Green Scare: Illuminating The New War On Dissent

"The term Green Scare refers to the federal government's expanding prosecution efforts against animal liberation and ecological activists, ... all » drawing parallels to the "Red Scares" of the 1910's and 1950s." www.greenscare.org

Barbara's talk is part of a three part series addressing the government's use of the ever expanding definition of "terrorism", located at Google Video, search PhilosopherSeed.

Barbara Dudley Portland State University professor Former Executive Director of Greenpeace USA Former President of the National Lawyers Guild

BARBARA DUDLEY speaks eloquently from her experience with Greenpeace USA and the National Lawyers Guild. She demonstrates with specific examples how prosecution of civil disobedience direct action tactics have frequently moved from misdemeanors to felonies since the election of George W. Bush.

Greenpeace USA www.greenpeace.org/usa

National Lawyers Guild www.lclark.edu/org.nlg

Northwest Constitutional Rights Center www.nwcrc.org

For more detailed information and to hear audio files of the presentations, please visit: http://philosopherseed.org/features.htm

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• greenscare
• terrorism
• NLG
• Greenpeace
• redscare

[Raunstar]

They should've sued the Press who labeled them eco-terrorists for defamation

[Rad1ka1]

Im just saying that we could all try to achieve this "personal purity" and become this 100% natural person, it would only get us that far. The rest of the world would still continue down the drain and make this world unhabitable.

Therefor Direct Action against those who destroy this earth is alot more effective than becoming a "natural elfie"

[TheChoujinVirus]

@Rad1ka1

but wouldn't that hurt the cause and result in retaliation?

[alcoholya]

@vanderbilt887 is this still not terrorism? lol

[etiennealive]

@etiennealive I still have to get used to this new layout of Youtube. More costefficient propably, but less accesable.

[etiennealive]

@vanderbilt887 Exxon doesn't have to be convinced, when you present more efficient systems, that are non oil based. It will be unavoidable they will lose power and part of the strenght of their company. Their mentality won't last either as a dominant one. I'm talking about changing business at the fundamental level of an economy. If our generation can achieve that, than we have a chance on achieving a higher form of excistence.

[etiennealive]

@vanderbilt887 Any proposed introduction of a new system of organisation of societies, will do so parralel aswell as dependend on the availeble techniques.

Tthe succes of introducing and imbedding these techniques in society, largely depents on the interaction with the current economic state. I wish it was in an other way. But I was born just like you  in this situation wich we certainly didn't choose for.

[etiennealive]

@vanderbilt887 Ok, you know I agree with you on, on most of your opinions. I shall be more specific. You say economic growth = ecological destruction. But this depents on the products we use and how we use them. Simply said ; we use the wrong kind of petrol for our mobility. The wrong kind of resources for a lot of other things, etc. etc. We've caused these un friendly conditions.

[vanderbilt887]

I am completely in favor of that, but how do you perceive doing that? Ideas are important, no doubt, but you won't convince, say, Exxon, with this Friedmanian (Thomas) approach of a "green capitalism", which, in my view at least, is a blatant contradiction in terms. Only market-fundamentalists think that the only way of solving the ecological crisis is the so-called "free" market, which in reality is rather *the cause* of it. Economic growth = ecological destruction, this is, sadly, a reality.

[etiennealive]

@vanderbilt887 We could also do an attempt to change, what these corporations have as property. Imagine way's to organise things that are more efficient than than the current levels of organisation, and contain other idea's that are more socialy, enviromentaly aplieble, than the current idea's. Even these corporations depend on the idea's, knowledge, information they receive from others, often individuals just with an idea that has an important impact on societies around the world.

[vanderbilt887]

We're going to have to face the fact that "hanging banners" and the like is -ultimately - ineffective. What we're up against is the huge onslaught of nature by the capitalist machine, which will not be stopped by banners (for it is primarily driven by greed). We need to destroy corporate property, on a large scale, to acquire notoriety, to directly stop the wrongdoings of corporations (law and the like is a never-ending story) and realize some real changes. By now this is completely justified.

[Rad1ka1]

@TheChoujinVirus I havent heard of Chelsea stating that anywhere. Got a quote from somewhere?