radical environmetalists in the news

[last_angry_man]

http://cnnwire.blogs.cnn.com/2008/03/03/homes-on-fire-at-street-of-dreams-subdivision/

Story concerns a fire at a residential "McMansion" development with the absurd name: "the Street of Dreams". CNN is reporting that the "ELF" tag was left nearby.

I've only been on the RevLeft forums for a month or so, but I noticed a definite bias against the more radical environmental groups and their 'whatever it takes' attitude toward their struggle against unchecked development. Can anyone either explain the general reason why folks here look down on the radical greens? Or point toward any links that might explain the reasons why they do not receive more support around here?

[Qwerty Dvorak]

The thing about the more hardline greens is that they seem to believe that we owe something to "mother Earth", or that we have a duty towards it. This is a very unmaterialistic view, because the Earth is not a sentient being and does not have rights. It is in effect a massive rock, we can do whatever the hell we want with it.

Of course I am still an environmentalist in a sense, because I recognize the Earth as an extremely valuable asset that must be managed with care, or else future generations may face extreme hardship. But we certainly don't owe anything to nature.

[Ele'ill]

My main issue with self proclaimed 'radical environmental' groups is that they proclaim themselves just that. Radical. Which is a bad way to gain support. The second issue I have with them is that burning unimportant objects will only get them on the news and then they'll go to jail if they're caught. The same goes for burning SUV's. It isn't affective enough.

This is mainly directed towards the ELF wannabes. I still remember the ski resort that was burned down because it was built right in the middle of a protected lynx habitat. The FBI didn't find so much as a footprint. That is the real ELF and it was fairly interesting to watch unfold on the news but now the burning of things is just old and crusty.

Earth First did a slightly better job dealing with the public but meh. Green Peace is ok I guess.


Ultimately it is going to take every one on this planet to want change. These groups are just making themselves stand out as ugly ducklings.

[last_angry_man]

we can do whatever the hell we want with it.


I often wonder about folks with this attitude. do they feel this way because humans (conveniently) happen to be at the top of the food chain? Or are their values absolute and they will happily bathe themselves and then rub their skin with salt and pepper when a more advance species arrives from outer space?




still remember the ski resort that was burned down because it was built right in the middle of a protected lynx habitat. The FBI didn't find so much as a footprint. That is the real ELF and it was fairly interesting to watch unfold on the news


yeah, they earned their reputation with that one (and a few others….like those whaling ships sunk in Iceland, not sure which acronym was responsible, but it was a thing of beauty)



Ultimately it is going to take every one on this planet to want change. These groups are just making themselves stand out as ugly ducklings.



But just sitting by (or holding picket signs…) while old growth forests are destroyed to print The National Enquirer’s latest story about “Elvis seen bowling in Cleveland” doesn’t seem appropriate either.


The local lefty FM station out here (KPFK) has been playing cuts from Malcolm Xs “the ballot or the bullet” speech pretty much around the clock for the past two weeks as part of their annual fund drive. He makes a strong case against the non-violence advocates, even if he never heard of the environmental movement. His basic theme seems appropriate in almost any struggle.


And anyone who can’t understand the value of “random acts of destruction” has gone too long since last reading Edward Abbey’s “The Monkey Wrench Gang” and “Hayduke Lives” (both should be required reading of anyone interested in any type of activism)

[bcbm]

This is mainly directed towards the ELF wannabes. I still remember the ski resort that was burned down because it was built right in the middle of a protected lynx habitat. The FBI didn't find so much as a footprint. That is the real ELF and it was fairly interesting to watch unfold on the news but now the burning of things is just old and crusty.

There is no "real" ELF or "fake" ELF. The "ELF" is not an organization, it is merely a banner under which to claim actions and so long as the actions meet the guidelines, they are legitimate ELF actions. That some are larger and more spectacular than others does make them better. The Vail fire was only a temporary set-back; the ski-lodge still opened and all it took to catch all of those involved was the government bribing an activist-turned-junkie to do some reminiscing with those involved. Click the Green Scare link in my signature to read all about it.

[Ele'ill]

There is no "real" ELF or "fake" ELF. The "ELF" is not an organization, it is merely a banner under which to claim actions and so long as the actions meet the guidelines, they are legitimate ELF actions. That some are larger and more spectacular than others does make them better. The Vail fire was only a temporary set-back; the ski-lodge still opened and all it took to catch all of those involved was the government bribing an activist-turned-junkie to do some reminiscing with those involved. Click the Green Scare link in my signature to read all about it.


The actions have to stay consistent in order for me or anyone to consider them to be ELF actions. There is a difference between significant actions that disrupt, say, deforestation and the petty act of burning an SUV.