0
0
Whose side are you on?
When a government becomes destructive of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it.
Do you believe that the United States government takes better care of corporations, or human beings?
I don’t know anyone who believes the United States government takes better care of human beings than it does corporations.
Do you believe that your vote counts as much as the votes of owners of transnational oil and gas corporations? Do you believe your vote counts as much as the money of owners of transnational oil and gas corporations?
The United States government is not a democracy. It is a plutocracy: government by, for, and of the wealthy.
It is a kleptocracy: government by, for, and of thieves. These thieves, these extremely wealthy thieves, these thieves who own corporations and the thieves who serve them in the U.S. government, steal communities, and they destroy the land. When they destroy the land, they steal not only the present but the future.
The purpose of a corporation is to amass wealth. That is its function. The function is not to protect communities, not to promote democracy, not to promote the health of the land. Corporations have no morals, and those who run them do not scruple at destroying life on this planet. Indeed, that is precisely what they are doing.
If aliens from outer space came to this planet and did the harm that oil and gas corporations are doing, we would stop them using any means necessary. If aliens from outer space were making it so there were carcinogens in every mother’s breast milk, we would stop them. If they were putting in oil and gas wells all over the planet, we would stop them. If they were changing the climate, we would stop them. If they were destroying landbase after landbase, we would stop them. And if they set up governments to “legalize” their sociopathological behavior, we would stop them.
When a government becomes destructive of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it.
When a government and corporations work together to destroy life on earth, it is the responsibility of the people to stop this using any means necessary.
In a sane culture, Tim DeChristopher would not be facing trial. He would be seen as the hero that he is. And the corporate executives who destroy landbases as surely as they destroy democracy would be on trial. And the federal land managers who put out illegal oil and gas leases, leases which violate law after law after law, would be on trial. And the police who arrest those who protest against these illegal gas leases would be on trial (do these individual police officers realize they are lending their talents to the destruction of the land and of democracy? They are to protect and to serve, but do they realize they are protecting and serving not the people, not their communities, but instead sociopathological corporations and the politicians who serve those corporations?).
Never forget that the atrocities committed by the Nazis were under their own laws legal. The Nazi government passed laws allowing them to legally commit atrocities. And they arrested those who opposed those laws. Never forget that the atrocities committed in apartheid South Africa were under their own laws legal. The South African government passed laws allowing them to legally commit atrocities. And they arrested those who opposed those laws. Never forget that the atrocities committed in Stalinist Soviet Union were legal. The Soviets put on show trials for many of those condemned under these laws. And the police arrested those who opposed these laws.
In all of these cases, including the current one, the question becomes, whose side are you on?
In the current case, Tim DeChristopher is on the side of communities, on the side of the land, on the side of democratic decision-making processes. He is standing against atrocities, and against a sociopathological kleptocracy.
Whose side are you on?
I’m on Tim DeChristopher’s side.
Never forget, when a government becomes destructive of life, community, and democracy, it is the responsibility of the people to alter or abolish it. If you do not, that government will destroy life, community, and democracy. As we see.
It is time we fulfilled our responsibility. The corporations would like us to believe that we can’t fight them. Timothy DeChristopher has single-handedly proved them wrong. Whether he is successful now depends on the broader environmental movement. Will we let Timothy’s act stand alone, as a symbolic protest that got a moment of press and then faded? Or will we join him in protecting the last scraps of wilderness, the final, fragile shreds of our planet? Will we let corporate power turn mountains into rubble and deserts into sludge? Or will we do what it takes to stop them? We have weapons, from protests and lawsuits to the time-honored American tradition of civil disobedience to the serious tactics that resistance movements have always used. Whatever weapons you choose, use them wisely and use them well, but use them.
With permission from the authors:
- Derrick Jensen, Lierre Keith ❧
0
0
We must stand together to demand a healthy and just world. Join our Regional Action List.
Not in this lifetime. I used to have great respect for Derrick Jensen. But I was shocked to learn that he advocates the massive and global killing of animals in the name of “sustainability.” The level of ignorance required to stake out this position is even more shocking. Lierre Keith’s book is FULL of misinformation. So much, in fact, it’s difficult to know where to start. Aside from her extrapolation of the personal to explicate the general: Ecology 101: There isn’t enough land on the planet to raise animals sustainably for human consumption. And never mind that there are entire cultures that have been living on a vegetarian diet for centuries. If Lierre Keith has decided she wants to eat meat, she’s going to insist that everybody else do it, too–even if it means fudging the facts, and extremely so. Animal Rights 101: “Humanely raised” does not equal “humanely slaughtered” (there’s an oxymoron if there ever was one). Apparently, however, the sentience and emotional lives of animals are insignificant to Mr. Jensen. Their interests are to be subjected to the gluttony of humans. No land ethic, no movement forward to care for the animals as members of our community. “Beyond Hope,” by Mr. Jensen, no longer holds any inspiration whatsoever. A man who argues on behalf of the destruction of the nonhuman is not a man who has anything to teach me.
You just posted something by Derrick Jensen and Lierre Keith, both of whom advocate for killing humans to save nature. How is that in line with the non-violent perspective of this site?
We are organizing a walk from San Francisco CA to Washington D.C. to raise the awareness of the public and their legislative representatives of the need to amend the Constitution of the United States to wrest the control of government from corporate money and restore it to human citizens.
We are working in concert with http://www.movetoamend.org/we-corporations for media outreach to help raise the voices of the people across the nation.
We will walk in one hour shifts, 24/7, rain or shine, starting at Golden Gate Park, in San Francisco, on May 16th and complete the walk at the Lincoln Memorial on August 1st. We will camp in state parks and recreation areas along the way and move camp every few days as the walk progresses.
We represent no political agenda save to restore the unalienable and Constitutional rights of human beings and the dominion of human citizens over corporations.
We believe that legislation and honest philosophical debate, of the people, by the people and for the people, can only begin when people control the government.
We believe that no true benefit to human citizens can issue from a government controlled by corporate purse strings. Unless and until corporations loose the claim of Personhood as opined by a Supreme Court in the 1880’s, no limit of the expenditure of money as speech can be legislated.
We hold no biases or prejudices of any human being based on: choices in their own lifestyle, their culture, biological heritage, or personal, religious or political, beliefs. We welcome diversity in this group and celebrate our common purpose.
If you would like to take part in all or any part of this political exercise, please respond to this e-mail and we will be glad to answer any questions and fill in details.
Thank you,
George L. Monahan