An EF! National Campaign
It was decided at the Earth First! Winter Moot 1999 that Earth First! would put on a national campaign, or series of hits. This is a summary of the discussion that led to and arose from this decision, and plans for turning it into reality.
The discussion from which these points are drawn was attended by about 30 people. The main areas talked about were: what might be the aims of a national campaign? How might it be structured? It was generally agreed not to discuss potential targets at this stage, especially given time constraints, though inevitably some ideas on this subject were aired. A meeting will be held on March 20th, by which time it is hoped that these ideas will have been discussed and developed by local groups, which can then feed back to the meeting, whether through at tendance or directing correspondence through the Action Update.
There was general agreement that this should not be a one-off action but a sustained campaign, not with one static target, but multiple targets with a wide geographical spread.
AIMS:
Internal
-
To strengthen local, regional and national networks through regular mobilisation for action.
-
To provide a vehicle for building links with other groups communities.
-
To provide individuals with a regular point of contact and action External.
External
-
To damage shut down a company activity.
-
Pro. We could get rid off something we all have a gripe against. Would show up links between state and industry as police moved to protect company. Empowering.
-
Con. Affecting profits is not as easy as we sometimes think (e.g. Shell had growth in profits in '95 year of Brent Spar and Ogoni solidarity action s across UK and Europe). If we aim to shut down and that doesn't happen, the campaign would be seen as failure, which wouldn't be fair to ourselves.
Comparison was drawn with the campaign to shut down Hillgrove cat farm by the animal rights movement. It is the only place of its kind, a 'weak link'. There were disadvantages in this sort of campaign for EF! Actions are too easily prevented by police if campaign is too geographically specific. If we choose a weak company activity we could be doing the market's job, and also not being effective in a wider sense. Lessons should be drawn from Hillgrove.
Structure
There was support for the idea of kicking off the campaign with a large national action, and following it up with monthly regional actions interspersed with regular (ie. every 3 months) national hits. There was a suggestion that the responsibility for sorting out these national hits could rotate around groups regions. The monthly actions could be on the same day of each month to give people grater access to them (as with Critical Mass). There was acknowledgement of a need for flexibility and constant analysis. The Campaign could be a vehicle for breaking down perceived hierarchies a nd organisational cliques. We should avoid burdening particular groups/ individuals with what could be a large workload (ie. A Road Alert! situation).
Targets
This is probably the most difficult bit. How do we choose one target, when we are against a majority of companies, industrial activities, etc? No matter what we choose one campaign will not bring down global capitalism. Should we focus on a company or an issue?
What criteria do we use to pick the target? Do we pick something where we can use our experience and proven tactics, or something that might take us out of the 'single issue' rut and give us an opportunity to build links with other struggles? Here are some of the suggestions so far:
-
Chevron. An oil company with operations in Nigeria. As well as showing solidarity with struggles over there, it links in to transport pollution, globalisation etc. and has multiple potential targets.
-
New Deal. Again, multiple targets, links with workforce unemployed.
-
Nuclear Industry Waste Transport. Industry is currently weakened and discredited in the public eye. Opportunities for linking with other groups active on the issue.
-
Tarmac. Construction company involved in road-building (Twyford Down, M65, Manchester Airport) and lots of quarrying. There has been a target tarmac campaign, circa 1993. They didn't like it.
-
Genetics. Already a huge focus on this. Possibilities are endless. Could focus on one company ie. Monsanto are in a dodgy position in this country. Suggestion that there are a few smaller companies underpinning the industry, especially in research and development.
-
Advertising. An attack on this industry is one that would strike at the heart of consumer culture? Billboards, TV, Radio, PR and ad companies provide multiple targets.
None of these suggestions were discussed at any length, and so no doubt there are many more out there. All suggestions, along with reasonings behind them, should be conveyed to the meeting in March via the Action update.
Meeting on Saturday March 20th, probably in Yorkshire. Call 01508 531636 for details.