Greenpeace is encouragung its supporters to engage in other campaigns on the weekend of the 'Great Climate Swoop' rather than backing the protest at Ratcliffe.
The ‘Great Climate Swoop’ against Ratcliffe power station on October 17th - 18th is arguably one of the most important protests this year. If it succeeds in closing down the site, it could lead to a massive upsurge in climate change campaigning. Unfortunately there is evidence that Greenpeace is not only indifferent to the protest but is subtly encouraging its supporters not to attend.
In recent weeks, there has been a lot of internal criticism from some of GP’s area networkers over its refusal to organise campaigns that utilise its pool of trained active supporters. It has been over a year since they have been used in a proper campaign and many local supporter groups are falling apart. In my group, instead of the 25-30 supporters that regularly attended meetings, we are now down to less than six.
One of the reasons that full-timers have been giving is that Greenpeace is suffering its own financial crisis and needs to concentrate its resources on its central activities. While I am sure that this is true, why has Greenpeace announced to its supporters in the past few days TWO separate campaigns (Heathrow and coal) that will make use of its active supporters? And why does it want them to carry out street campaigning in support of these initiatives on SAME the weekend of the ‘Great Climate Swoop’?
It may be the case that Greenpeace has made a mistake; or it may believe that encouraging its supporters to do something else is does not stop from going to Ratcliffe. But it is difficult to see these two requests as being nothing more than a subtle attempt to undermine support for the ‘Great Climate Swoop’. After all, if the Ratcliffe protest does work, then it is going to leave a lot of people, and especially those who loyalty give Greenpeace money each money, asking whether they have got their spending priorities right.
Of course us cynics in Greenpeace could be mistaken and the simple way to prove it would for Canonbury Villas to announce that a ‘Greenpeace bloc’ will be there on October 17th.
In recent weeks, there has been a lot of internal criticism from some of GP’s area networkers over its refusal to organise campaigns that utilise its pool of trained active supporters. It has been over a year since they have been used in a proper campaign and many local supporter groups are falling apart. In my group, instead of the 25-30 supporters that regularly attended meetings, we are now down to less than six.
One of the reasons that full-timers have been giving is that Greenpeace is suffering its own financial crisis and needs to concentrate its resources on its central activities. While I am sure that this is true, why has Greenpeace announced to its supporters in the past few days TWO separate campaigns (Heathrow and coal) that will make use of its active supporters? And why does it want them to carry out street campaigning in support of these initiatives on SAME the weekend of the ‘Great Climate Swoop’?
It may be the case that Greenpeace has made a mistake; or it may believe that encouraging its supporters to do something else is does not stop from going to Ratcliffe. But it is difficult to see these two requests as being nothing more than a subtle attempt to undermine support for the ‘Great Climate Swoop’. After all, if the Ratcliffe protest does work, then it is going to leave a lot of people, and especially those who loyalty give Greenpeace money each money, asking whether they have got their spending priorities right.
Of course us cynics in Greenpeace could be mistaken and the simple way to prove it would for Canonbury Villas to announce that a ‘Greenpeace bloc’ will be there on October 17th.
Comments
Hide the following 7 comments
Some validity
22.09.2009 13:42
“We would like to have a couple of National Weekends of Action on 10/11 October and 17/18 October getting as many campaign groups out on the high streets around the country as possible. Please build these dates into your plans.”
So there appears to be some validity in the above argument.
Josh
Please explain?
22.09.2009 15:42
Anon.
Don't worry about what Greenpeace is doing or not doing
22.09.2009 19:14
anon
Ho ho
22.09.2009 20:41
You can make a symbolic gesture, safe in the knowledge that nothing will change, or you can try for something bolder - your choice so stop fuckin whingeing.
anon
The orginal post is pointlessly destructive and ill informed
23.09.2009 19:03
I reckon between now and December I could find 3-6 different climate events every weekend that I could potentially support. I'll choose the one that works for me and the op can go swoop if that's what floats their boat.
Equally as far as I'm aware Greenpeace ditched the idea of 'area networkers' years ago so both the op and Josh can't be particularily close to the organsition. Any references to internal criticism are clearly ill informed twaddle.
John
Peoples front of Judea
or is that
Judean peoples front
John
Shum mishtake shurely
23.09.2009 19:31
Well, someone should tell Greepeace that they've ditched area networkers.
On their 'Active Supporters' Page they invite people to "Request more details from your local area networker" (
and in their June/July 2009 edition of Network, Sebastian Seeney writes that: "Last year I became area networker for North east London and I'm now area networker for Bethnal Green"
(
Perhaps John isn't that close to Greenpeace.
Ed
correction/addition to earlier article!
28.09.2009 09:02
thanks all,
Toby
Toby
e-mail:
tobyosmond@gmail.com