enviromentalists ! fags ! and cars !
audiotech | 17.04.2007 22:42 | Climate Chaos | Indymedia | Social Struggles | Sheffield
audiotech
Additions
hidden as 'non news'
18.04.2007 06:25
This question has been hidden as 'non news'
www.indymedia.org.uk/en/static/editorial.html
Indymedia uk: A network of individuals, independent and alternative media activists and organisations, offering grassroots, non-corporate, non-commercial coverage of important social and political issues.
www.indymedia.org.uk/en/static/editorial.html
Indymedia uk: A network of individuals, independent and alternative media activists and organisations, offering grassroots, non-corporate, non-commercial coverage of important social and political issues.
imcista
Comments
Hide the following 4 comments
u
17.04.2007 23:18
do
Stop breeding animals!
17.04.2007 23:43
Environmental pollution caused through intensive animal farming is an absolutely massive contributor to climate change.
Eating the remains of dead animals and drinking the pus filled milk of animals is killing both you and our planet.
Joe Shmoke
One step at a time
18.04.2007 00:57
1. If absolutely none of us has or uses cars, it becomes far easier to write us off as "completely unrealistic, elitist hippies" (or similar), since we "don't live in the real world". I know this would be a spurious attack, but it's rather often favoured and used against us already.
2. Smoking is an addiction - both mental and physical - and as activists, we are subject to quite a lot of emotional turmoil, making addictions all the easier to get trapped by. Breaking such an addiction is pretty hard (though apparently the "Allen Carr's Easy Way to Stop Smoking" book works wonders - I haven't read it). We all have our vices, and again, if we're purer than pure, it's so much easier to write us off as a bunch of "weirdo eco-puritans" or the like.
I don't think people should drive cars, though I do support a limited amount of communal vehicle ownership, such as sharing the use of a van running on recycled vegetable oil.
I also don't think smoking is a very good idea, but it is in fact possible to grow your own tobacco in the UK. From an environmental point of view, I guess you could argue that it's possible to carry on smoking while not supporting the tobacco industry or contributing to unnecessary industrialised farming or transit of tobacco - although maybe your land would be better used for growing food.
Anyway, overall, the point I'm making is that having a few vices and not being completely "perfect" hopefully shows the rest of the world that we are only human - just the same as they are.
If there was an amazing public transport infrastructure in place, affordable to everyone, as well as common, well established vehicle pooling schemes, then I think it would be much harder to justify owning a car. As it is at the moment, some environmental activists still need the use of a car/van - but I would hope they consider whether each journey is really necessary, and pool where possible. I hope they also consider why they "need" a car - for example, why do they "need" to work in such a job that requires them to drive, or whatever. Mutual aid would sort this as we could all quit work (as we know it), but most people aren't there yet.
As for smoking - it's an addiction, and being only human (and subject to the relentless pressure of those who stand to profit from getting us hooked at an early age), I think it's understandable that some activists find it nigh-on impossible to quit, particularly those who have been doing it for many years. I'm sure many do want to quit, and hopefully in time they will.
But at the moment, that's probably why some among us drive cars and smoke.
I'm not sure even I agree with my arguments above, but a certain degree of hypocrisy is again... only human.
"Judge not lest ye be judged."
To me, eco-activism is very much about being non-judgemental and inclusive of those who want to make an effort but haven't quite got there in all aspects of their lives yet. If we write non-hardcore-purists off all too easily, then all we'll do is alienate those who we really need to get on board. I think the only possible outcome of that scenario is failure for us.
Haven't your own views and daily actions changed and evolved over time, as you became more aware of your own environmental impact? Mine certainly have.
Everybody is at a different stage of awareness and action, and while we all need to change our ways fast, we also need to be patient and inclusive enough not to exclude those who we need to reach out to the most (resulting in them not bothering at all because we sneer at anything less than total, hardcore, instantaneous commitment).
Sanctimonious high-horse riding doesn't help our cause. (Not that I'm accusing you of that.)
Devil's Advocate
why
18.04.2007 01:11
driving
eating
smoking
working
getting benefits
talking shit
consuming
why we are not building alternative to all of this?
zac
zac