Get a FREE Issue of Earth Island Journal
Sign up for our no-risk offer today.

Go Back: Home > Earth Island Journal > Latest News > Post and Comments

Latest News

The Environmental Movement Doesn’t Resemble the Obama Coalition

Notes on the Unbearable Whiteness of the Green Movement

Last week Earth Island Institute hosted a discussion here at the David Brower Center in Berkeley to explore what the results of the 2012 election will mean for the environmental movement. I had the pleasure of moderating the evening’s conversation with a rock star cast of California Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner, former Clinton-era EPA official and the former Western Director of the NRDC, Felicia Marcus, and Michael Marx, a veteran corporate accountability activist who now leads the Sierra Club’s Beyond Oil campaign.

keystone xl protestPhoto by John DuffyThis is what environmentalism looks like: The mostly white crowd at the Nov. 18 Keystone XL rally
at the White House.

Portions of the conversation were expected. Everyone agreed that Barack Obama’s re-election, the Democratic gains in the US Senate, and the significant Democratic wins in the California legislature will prevent any rollbacks of major environmental laws. We won’t have to play defense, and that’s a relief. At the same time, everyone agreed that Democratic wins don’t mean we’re headed for Ecotopia. The Democrats are unreliable allies, at best, and environmental advocates and organizations will have to keep pushing for laws and policies that protect public health, our air, our water, our wild places, and the planet’s atmosphere to see any forward motion.

“We have to be smart about picking issues,” Assemblywoman Skinner said. When asked what that means, the three environmental veterans agreed that the best chances for defending the environment will come through the (California and federal) executive branches’ existing regulatory powers. “Anything we could get out of this Congress wouldn’t be good,” the Sierra Club’s Michael Marx said. So progress will have to come from federal and state agencies enforcing their existing powers to the best of their ability. This could mean new rules on CO2 emissions, new rules on chemical disclosure, and tighter prohibitions about extractive industries on public lands.

The real electricity of the night came when Assemblywoman Skinner spoke with passion about what should be obvious, but so far seems to have gone unmentioned by the eco-commentariat: The fact that the environmental movement bears very little resemblance to the coalition of voters who kept President Obama in the White House.

“The president was re-elected with strong support from African-Americans, Latinos, women, and young people,” Skinner said. “And the environmental movement, at least its leadership, remains mostly old white guys.”

Environmental movement, make a note-to-self: When we look more like a Romney-Ryan election night gathering than an Obama-Biden election night gathering, we’re in trouble.

That might be overstating things a bit — but not by much. Yes, the environmental movement is plenty youthful, with youth-led or youth-dominated groups like Energy Action and 350.org spearheading the effort to stem climate change. And, just like in much of the progressive NGO sector, women are in key leadership roles in many environmental outfits. (Rebecca Tarbotton of Rainforest Action Network and Frances Beinecke from NRDC come to mind, as does the estimable Betsy Taylor of Breakthrough Strategies.)

But all of those individuals and all of those organizations share something in common: They’re rather pale. 

This isn’t news, of course. The unbearable whiteness of the green movement was called out publicly for the first time at least 20 years ago, when Dr. Robert Bullard and others noted how environmental groups had neglected issues of environmental racism and injustice. Since then, some important progress toward alliance-building and solidarity have been made. The “Big Green” groups appear to have internalized the idea that a healthy environment is a human rights issue. National civil rights organizations understand how pollution and environmental destruction can harm their constituencies. (Just see this NAACP report on coal published last week.) And there are a constellation of organizations and individuals — Green for All, Urban Habitat, Little Village Environmental Justice Organization, Communities for a Better Environment, Van Jones, Carl Anthony, Majora Carter, Will Allen (to name just a very few) — for whom there isn’t a division between caring about civil rights and human rights and caring about the environment. Or, as Bullard likes to say: “If you drink water, you’re an environmentalist. If you breathe air, you’re an environmentalist. If you eat food, you’re an environmentalist.”

Still, despite this progress, I think it’s fair to say that most Americans perceive environmentalism to be a white thing. Backcountry camping, buying organic food, and going to climate change protests remain “Stuff White People Like.”

I can’t say I have any mind-blowing prescriptions for resolving this. At least, nothing beyond what’s already been said a million times already: The need for enviros to listen more and talk less; the importance of reducing self-righteousness and self-importance in favor of meeting people where they are at with humor and patience; the necessity of demonstrating how a healthy environment can truly lift all boats; the value of ecological education programs that expose kids of color (and all kids) to wild places; the virtue of real solidarity in place of on-again, off-again recruitment.

No, all I’ve got to offer is a long, hard look in the mirror — and with it the recognition that our environmental movement resembles the America of the past more than it does the America of the future.

Jason Mark, Editor, Earth Island JournalJason Mark photo
Jason Mark is a writer-farmer with a deep background in environmental politics.  In addition to his work in the Earth Island Journal, his writings have appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle, The Nation, The Progressive, Utne Reader, Orion, Gastronomica, Grist.org, Alternet.org, E magazine, and Yes!  He is a co-author of Building the Green Economy: Success Stories from the Grassroots and also co-author with Kevin Danaher of Insurrection: Citizen Challenges to Corporate Power. When not writing and editing, he co-manages Alemany Farm, San Francisco’s largest food production site.

Email this post to a friend.

Write to the editor about this post.

Subscribe Today
cover thumbnail EIJ cover thumbnail EIJ cover thumbnail EIJ cover thumbnail EIJFour issues of the award-winning
Earth Island Journal for only $10

 

Comments

Dear Sir/Madam,
According to United Nations report meat consumption is the major cause of global warming. Green house gas produced by livestock is contributing more in Global Warming than the emissions from the vehicles all over the world. More than 51% of pollution in this world is caused due to animals which are raised for meat consumption. Livestock sector produces many harmful greenhouse gases. It generates 65 per cent of nitrous oxide, which has 296 times the Global Warming Potential (GWP) of CO2. Most of this comes from manure. It also generates 37 per cent of methane (23 times as warming as CO2), which is largely produced by the digestive system of ruminants, and 64 per cent of ammonia, which contributes significantly to acid rain.

      Right now the total population of the world is 7 billion and the animals and birds   animals killed every year for meat consumption is 140 billion. Such a large numbers of animals and birds, which are raised for their meat, are consuming huge amounts of food grains, trees and greeneries including other natural resources and in return they are discharging tremendous amount of greenhouse gases. According to the data given by United Nations (FAO):- 1/3 of the food produced in this world and 90 percent of soybean is used up by animals and birds raised for their meat. It takes 10 kg of animal feed to produce 1 kg of beef, 4 to 5.5 kg of grain to produce 1 kg of pork, 2 to 3 kg of grain to produce 1 kg of poultry meat. And then of the total amount of clean water being used, human use 30% of it where as 70% is used up for animals and birds raised for meat. Likewise it requires 2/3 of fuel energy (electricity, gas, oil etc.) to produce and distribute the food to these animals and birds. So, if everyone is to be a vegetarian, all the resources required to raise animals and birds for meat will be available for human beings which will help reduce food shortage, drinking water problem etc. Moreover, all the greenhouse gases produced by these animals and birds will be stopped which in turn will help in stopping Global Warming.

      I also request you to visit the following website and watch the video entitled ‘Methane and Carbon Dioxide: A closer Look at the Numbers’:- www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHLiNJyJSLE

      Therefore, apart from switching from dirty to clean energy, we should also tell everybody, specially to the people at the top positions in the government that the easiest and quickest way for solving global warming problem is by changing our food habit immediately and adopting vegetarian or vegan diet.

Thank you,

By Krishna Dangol on Mon, December 03, 2012 at 8:27 am

http://www.alternet.org/election-2012/populist-revolution-how-bold-new-voter-coalition-can-reshape-nation

By Ali Canada 515 S.108th East Ave Tulsa on Tue, November 27, 2012 at 7:01 pm

Well said.

By Carter Brooks on Thu, November 22, 2012 at 12:14 am

Leave a comment

Comments Policy

Remember my personal information?

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Please enter the word you see in the image below:

View Posts by Date View Posts by Author

Subscribe
Today

Four issues for just
$10 a year.

cover thumbnail EIJ

Join Now!

 

0.0999