When in 1975 my late friend Ed Abbey published his novel, "The Monkey
Wrench Gang," I immediately bought a copy and read it.
It was a hoot!
I could identify with the book, since I was familiar, personally or by
reputation, with many of the individuals whose identities were thinly disguised
in the novel. And most importantly, like the author, I knew and loved the
southern Utah landscape in behalf of which the "gang" – Doc Sarvis,
Bonnie Abbzug, G. W. Hayduke and Seldom Seen Smith – were carrying out their
mayhem.
When I put down the book, I resumed my environmental activism – all within
the confines of the law. Similarly, to the best of my knowledge, Ed Abbey had
the good sense to realize that "in the long run," ecotage was "a
futile effort." Except for his prank of pulling out the surveyor’s stakes
for the proposed road in "Arches National Money-mint," Abbey employed
no weapon against industrial "development" more powerful than his
typewriter. But what a potent weapon it was!
Some individuals, it seems, have taken Abbey’s suggestion far more
seriously. In his recent (June, 2000) Atlantic Monthly article,
"Harvard and the Making of the Unabomber," Alston Chase quotes the
following from the Portland Oregonian:
"During the past four years alone, the West has been rocked by 33
substantial incidents, with damages reaching $28.8 million. [And although]
these crimes started nearly two decades ago – some seem clearly inspired
by Edward Abbey’s 1975 novel, The Monkey Wrench Gang – they have
escalated dangerously, sometimes with the use of bombs, in the last six
years." (No citation – just, "reported last fall").
And in an article this month (June 11) in the Philadelphia Inquirer,
Michael Sokolove reports the torching of a nearly completed private luxury home
near Bloomington, Indiana, by the "Earth Liberation Front" (ELF). Near
the ruins of the home was found a spray-painted sign: "No Sprawl.
ELF." Later ELF released the following statement:
The Earth Liberation Front would like to take credit for a late-night
visit to the Sterling Woods Development... The house was targeted because
the sprawling development . . . is in the Lake Monroe watershed. This is the
drinking water supply for the town of Bloomington, Indiana, and the
surrounding area. It is already being jeopardized by existing development
and roads. Once again the rich of the world are destroying what little we
have left in terms of natural areas and collective holdings (the water).
Hopefully they will get the message that we will not take it anymore.
Never mind that the proposed housing development had undergone several public
hearings and an environmental review, satisfying the concerns of local
environmentalists. As a capper, Lake Monroe, the "natural area" that
ELF was so concerned to protect, was an artificial impoundment.
Nor were the lives of the firemen or of the residents of the adjacent homes
of concern to ELF, which has adopted the motto of Earth First!: "No
compromise in the defense of the Earth."
The owner of the destroyed home, Vince Scott, resolved to build another at
the same site. It is scheduled for completion by Thanksgiving. Thus twice the
amount of lumber and other resources will be used in the construction of the
Scott home than would have been required had ELF not made their
"uncompromising defense of the Earth."
The destruction of the Vince Scott’s home, along with other ELF
"actions" such as the $12 million arson at the Vail Ski Resort in
1998, is not "civil disobedience" in the tradition of Thoreau, Gandhi
and King. First of all, it is clearly not "non-violent." And
furthermore, unlike Thoreau, Gandhi and King, the perpetrators did not submit
themselves to the punishment of the law. No, ELF’s tactics are less in the
tradition of King at Selma, than of McVeigh at Oklahoma City. Among
environmentalists, the former, non-violent, tradition is honorably represented
by Julia (Butterfly) Hill who established a "home" for a year, in the
branches of a threatened redwood tree, or by Mark DuBois, who chained himself to
a rock along the Stanislaus River, thus delaying the impoundment behind the New
Melones Dam.
At this point, we might open up a long, complicated and technical discussion
of such deep philosophical issues as the "moral considerability" of
natural objects and landscapes, or the libertarian claim of the inviolability of
property rights, or in opposition thereto, the allegedly over-riding
"defenses of necessity" as articulated in the Earth First! Maxim,
"no compromise in the defense of the Earth."
Happily, in this case, we can side-step all that, for the plain and simple
reason that the ELF tactics "in defense of the Earth" succeed in
"defending" nothing whatever, except, perhaps, the sense of
self-importance and self-righteousness of the perpetrators. Still worse, these
tactics are counter-productive, for they supply rhetorical and political
ammunition for the counterattacks of the "brownlashers" – the
corporate-political-ideological opponents to environmental protection and
reform.
Accordingly, the question of whether the "advantages" of
eco-terrorism outweigh the costs in property and personal safety is moot.
There are no "advantages" to be gained by such tactics, only costs --
and significantly, costs to the cause of "defending the Earth."
"Violence for the Hell of it," will not save the Earth. Still worse,
it will disarm those non-violent "mainstream" environmental forces
which offer the best hope for the defense of the Earth.
Violent acts of eco-sabotage, such as the burning of the home of the randomly
selected and innocent Scott family, are acts of blind rage. They are
"blind" in that, in Kierkegaard’s words, they "tear out the
eyes of the Reason." As a few moments of quite and sober reflection should
make clear, the occasional torching of private homes will not end suburban
sprawl, nor will the destruction of Vail ski lifts and lodges close down the
skiing industry. Instead, such acts will turn the law against the perpetrators,
and cast the suspicious eyes of the public upon "moderate"
environmentalists who share the concerns of the eco-terrorists while they
deplore the methods.
"Reason be damned, we have a world to save!," is a war-cry that is
fated to fail, and furthermore is likely to destroy in its downfall, much that is of human and
natural value. "Practical reason" implies the
deliberative and informed devising of means to ends – of tactics and strategy,
without which no battle or war or political campaign, worthy or otherwise, was
ever won.
When the environmentalists combine their passion for the Earth with practical
reason, employing both scientific knowledge and political savvy, and winning
widespread public support, they win. However one may lament the development of
such areas as Vail Colorado and the loss of Glen Canyon, we must remind
ourselves that informed and well-coordinated citizen action kept the ski lifts
and lodges out of Mineral King valley, and the dams out of the Grand Canyon. In
fact, today federal and state governments are actually taking out dams and
restoring wild rivers.
Finally, the radicals who cast reason and science aside in "defense of
the Earth," discard their most effective weapon. For it is science
which has most vividly portrayed the devastation that humanity has wrought on
its home planet, and has most effectively indicated the grave implications of
continuing down this road. Scientists such as Barry Commoner and Rachel Carson
alerted us to the perils of radioactive and chemical contamination of the
biosphere, and it was the weight of their evidence that captured our attention
and concern. Today, it is the scientists who, at great public cost and
investment, are measuring the loss of biodiversity and the anthropogenic
alterations of the atmosphere, and it is the scientists who are projecting and
publishing startling projections of these changes. (See our
"On
Behalf of Science," "Why
be Reasonable?," and other pages in
"No
Mo Po Mo" – this site).
Blind rage and "ecotage" are not the way out of the present and the
impending emergencies. Instead, the public must first reclaim its government
from private and corporate interests. Educators must then restore scientific
awareness and capacities of critical thinking to the youth. And informed
citizens, in coordinated activity and through the use of open media and
democratic institutions, must demand and bring about appropriate government
action.
In short, an informed public must act deliberately, rationally and
collectively in defense of the Earth. The tactics of the Earth Liberation Front
can only provoke an angry public to turn on those who, through terroristic
sabotage of property and endangerment of life, appoint themselves as
"uncompromising defenders of the Earth." As a result, both democratic
institutions and the Earth will be lost to humanity.
