Earth Liberation Front--- Crazy, Misguided, Desperate or Insane???

[Rakhmetov]

Earth Liberation Front--- Crazy, Misguided, Desperate or Insane???
Or all 4 at once??? I understand that the fight for a clean environment is part of the class struggle but ...

The earth liberation front, while their intentions are pure, are their tactics practical in the face of state and corporate violence????

http://www.earthliberationfront.org/index.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Liberation_Front

[IndependentCitizen]

Protecting Earth whilst burning down buildings which create vast amounts of carbon dioxide.

[IndependentCitizen]

Actually, saying that. Just read loads on them, they have a legitimate cause, and are brave enough to carry out those acts. I do like how they target property rather than life, and cause economic disruption....

[Desperado]

Can't see anything much wrong.

Of course, change will come through the building of socialism (and all movements fighting the evils of capitalism - war, discrimination etc. need realise the root), and like this it will depend on the actions of mass workers movements building autonomous communities and taking control of the means of production, not simply isolated acts by radical individuals. Socialism (and enviromentalism) isn't just a riot. But rioting is certainly a part of the process.

[Lenina Rosenweg]

What is the relationship, if any between the ELF and the IWW?

[Terminator X]

According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Liberation_Front):


The United States Department of Homeland Security (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Department_of_Homeland_Security) confirmed that the Animal Liberation Front and Earth Liberation Front are the most serious threats to the nation.[11] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Liberation_Front#cite_note-cnn1-10)

LMFAO. I guess they're doing something right then....:laugh:

But seriously, I support the Elves - while they'll never lead any workers revolutions, they have been more of a pain in the ass to capitalists than most leftist groups combined.

[Ele'ill]

ELF is a banner not a group and it's refreshing to see so many people in the beginning of a thread here support such an idea. I would like to see those who approve also support and identify with worker struggles- directly tying struggles together because they certainly are related. I think many do but I don't know that it has been made clear.

[bailey_187]

reactionary hippies

[Property Is Robbery]

Are those the only options? What's your problem with them?

[Tablo]

I actually like ELF. I do think workers struggles and the class war take more immediate priority over environmentalism, but the environment is important. They have good goals, a strategy that makes sense, and they are anti-capitalist. I wish them the best.

I also agree with Mariel that the tying together of the struggles makes sense.

[Ele'ill]

reactionary hippies

Historian tourists.

[Magón]

Depending on your views of Radical Environmentalism, then I guess words like: Crazy, Misguided, Desperate, and Insane, etc., would work for you. But what makes it any different from those who see them as such, but see Radical Leftism as the complete polar opposite of those words?

[Tim Finnegan]

They're alright. Their politics are limited and their potential to initiation major social change low, but they keep the bourgeoisie and the state on their toes and they keep direct action in the public eye, neither of which are at all bad things.


Protecting Earth whilst burning down buildings which create vast amounts of carbon dioxide.
Ah, but most of that carbon dioxide released in the burning of a building will have been have been part of the carbon cycle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_cycle) in recent years- a few decades, at most- and so its release into the atmosphere is not ecologically disruptive. The burning of fossil fuels is problematic because it releases carbon that has been trapped deep underground for tens of millions of years, removed from the cycle, so its reintroduction threatens to overburden the system. Burning down buildings is, unlike burning oil, overwhelmingly carbon-neutral. ;)

[TC]

The Western radical activist left (the socialists and anarchists who concentrate on human liberation in contrast to environmentalism) could accomplish so much more if it had an ounce of the courage and self-sacrificing, risk taking spirit of the ELF. They put their lives and freedom on the line to save trees; very few radical leftists in the west will do that to save people. If ELF tactics of non-violent direct action through sabotage and property destruction (but never human injury) were applied in the anti-war movement, to the supply lines that keep the war machine running, just maybe that might make imperialism just a little more difficult and give at least a tiny bit of relief to those trying to resist it abroad.

Having said that, I am not myself willing to do anything that risks a serious jail sentence for uncertain (and at best marginal) results - so it would be supremely hypocritical to suggest that anyone else do it. But if they had more guts than me (like the ELF does) than I certainly wouldn't criticize them while excusing my own inaction with the pathetic, fatalistic betrayal implied by the accusation of "adventurism" or "elitism."

[Ele'ill]

The Western radical activist left could accomplish so much more if it had an ounce of the courage and self-sacrificing, risk taking spirit of the ELF.

There have been A LOT of high profile ELF/ALF actions in the western hemisphere. Actually none of this makes sense- what are you comparing it to? Just the tactics or to a specific location where stuff has happened?

[Tenka]

reactionary hippies

Something like that. Much of their property destruction has seemed rather pointless... and what's with combating "urban sprawl"? Sub-urban sprawl is the real nuisance, but maybe that's where ELF members live after all.

[Texas Expat]

Idiotic Communist.

[Texas Expat]

In a word, No.

[Os Cangaceiros]

The Western radical activist left could accomplish so much more if it had an ounce of the courage and self-sacrificing, risk taking spirit of the ELF.

Unfortunately much of the "Western radical activist left" is tainted by the same kind of thing that afflicts ELF/ALF: namely, that both scenes draw a lot from "middle class" kids who balk when the possibility that they may spend decades in a federal prison comes up. That's why it was so incredibly easy for the feds to get snitches from within ELF's ranks during the "green scare". I can see how a long prison sentence could rattle people, but the possibility of that should've been taken into account before the act was carried out, and in no way justifies snitching and letting others take the fall for actions that you were equally involved in, IMO.

(The lead prosecutor who led the case that developed from Jacob Ferguson's snitching supposedly said that "my heart's with these people," and the only thing they did wrong in their valiant attempt to save the earth was the fact that they blew stuff up. This to me was incredibly bizarre, because here was a federal prosecutor saying that his heart went out to a pack of arsonists who destroyed a whole lotta property.)

That's not to say that there aren't people in the radical environmental movement who aren't very principled, though, like Walter Bond, who not only didn't snitch on anyone, but issued a statement before the court before being sent to prison in which he not only didn't regret his actions, but encouraged others to follow in his footsteps, lol. Gotta respect that.

The environmental movement has always kind of left me cold. Not that I don't see the benefits of a clean environment. I've lived in a fairly pristine environment for most of my life. I don't know, maybe that's had something to do with it. I don't oppose the tactics of ELF in principle, but I also don't see the value in destroying buildings that are just going to be built back up again unless you want to see yourself as a fearless eco-warrior who's much more concerned about the planet than those sissies in Greenpeace.

[IndependentCitizen]

They're alright. Their politics are limited and their potential to initiation major social change low, but they keep the bourgeoisie and the state on their toes and they keep direct action in the public eye, neither of which are at all bad things.


Ah, but most of that carbon dioxide released in the burning of a building will have been have been part of the carbon cycle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_cycle) in recent years- a few decades, at most- and so its release into the atmosphere is not ecologically disruptive. The burning of fossil fuels is problematic because it releases carbon that has been trapped deep underground for tens of millions of years, removed from the cycle, so its reintroduction threatens to overburden the system. Burning down buildings is, unlike burning oil, overwhelmingly carbon-neutral. ;)
;) haha I was only being sarcastic.

These actions and groups probably don't identify with class struggle, but they're actions which will spark questions on alternatives, and that's when us dirty commies come in with our rational ideas, and the proper solution to the capitalists' mess.

The thing is, actions like this are IMO better than marching, and debating. Actions speak louder than words, and Anarchists, well some, believe propaganda by the deed works. And I kinda have to agree with that idea. Because look how Earth First expanded after taking action.

[TC]

There have been A LOT of high profile ELF/ALF actions in the western hemisphere. Actually none of this makes sense- what are you comparing it to? Just the tactics or to a specific location where stuff has happened?

I was comparing the relatively low risk activities of the radical socialist/anarchist left to the high risk activities of the environmentalist radicals. The ELF/ALF are Western but for the purposes of my previous post I was not classifying them as "radical leftist" since they aren't primarily concerned with human liberation.

[Tim Finnegan]

;) haha I was only being sarcastic.
Yeah, I guessed as much, but that was one of only two things that I retained from three years of Environmental Science classes- the other one was that hand-dryers are, all things considered, more eco-friendly than paper towels- so I thought I'd put it out there while I could. Now that I've got the other one out there too, I can go and lie down and die somewhere, knowing that my work is done. ;)

[t.shonku]

Can't see anything much wrong.

Of course, change will come through the building of socialism (and all movements fighting the evils of capitalism - war, discrimination etc. need realise the root), and like this it will depend on the actions of mass workers movements building autonomous communities and taking control of the means of production, not simply isolated acts by radical individuals. Socialism (and enviromentalism) isn't just a riot. But rioting is certainly a part of the process.


Very well said !


Nice to see like minded peoples like you

[Omi]

Good to see so many people in this thread supporting the ELF/ALF. When I started reading this thread I thought it was going to be a massive shitfest.

I support the ELF/ALF. I couldn't care less for the property of massive industrial corporations and the sabotage of these destructive systems is justified. And they scare the crap out of state forces which is great.

Another thing: the people I have met who are involved in radical environmentalism/animal liberation, are also supporters of class war. The fact that someone puts his energy and time into enviromental struggles does not mean he won't support class struggle and human liberation. The two are not mutually exclusive and most enviromentalist-radicals understand this.

[black magick hustla]

i largely agree with ES posts, and i want to add that both ELF/ALF and the less "bold" radical left are actually the same in many ways, and both are the product of certain activisty ghettoes and therefore, actions undertaken by ELF7ALF will always be limited at radicalizing those who are already radicalized. i disagree with mariel about how such actionsa re related to workers struggles. they are not, they are mere activism and are made to appeal those who are already activists.

furthermore there is a worrisome idea that because the cops take on an interest on a particular group, it means its a threat. the state takes an interest on pedophiles, rapists, racketeers, and all sorts of other criminals.

[gorillafuck]

What is the relationship, if any between the ELF and the IWW?None. None at all.

Also, they're like all activist insurrectionists. Forever insignificant, and completely apart from class struggle.

[RedSunRising]

furthermore there is a worrisome idea that because the cops take on an interest on a particular group, it means its a threat. the state takes an interest on pedophiles, rapists, racketeers, and all sorts of other criminals.

So are you saying they are just a pack of criminals?

The state also seems to be more sharp when it comes to fighting political crime though.

[Inquisitive Lurker]

I was comparing the relatively low risk activities of the radical socialist/anarchist left to the high risk activities of the environmentalist radicals. The ELF/ALF are Western but for the purposes of my previous post I was not classifying them as "radical leftist" since they aren't primarily concerned with human liberation.

Maybe it's time for more high risk activities? Maybe it's time to move the servers from Germany to the Netherlands where we can speak more openly without fear of being shut down?

Maybe it's time for DIY to drop it's restrictions? Get some serious direct action information and suggestions distributed on this board.

[Inquisitive Lurker]

ELF does effect the class struggle, or rather, it benefits it. The losses are taken by the capitalist corporations, and the gains are given to the workers who now have to build it all over again. More work for the working man. ELF creates jobs!

"The passion for destruction is a creative passion!" - Bakunin.

[Franz Fanonipants]

IL is an idiot.


Anyways, my only problem with ELF is that like a lot of environmentalists they don't often lay the processes of environmental change at the feet of economic processes and systems. Otherwise, direct action is a valid strategy.

[Inquisitive Lurker]

IL is an idiot.

Disprove my logic, Fancypants.

Capitalists invest capital in a housing development.
Raw materials are procured by workers.
Construction work is undertaken by workers.
ELF destroys the housing development.
Capitalists now must invest another batch of capital.
More raw materials are required.
More labor must be done.
The capitalists lose their capital.
The workers get more work.
The working man wins!
ELF doubled the amount of work available!
ELF creates jobs!

Bakunin would be so proud.

[Johnny Kerosene]

Disprove my logic, Fancypants.

Capitalists invest capital in a housing development.
Raw materials are procured by workers.
Construction work is undertaken by workers.
ELF destroys the housing development.
Capitalists now must invest another batch of capital.
More raw materials are required.
More labor must be done.
The capitalists lose their capital.
The workers get more work.
The working man wins!
ELF doubled the amount of work available!
ELF creates jobs!

Bakunin would be so proud.

That actually makes sense. But sometimes when they burn SUVs and shit then someone just has to buy another one and only the car manufacturers win there.

Also, I'd be down for going to prison for the leftist cause, so long as what I was going to prison for would actually accomplish something for the worker's cause.

[Inquisitive Lurker]

That actually makes sense. But sometimes when they burn SUVs and shit then someone just has to buy another one and only the car manufacturers win there.

Wrong, the same sequence applies.

Capitalist automotive companies invest capital in manufacturing SUVs.
Worker, union workers, make the SUVs.
Workers get paid and go home.
SUVs get shipped to dealerships.
ELF torches the SUVs.
Capitalists must invest another batch of capital.
Workers are called back to work and the assembly lines start up.
More SUVs are produced.
More work is done.
More wages are paid.
More positions are created.
Capitalists lose their capital.
ELF creates jobs!


The fact that the cars suck is sort of secondary in my eyes. People are going to drive what people are going to drive.


But in both these scenarios we are forgetting something very important. The Propaganda of the Deed. Send a message. Inspire others.


The Propaganda of the Deed.

[Tim Finnegan]

Disprove my logic, Fancypants.

Capitalists invest capital in a housing development.
Raw materials are procured by workers.
Construction work is undertaken by workers.
ELF destroys the housing development.
Capitalists now must invest another batch of capital.
More raw materials are required.
More labor must be done.
The capitalists lose their capital.
The workers get more work.
The working man wins!
ELF doubled the amount of work available!
ELF creates jobs!

Bakunin would be so proud.
Job-creation isn't an unambiguously good thing in and of itself. If the workers are in effect engaged in non-productive labour, it will only serve to make them economically dependent on the labour of others, and so drive down the overall standard of living. That sort of contrived job creation serves to create a more even burden, but not to alleviate the general burden.

[Franz Fanonipants]

IL - your sophistry doesn't make you look like any less of a fuckwit. by your "logic" the creation of the CCC was the GREATEST ACT OF AMERICAN CAPITALISM.

gtfo or become a real marxist.

[Inquisitive Lurker]

IL - your sophistry doesn't make you look like any less of a fuckwit. by your "logic" the creation of the CCC was the GREATEST ACT OF AMERICAN CAPITALISM.

gtfo or become a real marxist.

Rule 1. When you can't argue intelligently, resort to vulgarity and ad hominem. :lol:

[Johnny Kerosene]

Wrong, the same sequence applies.

Capitalist automotive companies invest capital in manufacturing SUVs.
Worker, union workers, make the SUVs.
Workers get paid and go home.
SUVs get shipped to dealerships.
ELF torches the SUVs.
Capitalists must invest another batch of capital.
Workers are called back to work and the assembly lines start up.
More SUVs are produced.
More work is done.
More wages are paid.
More positions are created.
Capitalists lose their capital.
ELF creates jobs!


The fact that the cars suck is sort of secondary in my eyes. People are going to drive what people are going to drive.


But in both these scenarios we are forgetting something very important. The Propaganda of the Deed. Send a message. Inspire others.


The Propaganda of the Deed.




I guarantee you they would have already had more SUVs made before any were burned, thus they would purchased sooner, otherwise they might sit in the lot for a good while and potentially lose value, so the Dealer makes more profit if the SUVs are burned, and the company that produced the vehicle will experience little change in it's profits, and the worker's at the factory probably won't get paid any more or less because of it.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Disprove my logic, Fancypants.

Capitalists invest capital in a housing development.
Raw materials are procured by workers.
Construction work is undertaken by workers.
ELF destroys the housing development.
Capitalists now must invest another batch of capital.
More raw materials are required.
More labor must be done.
The capitalists lose their capital.
The workers get more work.
The working man wins!
ELF doubled the amount of work available!
ELF creates jobs!

Bakunin would be so proud.

This is one of the most absurd things I've ever read.

[Inquisitive Lurker]

This is one of the most absurd things I've ever read.

The logic flows perfectly. The only losers are the capitalists, the only winners are the workers (who are probably union).

The flip-side of destruction is creation. Bakunin said it best.

[Os Cangaceiros]

OK, number 1 is that the loss of an investment does not subvert the capitalist system at all, in any way, shape or form.

Number 2 is that destruction does not automatically translate into economic growth (i.e. more jobs and money for consumers). I don't think you'll find anyone in mainstream economics who'll agree with that prospect.

And number 3 is that POTD was never successful. The model of "actions inspire consciousness" never led anywhere. The most concerted effort of it was probably the narodnik movement in Russia, featuring a bunch of baffled revolutionaries who couldn't understand why the peasants weren't rising up against their oppressors, despite their best efforts. The case was similar with the Galleanist anarchist faction.

[Tim Finnegan]

The logic flows perfectly.
Then presumably you could resolve the apparent flaw I highlight?

Job-creation isn't an unambiguously good thing in and of itself. If the workers are in effect engaged in non-productive labour, it will only serve to make them economically dependent on the labour of others, and so drive down the overall standard of living. That sort of contrived job creation serves to create a more even burden, but not to alleviate the general burden.

[Inquisitive Lurker]

Then presumably you could resolve the apparent flaw I highlight?

It harms the Capitalists and benefits the Workers. It's progress. Wealth redistribution. That contracting team now gets a double contract. And if the development has to be finished on some sort of timetable, it means overtime. And hopefully they are Union. More money in the hands of the Workers.

Shall I sing "There is Power in a Union" for you?

[Inquisitive Lurker]

I guarantee you they would have already had more SUVs made before any were burned, thus they would purchased sooner, otherwise they might sit in the lot for a good while and potentially lose value, so the Dealer makes more profit if the SUVs are burned, and the company that produced the vehicle will experience little change in it's profits, and the worker's at the factory probably won't get paid any more or less because of it.

Not exactly accurate. First of all the dealer makes no money because they were never his cars in the first place. They are still owned by the automobile manufacturer. Not the dealer's cars. The dealer will now lose the opportunity to make a commission selling the cars, though he will, eventually, get a new shipment.

Second the supply chain is tighter than you think. There aren't thousands of cars just sitting idle waiting for other cars to be sold. In fact if there is a car you want with certain options that the dealer doesn't have and it has to send the order to the factory to make it, you could be waiting months. I've been there. Christ I just wanted a black Toyota Yaris with the Power Package. In the end I'm glad I went with another car. Honda Fit Sport. Much roomier and zippier. Also got the last black one in the country. After I got mine, people had to get on waiting lists, like they've done for the Prius.

If there was a significant coordinated attack and say 10,000 luxury SUVs of the same brand were torched cross-country (talk about The Progaganda of the Deed!) a new order would be placed at the factories. All assembly lines would be opened up. All shifts would be authorized. Supply must meet demand. That means more shifts, more overtime, more money for the Union Workers.

[Summerspeaker]

If ELF tactics of non-violent direct action through sabotage and property destruction (but never human injury) were applied in the anti-war movement, to the supply lines that keep the war machine running, just maybe that might make imperialism just a little more difficult and give at least a tiny bit of relief to those trying to resist it abroad.

Yes, yes, yes - a thousand times over. This is what I want to see from the anti-war movement. Direct Action to Stop the War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_Action_to_Stop_the_War) in San Fransisco stands out as a simultaneously inspiring and disappointing example. Smashing fighter planes would be even better, but trying something like that would involve the threat death as well as prison. The guards came close to shooting some of my comrades who simply shut down a base gate. Incidentally, none of them have been convicted on anything yet.


Having said that, I am not myself willing to do anything that risks a serious jail sentence for uncertain (and at best marginal) results

With the proper organizing it could be better than marginal. If enough people joined, the government would think twice about arresting/shooting everyone. I dream of such things on a regular basis.

[Communist Pear]

They actually destroyed several places where there were studies of genetic modification? I guess reactionary hippie would be the right term for them, then.

Now, that is off course my opinion on the matter.

[Tim Finnegan]

It harms the Capitalists and benefits the Workers. It's progress. Wealth redistribution. That contracting team now gets a double contract. And if the development has to be finished on some sort of timetable, it means overtime. And hopefully they are Union. More money in the hands of the Workers.
I asked you to address the point I raised, not to simply re-issue the same proclamations. If the socially necessary labour time of a given commodity is raised for an individual capitalist- the practical effect of a part of that commodity which is produced being systematically destroyed- then his expenses will be increased, but without the corresponding increased in exchange value, thereby driving down his rate of profit. The capitalist, seeking to maintain a steady rate of profit, will attempt to drive down wages to compensate. This may indeed go hand-in-hand with increased job creation, if we assume that the capitalist will seek to maintain the same market presence, but, as I said, this will merely serve to lessen the individual burden placed upon currently unemployed (or less lucratively employed) workers, but will still maintain the same general burden placed upon the working class, as the rate of exploitation will be unchanged.

And, please, don't just say "union", as if that were some magic spell that would resolve all the woes of the workers. The last century and a half stand as rather solid proof that this is not the case.


They actually destroyed several places where there were studies of genetic modification? I guess reactionary hippie would be the right term for them, then.
You don't believe in the defence of the genetic commons? It's a complex issue, I know, but writing them off as "reactionary hippies" doesn't seem any more a balanced perspective than declaring them to be unequivocally virtuous.

[Inquisitive Lurker]

I asked you to address the point I raised, not to simply re-issue the same proclamations. If the socially necessary labour time of a given commodity is raised for an individual capitalist- the practical effect of a part of that commodity which is produced being systematically destroyed- then his expenses will be increased, but without the corresponding increased in exchange value, thereby driving down his rate of profit. The capitalist, seeking to maintain a steady rate of profit, will attempt to drive down wages to compensate. This may indeed go hand-in-hand with increased job creation, if we assume that the capitalist will seek to maintain the same market presence, but, as I said, this will merely serve to lessen the individual burden placed upon currently unemployed (or less lucratively employed) workers, but will still maintain the same general burden placed upon the working class, as the rate of exploitation will be unchanged.

And, please, don't just say "union", as if that were some magic spell that would resolve all the woes of the workers. The last century and a half stand as rather solid proof that this is not the case.

Sorry but I am going to say "union." The price of the commodity is fixed by the market price of housing, so the capitalist can not raise the price. New "union" jobs are created, and the laborers are paid a fair wage. Or a fairer wage than they would be otherwise. The normal pattern of capitalism is over-production, over-consumption. In this model, we have double-production, and fixed-consumption. It breaks the model down. The capitalists can not regain their lost capital, neither through lower wages nor higher prices. It's an attack on the system, not a break, but a serious dent. The rate of exploitation is changed, as the labor cost per unit of production is doubled at least (possibly more due to deadlines and overtime).

If repeated often enough, and the rate of return lowered, the capitalists will give up on the property developments, and ELF's goal will be achieved. Who knows, maybe the developers will move from making McMansions in the park lands and start urban redevelopment.

[Tim Finnegan]

Sorry but I am going to say "union." The price of the commodity is fixed by the market price of housing, so the capitalist can not raise the price. New "union" jobs are created, and the laborers are paid a fair wage. Or a fairer wage than they would be otherwise. The normal pattern of capitalism is over-production, over-consumption. In this model, we have double-production, and fixed-consumption. It breaks the model down. The capitalists can not regain their lost capital, neither through lower wages nor higher prices. It's an attack on the system, not a break, but a serious dent. The rate of exploitation is changed, as the labor cost per unit of production is doubled at least (possibly more due to deadlines and overtime).
But why do you assume that the lowering of wages- either directly or indirectly, i.e. through reduced benefits, and either actively or passively, i.e. through wages being raised at lower than the rate of inflation, if at all- to be an impossibility? Unions are not all-powerful, especially in this day and age. This is the sticking point, and you are still not addressing it.

[Inquisitive Lurker]

But why do you assume that the lowering of wages- either directly or indirectly, i.e. through reduced benefits, and either actively or passively, i.e. through wages being raised at lower than the rate of inflation, if at all- to be an impossibility? Unions are not all-powerful, especially in this day and age. This is the sticking point, and you are still not addressing it.
Despite what happened in Wisconsin, Unions are still strong enough to protect their members. If a shop gets called back to rebuild a site, they will get the same contract. Benefits are guaranteed through the unions, as are wage rises with cost of living. This is especially true in the building trade employed in building McMansions in high property value areas.

Unions won't get us to the revolution, but they will stanch the blood flow until we get there.

[Tim Finnegan]

Despite what happened in Wisconsin, Unions are still strong enough to protect their members. If a shop gets called back to rebuild a site, they will get the same contract. Benefits are guaranteed through the unions, as are wage rises with cost of living. This is especially true in the building trade employed in building McMansions in high property value areas.

Unions won't get us to the revolution, but they will stanch the blood flow until we get there.
One would think, from all this, that the last forty years have entirely passed you by. Perhaps you should enlighten yourself as to the extremely limited success of the trade union movement over the last thirty or so years, because it really is rather vital.

[Nolan]

Insane idiots. Environmentalism can only be taken so far until it becomes quasi-primitivism, and thus reactionary.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Insane idiots. Environmentalism can only be taken so far until it becomes quasi-primitivism, and thus reactionary.

Care to explain how the ELF and their actions/views represent quasi-primitivism? They're not wanting us to go back to pre-industrialization, nor are they a group filled with a bunch of Unabombers.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Forever insignificant, and completely apart from class struggle.

I would have to seriously disagree. Maybe you meant it in some other way and should just re-word it, but nothing is completely apart from class struggle. Everything we see is in some way connected to class struggle.

[Communist Pear]

You don't believe in the defence of the genetic commons? It's a complex issue, I know, but writing them off as "reactionary hippies" doesn't seem any more a balanced perspective than declaring them to be unequivocally virtuous.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean with the defence of the genetic commons. But I'm just going to assume you mean the fact that company's and scientists modify plants genetically and then claim the new species.

I really do not like the fact that these new created genes are not common property. I want them to be public property, but then realism kind of kicks in. Let me give the example of medication:

Medication is made by scientists and then patented by companies. I want them to be common property too, but in the current society that's not possible, so I'm fine with them being made as is and don't go burning down buildings. :lol:

These things are highly necessary. Genetic modification is needed to be capable of supplying the world with plenty of food in the future. Plants have a lot of room to be adapted. They are very inefficient right now, since they are still adapted to the atmosphere the earth had when plants evolved. Same with medication...

[Eastside Revolt]

Earth Liberation Front--- Crazy, Misguided, Desperate or Insane???
Or all 4 at once???



Simply Comrades!!!

[Johnny Kerosene]

I actually started to get interested in Environmentalism and stuff like that, then that led me to the left, and then I stopped paying attention to environmentalism. So I owe my leftistism to econuts. Therefore, they have my respect.