Whether with guns or words, it's time to act

By Cathy Doodnauth

We’ve all seen protests before. Whether in pictures or videos, on the television or computer, we’ve seen people just like us carrying signs for change. We’ve seen them rallying and yelling at the authorities, getting arrested for their beliefs, and doing it all over again the next day. From strikes over wages to marches for equality to violent rebellions, activism is definitely not a new idea. It’s a form of change that has been around for centuries as the only way for the unheard to fight for their rights and fix the problems. There is only one question now: Is activism the answer to the many environmental issues and movements of the twenty-first century? 

Activism comes in many shapes and forms, and so, can be either violent or nonviolent. There are arguments for both of these aspects of activism, but no one can truly say one is better than the other. In different cases, both kinds of activists have reached their goals through their own methods; in fact, both have been already used in the modern environmental movement. But which method is the right approach for environmental activists? 

Most environmental documentaries feature a specific issue and the reason why it is a huge problem. I have not seen (or heard of) many that showcase an activist’s fight and the legal issues that follow. Tim DeChristopher was a college aged activist that made a peaceful decision, knowing that he could go to jail for years for it. And he made that choice anyway. The documentary explaining his story, Bidder 70, is a very influential film to environmentalists everywhere. This particular style of documentary goes more into the legal issues surrounding an individual’s decision to break the law, just to make a point. It’s very effective, simply because DeChristopher was a college student influenced by a lecture of Dr. Terry Root, a scientist for the International Panel on Climate Change. He was one student that believed so strongly in the need for change that he put his freedom in danger. His decision speaks to students all around the world; it shows that young adults can make a difference despite their age, and it shows that one person can spark a rebellion. The aftermath of DeChristopher’s decision shows that he had people, environmentalists or not, following in his footsteps and protesting. It shows that one person, young or old, can fight for what they believe in and create changes. And I believe this is the best kind of activism there is. 

Activism is easy to see in developed countries, where forming beliefs and standing up for change can be easier than it is in other areas around the world. The U.S. is a prime example of activists fighting for change, especially through peaceful marches like the recent People’s Climate March in New York City.) Despite any backlash they receive, more and more activists are standing up. In the United Kingdom, activists are starting to stand up as well. Following the aforementioned People’s Climate March, the Campaign Against Climate Change helped countries around the world organize their own marches. This includes the U.K. as a large campaign to show the governments that their people care about the earth. The Time to Act March in London was a huge success. The website is effective in showing the march’s turnout through videos and pictures, allowing the viewer to feel like they protested in front of Parliament too. The organization’s website shows that while the march had over 20,000 supporters, there were other activists around the country protesting as well, such as Plane Stupid. This organization based in England fights climate change by protesting the addition of a third runway at Heathrow Airport during the Time to Act campaign. Their method was also incredibly effective: I believe that their outlandish costumes and funny antics caused more people to pay attention and learn about the issue at the airport. Reaching more eyes this way is beneficial to their fight. 

Activism is not as black and white as most people think. It can come in many different forms, based on what the belief may be. In Margaret Atwood’s dystopian novel, The Year of the Flood, activism takes place in the form of cults. The future holds sects for every belief, from a heavy military standpoint to a newfound interpretation of God’s words. God’s Gardeners are the main group of this novel, their lives focused on the preservation of animal and plant life. Through their new understanding of God’s mission, they become peaceful activists determined to save nature from the Waterless Flood (a natural apocalypse changing the earth.) Atwood’s writing is effective in portraying a peaceful activist group because of her attention to detail: at the head of every chapter, there is a hymn written by Adam One, the leader of God’s Gardeners that teaches about their peaceful ideas about nature. These hymns act as guidelines that show the reader that activists can be peaceful while doing right by the world. 

Like I mentioned before, there have been cases of violence in the environmental movement alongside the peaceful. Eco-terrorism is a term coined by authorities worldwide when faced with radical environmentalists. There are some groups that do not mind taking the radical route; an example of such an eco-terrorist group is found in the film The East. The film revolves around an anarchical environmental group called The East that uses violent methods to inspire change. The group is at first portrayed as evil and isolated; but as main character Sarah delves deeper, the group is seen to have the right ideas with the wrong methods. This film’s style makes it effective in the environmental world: at first the group is unknown and thus, dangerous—this is the same way people view environmental groups and issues if they are uneducated. As the film progresses, truths of many companies are exposed and the group is not as evil; in fact, many of their acts (while radical) seem justified to the viewer. This relates to people who have become educated and now fight for the earth.  The most effective part of the film was the end—Sarah’s choice to act by convincing the other agents of the truth shows that violence is not always the answer. Her method brought the same effects as the group’s violent methods would have. This is effective because it shows that peaceful negotiation can cause good changes in environmental issues. 

Writer David Goodman traveled to southern Ecuador, learning about the struggles of the Sarayaku people against those who would take the land by force. In his article, “Deep in the Amazon, a Tiny Tribe Is Beating Big Oil,” he discusses the Sarayaku people of Ecuador who have fended off oil companies for years. While other areas of the country give up land for drilling, this indigenous group continuously fights off the big oil companies and the government In an example of violence in activism, the Sarayaku have (justifiably) ‘poisoned’ the soldiers after they forced themselves onto the land, by giving them strong batches of alcohol:

“As their drinking binge ended, the petroleros fell asleep. When they awoke, what they saw sobered them: They were staring into the muzzles of their own automatic weapons. Wielding the guns were the women and men of Sarayaku.”

This article is effective in showing how an indigenous people fought off oil companies and soldiers by going behind the scenes. The point of view is of the Sarayaku people, rather than the government’s. This tactic allows the readers to see what it is like to almost lose the land that provides for every aspect of life. It shows that in this case, their actions were justifiable. 

Julia Corbett, author of Communicating Nature, discusses deep ecology; the philosophy where all living beings are worthy of equal status through radical means if necessary. Out of all the activist philosophies she mentions, deep ecology is ideal to activists who do not mind violence in order to create changes. Kinessa Johnson is an ex-army veteran who devotes her time to hunting those who would hunt the wild animals of Africa. Yes, you read right; she is the definition of a badass. Through the VETPAW organization, Johnson patrols reserves to stop poachers from getting to the endangered rhinos and elephants of African countries. This article is effective in getting both Johnson’s and VETPAW’s message to the world by giving basic information on their overall mission. It shows that people are willing to literally fight fire with fire—using guns against poachers who would do the same. Furthermore, the article shows that these veterans inspire fear in poachers as Johnson “has already noticed a decrease in poaching activity in her team’s immediate area because their presence is known.” The pictures used of Johnson also inspire different people, including women and soldiers who can carry on their work through this organization. Overall, this violent approach is one that I can get behind fully. I believe poachers to be of the most evil due to their indifference towards animals. VETPAW is the answer I never knew we needed. 

It’s apparent that nonviolent methods do work when fighting for the earth. However, the cases of violence show that the “deep ecological” approaches work as well. While they are more radical, they do create changes that are beneficial to the world. Regardless of method, activism is obviously what we need in the environmental movements of today. With more and more issues arising, the natural world is relying on environmental activists of every kind to save it. It’s time we all, whether one individual or a whole group, stood up for the earth before there is no earth to fight for anymore.