And let's hope it is for the better.
This post will examine how gender has played a key part of the current protests in Iran.
Certainly, throughout history, women have played a very important role in advancing the ideals of democracy, and furthering the advancement of women’s basic rights.More familiar activists include Rosa Parks, Betty Friedan, Gloria Steinem, and Cindy Sheehan, to name a few.Another such female activist is little-known Marilyn Fowler, whose name recently surfaced and, as a result, uncovered the fact that she played a significant role as one of the main instigators of initial resistance to police in the mostly male-dominated Stonewall Riots, which recently commemorated its 40th anniversary; this event is widely thought to be the defining moment in the gay-rights movement. Chan, S. “Police Records Document Start of Stonewall Uprising”, The New York Times, June 22, 2009 retrieved on July 1, 2009 from http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/22/police-records-document-the-stonewall-uprising/?hp.
Unprecedented protests, violence, and the expulsion of foreign media have all been taking place following Iran’s June 12th presidential elections.As these events have unfolded, one thing is clear - women have played a big part in the country’s fight for democracy.Before delving into the current situation, a brief modern history of women’s issues in Iran is warranted.
In 1979, a combination of secular and religious Iranians overthrew the regime of the Shah of Iran.Although women played an important role in the revolution, its aftermath threatened their political, legal, and social standing.Many post-revolutionary changes were detrimental to women and the male-dominated Islamic Republic of Iran basically turned its back on the advancement of women as a goal.However, the women of Iran did not like being ignored and their post-revolution activity, referred to as “Islamic feminism”, sometimes acting together with men, but always mobilizing specifically and consciously as women, was a crucial factor in improving their literacy, education, labor force participation, and health.Unfortunately, women in Iran still face oppression and “legal” gender discrimination especially because of the patriarchal structure of Iranian society.Regardless, Iranian women continue to act collectively in ways that have enhanced their lives, status, and potential, and despite the many challenges they face, it is often they who raise the issues and bring them into public view and successfully mobilize for change.Halper, L. “Law and Women’s Agency in Post-Revolutionary Iran”, Harvard Journal of Law & Gender, Vol. 28, Winter 2005 (p. 85-92), retrieved on July 1, 2009 from http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlg/vol28/halper.pdf.It is within this context that we view the current events in Iran and how women have helped shape them.
One of the first images that comes to mind when thinking about the current situation in Iran is the death of 26-year-old female Neda Agha-Soltan, who was murdered while walking near an anti-government demonstration.Her death has come to symbolize Iranian resistance, and women’s resistance, to the government's “official” election results.Within hours of the video of her murder being posted online, she had become the iconic victim of the Iranian government crackdown.“Ahmadinejad: Neda's death is 'suspicious'”, CNN.com/world, June 29, 2009, retrieved July 1, 2009 from http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/06/29/iran.neda.ahmadinejad/index.html#cnnSTCText.
However, Neda is just one example of the many women who are actively involved in the current protests in Iran today.Women are protesting in the streets, side by side with Iranian men.The Islamic feminist organizations that already existed in Iran are now using what they learned during their initial efforts to obtain rights and resist oppression, to further the democratic goals of freedom and rights for all people in Iran today by standing up against the regime. Upon reflection, this is not as surprising as it first seemed to me, because women make up the group that is most restricted under the current regime in Iran.In addition, women are among the most highly educated persons in Iran today; there are more women students at TehranUniversity than there are male students.As history has proven during numerous movements, young, educated college students are often on the “front line” of the protests.Iranians Remain Defiant, CNN Larry King Live Transcript, Aired June 22, 2009, retrieved July 1, 2009 from http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0906/22/lkl.01.html.
And as history has already proven, women are often the guiding force behind social movements for equality.This brings to mind Helen Reddy’s classic song, I Am Women, made popular by the burgeoning women's movement in the early 1970s.The lyrics are timeless and certainly seem to capture the possible feelings of today’s women in Iran:
In the words of Mavis Leno, Board Member, Feminist Majority Foundation, “I believe this may be the century of the women.”Iranians Remain Defiant, CNN Larry King Live Transcript, Aired June 22, 2009, retrieved July 1, 2009 from http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0906/22/lkl.01.html.
This post will look at the so-called “Bono-izaton” of activism, which Naomi Klein argues is a “corporatized” form of protest that is “less dangerous and less powerful" than grassroots demonstrations. I will discuss whether I think Klein is correct in her assessment of activism today, and whether it is really less effective and less dangerous. I will also discuss what factors may have made activism by young people today different from that of the Freedom Riders or anti-Vietnam protests, and what is it about today’s social movements that has the potential to be powerful.
Before delving into the subject matter, I feel that a disclaimer of sorts is warranted: U2 is one of my favorite bands. However, I will take an objective position when analyzing these issues, and base my opinions on Bono the activist, and not the lyricist.
Klein accuses (PRODUCT) RED of making the radical claim that it is going to end poverty. (PRODUCT) RED, started by Bono and Bobby Shriver, is a business model created to raise awareness and money by teaming up with the world's most iconic brands to produce (PRODUCT) RED branded products. A portion of profits from each product sold goes directly to a fund to invest in African AIDS programs, with a focus on women and children. Klein also criticizes benefit concerts and calls the concertgoers waving their bracelets “less dangerous and less powerful (than grass roots street demonstrations.)” Delaney, B. “The Bono-ization of Activism”, CNN, October 12, 2007; retrieved on June 26, 2009 from http://www.joinred.com/Learn/AboutRed/FAQs.aspx.
Bono has previously responded to such critics as
cranks carping from the sidelines. A lot of them wouldn’t know what to do if they were on the field. They’re the party who will always be in opposition so they’ll never have to take responsibility for decisions because they know they’ll never be able to implement them. We get hits from the left, we get hits from the right, but in the end, every year, the world’s poor are better off for our presence.
Retrieved on June 26, 2009 from http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/article732323.ece?token=null&offset=0&page=1.
Certainly, this “corporatized” form of protest (buying products and waving bracelets at concerts) is less dangerous than the anti-World Trade Organization demonstration in Seattle in 1999 where injuries included damage from rubber bullets (including taking off part of a person's jaw), smashed teeth, plastic bullet wounds, tear gas injuries, and a lot damage to peoples’ eyes and skin. Retrieved June 26, 2009 from http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1822. But I am not sure that is a bad thing. And I think it is a lot less clear whether “corporatized” protest is less powerful than grassroots demonstrations. Part of the difficulty in answering such questions lies in the fact that comparing these two forms of protests is like comparing apples to oranges. Furthermore, "resistance is not one thing and should not be defined as one thing. It is a multiplicity of different things depending on the strategy implemented." Hequembourg, A. & Arditi, J., "Fractured Resistances: The Debate over Assimilationism among Gays and Lesbians in the United States", The Sociological Quarterly, Vol. 40, No. 4 (1999) (p. 665).
Without question, the effectiveness of grassroots demonstrations has been proven time and time again, from anti-Vietnam, Freedom Riders, Gay Rights, and anti-World Trade Organization protests, to name a few. But today’s youth is much different than the youth thirty, twenty, or even ten years ago. For better or worse (probably worse), today’s youth appear to be much more complacent than previous generations. Many reasons have been given for such complacency, however, that does not mean that today’s youth would not take to the streets in protest of a perceived injustice.
While I am certainly not a fan of global corporatization, this is the world within which we find ourselves these days and, like Bono, I think it a far better approach to work for change within these confines, than to just sit on the sidelines and complain. Let’s face it: people are going to buy things. And until such time that people finally come to realize and scrutinize their behaviors (and purchases), and grasp the fact that such actions have a direct effect on our environment (climate change) and worldwide poverty, we have to accept it. There is, I think, an argument to be made for “pocketbook and wallet protest”. Accordingly, because consumers are going to buy things, I think it far better that they purchase from companies that give to worthwhile causes. Although I am also not a fan of Wal-Mart and refuse to shop there, in 2007 they reportedly gave $296.2 million to charity. Similarly, Target claims to give 5% of its income, which amounts to over $3 million each week, to communities. Retrieved June 26, 2009 from http://www.forbes.com/feeds/afx/2008/02/25/afx4693102.html and http://sites.target.com/site/en/company/page.jsp?ref=nav_footer_community&contentId=WCMP04-031700.
I disagree with Klein regarding the purchasing and wearing of a wristband. I have a “Never Surrender” bracelet from Working Assets. This campaign was started to resist the Bush administration's radical agenda of corporate greed and environmental destruction. Over 70,000 Americans have joined in wearing the Never Surrender bracelet, signifying their commitment to protecting our environment, to promoting human rights, and to acting with compassion and responsibility at home and abroad. Even though I do not regularly wear my bracelet, it does signify to me that I am part of a larger group fighting for ideals we believe in. Similarly, bracelets or other paraphernalia are important and help foster a sense of solidarity in a group, an important aspect of any movement. Just recently, we saw the Iranian soccer team wearing symbolic green bands to show solidarity with their fellow citizens as they continue their protest for democracy. Also, wearing a bracelet signals awareness, which is another important aspect of all movements. So while wearing something is certainly not as powerful as say marching in the street, I believe it serves a very important purpose and should not be roundly discredited. Retrieved June 26, 2009 from http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4240819 and http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/06/17/iran.football.team/.
From firsthand experience, I also tend to disagree both with Klein in her belief that concerts are not effective in raising awareness, and with another activist who stated: “[n]obody ever changes anything from attending a concert.” A couple of years ago, I volunteered with Rainforest Action Network (RAN) and agreed to man a table at a Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young concert. RAN has thousands of volunteers and believes that a sustainable world can be created in our lifetime, and that aggressive action must be taken immediately to leave a safe and secure world for our children. Far from being “a waste of time”, we informed many concertgoers about injustices taking place, and signed up numerous new potential activists. Again, this may not have been as effective as a grassroots demonstration, but it worked to raise awareness. (Plus, it was a great concert - especially Neil Young’s encore of “Rockin’ In The Free World”, which he didn’t stop playing until he broke all the strings on his guitar.) Delaney, B. “The Bono-ization of Activism; retrieved June 26, 2009 from http://ran.org/about_ran/.
Furthermore, if a movement is striving to reach today’s generation of youth, it must communicate in ways that reach those potential activists; music is one of those ways. In fact, the use of music has often been used in traditional “grassroots” movements to evoke emotion and as a channel of communication among supporters. One such example is Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young’s song “Ohio” that commemorates the spirit of the four lost souls killed unnecessarily in the anti-Vietnam movement at the hands of the government. Eyerman, R. & Jamison, A. (2009) Movements and Cultural Change, The Social Movements Reader, (p. 368) West Sussex, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Regardless of your opinion of Bono the activist, one thing should be clear: Bono the musician has provided what I would argue are timeless and universal words for any movement:
How long… How long must we sing this song?
Sunday Bloody Sunday, U2
These words ring true not only about the oppression in Ireland that they were written about, but also apply equally well to the human rights that the Iranians are marching for today, to the rights of homosexuals to get married in this country, and to the right of every citizen in the world to breathe fresh air and drink clean water.
This post will examine social movements in the context of the tactics they employ.Specifically, I will look at 1) whether any of the “radical” tactics and practices used by movements are acceptable; 2) under what circumstances “radical” protest might be a valid option; and 3) what the political or social circumstances are that make it viable for a movement to engage in “in your face” actions.
One very successful example of “radical” tactics was employed by “movement activists” at the anti-World Trade Organization (WTO) protests in Seattle in 1999.There, tens of thousands of people from across the U.S. shut down the WTO with mass nonviolent direct action and sustained street resistance all week in the face of martial law, police and national guard violence, arrests, tear gas, pepper spray, and rubber bullets. Some of the “radical” tactics used by activists included blocking streets, vandalizing property, and forced mass arrests. Finnegan, W. (2003) Affinity Groups Against Corporate Globalization, The Social Movements Reader, (p. 215) West Sussex, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.; Solnit, D. Seattle WTO Shutdown 9 Year Anniversary: 5 Lessons for Today, published: November 30, 2008, retrieved June 23, 2009 from http://www.commondreams.org/view/2008/11/30-6; Cabrera, L. US: Seattle WTO Protests Mark New Activist Age, published: November 25th, 2000, retrieved from http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=314.
A big part of the success of this particular protest was that it was largely coordinated online.The Internet brings about a sense of camaraderie which is important to the movement activists, many of whom had spent the last several years feeling isolated. Carl Pope, Executive Director of the Sierra Club, remarked that “Seattle was the first time where you saw multigeneration, multiclass and multi-issue in the streets together." This feeling of solidarity grew online long after the debris from vandalized Starbucks, Nike, and Gap stores had been cleaned up. After the protest, movement activists were sharing digital photos of police brutality, reading articles on media brainwashing, and posting tips on how to defend against pepper spray.Not only did these activists succeed in effectively shouting down and embarrassing the gathered WTO representatives and otherwise disrupting their meeting, they also had a direct impact in helping foster a rebellion of sorts by Third World delegates at the meeting who refused to enter into agreements authored by rich countries and which were adverse to their own interests.Perhaps most importantly, the Seattle activists inspired hundreds of millions around the globe to fight back against the evils of corporate globalization.Finnegan, W. (p. 211, 215); Kirn, W. The new radicals, April 17, 2000, retrieved June 23, 2009 from http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/time/2000/04/17/radicals.html; Parrish, G. Is This What Failure Looks Like?, published: November 24, 2004, retrieved June 23, 2009 from http://www.seattleweekly.com/2004-11-24/news/is-this-what-failure-looks-like/.
Some of the training in preparation for the anti-WTO protest was provided by The Ruckus Society, an organization that has been described as specializing in “nonviolent guerrilla action”.The training they provided consisted of not only traditional forms of civil disobedience, but also more “radical” tactics such as rappelling from buildings in order to hang banners, how to form human blockades, and how to “lock down” in groups by linking arms together in specially constructed plastic tubes.Certain groups such as The Ruckus Society and others who advocate the use of “radical” and aggressive tactics have been labeled anarchist extremists by the U.S. government.A recent report from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security lists the following movements as Leftwing Extremists:the Animal Liberation Front, the Earth Liberation Front, Earth First!, and The Ruckus Society.It is interesting to note that the “face” that The Ruckus Society presents to the public seems far from that of an anarchist extremist organization:
We are living in a time of extreme challenges: stopping the war in Iraq, thwarting climate change catastrophes, reclaiming the commons from corporations, conquering our addiction to oil, and protecting human rights. In order to effectively meet these challenges, now, more than ever, environmental and social justice organizers must develop winning strategies that are creative, nonviolent, and take their lead from impacted communities. By building on the traditions of leaders like Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr., we, at The Ruckus Society, provide our partner organizations and activists with the tools, training, and support necessary to tackle these problems and achieve their goals.
So, are the “radical” tactics employed by The Ruckus Society and others ever acceptable?This, I believe, is a very difficult question to answer definitively.Certainly, in a broad sense, techniques of civil disobedience like those advocated by Martin Luther King, Jr. are acceptable, whereas Malcolm X’s cry of “by any means necessary” can, and often does, lead to unacceptable conduct.It is in between these two boundaries that things can get fuzzy.
One way to judge whether tactics are acceptable is whether they are legal.However, this presents problems.Activists who participate in civil disobedience, regularly, and often intentionally, get arrested.But if their actions are in fact “civil” (meaning adequate in courtesy and politeness, or mannerly), the risk of injury to people or property should be very low.So even though their actions may technically be illegal, I believe, nonetheless, that it is an acceptable form of protest.Merriam-Webster OnLine, retrieved on June 24, 2009 from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/civil.
However, when so called “civil disobedience” or “nonviolent” action results in, or has a very high likelihood of resulting in, personal injury or property damage, then such action is not acceptable.We like to think of ourselves as living in a democratic and “civilized” society.As such, the rule of law must be respected, or else the possibility of societal chaos and anarchy greatly increases, and may in fact become inevitable.We have laws that are meant to protect us from personal injury and damage to our property.Accordingly, “radical” tactics that do, or have a propensity to, break such laws, are not acceptable.This is especially true where, in a society such as ours, there are other genuine forms of “civil” protest available to activists, ones that will in all likelihood not injure the activists, police, or nonparticipating citizens, and which will not cause property damage.
I think my hypothesis is supported both by common sense, and the public’s perception and reaction to “radical” tactics.Although the anti-WTO protest was called a positive “critical event” and activists succeeded in their goal of effectively shutting the meeting down, at what cost did they do so?Setting aside the costs to clean up and repair the property damage caused by vandalism, the “radical” tactics used cost the activists in the public’s eye.For instance, the confrontations with the police discouraged and angered middle-class, family-oriented activists who’s participation in protests lends credence to the cause in the public's eye.Furthermore, the vandalism committed by anarchists became validation in the American public's mind for aggressive law-enforcement actions that lead to further limit the public's sympathy for future protests. Parrish, G., retrieved June 23, 2009 from http://www.seattleweekly.com/2004-11-24/news/is-this-what-failure-looks-like/.To be more effective, movements should seek to garner the public’s support, not alienate them.
There are certainly other “radical” tactics and practices, such as the Clothesline Project, sidewalk picketing by the pro-life movement, and “outing”.The Clothesline Project is a program that addresses the issue of violence against women by allowing women affected by violence to express their emotions by decorating a shirt which is then hung on a clothesline to be viewed by others as testimony to the problem of violence against women.An issue arose regarding the Project in 2007 at the University of Maryland-College Park when the school banned from its campus any shirt that included the full name of an alleged assailant out of fear of reprisal lawsuits.Retrieved June 23, 2009 from http://www.clotheslineproject.org/; Beachum, L. Students Against Violence Take a Stand, Refuse to Be Silenced, National Organization for Women, October 25, 2007 (p. 1).
While I sympathize greatly with women who have suffered from violence, and believe that criminals who perpetrate such crimes should receive the toughest sentence allowable, I believe that publicly displaying the full name of an alleged assailant is not an acceptable tactic.A big part of our criminal justice system is based on the principle of “innocent until proven guilty”.I believe that when we say or directly imply that a person is guilty of a crime before he is convicted, we find ourselves on a slippery slope that could lead to the erosion of this basic right.However, if the alleged assailant is indicted (which necessitates at least a minimum of evidence of guilt), and certainly if he is convicted, then I find this tactic acceptable.
Certainly, as noted above, these types of questions are difficult to answer definitively.As an example of such complexity, I would offer a comparison of this issue to that of pro-life activists who carry signs stating that Dr. John Doe is a “murderer”.Clearly, Dr. Doe is not a murderer in the legal sense in that he has not been convicted of the crime of murder.Nonetheless, these protestors are legally permitted to state their “opinion” that he is a murderer, but which opinion, like calling someone a rapist, has a negative connotation and stigma attached to it.As such, I find this type of action unacceptable as well.However, the complexity of determining whether these different, yet similar, tactics are acceptable, is evident.
Another tactic employed by the pro-life movement is their use of sidewalk picketing or, as they call it, “Sidewalk Counseling”.This consists of standing on the sidewalk outside an abortion clinic and counseling women and couples on their way inside.While I personally do not agree with this type of tactic, and actually get annoyed when someone invades my personal space and disrupts me with something I am not interested in, this is an acceptable tactic.However, several years ago, after two workers at abortion clinics in Massachusetts were murdered, a debate ensued among religious leaders over whether pro-life activists should pull back from sidewalk protests and turn instead to prayer.Niebuhr, G. Anti-Abortion Tactics Debated By Nation's Christian Leaders, The New York Times, published: January 9, 1995, retrieved on June 24, 2009 from http://www.nytimes.com/1995/01/09/us/anti-abortion-tactics-debated-by-nation-s-christian-leaders.html?scp=3&sq=social%20movement%20tactics&st=cse&pagewanted=1.Unfortunately, due to the existence of the Sidewalk Counseling website, the debate appears to have been short-lived.Although sidewalk counseling may be acceptable, I find their argument for this tactic disingenuous, in that they claim they “care about the women being exploited by the abortion industry”.Retrieved on June 23, 2009 from http://prolifeaction.org/sidewalk/.Setting aside the fact that I am pro-choice, I cannot objectively see any such “exploitation” and, therefore, find their use of such tactic suspect.
The last “radical” tactic to be discussed is “outing”, which is the public disclosure of the covert homosexuality of a prominent person by homosexual activists.Merriam-Webster OnLine, retrieved on June 24, 2009 from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/outing.Although not illegal, I find this tactic highly offensive and insensitive and, as a result, unacceptable.Citizens in this country are afforded the right to privacy, especially in the highly personal area of sexual preference.“Outing” someone results in a violation and invasion of that privacy.Again, I see this issue as another slippery slope in that if we condone this tactic, we run the risk of sliding down the slope toward the erosion of our rights.Furthermore, I question the success of such a strategy.Arguably, “outing” a prominent person may result in some short term gains.However, the damage done by the intrusive nature of the tactic, and the likely reluctance of the “outed” person to get involved in the movement, outweighs any benefits.People should be free to state their sexual preference or not.They should not be forced or subjected to defend or explain their choice merely because a movement wishes to advance its agenda.It would seem that the more practical tactic would be to approach the individual and ask if they would lend their name and voice to the movement.And if the answer is “no”, accept it and honor that person’s right to privacy.
This is not to say that “radical” tactics are never warranted; they are, in limited circumstances.And a great example of when such tactics are warranted is playing out right now, before our eyes, in the so called “democratic” election in Iran.The current political and social circumstances in Iran are such that radical protest is not only warranted, but necessary.The Iranian citizens have been oppressed for years, especially Iranian women, who are treated like second class citizens.People are denied basic civil rights that we take for granted:the right to personal liberty, the right to assemble and protest, freedom of the press, and freedom of speech.The government affords them no avenue to protest this and other unjust treatment.When people became dissatisfied and disillusioned with their government, because of its support for a clearly fraudulent election, they sought to protest.However, the government is responding by breaking into homes, arresting people for no cause, and even murdering activists.
It is this kind of situation, in an undemocratic society in which government continually and systematically represses its own people, and where citizens are afforded no other choice because it is “illegal” to demonstrate peaceably, that radical protest is warranted.Anything goes, or as Malcolm X stated, “by any means necessary”.In fact, I would argue that what the citizens of Iran are doing is not “radical”, but a normal, natural, and rational reaction as a result of suffering for years under a brutal regime.And I support them.
Today’s posting will discuss the emotions elicited by the Global Warming movement.Specifically, what primary emotions are encouraged in its members, how these emotions relate to the tactics being deployed, and whether the “face” the movement puts forth to the public differs from that presented to members or potential recruits.
Certainly, all social movements involve emotions, and the Global Warming movement is no exception.In fact, there would likely be no social movements at all if folks did not have emotional responses to developments that affect them.Movement activists are continually attempting to generate emotions that are good for the movement and prevent emotions that are nonproductive.Such emotions include anger, outrage or indignation, fear or dread, excitement, love, joy, guilt, hope for the future, solidarity or loyalty, trust, commitment to the cause, mitigation of fear, depression, hopelessness, and boredom.Jasper, J. (2003) The Emotions of Protest, The Social Movements Reader, (p. 153, 158-159) West Sussex, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Depending on the language used to describe the opposition, “inherently malevolent” versus “well-meaning but ignorant”, an organizer can stir up different emotions. Permanent feelings or emotions, such as a sense of connection with a cause and loyalty to its members, can and are utilized effectively by many movements.
Certainly, political activity and related movements are constantly invoking positive or negative emotions to describe groups, policies, and activities, in an effort to help accomplish their objectives. Jasper (p. 155-156).
As I noted in an earlier post, much of the success of the Global Warming movement is in large part due to its emotional message, which has a direct impact on people’s everyday lives.Much of the movement has been described as a way to protect our land for generations to come – a forceful emotional plea that causes people to think about the futures of their children and grandchildren.In addition, a recent impact on the movement has been the acknowledgement of religious groups and leaders of the need to stop global warming to protect “God’s Green Earth.”Pepper, A., God's green Earth: Faith-based interest in environment spreads, The Orange County Register, Published: October 11, 2006.Retrieved June 17, 2009 from http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/homepage/abox/article_1308603.php#.This has certainly had the effect of organizing many more people around the movement who may not have done so without that cultural and emotional stimulus.
The primary emotions that the Global Warming movement appears to encourage in its members are hope for the future (responsibility to preserve the Earth for future generations), outrage, fear (coupled with a sense of urgency), love (for family members and future generations), and faith-based trust.The Global Warming movement’s success is based on changing our behaviors, lifestyle, and emotions.Every day it makes an emotional appeal to work comprehensively to save our planet for future generations.Here is a good example of an attempt to invoke fear, urgency, and solidarity: “It’s not just an environmental issue. It affects our public health and national security. It’s an urgent matter of survival for everyone on the planet — the most urgent threat facing humanity today. It’s going to take action from you and all of us working together.” Retrieved June 17, 2009 from http://www.stopglobalwarming.org/sgw_learnmore.asp.
Another good example is Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth”, which attempted to invoke:1) love:“If you love your planet…If you love your children…You have to see this film”; 2) fear: “By far, the most terrifying film you will ever see”; and 3) solidarity: “We have to act together to solve this global crisis.” Retrieved on June 19, 2009 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XMn_Ry3z6M.By describing the crisis as one that is global in nature and that requires all of us acting together to solve, it helps dissipate possible feelings of hopelessness, and encourages a “we can do attitude” of being able to solve the problem if we all stick together.Furthermore, this type of message helps remind members of their commitment, elicit strong emotions, and strengthen a sense of solidarity with the group, what Jasper calls “we-ness’.Jasper (p. 161).
Two other good examples are found in thought-provoking commercials from Repower America, which are narrated by a kindly and pleasant older gentleman.The first one attempts to elicit outrage, faith, and hope for the future.The narrator states: “Well if the Big Oil boys want to keep on polluting and keep raising gas prices maybe we’re due for a new direction.” He goes on, “[r]epowering America with truly clean energy won’t just save God’s Green Earth, it will help get our economy back on its feet, and more people back to work.” Retrieved on June 19, 2009 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9O-2skPOt2E&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.repoweramerica.org%2F&feature=player_embedded.The second one attempts to evoke outrage, faith, and love of family: “Forty years now we’ve been talking about how we’ve got to stop being held hostage by foreign oil… and burning it in ways that kill God’s Green Earth….Now we can either go down the same old dead end path, or finally do right by our kids.So what are we waiting for?”
In these examples, the targeted emotions are very similar to the strategy being used by the Global Warming movement, namely, the use of media as a tool to arouse emotions such as outrage, fear, love, solidarity, and faith.Also, these messages, like the movement itself, are a non-violent form of outreach aimed at all walks of life.These messages are intended to resonate with people, and although they may initially impart feelings of fear and possible hopelessness, the take-away message is one of hope for the future through solidarity.This is directly in line with strategies used by many organizations within the Global Warming movement, for example:
[t]here is no doubt we can solve this problem. In fact, we have a moral obligation to do so. Small changes to your daily routine can add up to big differences in helping to stop global warming. The time to come together to solve this problem is now – TAKE ACTION.
For the most part, the “face” the Global Warming movement puts forth to the public is very similar to that presented to members or potential recruits.For example, one group elicits the emotion of solidarity as an indirect appeal for new members by detailing the extensive involvement of the public already.“Across the country people are showing their support for repowering America with clean electricity.They’ve written more than ten thousand letters to the editor, 2.9 million emails to their friends and shared their excitement with their neighbors.”Retrieved on June 19, 2009 from http://www.repoweramerica.org/plan/.In fact, it is this emotion, as well as the others described above, that organizers appeal to, stimulate, influence, and support in order to recruit and retain members.Jasper (p. 158).
In this posting, I will discuss what an ideal figurehead or icon might look like in an Environmental activism movement.Thereafter, I will discuss some of the benefits and potential pitfalls of having such an icon.Finally, I will discuss some of the ways the Civil Rights movement might have developed differently if Claudette Colvin had been chosen to spearhead the Montgomery Bus Boycott instead of Rosa Parks.
The Environmental activism movement I have chosen to create an icon for is, not surprisingly, Global Warming.The dictionary defines an icon as “an object of uncritical devotion: idol”.Merriam-Webster’s Online Dictionary retrieved June 17, 2009 from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/icon.Certainly, there are many icons already established in current Environmental movements:Al Gore for Global Warming, Leonardo DiCaprio for his Foundation and website devoted to raising awareness of environmental issues, and Robert Redford for, among his many environmental crusades, fighting on behalf of the wilderness since the early 1970s.Also on the list are punk rockers Green Day, who teamed up with the National Resources Defense Council for the Move America Beyond Oil campaign.Retreived June 17, 2009 from http://www.algore.com/, http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1663317_1663319_1669890,00.html, http://www.leonardodicaprio.org/aboutus/, and http://www.nrdc.org/media/pressreleases/061116a.asp.
Although Al Gore has certainly been a very successful icon for the Global Warming movement, if I were to construct the ideal figurehead moving forward, she would be very different than him in many respects.First, as I just noted, it would be a woman.Women have a different way of expressing themselves than men, and are more successful than men when it comes to expressing ideals that involve emotional concepts.The Global Warming movement’s success is based on changing our behaviors, lifestyle, and emotions.Everyday it makes an emotional appeal to work comprehensively to save our planet for future generations: “It’s not just an environmental issue.It affects our public health and national security.It’s an urgent matter of survival for everyone on the planet — the most urgent threat facing humanity today.It’s going to take action from you and all of us working together.”Retrieved June 17, 2009 from http://www.stopglobalwarming.org/sgw_learnmore.asp.
As framed above, the movement seeks to be all inclusive and includes “everyone”.Accordingly, my ideal “everywoman” would be a mix of all races.But since that is not possible, she would be a minority, possibly African American, Latina, Asian American, or, most likely, Native American.This is especially important because in the near future, whites will no longer be in the majority.Regardless, I think an ethnic minority icon would reach all races, including her own.This is vital because the movement needs the cooperation of all races to fully succeed.A Native American would be the appropriate choice because that group was arguably the first environmentalists: “Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children.We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children.”Native American Proverb retrieved June 17, 2009 from http://www.legendsofamerica.com/NA-Proverbs.html.
Next, my icon would be middle-aged: someone that could be seen as a mother, aunt, sister, or daughter.She would be young and spirited enough to appeal to the younger activists, but also mature and wise so that she would connect with older folks.She would be somewhat religious, but in her own personal way, tolerant of all religions and certainly not a religious zealot.This way, she could connect to diverse religious groups, groups that have thankfully become more engaged in the movement, but would also be tolerant of different religions so as not to offend or alienate anyone.
Furthermore, my icon would be apolitical.Although Al Gore has done a fine job advancing the Global Warming movement, his political background has prevented his message from reaching everyone.Accordingly, someone without direct past involvement in politics and not aligned with a particular political party would have a better chance of connecting with folks of all political persuasions.At the very least, no one could accuse her of being politically motivated.(Well, they could, and probably would, but such an accusation would ultimately fail.)
Finally, my icon is also a scientist - a scientist that is not only an expert at climate change, but also a person who can explain Global Warming in plain English.This would accomplish several things.First, it would allow her to testify as an expert before Congress and other necessary governmental bodies about the dangers of climate change and the ways in which we must act to make significant changes.Also, as a scientist, she could refute the untenable position of other scientists, politicians, and critics who stubbornly refuse to accept the fact that climate change is real, by utilizing facts based on scientific research and empirical data.(Al Gore was criticized for being misleading in “An Inconvenient Truth” by using images of hurricanes without explaining that their relationship to Global Warming was conjectural.Weart, S. (2008) The Discovery of Global Warming, Cambridge, MA: HarvardUniversity Press. Retrieved June 16, 2009, from http://www.aip.org/history/climate/public2.htm.)Finally, as a plain speaking citizen, she could explain the dangers of climate change to regular folks, and convince them of the need to alter their lifestyles.She would “lead by example”, adopting and showcasing changes to her own lifestyle to combat climate change, thereby encouraging others to do likewise.
As I think about my ideal icon for the Global Warming movement, it occurs to me that in many respects, she already existed in Rachel Carson.In 1962, Rachel Carson’s book “Silent Spring” alerted the world to the terrible impacts that pollution was having on our planet.In her book, she explains in plain English what is meant by the “balance of nature” and how careful we must be not to disturb this balance.Arguably, she started the modern environmental movement and became an icon in the process.Rachel Carson: scientist, sentimentalist, icon, CBC Digital Archives, retrieved June 17, 2009 from http://archives.cbc.ca/environment/pollution/clips/15199/.
Rachel Carson was a writer, scientist, and ecologist.She wrote pamphlets on conservation and natural resources and edited scientific articles.Disturbed by the use of synthetic chemical pesticides, Carson warned the public about the long term effects of misusing pesticides.She challenged the practices of agricultural scientists and the government, and advocated for a change in the way we viewed the natural world.Although she was attacked by the chemical industry and some in government, she courageously spoke out to remind us that we are all a vulnerable part of the natural world subject to the same damage as the rest of the ecosystem.Testifying before Congress in 1963, Carson called for new policies to protect human health and the environment.Lear, L., The Life and Legacy of Rachel Carson, Rachel Carson's Biography, retrieved June 17, 2009 from http://www.rachelcarson.org/Biography.aspx.
Accordingly, what the Global Warming movement (and the world) needs now is another Rachel Carson.
As I explained above, there are many benefits to having my ideal Global Warming movement icon be a middle-aged, minority female scientist, who is somewhat religious, yet apolitical.As a woman, I believe she would reach more people on an emotional level, which is what the movement strives for.The movement also seeks to connect with all ages, something a mature woman could accomplish.Being a minority, she would connect with other minorities, helping explain why the movement needs people of all races in order to be successful.As one who is not overly religious and tolerant of all religions, her message would resonate with both religious and non-religious folks alike.Because she is apolitical and not tied to any one political group, she should not get embroiled with partisan politics, which has hampered movements in the past.Finally, as a plain speaking scientist, she has the necessary credentials and is well-equipped to hold her own and advance the movement’s agenda, while scientifically and factually rebutting others’ opinions when needed.But she also has the personality, empathy, and communicative skills to strike a chord and reach regular citizens, because she is one herself.
This is not to say that there are not any potential pitfalls to my ideal icon; unfortunately, there are.As a woman, she might be subjected to sexism, particularly within the political world which is still somewhat dominated by “The Old Boys’ Club”.Being a minority, she would most likely be subjected to racism, as, unfortunately, some people do not respond well to people that are “different” than them.But for a movement such as Global Warming, I can see my icon taking these potential pitfalls, and using them to her advantage, as she advocates her message that in order to save all our future generations from the devastating effects of climate change, it will take all of us, whether we are men, women, children, minorities, religious, or otherwise.And that she embodies them all; she is “everyperson”.
Regarding the Montgomery Bus Boycott, it is hard to say how the Civil Rights movement might have developed differently if Claudette Colvin had been chosen to spearhead the boycott instead of Rosa Parks, but one can speculate.I like to think that regardless of who was chosen, the end result would have been the same.Certainly, the time was more than overdue to end this appalling discrimination.While Rosa Parks has been described as “a perfect and righteous symbol for igniting not just a year-long boycott but an entire movement”, Claudette Colvin “was a highly emotional 15-year-old 11th–grader about whom there were unsavory stories”.Hendrickson, P., The Ladies Before Rosa: Let Us Now Praise Unfamous Women, Rhetoric & Public Affairs, (2005) Vol. 8, No. 2, (p. 287).
Accordingly, had Colvin been chosen instead of Parks, there would certainly have been an effort by the opposition to discredit her unfairly based on her position in society.In addition, because of her young age, she would likely have been characterized as merely a pawn of the movement, and not a leader.Furthermore, we can imagine that someone of such a young age and lack of life experience might not be able to “stomach” the offending critics and stand up for her rights in the face of criticism and violence.Most likely, these would have only been temporary setbacks, but based on the insurmountable odds the Civil Rights leaders faced, they could ill afford to choose anyone but the most “perfect and righteous symbol” on their road to freedom.
Originally from NY, Marty is an attorney who practiced law in NYC for several years and is thrilled to have left the urban jungle for the Wild West! After seeing the light, Marty changed his career to focus primarily on land conservation and environmental issues. Through this blog, he hopes to raise awareness of the pressing issue of climate change, and to stimulate creative discussions about ways to ameliorate this problem.
