Earth First! Blockades Coal Power Plant

[Nachie]

This was an incredible action, the plant was blockaded for about six hours. Contrary to what you might think, there was a lot of solidarity from the coal truck drivers, one of whom said "if I had my way I'd blow up all those trucks".

The pictures and the press release come from the very start of the action and do not show the massive local and state police response. Eventually the energy company decided not to press charges if the blockade was taken down and everyone got away with no arrests. That overloaded coal truck still didn't have any air in its tires though, so presumably they still had a lot of work to do to clear the bridge.

Woo!

--------------------------------

July 10, 2006, Carbo, Virginia - Early this morning, activists with Earth First! and Rising Tide North America set up a non-violent blockade of American Electric Power's (AEP) nearly 50 year old Clinch River coal fired electric facility. Emitting millions of pounds of pollutants yearly, the Clinch River coal plant threatens the health and lives of thousands of downwind residents and the surrounding environment. Burning coal is not only a primary factor behind global climate change, but also drives the expansion of large scale strip mining. Large scale surface mining destroys forests, streams and communities as it alters the Appalachian landscape forever.

Over 50 activists arrived at AEP's Clinch River plant at 9:00 this morning. An Earth First!er attached a rope to the bridge and stretched it across the road while another suspended himself below the bridge over the Clinch River. One activist locked himself to the axle of the coal truck.
Earth First! and Rising Tide demand the following:

1. Shut down the Clinch River facility and all aging, dirty coal burning power plants.
2. An immediate halt to mountaintop removal and other destructive forms of strip mining.
3. A nationwide response to the reality of global climate change marked by a move away from fossil fuels, transition towards cleaner sources of energy and vigorous promotion of electricity conservation.

"The Clinch River facility is a symbol of all that is wrong with King Coal. Dirty air, ravaged landscapes and global climate disruption are the legacies of a corrupt, inefficient and destructive industry that kills with impunity" said Patrick Garnett of Lexington, Kentucky.

"The coal industry and its government puppets are ignoring widespread public concern over large scale strip mining, air pollution and global climate change" said Erin Mckelvy of Blacksburg, Virginia. "Concerned citizens are forced to take direct action to call attention to the devastation caused by the irresponsible mining and burning of coal" she added.

The Clinch River coal burner releases 4.25 million pounds of carbon dioxide into the air annually, contributing to an unpredictable change in the global climate. Particulate pollution from burning coal has been proven to worsen asthma for residents across the nation. Mountaintop removal coal mining in Appalachia has destroyed over 800 square miles of the most biologically diverse temperate forest in the world. Over 1200 miles of streams have been buried by valley fills and mining waste.

"I was born here in southwestern Virginia. The mountains here are part of my soul. They are sacred to me, and also to God" said Ernest Wayne Cantrell of Clintwood, Virginia. "I fight back because I can't continue to watch the world's oldest mountains be leveled forever" he continued.
Earth First! is an international environmental action movement focusing on protecting wild nature. Rising Tide North America is part of an international network focusing on the root causes of global climate change.

More information available at www.mountainjusticemedia.org and www.katuahearthfirst.org,
Contact: Mountain Media Center - Claire Jones - 828-277-8729 or E-mail [email protected]

Related Link: http://www.katuahearthfirst.org :: http://www.mountainjusticemedia.org

LOTS OF PICTURES HERE (http://www.mountainjusticemedia.org/article/22)

[Vinny Rafarino]

Only dim-witted hippies would blockade a plant that provide energy to the citizens.

This is the best part:

"I was born here in southwestern Virginia. The mountains here are part of my soul. They are sacred to me, and also to God"

Fucking losers.

[Nachie]

wah wah wah

[which doctor]

Good story Nachie.


Only dim-witted hippies would blockade a plant that provide energy to the citizens.

I bet you support all capitalist corporations that exploit the natural resources for the "good" of the people, don't you. I would expect better from a "communist" or whatever you call yourself.


Fucking losers.
The only loser I see around here is you. :rolleyes:

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Yeah, that's we need right now, a bunch of bourgeois liberal "environmentalists" trying in their little insignificant way to roll back civilization... three cheers for reaction!

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

PS. $100 says these lames also oppose clean, nuclear energy.

[Nachie]

Any group in the US that isn't organizing in Appalachia is missing a huge piece of the puzzle.

[rioters bloc]

awesome.

i find it simultaneously funny and disturbing how so many members of this forum aren't environmentally aware, let alone active, and yet consistently deride effective direct actions from an armchair. it's strikingly different to how the left operates here.

anyways. props to ya :D

[Brekisonphilous]

Originally posted by Compañ[email protected] 15 2006, 03:08 AM
PS. $100 says these lames also oppose clean, nuclear energy.
People like this are why I don't call myself a communist. still not quite progressive enough to grasp the importance of ditching these failed nonrenewable resources.

[rioters bloc]

Originally posted by Brekisonphilous+Jul 15 2006, 01:31 PM--> (Brekisonphilous @ Jul 15 2006, 01:31 PM)
Compañ[email protected] 15 2006, 03:08 AM
PS. $100 says these lames also oppose clean, nuclear energy.
People like this are why I don't call myself a communist. still not quite progressive enough to grasp the importance of ditching these failed nonrenewable resources. [/b]
heh. ditto.

i've yet to meet a leftist activist in real life who supports nuclear energy as a 'viable' substitute.

and i hope i never do.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Any group in the US that isn't organizing in Appalachia is missing a huge piece of the puzzle.

I agree, though we're probably not talking about the same thing, since I'm talking about organizing workers.


awesome.

i find it simultaneously funny and disturbing how so many members of this forum aren't environmentally aware, let alone active, and yet consistently deride effective direct actions from an armchair. it's strikingly different to how the left operates here.

Being 'environmentally aware' (I guess that means aware that capitalism destroys the natural environment??) doesn't mean carrying out actions like this.

Human progress is made with progress in technology, which is what coal power is.. people that take actions like this don't take their thoughts and actions to their logical conclusions. They'd have us revert to a world with no electricity what-so-ever, and all the problems that come along with that. Humans must master nature (which includes making sure that our energy sources are sustainable).

We should have no concerns about the condition of the environment in the abstract -- as the bourgeois liberals do -- but rather as a part of the overall picture of humanity and our earth.

Is coal energy dirty and harmful to the environment? Yes. Is it over consumed (especially in places like the U.S.)? Yep... Is the way the coal industry gathers coal horrible (both in the dangers they put workers through, and the way they show no regard for the environment by doing things like strip mining and blowing off the tops of mountains[!!])? Most certainly. But shutting down an old coal plant, while there is no alternative source of much needed energy available, and while most likely opposing any realistic (and clean) alternatives like nuclear power, is nothing but adventurism at best. It's like burning a lot full of SUVs.

What's needed is a struggle of the oppressed and exploited to overturn property relations and take power, so we can reorganize society in the interest of human need, which includes creating sources of renewable energy and eventually moving away from fossil fuels.


anyways. props to ya

You better stop using the computer since you're using up electricity probably made by burning coal! (OH THE HORRORS!!)

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

i've yet to meet a leftist activist in real life who supports nuclear energy as a 'viable' substitute.

and i hope i never do.

Get out of the vegan infosquats and you'll find plenty of leftists who do.. like these cats:

Free People's Movement (http://www.fpm-mgl.org)
Revolutionary Youth (http://ry-jr.info)
SWP (USA) (http://www.themilitant.com)
Sparts (http://www.icl-fi.org/)
Communist Party of Cuba (http://www.pcc.cu/)

I could go on and on...

I'm a communist. Unlike the bourgeois liberals ('Earth First') that carried this action out, I'm for putting Humanity First..


People like this are why I don't call myself a communist. still not quite progressive enough to grasp the importance of ditching these failed nonrenewable resources.

I'm glad you don't call yourself a communist, since you clearly aren't one.

[which doctor]

Get out of the vegan infosquats and you'll find plenty of leftists who do.. like these cats:

Free People's Movement
Revolutionary Youth
SWP (USA)
Sparts
Communist Party of Cuba

I wouldn't consider communist party members "activists."


I'm a communist.
NO WAI


Unlike the bourgeois liberals ('Earth First') that carried this action out,
Bourgeois? You have got to be kidding me. I doubt they have cumfy office jobs as executives. Lumpen, maybe, but not bourgeois.


I'm for putting Humanity First..
So are we, but humanity must have a place to live. Earth would be nice. At the current rate, I'm not sure how much longer earth is going to be a viable place to live.


I'm glad you don't call yourself a communist, since you clearly aren't one.
I started calling myself an anarchist to distance myself from the horrible state of the current communist movement as well.

[YSR]

I'm sorry, CdL, are you pro-surface mining?

Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface_mining) on surface mining.

I guess I missed the memo: when did being class conscious and for liberating humanity from the chains of capitalism conflict with giving something resembling a shit about the environment. I'll be honest, I'm not an Earth First!er and I doubt I ever will be. Environmental protection just isn't my bag, I work better on other issues. But the only people (as far as I'm aware) who really like surface mining are the people who run the mines and their allies.

You can call me a "bourgeois liberal" until you're blue in the face, but I know that given the choice between direct action against environmental destruction or capitalist greed, I'll choose the former.

[Nachie]

Originally posted by Compañ[email protected] 15 2006, 03:41 AM
I agree, though we're probably not talking about the same thing, since I'm talking about organizing workers.
That's funny, so was I! And uhhh... it's not exactly as easy as it looks, you know? Communities are terrified of Peabody and Massey and the other big companies, and there's a serious history of violence in the area against anybody who dares to speak up against their policies. However there is currently an amazing interchange of energy between local working class folks and more direct-action oriented groups like EF!

A lot of locals feel like they can't even show their faces at actions like this but that doesn't mean they're not part of the movement and giving support in other ways. Just as an example, one of our organizers (who is a local) had her house vandalized by coal company thugs and some members of the community got together and tracked down the people who did it and made it abundantly clear that that would not be tolerated.

Check out http://www.mountainjusticesummer.org

If, after reviewing their work and maybe checking out the situation first hand, you can point me in the direction of somebody who is doing a better job of what needs to be done in that bioregion, please let us know.


We should have no concerns about the condition of the environment in the abstract -- as the bourgeois liberals do -- but rather as a part of the overall picture of humanity and our earth.
So then I guess you're really familiar with biocentrism and the entire accumulated history of Earth First?

Or wait maybe you're not.


What's needed is a struggle of the oppressed and exploited to overturn property relations and take power, so we can reorganize society in the interest of human need, which includes creating sources of renewable energy and eventually moving away from fossil fuels.
Again, if you're able to wave your magic wand from the sidelines and make this happen, that'd be sweet. In the meantime there are plenty of people with their boots in the mud trying to bring this about the old-fashioned way.


You better stop using the computer since you're using up electricity probably made by burning coal! (OH THE HORRORS!!)
Wah Wah Wah, if it was actually true that leftists spontaneously combusted whenever they did anything remotely "hypocritical", the world would have been consumed in a fireball a long time ago.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

I'm sorry, CdL, are you pro-surface mining?

No.. nor did I say anything to indicate that anywhere, ever.

I am pro-human and pro-civilization though.


I guess I missed the memo: when did being class conscious and for liberating humanity from the chains of capitalism conflict with giving something resembling a shit about the environment.

Never.


But the only people (as far as I'm aware) who really like surface mining are the people who run the mines and their allies.

An obvious truth.


You can call me a "bourgeois liberal" until you're blue in the face, but I know that given the choice between direct action against environmental destruction or capitalist greed, I'll choose the former.

Cool dude! You should go pound huge nails into trees with the eco fascists in the Pacific Northwest so when lumberjacks cut into them they metal fragments come out and kill them! GOOD TIMES!

[Vinny Rafarino]

Originally posted by brain of bolts
I bet you support all capitalist corporations that exploit the natural resources for the "good" of the people, don't you. I would expect better from a "communist" or whatever you call yourself.


As the dominant species on the planet, we will continue to "exploit" ( :lol: ) our natural resources for the good of the people for many generations after you have smoked yourself into hippy oblivion, Cheech.

The fact that you would rather see the working class go without electricity because the power company is a capitalist organisation shows your complete lack of understanding of both the social conditions in which we live and leftist theory.

Do yourself a favour kid, drop the bong for a second and realise that if you live in a capitalist environment, everything is run by capitalists; [/b]including the computer you are typing on.

So either get busy moving into a cave where you will hunt for rabbits wearing only leaves to cover your pre-pubescent coglioni or just simply be quiet.

[violencia.Proletariat]

still not quite progressive enough to grasp the importance of ditching these failed nonrenewable resources.

Do you have something better? Lets here it and we will put it in place. Whineing about non-renewable energy doesn't create renewable energies, science does, so get to it or shut the fuck up.


i've yet to meet a leftist activist in real life who supports nuclear energy as a 'viable' substitute.

You just met one. Nuclear energy is safe and clean. Your other options right now are to hurt the environment more using other practical methods, develope new methods but until then use this, or live without electricity.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Again, if you're able to wave your magic wand from the sidelines and make this happen, that'd be sweet. In the meantime there are plenty of people with their boots in the mud trying to bring this about the old-fashioned way.

Yeah, by blockading a coal plant for a few hours. Capitalism is now crumbling at its foundations and workers councils are sprining up all over the world! You better go burn down an RCP bookstore before they infiltrate them! :lol:

[which doctor]

Originally posted by Compañ[email protected] 14 2006, 11:13 PM
Cool dude! You should go pound huge nails into trees with the eco fascists in the Pacific Northwest so when lumberjacks cut into them they metal fragments come out and kill them! GOOD TIMES!
Earth First! denounced tree-spiking.

[rioters bloc]

Originally posted by Compañ[email protected] 15 2006, 01:41 PM
Being 'environmentally aware' (I guess that means aware that capitalism destroys the natural environment??) doesn't mean carrying out actions like this.

Human progress is made with progress in technology, which is what coal power is.. people that take actions like this don't take their thoughts and actions to their logical conclusions. They'd have us revert to a world with no electricity what-so-ever, and all the problems that come along with that. Humans must master nature (which includes making sure that our energy sources are sustainable).

We should have no concerns about the condition of the environment in the abstract -- as the bourgeois liberals do -- but rather as a part of the overall picture of humanity and our earth.

Is coal energy dirty and harmful to the environment? Yes. Is it over consumed (especially in places like the U.S.)? Yep... Is the way the coal industry gathers coal horrible (both in the dangers they put workers through, and the way they show no regard for the environment by doing things like strip mining and blowing off the tops of mountains[!!])? Most certainly. But shutting down an old coal plant, while there is no alternative source of much needed energy available, and while most likely opposing any realistic (and clean) alternatives like nuclear power, is nothing but adventurism at best. It's like burning a lot full of SUVs.

What's needed is a struggle of the oppressed and exploited to overturn property relations and take power, so we can reorganize society in the interest of human need, which includes creating sources of renewable energy and eventually moving away from fossil fuels
clearly, abolishing capitalism would help to solve many environmental problems. but the fact remains that until that happens this world and it's natural environment and resources is continuing to degenerate. by the same token, do i think that fighting for and winning the lifting of the ban on the abortion pill is tantamount to abolishing patriarchy, or even to removing the state's hold on abortion? of course not. but it's doing something now, and if it helps even a handful of wom*n, then i support it.


You better stop using the computer since you're using up electricity probably made by burning coal! (OH THE HORRORS!!)

ha..ha.

i do my best to use as little energy and water as possible. but obviously it hardly makes an impact when you compare it to how much waste is created by corporations.


Get out of the vegan infosquats and you'll find plenty of leftists who do.. like these cats:

Free People's Movement
Revolutionary Youth
SWP (USA)
Sparts
Communist Party of Cuba

i don&#39;t think i&#39;m likely to meet any of them in australia. except for the sparts, who i don&#39;t like to talk to since they support the dprk <_<

i&#39;d venture that the huge majority of radical leftists in australia are opposed to nuclear energy and uranium mining, as not only is it environmentally damaging but it also violates indigenous rights, of which there are very, very few in this nation.


I&#39;m a communist. Unlike the bourgeois liberals (&#39;Earth First&#39;) that carried this action out, I&#39;m for putting Humanity First..

you know, i&#39;d agree with you, but without an earth there&#39;s little hope for humanity&#39;s survival :rolleyes:

oh yeah, and calling every group that you disagree with &#39;bourgeois&#39; is starting to get a tad old.

[rioters bloc]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2006, 02:17 PM

i&#39;ve yet to meet a leftist activist in real life who supports nuclear energy as a &#39;viable&#39; substitute.

You just met one. Nuclear energy is safe and clean. Your other options right now are to hurt the environment more using other practical methods, develope new methods but until then use this, or live without electricity.
i have yet to meet you in real life, and so have no idea what kinda activism you actually do or what you politics are really like. hence why i specified &#39;in real life&#39;

[which doctor]

As the dominant species on the planet, we will continue to "exploit" ( laugh.gif ) our natural resources for the good of the people for many generations after you have smoked yourself into hippy oblivion, Cheech.
Hopefully I, and everyone else who is smart enough, can stop you and your crazy rampage on the natural resources of the earth.


The fact that you would rather see the working class go without electricity because the power company is a capitalist organisation shows your complete lack of understanding of both the social conditions in which we live and leftist theory.
When did I say that they should go without power? There are cleaner ways of generating electricity than decades old coal mines.


Do yourself a favour kid, drop the bong for a second and realise that if you live in a capitalist environment, everything is run by capitalists; including the computer you are typing on. [/b]
You don&#39;t think I understand this already?


So either get busy moving into a cave where you will hunt for rabbits wearing only leaves to cover your pre-pubescent coglioni or just simply be quiet.
Umm....neither&#33;

You are one of the most reactionary members of this board, Bill Shatner.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Earth First&#33; denounced tree-spiking.

In 1990, 10 years after they started advocating it. Not that that has anything to do with what I said.

[RevSouth]

Some of you "pro-progress" guys just do not understand. I live pretty near Appallachia, and you don&#39;t understand how much it hurts the people there. Not only the pollution in the air, but their water is polluted from the chemical-ridden water that runs down from these deplorable mining tactics. Not to mention that they destroy a beautiful piece of landscape. And the people this effects can&#39;t neccessily even benefit from the coal burning. Appallachia is one of the poorest regions in the United States. Many people have neither electricity or running water. And these are the people that are being exploited by the mining companies and energy industry in the name of "progress".

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

This is the first time I&#39;ve heard of a coal station being blockaded. While I personally think it was another pointless stunt, they do have a point. The power plant should be nuclear, not coal.

[Nachie]

Originally posted by Compañ[email protected] 15 2006, 04:17 AM
Yeah, by blockading a coal plant for a few hours. Capitalism is now crumbling at its foundations and workers councils are sprining up all over the world&#33; You better go burn down an RCP bookstore before they infiltrate them&#33; :lol:
AGAIN, PLEASE WHIP OUT YOUR MAGIC WAND, SIR&#33;


Earth First&#33; denounced tree-spiking.
Thank you for pointing that out. Also that happened so damn long ago that nowadays the only people still accusing EF&#33; of spiking trees are right wingers and uneducated "workerists" with such kneejerk reactions to eco-defense that it&#39;s amazing they haven&#39;t broken their own noses.


oh yeah, and calling every group that you disagree with &#39;bourgeois&#39; is starting to get a tad old.
But rioters&#33; It&#39;s so delightfully all-purpose&#33;

[violencia.Proletariat]

i have yet to meet you in real life, and so have no idea what kinda activism you actually do or what you politics are really like. hence why i specified &#39;in real life&#39;

My mistake I didn&#39;t read your post in detail.


Hopefully I, and everyone else who is smart enough, can stop you and your crazy rampage on the natural resources of the earth.

What is your alternative? Companero is I&#39;m sure advocating the use of coal only to the extent that its necessary to sustain production and benefit the population that relys on its power.

Of course wasteful overuse would be ended during a revolution. But if the revolution were tomorrow, do you expect the coal plant to shut down the next day? "Alternative energies" are not as simple as you make them out to be. You can&#39;t plug in a bunch of windmills and support an infrustructure.


There are cleaner ways of generating electricity than decades old coal mines.

Yes like nuclear energy. What are your other alternatives?

[violencia.Proletariat]

Not only the pollution in the air, but their water is polluted from the chemical-ridden water that runs down from these deplorable mining tactics.

Then the community, not a bunch of out of town activists, should confront the powerplant about cleaning it up. If they refuse then direct action can be implemented. However, that direct action must have a specific goal (IE cutting back on toxins leaking into water supplies). Shutting down the coal plant because it&#39;s "bad" is not a goal when you have no immediate alternative.


Not to mention that they destroy a beautiful piece of landscape.

Subjective, this would have to be based on a poll of community members agreeing. What we should be worried about is destroying necessary habitat not "beauty."


Many people have neither electricity or running water.

Can we see some statistics that show us the majority of people who live in that region don&#39;t have electricity?

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

This is the first time I&#39;ve heard of a coal station being blockaded. While I personally think it was another pointless stunt, they do have a point. The power plant should be nuclear, not coal.

Too bad that wasn&#39;t their point.. and too bad blockading a coal plant won&#39;t accomplish anything.


Thank you for pointing that out. Also that happened so damn long ago that nowadays the only people still accusing EF&#33; of spiking trees are right wingers and uneducated "workerists" with such kneejerk reactions to eco-defense that it&#39;s amazing they haven&#39;t broken their own noses.

1. EF has been around for 25.5 years, they advocated spiking for 10 of them.

2. I didn&#39;t say EF advocated spiking.

3. Whether or not EF advocate spiking has 0 to do with my original comment.


AGAIN, PLEASE WHIP OUT YOUR MAGIC WAND, SIR&#33;

As always, your debate style is amazing. In your next post, make sure to do your usual issue dodging before denouncing "Lennies" and posting an irrelevant picture. DIRECT ACTION GETS THE GOODS&#33; :lol:

Class concious workers and our oppressed allies are struggling against the capitalist system and fighting for workers power.


oh yeah, and calling every group that you disagree with &#39;bourgeois&#39; is starting to get a tad old.

That&#39;s not a response. If there are 50 groups that are full of bourgeois liberals, then there are 50 bourgeois liberal groups.. I&#39;m not going to call them fighting class struggle workers just cause the &#39;left&#39; is full of these scum bags.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Originally posted by Compañ[email protected] 15 2006, 04:39 AM

This is the first time I&#39;ve heard of a coal station being blockaded. While I personally think it was another pointless stunt, they do have a point. The power plant should be nuclear, not coal.

Too bad that wasn&#39;t their point.. and too bad blockading a coal plant won&#39;t accomplish anything.

Touche. In fact, if it wasn&#39;t for those eco-fundies, at least one nuclear plant would never have been changed during construction to be a more polluting coal plant.

[RevSouth]

Have you been to the Appallachians, Violencia? And just because some people such as yourself have no concept of beauty other than so-called progress, doesn&#39;t meen the rest of us don&#39;t.
http://www.arc.gov/index.do?nodeId=1272&print=yes
This is the poverty level chart, couldn&#39;t get reliable statistics on electricity and water. Some areas of the Appallachians have a lower population livng in poverty than the national average, but the ones in question (Virginia, West Virginia) seem to average about 10% more people living below the poverty lines. These graphs can be slightly misleading, though. The demographic of late in these areas have been shifting. The poorer people are having all the land that is still of use bought for residences or business, and are being shifted to the more polluted, dangerous areas. I know this from experience, having driven through places quite a few times. It is more sad than anything, to be honest. These people don&#39;t have a fighting chance, capitalism has really screwed them over. It&#39;s not so simple that they can organize themselves, either. They are heavily employed by the mining industry, and those are the only jobs available, and if they were caught trying to organize an opposition, could easily be fired, without money, and isolated in one of the poorest job markets in the United States. On the other hand, their neighbors are professionals and business execs retreating from city life, driving the poverty level for the area down in their presence, but they don&#39;t give a fuck about the people they displaced.

[violencia.Proletariat]

Have you been to the Appallachians, Violencia?

Yes, they run through my state. An contrary to what you make it seem, its not full of shanties and starving people. There are large towns and some cities in the appalachians (Asheville).


And just because some people such as yourself have no concept of beauty other than so-called progress, doesn&#39;t meen the rest of us don&#39;t.

Theres a reason they call it a mountain RANGE. The partial destruction of one side (or the whole thing w/e) of a mountain or two is worth it to me if it means maintaining industrialization.


These people don&#39;t have a fighting chance, capitalism has really screwed them over.

And shutting down a powerplant is doing what to change this? :huh:


They are heavily employed by the mining industry, and those are the only jobs available, and if they were caught trying to organize an opposition, could easily be fired, without money, and isolated in one of the poorest job markets in the United States.

And you want to shut down their employment. Do you think it&#39;s the bourgeoisie working at the cole plant?

[Janus]

clearly, abolishing capitalism would help to solve many environmental problems. but the fact remains that until that happens this world and it&#39;s natural environment and resources is continuing to degenerate
I completely agree, rioter&#39;s bloc. Frankly, I, myself, wonder why some leftists are so apathetic to environmental issues.


And you want to shut down their employment. Do you think it&#39;s the bourgeoisie working at the coal plant?
I&#39;m not sure if these people are really making a difference. I would think that the local inhabitants themselves should fully engage in the protests rather than leave to Earth First.

But also look at it from this angle, what do you think will happen to the workers when the coal is gone or when the factory shuts down? This is happening in many Appalachian mining towns and factory towns (Allentown, for instance) all over the US.

Political struggle and the well-being of the workers are extremely important but the environment should be an important issue as well. Though I agree that some sacrifices can be made at this point, that time is rapidly coming to a close.

[Janus]

But the only people (as far as I&#39;m aware) who really like surface mining are the people who run the mines and their allies.
No one likes strip mining but the fact is that if the coal is at the top like it is here, that&#39;s the only method which would make any sense.

[RevSouth]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2006, 12:21 AM
Yes, they run through my state. An contrary to what you make it seem, its not full of shanties and starving people. There are large towns and some cities in the appalachians (Asheville).
I pointed out that it was not all poverty. I live in what could be considered Appallachia, there are quite a few urban areas in the Appallachian Mountain area. Atlanta is sometimes considered in Appallachia (I don&#39;t know who drew the fucking map on that one). Appallachia is not filled with shantytowns, but I have seen trailers that had fallen trees on them, but couldn&#39;t afford to be fixed, and whole families living in broken down school buses.


Theres a reason they call it a mountain RANGE. The partial destruction of one side (or the whole thing w/e) of a mountain or two is worth it to me if it means maintaining industrialization.

I honestly cannot believe what you are advodcating. "Oh, well there is plenty of them, so disposing of one or two can&#39;t hurt much." There are ways that are safer for the environment to harvest the resources we need. You do not need mountaintop removal to get the coal.


And shutting down a powerplant is doing what to change this? :huh:

I was merely pointing that out, this is a revolutionary leftist forum.


And you want to shut down their employment. Do you think it&#39;s the bourgeoisie working at the cole plant?
No. I would advocate cleaner standards, as the U.S. does not have high enough standards for filtering processes. I also wish they would unionize more heavily in these coal plants, but I don&#39;t know if the initiative and motivation is there, I will have too look into it.

[rioters bloc]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2006, 03:21 PM
Yes, they run through my state. An contrary to what you make it seem, its not full of shanties and starving people. There are large towns and some cities in the appalachians (Asheville).
hurrah, that makes it all better then&#33; :rolleyes: cos as long as there are some rich people and cities around...


Theres a reason they call it a mountain RANGE. The partial destruction of one side (or the whole thing w/e) of a mountain or two is worth it to me if it means maintaining industrialization.

and if it doesn&#39;t stop at a mountain or two?


And you want to shut down their employment. Do you think it&#39;s the bourgeoisie working at the cole plant?

so, by your reasoning, we shouldn&#39;t oppose the us military either, and try and shut that down? since it&#39;s not the bourgeoisie who will be losing their jobs?

[bcbm]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2006, 11:21 PM
And you want to shut down their employment.
Quoth the worker, "if I had my way I&#39;d blow up all those trucks."


For all of those shitting themselves about the supposed primitivists (my syndacalist friend was down there, go figure), did you bother to read their fucking goals?

"1. Shut down the Clinch River facility and all aging, dirty coal burning power plants.
2. An immediate halt to mountaintop removal and other destructive forms of strip mining.
3. A nationwide response to the reality of global climate change marked by a move away from fossil fuels, transition towards cleaner sources of energy and vigorous promotion of electricity conservation."


I would think that the local inhabitants themselves should fully engage in the protests rather than leave to Earth First

As already mentioned, many of them are supportive but face reprisals from the mining companies.

[Nachie]

Originally posted by Compañ[email protected] 15 2006, 04:39 AM
As always, your debate style is amazing. In your next post, make sure to do your usual issue dodging before denouncing "Lennies" and posting an irrelevant picture. DIRECT ACTION GETS THE GOODS&#33; :lol:
Dude if anybody&#39;s debate style is questionable, it&#39;s not mine.

Go back and read over the thread. I explicitly indicate the extensive community and workers&#39; organizing going on behind the scenes and you use your magic wand to make it look like this particular action was the only thing I was talking about? Sticking fingers in your ears and humming really loud isn&#39;t going to make the mountain justice campaign go away, you know&#33; You can&#39;t just dictate reality to your ideological convenience from the Internet and you certainly can&#39;t tell us that our movement is anything other than what we know it to be.


Class concious workers and our oppressed allies are struggling against the capitalist system and fighting for workers power.
What the hell does this random rhetoric even have to do with the topic? Way to sit on the sidelines and dismiss anything that isn&#39;t flying your party&#39;s flag; do you ever get off your soapbox and talk to real people, or has the lack of oxygen up there made it impossible?

[Comrade-Z]

There are tons of options for producing renewable energy: wind, solar (lots of different designs), tidal, wave, and eventually fusion (if the ITER project would get their shit together and get the ball rolling). And these technologies are continually becoming more feasible and efficient.

I wouldn&#39;t be adverse to more nuclear either, though. Look at France. They get 80% of their electricity from nuclear, and they are doing just fine.

What also needs to be addressed, though, is better urban planning so that we require less energy in the first place.

[More Fire for the People]

Wow. I can&#39;t believe that anyone would support such anti-worker actions. Any bunch of students stopping the flow of income and electricity to the working class should be taken into a dark alley and... you know the rest.

[Brekisonphilous]

Originally posted by Compañ[email protected] 15 2006, 04:26 AM

Earth First&#33; denounced tree-spiking.

In 1990, 10 years after they started advocating it. Not that that has anything to do with what I said.
Oh christ, give me a break with this. NO ONE HAS EVER EVEN DIED DIRECTLY FROM TREE SPIKING&#33; There has only been one reported injury resulting from this and the victim did not even put blame on environmental advocacy, the logging industry did.

Get off your high horse and do some research.

[Nachie]

Originally posted by Hopscotch [email protected] 15 2006, 05:06 PM
Wow. I can&#39;t believe that anyone would support such anti-worker actions. Any bunch of students stopping the flow of income and electricity to the working class should be taken into a dark alley and... you know the rest.
AHHHHH SOMEBODY START A POLL IN THE CC TO BAN THIS GUY HE IS ADVOCATING VIOLENCE AGANIST COMRADES&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;1111

[More Fire for the People]

Originally posted by Nachie+Jul 15 2006, 11:36 AM--> (Nachie @ Jul 15 2006, 11:36 AM)
Hopscotch [email protected] 15 2006, 05:06 PM
Wow. I can&#39;t believe that anyone would support such anti-worker actions. Any bunch of students stopping the flow of income and electricity to the working class should be taken into a dark alley and... you know the rest.
AHHHHH SOMEBODY START A POLL IN THE CC TO BAN THIS GUY HE IS ADVOCATING VIOLENCE AGANIST COMRADES&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;1111 [/b]
We restrict primitivists. They are not considered &#39;comrades&#39;.

[violencia.Proletariat]

There are ways that are safer for the environment to harvest the resources we need. You do not need mountaintop removal to get the coal.

What are they? Wheres your plan?


I also wish they would unionize more heavily in these coal plants, but I don&#39;t know if the initiative and motivation is there, I will have too look into it.

There you go&#33; This is a good tactic that can actually accomplish something.


hurrah, that makes it all better then&#33; cos as long as there are some rich people and cities around...

Actually I think 15% of those living in Asheville are below the poverty line.

Before you completely take my point out of context, I will explain. There is a reason for powerplants to supply power, there are cities in the Appalachians that need that power. Workers live in cities.


and if it doesn&#39;t stop at a mountain or two?

We&#39;ll use that secret bag of alternatives you seem to have but aren&#39;t being implemented for no good reason. :rolleyes:

Personally I think migration from rural areas should take place, then we wouldnt have to worry aobut it.


so, by your reasoning, we shouldn&#39;t oppose the us military either, and try and shut that down? since it&#39;s not the bourgeoisie who will be losing their jobs?

The military directly conflicts with our objectives and could stop us. Power plant workers are not my enemy.


Quoth the worker, "if I had my way I&#39;d blow up all those trucks."

If I&#39;m not mistaken, that was a truck driver who said that. He doesnt actually work at the power plant. You shut down the plant he just has a different route. Not the same for the plant workers.


3. A nationwide response to the reality of global climate change marked by a move away from fossil fuels, transition towards cleaner sources of energy and vigorous promotion of electricity conservation."

YES OF FUCKING COURSE. The problem is WHAT IS YOUR GOD DAMN ALTERNATIVE? You can&#39;t replace power plants with a windmill farm and call it even. IT DOESNT WORK LIKE THAT.

We must develope PRACTICAL alternatives. Until then we have no choice but to use what we have in the cleanest way possible. The liberal solution of "shutting it down" IS NOT SOLVING THE PROBLEM. You guys even deny the practical cleaner alternatives that are readily available (nuclear). SO WHAT THE FUCK DO YOU WANT?

[violencia.Proletariat]

Originally posted by Comrade&#045;[email protected] 15 2006, 11:34 AM
There are tons of options for producing renewable energy: wind, solar (lots of different designs), tidal, wave, and eventually fusion (if the ITER project would get their shit together and get the ball rolling). And these technologies are continually becoming more feasible and efficient.

I wouldn&#39;t be adverse to more nuclear either, though. Look at France. They get 80% of their electricity from nuclear, and they are doing just fine.

What also needs to be addressed, though, is better urban planning so that we require less energy in the first place.
None of these are practical for mass energy at this point. So all the people whining in this thread need to get out there and help make them possible.

And thank you Comrade Z, your point is well taken about urban planning. That is a practical way to help the problem.

[Nachie]

Originally posted by Hopscotch [email protected] 15 2006, 05:40 PM
We restrict primitivists. They are not considered &#39;comrades&#39;.
I suppose you were down at the blockade verifying that everyone who participated was both a student and a primitivist.

Oh wait no you weren&#39;t.

[Brekisonphilous]

We must accept green alternatives such as Geothermal energy (more research in this could make Green alternatives much more effective)
wind power, solar power, and tidal power.
If as much development and research were put into green alternatives as there were for Coal and nuclear power, we wouldn&#39;t even have this problem. The bourgeois are not interested because there is less room to profit from these energy sources.
It is not impossible at all. We need tons more focus on green alternatives so we can stop passing down a whole centuries worth of energy consumption problems down to newer generations.
And if these alternatives mean people will need to be more energy consumption conscience, then so be it.

[bcbm]

Originally posted by Hopscotch [email protected] 15 2006, 11:06 AM
Wow. I can&#39;t believe that anyone would support such anti-worker actions. Any bunch of students stopping the flow of income and electricity to the working class should be taken into a dark alley and... you know the rest.
Not all of the people there were students, I personally know some workers (gasp&#33;) who were involved. They also said the community gave them a lot of support, this was just an expression of issues the community itself is interested in but has been intimidated into not acting by the coal companies. I&#39;m amazed at the number of people siding with the coal company first. :rolleyes:


You guys even deny the practical cleaner alternatives that are readily available (nuclear).

Who is "you guys?" I don&#39;t deny that practical, cleaner alternatives exist; I haven&#39;t said anything on this issue besides that the people involved in this action are getting completely misrepresented here.

[Black Dagger]

Originally posted by Hopscotch+--> (Hopscotch) We restrict primitivists. They are not considered &#39;comrades&#39;.[/b]

I am sure you are quite aware that not all enviro-activists are primitivists (or even a sizeable minority), i think nachie&#39;s point is apt.



Also, the amount of people supporting enviromental degradation in the name of industralisation -or perhaps it is worth mentioning-, industrial capitalism - is very suprising.

It&#39;s not as if industrialisation is a value-neutral concept in a capitalist society, capitalists do not pursue wealth or resources with the environment (or humanities future) in mind.


BBBG
I&#39;m amazed at the number of people siding with the coal company first.

Same.

[ComradeOm]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2006, 05:55 PM
I suppose you were down at the blockade verifying that everyone who participated was both a student and a primitivist.

Oh wait no you weren&#39;t.
How else would you classify Earth First&#33; if not primitivist?

[Nachie]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2006, 06:16 PM
How else would you classify Earth First&#33; if not primitivist?
By their own definition Earth First&#33; is bio-centrist, not primitivist. However I think it&#39;s also worth noting that they&#39;re practically the only biocentrist group in the world that mixes in misanthropy, though this is definitely not shared throughout the entire EF&#33; movement, much less an official policy, and many people have criticized it (I myself see it as a byproduct of Northern white guilt). In fact the relationship between EF&#33; and social movements such as that of immigrant populations are at the very center of an ongoing debate as to where the organization is going. A lot of primitivists actually criticize EF&#33; for being "soft"&#33;

With all that said, I can definitely tell you that not everyone who took part in the blockade even considers themselves a member of Earth First&#33; and this is even more true in regards to the larger Mountain Justice campaign, of which EF&#33; is only one of the groups participating.

[Nachie]

Originally posted by Black [email protected] 15 2006, 06:15 PM
It&#39;s not as if industrialisaiton is a value-neutral concept in a capitalist society, capitalists do not pursue wealth or resources with the environment (or humanities future) in mind.
Fuckin&#39; ay.

[violencia.Proletariat]

We must accept green alternatives such as Geothermal energy

We can&#39;t accept these energies. They are not practical yet.


wind power

Only works effectivley in certain places in certain parts of the country.


solar power

Only practical at certains times during the year in places where seasonal weather exists. It&#39;s also not practical for home use yet.


and tidal power.

I&#39;m not very educated on this, but this is just a theory am I correct? The technology to harness this power doesn&#39;t exist yet, right? We can&#39;t use something that doesn&#39;t exist.


If as much development and research were put into green alternatives as there were for Coal and nuclear power, we wouldn&#39;t even have this problem.

You don&#39;t know that. Secondly what research is still being put in coal unless its to make it cleaner? Research should be put into nuclear power, BECAUSE ITS PRACTICAL.


The bourgeois are not interested because there is less room to profit from these energy sources.

May be partially true. There is money to be made in these industries once they are practically available. However by the time this happens we should be hopefully in proletarian rule.

[RevSouth]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2006, 12:49 PM

There are ways that are safer for the environment to harvest the resources we need. You do not need mountaintop removal to get the coal.

What are they? Wheres your plan?


They could actually go into the coal seam to retrieve it. This may sound more dangerous, but truly its not. As long as workers are outfitted with proper safety equipment, and the coal companies maintains good safety practices (this goes back to the unions) it would be fine.

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

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

[Nachie]

VP you should try looking some of this stuff up next time. The reason MTR exists is that it&#39;s cheaper for the capitalists to blow up a fucking mountain than it is to pay workers to go in and get coal through other methods.

When you factor this into the irreversible destruction of the region&#39;s water supply and the increased rates of cancer, kidney stones, birth defects, and any other number of problems linked to MTR - particularly the construction of unreliable sludge dams that threaten thousands of lives and have already broken in some cases leading to hundreds of deaths for the sake of &#036;1 more per ton of coal, it becomes very clear that direct opposition to MTR is proletarian self-defense.

[Nachie]

Also a very large wind power project in West Virginia was recently scrapped (or is in the process of being scrapped) because rich people in the area were complaining that it would "ruin their viewshed".

Lemme ALSO add, when these mountains are blown up and the valleys filled, they are then SOLD to development companies who tend to build one of two things on the land: either Wal Marts, or prisons.

This is NOT just an "environmental" issue&#33;

[which doctor]

I like how some people are in direct opposition to anything Earth First&#33; related, regardless of what is in question.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

The bourgeois are not interested because there is less room to profit from these energy sources.

Exactly. And guess who rules society under capitalism?? THE BOURGEOISIE&#33; What did this action do to end the rule of the bourgeoisie and replace it with the rule of the working class???


I&#39;m amazed at the number of people siding with the coal company first.

I&#39;m amazed at the number of kids who think anarchism is a valid working class theory.. or that this action did anything to end the rule of the bourgeoisie or even push capitalist America towards renewable energy at all, in any shape or form.... what are you gonna do?

Oh, it&#39;s also convinient to note that no one in this thread took the side of the coal plant owners ever. There&#39;s a dangerous &#39;with us or against us&#39; mentality amongst alot of you... you can oppose capitalists and bourgeois liberal hippies that do shit like this.. especially if you define yourself by what you&#39;re actually for (in the case of communists, working class rule), instead of just what you&#39;re against.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Also a very large wind power project in West Virginia was recently scrapped (or is in the process of being scrapped) because rich people in the area were complaining that it would "ruin their viewshed".

Thanks for mentioning this.. I was in prison, in Appalachia, while all of this was going down, and I was reading alot about it in the local paper, and guess who was opposing the wind mills the most? You guessed it, bourgeois liberal environmentalists&#33; :lol:

[which doctor]

Originally posted by Compañ[email protected] 15 2006, 02:58 PM
bourgeois liberal hippies that do shit like this..
Do you even know the definition of the word bourgeois?

It seems like you don&#39;t.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Yeah.. do you know what a bourgeois liberal is? Probably not, as you don&#39;t seem to know too much of anything but mindless (and meaningless) anarchist slogans.

[Brekisonphilous]

Yeah, because hippies are dangerously bourgeois... :rolleyes:
give me a break, you people throw that word around like it is the only way you can make a point.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Way to get at the actual argument&#33; :lol:

Hippies are, by definition, bourgeois liberals. There are alot of bourgeois liberals (and their fans here), so you&#39;ll see it alot. Deal with it.

[Comrade-Z]

Hippies are, by definition, bourgeois liberals.

A lot are. Some are also poor dumpster-diving lumpen-proletarians.


You guessed it, bourgeois liberal environmentalists&#33;

If that&#39;s true, then those "environmentalists" are the biggest hypocrites ever.


What did this action do to end the rule of the bourgeoisie and replace it with the rule of the working class???

Yeah, the way I look at environmental actions like this is they are reformist in nature. They are addressing a symptom of capitalist society (environmental irresponsibility from the capitalist class) without doing as much as they could to strike at the root of the problem (the entire capitalist class).

Right now radical environmentalists have a very piece-meal approach to their activities. A coal power plant begins construction here, and while they are protesting that one, 5 more are going up somewhere else. They will never get anywhere with an approach like this. And the bourgeoisie would infinitely prefer these single-issue movements as opposed to a movement that strikes at the totality of the current system.

What some EarthFirst&#33;ers don&#39;t realize is that the best way to protect the environment is to first encourage and participate in proletarian revolution. Only after that is addressed can any significant change be made with regards to the environment.

[which doctor]

Originally posted by CdL+--> (CdL) Yeah.. do you know what a bourgeois liberal is?[/b]
Yes.. But do you think that these Earth First&#33;ers are starbucks drinking, hip clothes wearing, coffee shop hanging professionals by day and radical environmental protesters by night?


Originally posted by CdL+--> (CdL)Probably not, as you don&#39;t seem to know too much of anything but mindless (and meaningless) anarchist slogans.[/b]
"THE DAY WILL COME WHEN OUR SILENCE WILL BE MORE POWERFUL THAN THE VOICES YOU ARE THROTTLING TODAY" "HOCH DIE ANARCHIE" "ANARCHY IN THE UK" "FUCK THE SYSTEM" "ARGH&#33; GET PISSED OFF AND FUCK SHIT UP"


[email protected]
Hippies are, by definition, bourgeois liberals. There are alot of bourgeois liberals (and their fans here), so you&#39;ll see it alot. Deal with it.
Since you seem like such a smart(not) fella, give me the marx based class analysis of a hippie.


Z
A lot are. Some are also poor dumpster-diving lumpen-proletarians.
Bourgeois liberals join Sierra Club and take eco-vacations to Costa Rica. Earth First&#33; is full of lot&#39;s of lumpens.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Right now radical environmentalists have a very piece-meal approach to their activities. A coal power plant begins construction here, and while they are protesting that one, 5 more are going up somewhere else. They will never get anywhere with an approach like this. And the bourgeoisie would infinitely prefer these single-issue movements as opposed to a movement that strikes at the totality of the current system.

What some EarthFirst&#33;ers don&#39;t realize is that the best way to protect the environment is to first encourage and participate in proletarian revolution. Only after that is addressed can any significant change be made with regards to the environment.

Of course.. now, getting people here (and in the "left" generally) to understand this is a whole other story.

[bcbm]

Originally posted by Compañ[email protected] 15 2006, 01:58 PM
I&#39;m amazed at the number of kids who think anarchism is a valid working class theory..
:rolleyes: Keep your sectarian bullshit to yourself, thanks. Anarchism has a history as long as communism with plenty of successes and failures, just like other working-class traditions. I know you like cheap pot shots whenever you can get them in, but seriously, can you at least pretend to have a mature discussion without ad hominem?


or that this action did anything to end the rule of the bourgeoisie or even push capitalist America towards renewable energy at all, in any shape or form.... what are you gonna do?

It raised awareness that people are opposed to the practices of the mining company in the form of MTR, which is definitely against working class interests as shown elsewhere in this thread. I sincerely doubt every action you&#39;ve undertaken did something to end the rule of the bourgeoisie, so that is pretty much a non-criticism. This was about protecting workers and it was in support of renewable energy, although no action short of revolution or a collapse of oil and coal will do much in that regard anyway, but we can fight for smaller victories now while working towards bigger ones in the future.


Oh, it&#39;s also convinient to note that no one in this thread took the side of the coal plant owners ever.

And nobody was coming out against the working class or working class organization, but you freely fling that hyperbole around. Whoops.

And condemning people trying to act in opposition to things that are harmful to the working class and raise awareness in order to further your own individual aims seems to not be very beneficial to the workers, yeah...?


especially if you define yourself by what you&#39;re actually for (in the case of communists, working class rule), instead of just what you&#39;re against.

Uh, nobody here has defined themselves solely through what they are against, there has been plenty of talk of what people are for.

[Nachie]

Originally posted by Comrade&#045;[email protected] 15 2006, 09:18 PM
What some EarthFirst&#33;ers don&#39;t realize is that the best way to protect the environment is to first encourage and participate in proletarian revolution. Only after that is addressed can any significant change be made with regards to the environment.
This is actually the driving dialogue within EF&#33; at the moment. To stay updated on this, check out http://rootforce.org/

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

It&#39;s obvious that this particular action by Earth First&#33; did bugger all. Like it or not, industrial society requires large amounts of energy, and that energy has to come from somewhere. Even nuclear fission on it&#39;s own won&#39;t provide all our energy needs, at least not long enough for fusion to become viable.

A mixed approach, with nuclear as a major source, and renewables and fossil fuels as a minor source of energy is the only realistic way forward.

[bcbm]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2006, 06:21 PM
It&#39;s obvious that this particular action by Earth First&#33; did bugger all.
This isn&#39;t just EF&#33;&#39;s problem, most of the left has become quite adept at such actions.


Like it or not, industrial society requires large amounts of energy, and that energy has to come from somewhere. Even nuclear fission on it&#39;s own won&#39;t provide all our energy needs, at least not long enough for fusion to become viable.

I don&#39;t think anyone is saying otherwise, merely that methods used to retrieve certain things (say, coal) are incredibly destructive and need to be stopped in favor of better approaches.

[rioters bloc]

Originally posted by black banner black [email protected] 16 2006, 04:05 AM
I&#39;m amazed at the number of people siding with the coal company first. :rolleyes:
what?? you&#39;ve been on revleft for longer than me and this surprised you?? :lol:

[bcbm]

Originally posted by rioters bloc+Jul 16 2006, 02:48 AM--> (rioters bloc @ Jul 16 2006, 02:48 AM)
black banner black [email protected] 16 2006, 04:05 AM
I&#39;m amazed at the number of people siding with the coal company first. :rolleyes:
what?? you&#39;ve been on revleft for longer than me and this surprised you?? :lol: [/b]
But I didn&#39;t start posting until several months later. :-P

[Entrails Konfetti]

I want to be a lumberjack&#33;

[bcbm]

Originally posted by EL [email protected] 16 2006, 12:26 PM
I want to be a lumberjack&#33;
I once looked like a lumberjack.

[ComradeOm]

Originally posted by EL [email protected] 16 2006, 06:26 PM
I want to be a lumberjack&#33;
They&#39;re okay.

[Entrails Konfetti]

Lookit here, though this is a hypothetical situation it could be very real.
Lets suppose the workers at that coal-plant organize to demand better pay, less hours to work. There are many courses in the struggle but they seize the plant and operate it.

The environmentalist organizations might protest against them for runing a coal-plant and call for these inefficient alternatives to replace coal. The environmentalists may make demands during strikes, protests, millitary intervention, seizure of plant ect. The thing is the workers can&#39;t do this yet, for one thing it isn&#39;t totally their concern when they&#39;re starving, trying to stay employed, and fighting off the army, another is that the society now doesn&#39;t leave enough room to find a better resource, and change can only come when profit isn&#39;t the objective but when the workers seize political power.

The problem is that a real quality renewable resource can only be answered after the revolution. Earth First is an issue organization, it doesn&#39;t have an encompassing plan. Marxism is a viable theory because it encompasses all issues, and has a solid plan, but at the same time it whittles through all the issues to find out where all these issues came from and where the main source of antagnonism comes from: Class society.

[Janus]

As already mentioned, many of them are supportive but face reprisals from the mining companies.
Yeah, I&#39;m aware of that. It just seems from the article that Earth First is not only participating in the people&#39;s cause but kind of dominating it.


This is of course assuming that the warming trends are have anything to do with us whatsoever. There have been many cases in history where the globe hase been substantially hotter than it is now. Did you not know that?
There were small heat-ups during the Middle Ages, etc. but nothing compared to now. The recent warm-up is even larger than the heat-up before the last ice age.


The extinction of plants and animals (remembering of course that the rate of human caused extinction has slowed dramatically in the modern era compared to a couple hundred years ago) has absolutely no bearing on the survival and social functionality of the human species.
Actually, we do rely on plants and other species for medicines, etc. The loss of biodiversity may not be very significant now but is a troubling sign.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Lookit here, though this is a hypothetical situation it could be very real.
Lets suppose the workers at that coal-plant organize to demand better pay, less hours to work. There are many courses in the struggle but they seize the plant and operate it.

The environmentalist organizations might protest against them for runing a coal-plant and call for these inefficient alternatives to replace coal. The environmentalists may make demands during strikes, protests, millitary intervention, seizure of plant ect. The thing is the workers can&#39;t do this yet, for one thing it isn&#39;t totally their concern when they&#39;re starving, trying to stay employed, and fighting off the army, another is that the society now doesn&#39;t leave enough room to find a better resource, and change can only come when profit isn&#39;t the objective but when the workers seize political power.

The problem is that a real quality renewable resource can only be answered after the revolution. Earth First is an issue organization, it doesn&#39;t have an encompassing plan. Marxism is a viable theory because it encompasses all issues, and has a solid plan, but at the same time it whittles through all the issues to find out where all these issues came from and where the main source of antagnonism comes from: Class society.

Thank you comrade.

[Nachie]

Originally posted by EL [email protected] 16 2006, 07:02 PM
The problem is that a real quality renewable resource can only be answered after the revolution. Earth First is an issue organization, it doesn&#39;t have an encompassing plan. Marxism is a viable theory because it encompasses all issues, and has a solid plan, but at the same time it whittles through all the issues to find out where all these issues came from and where the main source of antagnonism comes from: Class society.
*snore*

It must be pretty funny to see the look on your face when you go from that last sentence to realizing that everybody left the room a long time ago.

[More Fire for the People]

Yeah, we know Nachie. The RAAN cult opposes workers and their struggle. You don&#39;t have to remind us every post you make.

[Nachie]

http://www.ehponline.org/docs/2005/113-2/crybaby.jpg

WAH&#33;

[bcbm]

Originally posted by EL [email protected] 16 2006, 01:02 PM
The environmentalist organizations might protest against them for runing a coal-plant
No they wouldn&#39;t. The only "environmentalists" who might even consider such a thing are those on the "extreme nutjob" end of the spectrum, who don&#39;t matter for shit anyway. Out West in the 90&#39;s, a lot of work was done with environmentalists working with loggers about their job concerns, etc against their common enemy: the logging corporations.

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by black banner black [email protected] 16 2006, 11:41 PM
No they wouldn&#39;t. The only "environmentalists" who might even consider such a thing are those on the "extreme nutjob" end of the spectrum, who don&#39;t matter for shit anyway. Out West in the 90&#39;s, a lot of work was done with environmentalists working with loggers about their job concerns, etc against their common enemy: the logging corporations.
How would that work with industries like coal power plants?
I mean for instance the environmentalists may call for alternative energies, if the workers add that to their demands aswell as better pay less hours, and if that turns into a seizure of property some could find themselves out of the job.

[Zero]

-.-&#39;

What was it? That "Only when the last tree has died and the last river been poisoned and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."

I really fail to see why trying to stop the damage we are doing to our planet, and delve more research into alternative fuels/energy is somehow "reactionary"

Those who have read the Nanotechnology article in June 2006 issue of National Geographic would know that we have a nanotube sunlight collecter which can catch 9% of sunlight rays (as opposed to 11% from normal collecters) there is talk of being able to expand this to 13%. This article was awhile ago though, so it might be possible now. Though whats so different about this meterial is that it comes in a spray can. Thats right, a spray can. We will soon be able to process enough energy from the sun to power a household off of renewable, clean energy from a spray can on your roof.

Renewable energy isn&#39;t as far off as you think...

EDIT: Uhh... since when is a hippie a bad thing? Seriously...

EDIT 2: By the way, very nice protest Nachie&#33; I love it&#33; I hope I can do the things you&#39;ve done once I get out of college. ^_^

[bcbm]

Originally posted by EL [email protected] 16 2006, 11:01 PM
How would that work with industries like coal power plants?
I mean for instance the environmentalists may call for alternative energies, if the workers add that to their demands aswell as better pay less hours, and if that turns into a seizure of property some could find themselves out of the job.
The real problem in Virginia (and what was primarily being protested here, as I understand it), was the pracice of Mountain Top Removal to get coal, which would be something the workers could demand. And they could probably also work for a modernization of the plant.

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by black banner black [email protected] 17 2006, 04:23 PM
The real problem in Virginia (and what was primarily being protested here, as I understand it), was the pracice of Mountain Top Removal to get coal, which would be something the workers could demand. And they could probably also work for a modernization of the plant.
Well if its feasable, keeping in mind all the particularities, logistics, and whatnot.
Like if those who work in mountain top removal could move all their jobs to another type of implemenation of energy sources. If you want to find something thats sufficient re-newable and better for the environment to replace todays dominant energy sources this would call for a very gradual switch-over.

Two things I can think of that need to be figured out:

Priorities have to be straightened out. (Ex: Workers seize plant first, then
figure out how to solve the energy problems, otherwize if this is done by the owners before hand workers could be set out of the job, its cheaper to find new workers who are educated on new energy sources than to teach the old ones.)

There has to be a solid plan otherwize it&#39;s just another pipe dream.

[bcbm]

Originally posted by EL [email protected] 17 2006, 10:49 AM
Like if those who work in mountain top removal could move all their jobs to another type of implemenation of energy sources. If you want to find something thats sufficient re-newable and better for the environment to replace todays dominant energy sources this would call for a very gradual switch-over.
This has already been discussed, actually. Workers could simply go in and get the coal using traditional mining methods, instead of blowing up the mountain. Renewables can be a long-term goal.

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by black banner black [email protected] 17 2006, 04:54 PM
This has already been discussed, actually. Workers could simply go in and get the coal using traditional mining methods, instead of blowing up the mountain. Renewables can be a long-term goal.
Well thats your methodology as a person who understands class-struggle and that humans aren&#39;t a seperate entity from the environment. Switching to different methods of coal extraction wasn&#39;t a part of their demands. Their demands weren&#39;t very clear, and called for setting people out of work.



1. Shut down the Clinch River facility and all aging, dirty coal burning power plants.
2. An immediate halt to mountaintop removal and other destructive forms of strip mining.

The second demand totally negates the first, to shut down all coal plants means to end all forms of coal mining.


3. A nationwide response to the reality of global climate change marked by a move away from fossil fuels, transition towards cleaner sources of energy and vigorous promotion of electricity conservation.

I don&#39;t know if they are infact demanding nuclear power, but the other renewable energy sources just aren&#39;t efficient as of now. They should call for more funding toward finding better alternatives instead of saying we can make the transition now, we can&#39;t&#33;

Furthur more I&#39;d be really pissed off if I was the truck-driver who had the environmentalist chained to my truck, I need my paycheck dammit&#33;

[bcbm]

Switching to different methods of coal extraction wasn&#39;t a part of their demands. Their demands weren&#39;t very clear, and called for setting people out of work.


Their demands were vague, but my talks with people who were actually there make it sound like a lot of them are on the same page I am. The second demand could relate to that, and I imagine they wouldn&#39;t oppose modernization (not the "aging" part of the first demand).


Furthur more I&#39;d be really pissed off if I was the truck-driver who had the environmentalist chained to my truck, I need my paycheck dammit&#33;

I believe in the first post in this thread they outline his views on the subject. He supported it.

[Nachie]

Originally posted by EL [email protected] 17 2006, 05:23 PM
Furthur more I&#39;d be really pissed off if I was the truck-driver who had the environmentalist chained to my truck, I need my paycheck dammit&#33;
Yeah but you weren&#39;t that trucker, and the guy who is was actually very supportive and very politely declined to take some money that he was offered for his troubles.

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 05:50 PM
Yeah but you weren&#39;t that trucker, and the guy who is was actually very supportive and very politely declined to take some money that he was offered for his troubles.
Why wasn&#39;t that included in the article, among other things.

[bcbm]

Originally posted by EL KABLAMO+Jul 17 2006, 11:55 AM--> (EL KABLAMO @ Jul 17 2006, 11:55 AM)
[email protected] 17 2006, 05:50 PM
Yeah but you weren&#39;t that trucker, and the guy who is was actually very supportive and very politely declined to take some money that he was offered for his troubles.
Why wasn&#39;t that included in the article, among other things. [/b]

there was a lot of solidarity from the coal truck drivers, one of whom said "if I had my way I&#39;d blow up all those trucks"

[Entrails Konfetti]

I know, I read that.
"Solidarity among the truck drivers" doesn&#39;t describe how many, what they did exactly. All I&#39;ve seen from the photos is that there was one truck blocking an enterance. We do not know of the opinions of the workers inside the plant.

And another thing we donot know of what the trucker meant when they said " if i had it my way I&#39;d blow up all those trucks". Maybe hes sick of his job.
I doubt Earth first would advocate blowing up trucks because that would release deadly troxins into the air.

Point in case, no one knows what the hell these activists meant.

[Janus]

I doubt Earth first would advocate blowing up trucks because that would release deadly troxins into the air.
Some probably would but not use explosives but rather just fumble with them like The Monkey Wrench Gang.

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 06:30 PM
Some probably would but not use explosives but rather just fumble with them like The Monkey Wrench Gang.
But where does this get us?

[Janus]

No where, it just places a bad image on the environmental movement. Action needs to be taken by the inhabitants and workers themselves rather than allow their cause to be dominated by the activists of Earth First.

[bcbm]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 12:30 PM
Some probably would but not use explosives but rather just fumble with them like The Monkey Wrench Gang.
EF&#33; stopped monkeywrenching in the late-80&#39;s or so.


Action needs to be taken by the inhabitants and workers themselves rather than allow their cause to be dominated by the activists of Earth First.

Workers and inhabitants can be activists of Earth First.

[Janus]

EF&#33; stopped monkeywrenching in the late-80&#39;s or so.
I see.


Workers and inhabitants can be activists of Earth First.
I&#39;m aware of that. Yet I think it is just bad publicity when EF&#33; activists are in the major spotlight rather than the actual inhabitants of the area. People just think that it&#39;s just a hippie movement rather than an actual local response.

[chimx]

i worked pretty close with ef&#33; years back. we were all from montana or idaho and trying to stop massive logging going on in the forests in our back yards. fuck the USFS that sell out our land to the highest bidder. fuck the timber industry trying to make a quick buck off of our land. fuck urban leftists that denounce me and my comrades for defending my bioregion from capitalist swine that take a big fucking shit over my home country. if you want to sit there and defend the actions of the state and the capitalist timber industry, than you need to be rounded up a shot.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

I do wonder if groups like EF&#33; put forests and animals above human happiness. If it was necessary to stripmine the entire planetary surface and remove every tree and then pave the whole thing over in order to ensure maximum happyness for every single human being, then I would do it in a heartbeat.

[which doctor]

I do wonder if groups like EF&#33; put forests and animals above human happiness.
They try to keep an ecological balance healthy for all living organisms (that includes you and I).


If it was necessary to stripmine the entire planetary surface and remove every tree and then pave the whole thing over in order to ensure maximum happyness for every single human being, then I would do it in a heartbeat.
You do know that everyone would soon die after you did this. I don&#39;t think they would be too happy about that.

[chimx]

transhumanism would save them&#33;

[Wanted Man]

I like where this thread is going.

[Black Dagger]

Originally posted by Janus
I don&#39;t think we should talk about a possible ice age any more as this will only discredit us in Bill Shatner&#39;s eyes.


Why does that matter? I mean, does anyone in this thread take him seriously? At all? He&#39;s such a nutter that even people who were on the other side of this debate before, don&#39;t agree with him :wacko:

[Entrails Konfetti]

Global warming serious or not. Still EF&#33;s approach sucked.
And their message isn&#39;t clear.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Agreed.