NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #19/NN_1992_19.iso/spool/misc/activism/progress/6193

Text File | 1992-08-31 | 7.3 KB | 151 lines

Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive
Path: sparky!uunet!usc!wupost!mont!pencil.cs.missouri.edu!rich
From: [e-mail] (Rich Winkel)
Subject: What went unsaid at UNCED?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Followup-To: alt.activism.d
Originator: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail]
Nntp-Posting-Host: pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Organization: PACH
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 08:23:06 GMT
Approved: [e-mail]
Lines: 136

/** gen.newsletter: 136.1 **/
** Written  5:37 pm  Aug 27, 1992 by ecologycntr in cdp:gen.newsletter **
What went unsaid at UNCED?

by George Marshall

Adam Smith once said that  whenever rival  businessmen came
together you knew that they were up to no good. In his concept of
the "invisible hand" of the market, collusion was corruption.
There are similar problems whenever environmentalists and
governments come together. Although governments still have no real
intention of tackling the causes of environmental problems, there
is a substantial body of environmental groups who insist that
progress, however inadequate or compromised, can only be made
through cooperation.

The root of the problem is that many environment groups have come
to believe that consultation with governments and industry is an
achievement in its own right rather than a means to an end.  Many
groups regard their involvement in UNCED as a proof that their
hard work to appear erudite and responsible has been worthwhile.

There is a belief, unique to academics and activist groups, that
information and logical argument alone have the power to change
the world. All that is needed is to create credibility for the
source. To this end, environment organizations concentrated,
throughout the UNCED process, on the creation of discussion forums
where they could present, share, and promote their arguments.

It has not worked. Environmental destruction is a product of
deeply entrenched political and economic interests that will not
be changed through information or lobbying alone. Surely the
lesson of the 1980s is that real change in economic structures can
only come through an upsurge of protest and resistance. What is
needed now is the mobilization of ever larger and more vocal
social movements rather than more conversation for conservation.
, the movements are in the South. None of them are building or
even supporting true people's movements in the North. They have a
membership, usually drawn from liberal professionals, which they
encourage to give money, buy T-shirts, and send in lobby cards ...
but which they actively discourage from taking their own
initiative and expressing their rage, horror, or fear over what we
are doing to ourselves.

The vast majority of the Northern population remains untouched and
unmoved by the reality of the environment crisis. There has been
no real attempt to reach or motivate people in the industrial
workplace, and even the popular press is commonly regarded with
contempt. As a result, even if the bulk of the population hears
that things are going badly wrong, it does not yet feel it, nor is
it given any encouragement to do anything to change it.

There was some degree of outreach surrounding UNCED, for which we
can be grateful. There were parties and carnivals throughout
Europe to make people aware that something happened at Rio, and a
plethora of TV documentaries. And there was the "Tree of Life" in
the Global NGO Forum's Flamengo Park, which bore thousands of
leaf-shaped "pledges."

All these activities were a very strange and confused way to
respond to the accelerating collapse of the natural world on which
we depend. There is a huge and growing hole in the ozone layer, a
world climate that is changing permanently, the fastest mass
extinction ever, and the imminent collapse of many of our
agricultural resources. And there, in the middle of the earnest
environmental debate, was our monument to this dying planet, our
expression of outrage. A paper and metal tree.

Pledge-making, like petitions and green consumerism, is a largely
passive and unemotional activity. People are urged to pledge that
they will consume less and more wisely, and that they will recycle
more, and that they will not buy tropical hardwoods.

Of course it is worthwhile to make people think about what they
consume and make changes within their lives. However, one
certainly wonders whether such pledges, even if made by millions
of people, really re_ect the scale or urgency of the problem. One
also wonders whether anyone will pay any attention.

The tropical timber industry, for example, is a mafia, with a
corresponding level of illegal practices, violence and corruption.
Jose Lutzenberger described the Brazilian mahogany industry as
"out of control." Last year the Indonesian minister of forests
admitted that 90 per cent of operations were breaking forestry
law. In Papua New Guinea, a government Commission of Inquiry found
corruption at all levels of the industry and described logging
companies as "roaming the countryside with the self assurance of
robber barons." Shortly after writing this comment the
commissioner was stabbed almost to death with screwdrivers by
assassins hired by the timber industry.

The criminal vested interests behind the tropical timber industry
can only be forced out by being challenged and threatened. Time
and again, throughout history, such changes have only come through
an upsurge of protest and resistance, and the building and
mobilization of ever larger and more vocal social movements.

Of course there is a need for the middle ground so that more
people become involved. The problem in the North is that this is
too often the only approach. Thankfully, however, there are signs
of change.

Throughout Europe and the USA, local communities are resisting the
destruction of their local environment. There are now frequent
road blockades across Europe in protest against the car culture
and global warming. In Goeteborg in Sweden there were monthly road
blockades for five months. In the week beginning May 15, there
were anti-car protests and road blockades in 150 cities across
Europe.

The movement is growing particularly fast in Britain. During the
G-7 heads of state meeting in London last year there were only 30
people protesting over the environment. As in Rio, the mainstream
groups preferred to exchange information in an alternative summit.
Yet within six months this fledgling movement had grown to a point
where 400 people closed down a part of Liverpool docks for two
days to stop the movement of rainforest timber. On May 11, 300
demonstrators closed down Britain's second largest tropical timber
wholesaler for a day.

These protests can only grow with each successive failure of
governments and industry to stop the growing environmental crisis.
In its failure, UNCED may have given us something to celebrate; a
final confirmation that governments will do nothing and that we
have to demand control over our own future.

George Marshall represented London Rainforest Action Group (LRAG)
at the Earth Summit.  LRAG, 18 Cazenove Rd, London N16, UK.

Reprinted from Peace News July 1992.  Originally published with
the title "Celebrating UNCED's Failure" Please credit if
reprinting.  Peace News and War Resisters' International, 55 Dawes
Street, London SE17 1EL (tel [phone]; fax [phone]; email
gn:peacenews or gn:warresisters)
** End of text from cdp:gen.newsletter **