

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Long ago and far, far away, in a Canadian prairie city and a prior life as a local and regional reporter for TV news, I wondered why we covered Indigenous issues so badly. I presented this question to reporters, editors and producers in print and broadcast newsrooms, including my own, throughout the city. This in a city where roughly one-quarter of the local population was Indigenous, living literally on the other side of the tracks.
Not a single person I interviewed argued against my premise. Everyone agreed our coverage was "lousy," and got worse throughout the province, the further away from the city you were. Most gave me the usual excuses: We didn't have enough time or people to do better, given tight deadlines; didn't have adequate resources or people, given tighter budgets; and we worried about accusations of racism if we did a story about the problems, and accusations about racism if we painted over the problems.
One producer in TV news said something different. She didn't agree with what she called easy excuses. She said it was about money--advertising. Poor people in poor neighborhoods didn't buy advertising, as a rule. Indigenous peoples, often the poorest of the poor, not only didn't buy ads, but didn't pay attention to ads or buy newspapers, a major source of stories and ideas for local broadcasting newsrooms. To her, Indigenous peoples got the coverage they paid for: no money, no coverage.
Put simply--we weren't considered part of the audience or readership.
Most journalists also said we didn't bother to cover Indigenous peoples because there was no journalistic payoff. We, reporters, preferred to do stories to improve situations and conditions, by pointing out things that didn't work properly. We looked for bad guys, stories about corruption or inept business owners, government administrators, politicians, cops, for example. Yet similar stories about Indigenous communities never went anywhere. Things never changed. Also, by telling these stories, we faced accusations of concentrating on the negative. (See comment above about racism.)

In my opinion, things haven't changed much in the last 25 years in Canadian print and broadcasting, with the exception of APTN News, now in its 18th year of broadcasting a national newscast by, for and about Indigenous peoples. CBC News, to its credit, has played catchup, creating its own unit called CBC Indigenous. There are a handful of reporters and opinionators at other major news organizations, print and broadcasting, with a working or better knowledge about Indigenous peoples, histories, politics and lives. Notable is Doug Cuthand, a Cree and a columnist at the Saskatoon Star Phoenix.
Otherwise most journalists continue to rely on old stereotypes and stubborn prejudices, and on superficial and erroneous stories, as they helicopter into and out of "Indian Country" to report on complicated issues. Take the mainstream media's coverage of the TransMountain oil pipeline in Western Canada and the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines through the United States. The legacy media covered these stories in one of two ways: as protests against oil pipelines, citing damage to health of people and the ecology; or as paramilitary and police forces used by governments to suppress peaceful protest. Basically, good guys vs. bad guys, depending on your point of view, with the spirit of "cowboys fighting Indians" the underlying narrative. True, but nowhere near the whole and much better story.
In both Canada and the United States, anti-pipeline protests galvanized Indigenous activists, creating broad alliances with non-Indigenous activists and turning scattered voices into emerging political movements. For example, Idle No More, often described by the mainstream media as a fading social media phenom, found traction with people fed up with the inaction or lack of support from Indigenous politicians over the Standing Rock, North Dakota, protests. There were plenty of pious promises from Indigenous politicians, but the only real action came from grassroots activists putting their bodies out there. Similar frustration with the established orders in "Indian Country" on both sides of the Canada/US border is leading to calls for change from a younger generation of Indigenous peoples, asking their political representatives for more push for their rights and less give to government demands.

That was the story most journalists missed, in some cases because the story handed to them limited the historical scope of what was at stake in anti-pipeline protests. The Oceti Sakowin Camp was billed and billed itself as "a first-of-its-kind historic gathering of Indigenous Nations." But real historic memory would show it was only the latest broad political alliance going back to the occupation of Alcatraz in 1969; the "Trail of Broken Treaties Caravan" to Washington, DC, in 1973; and the occupation of Wounded Knee, also in 1973, by the American Indian Movement.
"The Alcatraz occupation is recognized today as one of the most important events in contemporary Native American history," according to the US National Park Service:
It was the first intertribal protest action to focus the nation's attention on the situation of native peoples in the United States. Because of the attention brought to the plight of the American Indian communities...federal laws were created which demonstrated new respect for aboriginal land rights and for the freedom of American Indians to maintain their traditional cultures.
In Canada, the 78-day Oka Crisis at Kanehsatake Mohawk Territory, Quebec, in 1990 grabbed national and international news interest. Canadians were shocked from complacency as Mohawks set up barricades and governments ordered more of the military than it would later send to the first Gulf War, to corral 40 men women and children--all over the expansion of whites-only golf course from nine to 18 holes. The Oka Crisis is often credited with sparking an awakening of Indigenous activism across Canada, and a series of developments from commissions of inquiry to the creation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
Most reporters at major news networks and newspapers didn't see those historical threads, because it's never been part of their journalistic DNA. They were never taught about these events, social and political developments in their history or poli-sci classes. Those courses didn't exist until relatively recently as Native or Indigenous Issues at a few colleges and universities. Even if the courses were available, journalists were unlikely enroll in them, as the courses didn't increase their chances for a job or advance their career in a newsroom.
In my humble opinion, the alternative and Indigenous news media did better covering these Indigenous stories. Vox, Vice, APTN and Mother Jones understood better the significance of these stories to Indigenous nations, communities and peoples, because they accepted the need to see stories through their eyes. These are the missing pieces in the puzzles presented to both US and Canadian audiences by the legacy media. Indigenous perspectives, plural because there are many, have always been missing to our understanding, whether it's about pipelines, land rights, racism or music.
Things are changing, if slowly, thanks to Royal Commissions, justice inquiries, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission Report, and--yes--thanks to more and better media coverage. There's greater interest, a genuine hunger by the audiences and readerships to know more about Indigenous peoples than ever. There's a greater understanding that we need the missing pieces in this puzzle called us. There are more stories asking the right questions. More Indigenous and people of color journalists telling their own stories. Better trained and informed non-Indigenous reporters graduating J-schools and entering newsrooms than ever.
That's good news.
Formerly known as Columbus Day, today is Indigenous Peoples Day in more than 80 (and counting) cities, counties, and states. While "official" recognition of this day began in the late 70's, with the U.N. discussing the replacement of Columbus Day, resistance and challenge to said "holiday" existed in the hearts and minds of Indigenous and Native Peoples long before cities or states began to observe Indigenous Peoples Day.
As land defenders--people who are working for Indigenous territories to be protected from contamination and exploitation--we see Indigenous Peoples Day as progress; it signals a crucial shift in our culture to recognize the dark past of colonization. No longer are our communities, towns, cities, and states remaining silent and complacent in celebrating the cultural genocide that ensued after Christopher Columbus landed on Turtle Island (aka North America). Today also means that the erasure of our narrative as Indigenous Peoples is ending and our truths are rising to the surface. These truths include: Christopher Columbus was not a hero, he was a murderer. The land we all exist on is stolen. The history we've been taught is not accurate or complete. And perhaps most important among those truths, Indigenous lands are still being colonized, and our people are still suffering the trauma and impacts of colonization.
Across the country we continue to see the violation of our right and treaties as extractive projects are proposed and constructed. Across the nation, we continue to grieve our missing and murdered Indigenous women, victims of violence brought to their communities by extractive oil and mining projects. We continue bear the brunt of climate change as our food sovereignty is threatened by dying ecosystems and as our animal relatives are becoming extinct due to land loss, warmer seasons, and/or contamination. And now, we are fighting for the very right to resist as anti-protest laws emerge across the country, which aim to criminalize our people for protecting what is most sacred to us.
Yet despite these challenges, our people and communities are demonstrating incredible bravery and innovation to bring forth healing and justice. Through the tireless work of Indigenous organizers, activists, knowledge keepers, and artists, we are learning about what is working and what our movements need more of to dismantle systems--like white supremacy and systemic racism--that colonization has imposed onto our communities.
So while we could dive into the stories of how our people are still being attacked by the many forms of colonization, we find it important on this day, a day that symbolizes progress and evolution, to acknowledge what is working in our communities and in our movements. All too often, our people are framed as victims, and while there's truth in those narratives, it's also critical, for our self-actualization as Indigenous Peoples, to have our strengths, our resilience, and our creativity seen and honored.
All too often, our people are framed as victims, and while there's truth in those narratives, it's also critical, for our self-actualization as Indigenous Peoples, to have our strengths, our resilience, and our creativity seen and honored.With that in mind, we want to highlight three frameworks that are driving our movements to be stronger, inclusive, and transformative:
Be Intersectional
This term or concept has fallen into the category of buzzwords and trendy topics in social and environmental justice discourse but it is imperative that we break down the silos that keep our issues and movements separate. This past September, the Indigenous Environmental Network mobilized in response to the Global Climate Action Summit (GCAS) with the It Takes Roots Alliance, which consists of the Climate Justice Alliance, Global Grassroots Justice Alliance, and Right to the City Alliance. As we challenged Governor Jerry Brown of California and the GCAS for promoting climate capitalism, and as we demanded investment in real climate solutions that honor Indigenous and place-based knowledge, we also built solidarity and unity across races, cultures, and issues, so that as we take on the roots of climate change, capitalism and colonization, we are empowered by our alignment, our diversity, and our respect and trust with one another.
In Indian country, organizations like the South Dakota-based Thunder Valley Community Development Corporation are leading the way when it comes to intersectional projects. Not only is Thunder Valley CDC building a model for how our communities can thrive and not be dependent on the fossil fuel industry, but through sustainable community projects, it is addressing housing issues, improving the workforce, and building food sovereignty for its community. Another project making strides in connecting many intersectional issues is the MMIW Who Is Missing Campaign, which utilizes art to amplify the epidemic of Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls. The visual project amplifies the absolute necessity for us to take an intersectional approach in addressing the crisis we face as Indigenous peoples. Resource extraction, poverty, racism, and an extremely flawed justice system are all compounding causes that must be seen as parts of a system that needs to be dismantled.
Embrace Indigenous Feminism
It must be said that Indigenous women have played a critical role in showing mainstream society the power that grassroots feminist movements carry when initiating transformative action. From #MeToo to #BelieveSurvivors, we are seeing countless institutions across what is currently the United States being challenged to own their inherent condonement of gender inequity and violence, and to meanwhile witness and accept an upsurge of feminist activism. However, Indigenous feminism goes beyond the mainstream critique of only addressing toxic masculinity and systemic patriarchy--by taking a much broader stance that critiques the overall system of settler-colonialism. At its heart, Indigenous feminism is unapologetically anti-colonial, and we need to embrace that.
Indigenous women are demonstrating what it takes to smash patriarchy, to defend our homelands, and to protect our families all at the same time. In the far reaches of Alaska, Gwich'in women have for decades been leading the fight to protect their homelands and the Porcupine Caribou herd from oil development in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Indigenous feminist movements are often the first to identify the intersections of violence, colonization, poverty and environmental injustice. In the bayous of Louisiana, along the U.S. Gulf Coast, Indigenous women have been defending Indigenous and Black communities from the dangers of the Bayou Bridge oil pipeline by blockading construction for months on end. Through direct action and community-based education, Indigenous women leaders are catalyzing our communities and nations to reevaluate what it means to live in relation to Mother Earth and one another. If we are to truly make progress toward building a more just and sustainable society, then we must center an Indigenous feminist framework in our practices.
Disrupt the Status Quo / Change the Story
We live in a world shaped by stories. Stories motivate us to build societies and nations. Stories give us purpose and direction. And in this current world, it is a story of white supremacy that dominates. In this story, imperialism is necessary, resource extraction is compulsory, capitalism is inevitable, blackness is demonized, and Indigenous territories must be settled and colonized. Why? Because, the story of white supremacy must be self-fulfilling. Any alternative narratives, such as inherent rights, Indigenous nationhood, and local sustainable economies must be diminished or erased. In this context, we as Indigenous peoples are not meant to exist; we are not meant to have made it this long in the eyes of settler colonialism. As such, simply asserting ourselves in the present and placing ourselves in the future are tremendous acts of defiance to the status quo.
This is what we saw in the Idle No More movement of 2012, wherein Indigenous peoples across Turtle Island took to occupying public spaces to uplift the struggle for environmental justice and Indigenous sovereignty. We also saw this in the open prairies of the NoDAPL fight at Standing Rock, where thousands took action against an oil pipeline project and many more watched the events through the eyes of Indigenous water protectors via social media broadcasts. These events show that Indigenous peoples are not only taking control of our stories, but are challenging the status quo of settler narratives overall. We are changing the story, bit by bit, of what it means to exist in the heart of settler-colonial states like the United States of America and Canada.
This is a process. We have all been affected by capitalism, colonization and white supremacy. As such, it's going to take all of us--native and non-native alike--to dismantle these systems of oppression. However, White allies in particular must be held accountable for their role in the dismantling of white supremacy and extractive economies. We need our allies to join us in pushing back against the narratives of colonization and to incorporate the frameworks of intersectionality, indigenous feminism, and indigenous story-based strategies in their allyship. It is incumbent upon our allies to honor the work, sacrifice, and blood shed by Indigenous people in the fights to protect Mother Earth and defend our homelands. As Indigenous peoples, we are powerful agents of change in a time that needs us the most--and our ability to harness an intersectional, feminist, and transformative movement is what will lead us in the right direction for the benefit of all life on this planet. Let's cherish that. Let's honor that. Let's build on that.
Climate change, the most important issue currently affecting our planet and our species, is the subject of a global conference this week--yet it is barely a blip in media coverage. The 23rd Conference of Parties (COP23), which is the United Nation's annual international gathering on climate change, is taking place this week in Bonn, Germany, co-hosted by both Germany and the island nation of Fiji. As usual, country delegates and their staff are huddled in official meetings and panels while climate justice and environmental activists are attempting to hold them accountable from the outside.
But this year marks a special moment: Less than a year after the historic (but flawed) Paris Climate Accord was agreed upon in December 2015, the largest emitter of greenhouse gas emissions chose a climate change denier as president. Donald Trump quickly moved to undo Barack Obama's commitment to the Paris Climate Accord. Ten months into his presidency, Trump's administration is racing to lighten the regulatory load of polluting mega-corporations and revive the dying coal industry. COP23 attendees perceive an even greater urgency to address climate change within this political context.
U.S.-based climate justice activists who have traveled to COP23 are especially sensitive and more determined than ever to push for grass-roots change in mitigating climate change. One such activist making his voice heard at COP23 is Kali Akuno, co-founder and co-director of Cooperation Jackson (a network for sustainable development in Mississippi), and former executive director of the Peoples' Hurricane Relief Fund, established in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. Akuno, who is in Bonn as part of the It Takes Roots delegation, told me in an interview that he and others in his delegation are there "to strengthen the framework that we advanced in Paris two years ago, and that can best be summarized by making the argument to 'keep it in the ground.' " That phrase, which describes what best to do with fossil fuels, has been popularized over several years by leaders in the environmental justice movement and has been echoed at COP23. "There have to be major reductions [in emissions] at the source," Akuno warns, "if we are to keep to the goal of 1.5 degrees warming."
Alarmingly, however, global greenhouse gas emissions have spiked this year for the first time in three years, not because of Trump's election but because of Chinese resurgent reliance on coal. The Trump effect may still come next year or the year after. Regardless, if there is no slowing down and eventual reversal of emissions levels, there is absolutely no hope to mitigate a global climate disaster. As the residents of Houston, Puerto Rico and California realized this year, climate change is a global phenomenon and impacts all of us no matter where the emissions originate.
One climate justice activist who traveled a long way to attend the conference is Chief Ninawa Huni Kui, president of the Federation of the Huni Kui, an indigenous Amazonian tribe based in Acre, Brazil. He shared his insights with me in an interview from Bonn. "We understand what is happening and we believe that mother Earth is powerful, and part of her protests are terrible hurricanes, the flooding, the drought and the erratic seasons," Chief Ninawa said. "They're not talking about Mother Earth here in this conference of parties. They're talking about business, money, capital, carbon credits and fracking, and supposedly [about] offsetting pollution."
When asked how the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accord was being felt in Bonn, Akuno explained that it has partly hindered progress but also fueled the determination of nations to power on without the U.S. "Many of us would argue that the United States and the Trump administration not being here to a certain degree has actually opened up more space," he said. "It's eliminated some of the blocks that the United States has traditionally registered." Still, how do you hold the world's economic superpower accountable for its contribution to climate change if its representatives are absent?
The Trump administration did make one appearance at COP23. It was the height of irony that at a global conference devoted to combating climate change, the White House decided to promote the very energy source that fuels climate change by audaciously sponsoring a panel featuring coal, natural gas and nuclear power as "clean" energies. White House energy adviser George Banks spoke alongside industry representatives and corporate fossil fuel executives in pushing the idea that "clean coal" and fracked gas could help reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The panel became a flashpoint for derision and anger from both the international community gathered in Bonn as well as the U.S.-based activists present.
Among those protesting the White House panel were two young indigenous members of Idle No More SF Bay, Isabella Zizi and Daniel Ilario, who are attending the COP23 as part of the same delegation as Akuno. They, too, shared their experience with me in an interview. Zizi described a powerful parade of people who protested the White House panel, and some among them held an impromptu press conference outside the location featuring indigenous representatives from all over the Americas. "That really just told the solid truth about what we have to deal with on the front lines in our own impacted communities when it comes to nuclear waste, fracking and coal."
So embarrassing and inappropriate was the White House panel promoting fossil fuels that even COP23's president, Fijian Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama, told the press, "I really don't want to get into an argument with the United States of America, but we all know what coal does and we all know the effects of coal mining ... we all know what coal does with regard to climate change."
Countering Trump's position on climate are several U.S. state governors who traveled to Bonn to present themselves as the new American leadership on climate. Among them is California Gov. Jerry Brown, who sees himself as a climate hero but who has been roundly criticized for promoting what many call "false solutions" to climate change, such as his state's cap and trade program. At a panel in Bonn, Brown felt the wrath of climate justice protesters (including Ilario) who interrupted his talk with the familiar refrain of "Keep it in the ground." According to Ilario, the irate governor responded, "Let's put you in the ground."
Ilario explained that he led the protest against Brown because, as a resident of the Bay area, his community is exposed to "five refineries that constantly pollute and are seeking to expand." Brown's signature cap-and-trade extension, AB 398, "allows these refineries to expand and it restricts us from the ability to locally cap carbon until 2030," Ilario said.
Brown's flippant response to him was a "shock," Ilario added, because he sees himself as fighting, "to protect the water, to protect the air, so we have a chance at having a next generation because right now that's not certain." Indeed, this year's U.N. climate conference appears similar to past conferences: While civil society representatives vocally demand basic rights to exist without fear of extinction, policy makers congratulate one another on preserving financial markets at the expense of humanity.
Chief Ninawa echoed Ilario's sentiment, saying "We are sad when we see that the governments and corporations are setting the table to get down to auctioning off the animals, buying and selling the plants, buying and selling the water, buying and selling the very air that we breathe." He added, "These gifts that the creator created for all of humanity are being auctioned off at these negotiations."
Ordinary people, who will pay the heaviest price for global warming, far outnumber the powerful political and financial elites trying to silence the masses. Negotiators need reminding that the preservation of financial markets and the energy economy means nothing if large swathes of our species will be wiped out. "There are only one or two governments that are making all the decisions and the people of world's voice isn't being heard," Chief Ninawa said. "Life itself and the future of humanity is at stake."
Like millions of other Americans, I was shocked, but perhaps not entirely surprised, by Donald Trump's victory on election night. His blatant racism and misogyny, cynical exploitation of economic populism, and ties to fascist ideology have generated enormous fears. Yet if we stop at the point of those fears, and let fatalism or blame games drive our response to the Trump regime, then we have already ceded our power to him.
Like millions of other Americans, I was shocked, but perhaps not entirely surprised, by Donald Trump's victory on election night. His blatant racism and misogyny, cynical exploitation of economic populism, and ties to fascist ideology have generated enormous fears. Yet if we stop at the point of those fears, and let fatalism or blame games drive our response to the Trump regime, then we have already ceded our power to him.
Yes, Trump carries the whiff of fascism, and many of his followers indeed hold racist and misogynist beliefs. But we cannot stop thinking at that point. We should begin to ask ourselves: if we lived in Europe during the rise of fascism in the 1920s or early 1930s, what would we actually do to stop it? In that era many progressives were defending tepid establishment politics, and radicals were making boring speeches, while the fascists were forming chorale groups, hiking societies, and theater troupes to reach and inspire people on an emotional level.
The European left at that time didn't effectively speak to large numbers of working-class and middle-class citizens, particularly in small towns and cities, and created a vacuum that the far-right was all too eager to fill. In fear of alienating the majority, leftists also failed to defend the rights of Jews, Gypsies, and others who were targeted as the economic scapegoats for the Depression. They failed to have a sense of their own power and their ability to go on the offensive, and went into a reactive mode, defining themselves by what they were against rather than what they were for.
"The future looks bright--it's just the present that sucks."
We can see these trends today, as many white progressives propose stepping back from defending so-called "identity politics," in order to gain more votes from the white, straight majority. Many progressives and radicals likewise seem to be stepping back from class-based "unity politics," by writing off huge areas of the country's interior as a backward and hopeless "Trumpland." Both knee-jerk reactions are enormous, strategic movement-killers at this moment in history.
The ascribed identities of race, ethnicity, and gender, and the achieved status of economic class, have always been inseparable this country's history. Whether your politics are centered primarily on racial, ethnic, or gender identities, primarily on economic inequalities, or hopefully on both, our common enemy is the elites from both parties who currently hold power.
"Identity politics" (or particularism) and "unity politics" (or universalism) are not mutually exclusive, and do not have to detract from each other. To clip either wing of our movement is to cripple its ability to fly, and fails to recognize--as Bernie recognized midway through his campaign--that both identity and economic messages can be strengthened at the same time. But in order to do so, we need to recognize our existing strengths, and expand the geographical scope of our social movements into unlikely places.
Our Strengths
First, we should become more confident of the strengths that we have in January 2017, (despite Trump's Electoral College victory), and compare them to January 2001, when Bush came to power under similar clouded circumstances. Back then, the only recent mass movement that had united different constituencies was the opposition to the World Trade Organization, and the WTO protests in Seattle had only occurred a year before. We weren't prepared for Bush's war on civil liberties and Iraq, partly because our capacities were so low.
In contrast to January 2001, we are far more prepared in January 2017. Since then, we've had under our belts the antiwar movement, Occupy, climate justice, marriage equality, Black Lives Matter, the Bernie campaign, and Idle No More (expressed most recently at Standing Rock). We weren't as resilient then against Bush and 9/11 as we are now against Trump and whatever comes next.
We now have far more young people with movement experience, hooked up with each other through social media. Polls show that demographics are in our favor, with younger people far more critical of capitalism and accepting of a diverse society than previous generations. The future looks bright--it's just the present that sucks. History may view Trump as the last gasp of the racist and misogynist dinosaurs, but only if we view ourselves as the comet that finally wipes them out.
Rural Challenges
Second, the election confirmed our need to confront urban-rural divides in the country like never before. As a geographer, I'd highlight the New York Times map that shows the Democratic vote as a limited "archipelago" along the coasts (with some interior cities and college towns), and the country's vast interior as a Republican "sea." It may be easy for urbanites to blame white racial homogeneity, but even some relatively diverse interior areas voted for Trump (in Washington, for example, Republican Yakima County is more diverse than my Democratic city of Olympia). In seeing how we got to this point, let's examine Wisconsin and Iowa, both states with many rural counties that voted twice for Obama, but went this time for Trump.
Rural Democrats in Wisconsin begged their party leaders in Madison for yard signs, but were told the campaign funds had to be put into TV ads. Hillary Clinton failed to visit Wisconsin even once, and her campaign rebuffed Obama when he volunteered to stump for her in Iowa. The urban-based Party's arrogant and elitist decisions created a Democratic vacuum in rural areas, isolating its own supporters. The resulting "sea" of Republican yard signs swayed undecided voters with an illusion of their neighbors' consensus, in counties that actually voted only narrowly for Trump.
Again, asking the question about what could have been done in Europe during the rise of fascism, we have to look to U.S. models that have actually included rural whites in a common cause with marginalized communities. There is perhaps no better example than the Cowboy Indian Alliance, which has so far blocked the Keystone XL Pipeline in the deep-red states of South Dakota and Nebraska. The unlikely alliance combined the treaty rights of Indigenous nations with the populist grievances of their historic enemies: white farmers and ranchers. People power fused identity and economic values, and strengthened Native sovereignty, by defending the land and water from corporate power.
The leader who brought forward the Cowboy Indian Alliance name from earlier groups was Faith Spotted Eagle, an Ihanktonwan Dakota elder who more recently fought the Dakota Access Pipeline at Standing Rock. On December 19, Washington Puyallup elector Robert Satiacum gave his vote to Spotted Eagle for president, and to Ojibwe activist Winona LaDuke for vice president. Their names came up in my conversation with Robert a month before, partly because they were Indigenous women leaders fighting oil pipelines, and also because they had built bridges with rural whites. Their most effective approach for cross-cultural organizing has been through social movements, rather than electoral politics, and they will continue the fight under Trump.
As Faith Spotted Eagle said in 2014, "The model of capitalism is trying to suffocate us, because with capitalism you need an underclass. Capitalism cannot survive without poor farmers, without poor Indians, without poor people in the cities who are selling their souls." When Keystone XL was blocked in 2015, she commented, "We stood united in this struggle, Democrat, Republican, Native, Cowboy, Rancher, landowners, urban warriors, grandmas and grandpas, children, and through this fight against KXL we have come to see each other in a new better, stronger way."
The Cowboy Indian Alliance was not a fluke, but part of a rich tradition of rural social movement organizing. Community organizers in the South have opposed Klan and police violence, and point out that social programs won by the civil rights movement have also benefited rural whites. Groups such as the Rural Organizing Project in Oregon and Northern Plains Resource Council in Montana are trying to fill the void, but need more funding and resources to compete with far-right politicians and militias for the hearts and minds of rural whites. The success of such alliances fighting for justice and the land weakens the appeal of racist groups fighting against economic scapegoats.
Potential in Small Cities
Third, the election also exposed how our movements have become over-reliant on large urban areas. Progressive/radical movements have long been concentrated in particular urban neighborhoods, and college towns such as Madison, Berkeley, and Olympia. In large cities, movements possess a critical mass to hold large rallies, staff and fund organizations, and create intersectional ties between communities. But if these positive advances do not spread or reverberate in places where movements have fewer people and resources, they will not change the country as a whole, but reinforce the divides in our country.
This is not a criticism of urban-based movements, since historically social change has begun in large cities, but a criticism of keeping social change isolated in "safe" progressive enclaves. On one hand, some white progressives may feel more comfortable in a neighborhood with Co-Exist bumperstickers and Tibetan prayer flags, and activists of color may feel more comfortable in a large city than to support their counterparts in smaller communities. Yet on the other hand, we may come to realize that capitalism needs these enclaves. They keep radicals and progressives cloistered, talking only with each other, and not influencing or learning from other people.
It is a huge mistake for urban progressives and radicals to view rural areas or smaller cities as cultural-political wastelands, and create a vacuum that cedes these areas to the far-right. Just as identity and economic politics are not mutually exclusive, urban and rural organizing can work hand-in-hand. We can use our more open cities and neighborhoods as a base, but also stand in solidarity with movements outside them. For example, Olympia activists recently blockaded a train carrying oil fracking materials to North Dakota, and Minneapolis activists hung a NoDAPL Divest banner at a televised NFL game. We can also understand that the sparks of mass movements sometimes occur in smaller communities, such as Ferguson or Standing Rock, and not assume that urban activists have all the answers.
The greatest potential growth for our movements may not be in either large cities or rural areas. In large cities, residents have generally been exposed to social movements, even if only by seeing headlines or riding past a rally, and have ample opportunities to express their views. On the other hand, residents of small rural towns are often afraid of rocking the boat, and being ostracized by their neighbors, so any movement growth there is bound to be slow and incremental.
But it is in small- and medium-sized cities where the battle for the heart and soul of America is taking place--in cities such as LaCrosse, Wis., Flint, Mich., or York, Pa. There is room for the movement to grow in these "in-between" places, for people to begin to express their views and find limited safety in numbers. But there is not enough support for groups doing the slow, unglamorous work of education and organizing in these smaller cities, where every small rally or leaflet actually counts.
Here in Washington state, for example, the hotspots for the fossil fuel wars have been smaller working-class cities, such as Aberdeen and Hoquiam, where residents have been fighting the proposed Grays Harbor oil terminal. Seattle-based environmental groups are not as successful in mobilizing residents of these former timber towns as local, frontline organizers. Smaller towns and cities such as Forks and Kelso have similarly become frontlines for immigrant rights organizers.
More resources and funds should be directed toward these communities, not only in episodic responses to police shootings or environmental threats, but to steadily build the capacities of local organizers. In Eau Claire, Wis., for example, social movements languished for years after local factories were shut down. But then community members put their energies into starting cooperatives and coffeehouses, working with student groups on the small branch college campus, and building a low-power community radio station. The new artistic venues generated a vibrant music and political scene, and the county stayed blue as the others in western Wisconsin turned red.
Building Hope in Unlikely Places
Our movements need both the depth we develop in large cities through activism among the already-aware residents, and the breadth we develop by diffusing progressive ideas outside the echo chamber, using grassroots education and organizing. By shifting resources to smaller communities, and enlarging our base beyond the progressive enclaves, we need to develop faith in the ability of people to change their views and actions. Urban residents often believe and internalize fixed stereotypes of people from smaller communities as simply "hicks" or "rednecks," and thereby dismiss these places from the start.
Spanish is better suited than English when describing people and their beliefs. English only has one verb for "to be," but Spanish verbs differentiate fixed identity from actions. People "are" (ser) a certain type of person, but also "are being" (estar) a certain way. When we hear the racism and misogyny of many Trump voters, we can assume they are (ser) racist, without seeing that the media and educational system have failed to educate them. We can also view them as being (estar) racist against people below them in the social hierarchy, and help redirect their anger against the powerful elites above them that are the actual source of their problems.
We can begin by switching in our minds from using ser to using estar, to see the possibilities of reaching and organizing unlikely people in unlikely places --particularly if we are from these places. We can try to communicate with our friends, family, and citizens who are attracted to the right-populist message, and offer a left-populist alternative they may not yet have heard in the business-as-usual morass of lies and commercialism.
There is potential hope in everyone, because everyone can change their opinions over time and with events. Social change is all about people changing their minds, and being inspired to act. If we assume their views are permanently fixed, we have already given up on making change. If we assume their views can shift, and they might have something to fight for alongside communities other than their own, we open up more possibilities for hope. In this way, we can enlarge the Rebel Alliance against the Empire.
As we end 2016, with many Americans still in shock over the elections results, it's easy to overlook all the good things that happened in the US politically. So, as we prepare for 4 years of open resistance of the majority of the population against an elected administration, here are a few things we can be thankful for...
The meteoric rise of the Bernie Sanders campaign during the early part of this year was both stunning and important. In just a few months, Sanders went from less than 5% support to a near dead-heat with the favored and massively-funded favorite of the DNC; regularly filling stadiums of 10,000 or 20,000 people, galvanizing a massive volunteer force and setting records for public campaign contributions. Whether the systemic voting irregularities and potential fraud in primaries from Iowa to California and backroom dealing with the DNC and major media actually cost him the election we may never know, but the Sanders' candidacy marked the moment when the anti-corporate movement went mainstream. The Occupy message, which the corporate media had so successfully obfuscated and squelched, was now being articulated in a way that could no longer be ignored and the public response was so overwhelming that the media had to predictably resort to personal smears (he's a 74-year-old Jewish Socialist...), naysaying (he's untested, he'll never win, he won't be able to get any of his policies enacted...), and demonization of his followers (as misogynistic, racist, chair-throwing "Bernie Bros"). But the real significance of the Sanders phenomenon still stands: The anti-corporate movement has come of age. Gone are the days of Seattle, or even Occupy, when it could be dismissed as a fringe phenomenon. The great political struggle of our time is defining itself as the struggle of the People against the new tyranny of corporate political power, and 2016 is the year the genie could no longer be put back in the bottle.
2. The Collapse of the Corporate Duopoly
Both major US parties have for decades been progressively overcome by corporate money and direct political control, to the point where a false political "center" has been created that is no longer aligned with either party base. 2016 was the year that system began to visibly unravel. The stunning failure of the RNC to push its own agenda down its rank-and-file members' throats amounted to a full-scale revolt. The anointed favorite, Jeb, barely got out of the gate, and the desperate deployment of Romney to stop voters from enabling a candidate who was not a party insider was a comic display of cluelessness. Of course, the DNC, mired in its own systemic cronyism, elitist myopia and beholdenness to corporate money and power, refused to see the writing on the wall and aggressively put to sleep their own voter revolt only to lose to the revolt that had been successful. 2016 marked the moment when both parties were unmasked as tools of corporate power to the point where they could no longer win elections.
3. Intersectionality and the Convergence of Social Movements
A trend has been developing for several years toward increasing displays of solidarity among different liberation struggles and efforts to form a united front around basic principles, such as anti-colonialism and human and civil rights, and 2016 was the year that it finally came into its own. Black Lives Matter and Flint, BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions against Israel) and Idle No More (and later, Standing Rock) all began visibly supporting and cooperating with one another amid a general Zeitgeist of convergence. (To give a personal example, I was at Standing Rock with an activist from Flint and passed on some some contacts to a famous Palestinian author-activist who went there several days later.) This ability to de-ghettoize these particular struggles and focus on the deep common principles - and adversaries - uniting them will be critical to the effectiveness of popular resistance going forward.
4. Wikileaks
Whatever you may think about them, Wikileaks provided a major service to American voters this year by exposing the deep systemic corruption of our political elites. In an age when whistleblowing has been criminalized and even conflated with terrorism, we need to recognize the efforts of those who risk everything to bring us the truth that governments want hidden from us. Many of the things we only suspected during the primaries about the DNC's true actions and motives were confirmed by the various Wikileaks releases, and this will be important in holding them accountable - or finding an alternative to them - going forward.
5. The Rise of Alternative News
It's fitting that Democracy Now! celebrated its 20th anniversary this year, as 2016 was truly a watershed year for independent journalism. During the campaign, outlets like DN!, TYT, TRNN and the many online alternative journals that have been burgeoning for the past few years seemed to experience a notable surge in popular interest. Chris Hedges and Abby Martin started new shows. The political elite and mainstream media's attempts to co-opt, challenge and discredit alternative news - including the buying out of several once-reliable sources by major DNC donors, the creation of new partisan outlets, and a veritable campaign to brand all non-corporate journalism "Fake News" - was merely a confirmation of the inroads being made and the fact that "Mainstream Media" was experiencing a loss of popular support analogous to that of the mainstream parties.
6. Standing Rock
The emergence of the #NoDAPL struggle at the Standing Rock Indian Reservation captured the hearts of millions of people across the country and around the world. The struggle marked the convergence of Indigenous Rights, Environmental Justice and the battle against the Corporate State. The fact that it's Indigenous-led and mobilized positive and universal imagery ("Water is Life"; "Defend the Sacred") is also important to defining broad popular struggle going forward. The encampment itself has reached a population of some 20,000 people at peak moments and surpasses Occupy in size, organization and infrastructure. The involvement of nearly 200 Native American tribes, several thousand Veterans, and a number of highly visible celebrities and political figures almost certainly kept the camp from being violently crushed in favor of a strategy of inventing a false win to demobilize the movement. Time will tell what happens at Standing Rock itself, but this movement has already upped the standard for popular resistance.
7. Demographics
Trump may have won the election, but the election also proved the limited nature of his support. He only won - with an historically-low 26% of registered voters - because he was running against an extremely unpopular candidate who literally personified the State as surrogate for corporate rule. While part of his appeal was undoubtedly to true racists, bigots, supremacists and xenophobes, it would be a mistake to see his election only in these terms. He was in many ways the Right's answer to Bernie Sanders: a self-proclaimed revolt against a political elite that was not only hurting women, immigrants, Muslims and People of Color, but also the White Working Class. There were two-time Obama voters who voted Trump and would-be Sanders voters who voted Trump. The fact is that the US population is far to the Left of its formal political spectrum. A majority of Americans support gun control and believe in climate change, Gay marriage and legalization of marijuana are sweeping the country. Our population is more ethnically and culturally diverse than ever and more accepting of difference of all kinds. English will soon be our second language. The kind of "Trump supporter" that Liberals were fear-mongered with in this election are less than 20% of the population. We may be the Roman Empire but we're not Nazi Germany. If we want to block a second Trump term, we just have to stop the DNC from running more corporate shills like Schumer and Pelosi.
9. The Mobilization of the Liberal Class
The Trump victory stunned millions of people who had been contented with political action that consisted of voting once every two years and reading the New York Times. Their party failed them spectacularly and they are aware that they will need to fight this administration every step of the way. The US slide toward fascism over the past 8 years has been completely ignored. Indefinite detention, drone wars and the war on whistleblowers didn't galvanize much resistance because people felt comfortable with the occupant of the White House. All that's about to change. With three Goldman Sachs people on his Cabinet and Exxon-Mobile running State, the anti-corporate fight and the anti-Trump fight are about to become one.
10. Trump's Betrayal of his Base
With the Left in open revolt against him and key Republican allies (Christie, Guilani, Bolton, Romney...) already under the bus, Trump is also wasting no time in betraying those who voted for him. This opens the possibility for a united front against the sitting Administration the likes of which we've never seen.
So buckle up! It's going to be one hell of a year. And Merry Christmas!
Warning against dangers to "workers, communities, and our environment," more than 450 environmental advocacy groups called on Congress to reject the controversial Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP).
"These deals harm workers, communities, and our environment."
--Ilana Solomon, Sierra ClubSpecifically warning against the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) provisions, which allow multinational corporations sue nations in private, clandestine tribunals for passing laws they don't like, the groups sent a letter on Monday that stated: "We strongly urge you to stand up for healthy communities, clean air and water, Indigenous peoples, property rights, and a stable climate by committing to vote no on the TPP and asking the U.S. Trade Representative to remove from TTIP any provision that empowers corporations to challenge government policies in extrajudicial tribunals."
The letter was signed by organizations both large and national and small and local, ranging from the Sierra Club, Food & Water Watch, and 350.org to groups such as Bold Nebraska, Catskill Citizens for Safe Energy, and Kauaians for a Bright Energy Future, among many others.
"The TPP would let foreign oil and gas companies undermine the will of hundreds of communities that have worked tirelessly to protect themselves from the environmental and public health hazards associated with fracking," said Food & Water Watch Executive Director Wenonah Hauter. "These trade deals give the worst climate scofflaws new and powerful weapons to wield against the broad-based grassroots movement to stop fracking and fight for a clean energy future."
Pointing out the precedent set by TransCanada's $15 billion lawsuit against the U.S. for its rejection of the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline, the groups detailed the stark dangers the ISDS provision poses to the environmental movement.
"By empowering many more firms to launch ISDS cases against the U.S.," the letter continued, "the TPP and TTIP would pose a major threat to efforts across the country to restrict fossil fuel activities," including:
"The TPP and TTIP's unprecedented expansion of U.S. ISDS liability would similarly threaten efforts to protect communities from fossil fuel trains, LNG terminals, refineries, and other fossil fuel hazards," the letter concluded.
The letter was also signed by several Indigenous groups, including Idle No More San Francisco Bay, Indigenous Environmental Network, and the Alaska Inter-Tribal Council, and drew particular attention to the threats such trade agreements pose to Indigenous rights and traditional territories:
Much of the world's remaining fossil fuel reserves are on or adjacent to Indigenous lands and territories. Unfortunately, the nation-states engaged in the TPP and TTIP agreements have not strongly defended Indigenous land rights and Indigenous peoples' right to free, prior, and informed consent. Ultimately, such trade deals grant more rights to transnational corporations, often at the expense of Indigenous rights, undermining special protections of Indigenous lands and cultural resources. For Indigenous peoples wanting a just economic transition away from oil and gas development, these deals pose severe risks to their sovereignty and ability to self-determine their futures as nations and tribal citizens concerned about the climate, health, and environmental impacts from fossil fuels.
Rising opposition to so-called "free trade" agreements has fueled voters this election cycle, and presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders has made his vocal opposition to the TPP and other deals like it a cornerstone of his campaign:
"There is so much momentum now to end the TPP and other trade agreements," as Sierra Club trade program president Ilana Solomon told Reuters. "This is an area where there is bipartisan agreement... that these deals harm workers, communities, and our environment."
President Obama is hoping to have the TPP ratified before he leaves office on January 20, 2017, and Reuters reports that Congress is expected to vote on it after the election in November.
Anti-corporate activists, organic farmers, Indigenous peoples, environmental groups and others took to the streets across six continents and over 400 cities on Saturday in a global grassroots march against bioengineering giant Monsanto.
"The fight against corporate control of our food is global," a food sovereignty campaigner with UK-based nonprofit Global Justice Now rallied the crowd marching in London.
The grassroots March Against Monstanto campaign began in 2013 as a coordinated movement to "take back the food supply."
This year's march takes place amid allegations of collusion and industry rigging of the regulatory processes surrounding the company's toxic weedkiller Roundup and GMO crops in Europe and the United States.
The campaign, based in the U.S., described why so many are fighting the chemical behemoth in a statement:
Monsanto has infiltrated various agencies within the United States government, and as a result both public health and the health of our environment has suffered greatly.
Glyphosate, the cancer-linked herbicide that is an essential component in the expansion of GMO crops, is already being banned around the world over safety concerns. Here in the United States, glyphosate is consistently being discovered in everything from hospital feeding tubes and tampons to the breast milk of nursing mothers.
The group also posted a billboard in Times Square this week calling for Monsanto and regulators to "keep GMOs out of our genes."
In France, the pro-democracy Nuit Debout ("Up All Night") movement took part and joined forces with the March Against Monsanto campaign in Paris, forming a massive demonstration that marched all afternoon through the capital streets.
Activists also documented marches in Frankfurt, London, Cape Town, and Teipei, among many other cities, on social media:
I'd like to begin by acknowledging that we're on the traditional territory of the Algonquin people.
I'm delighted to be here today with my colleagues from the Canadian Union of Postal Workers, Idle No More, ACORN, and the Canadian Labour Congress, brought together by our allies from Friends of Public Services.
2016 is a leap year; today, February 29th, is Leap Day. We all enjoy the extra day we add to our calendars every four years to align them with the earth's orbit around the sun.
We do this because it's easier to change our human-created systems than to change the laws of nature. In this way, the leap year is a perfect metaphor for the present moment, in which our political and economic systems badly need updating to accommodate the hard realities of our common home, the Earth.
We see the conflicts all around us. In the gap between what scientists tell us we must do to prevent catastrophic warming, and the emission reduction pledges our government has proposed. In the gap between even those inadequate pledges and the actual policies that would get us there.
We see more gaps between the promise of reconciliation with First Nations in Canada and the gross inequities facing Indigenous communities. We see more gaps still, between the values of inclusion and compassion with which so many Canadians identify--and the economic policies that continue to exile many to the margin.
The gaps are huge and they are many. Too many, in fact, to tackle slowly and one at a time. In a time of overlapping crises, we need visionary policies capable of addressing multiple failures at the same time. So, how do we make the leap?
The Proposal
We're here to launch a concrete proposal for what a post-carbon economy could look like in Canada, one that would touch every community in the country. "Delivering Community Power" lays out a vision for post offices with solar panels on the roof, electric chargers outside, and a low-emissions fleet on the roads.
But this is far from cosmetic. Services provided inside would expand to include food delivery, door-knocking on elders' homes, and perhaps most exciting, affordable banking.With this proposal, the post office once again becomes a community space, where you can come in to mail a letter or make a deposit; organize farm-to-table food delivery for your home; get advice and a loan for rooftop solar panels; invest in a community energy project; and buy products from local businesses.
We believe this is no time to further contract public services. But neither is it a moment to simply protect a static status quo.Rather, our moment calls on us to reimagine what is possible.
And we find ourselves at a critical juncture that makes this kind of visionary change both necessary and entirely possible. The Trudeau government is in the process of unleashing billions of dollars of stimulus to Canada's economy, which is suffering thanks to our ill-advised ride on the oil roller coaster.
What we are saying is that every new public dollar we spend has to do more than simply spur random economic activity. Given the pressing nature of the climate crisis, as well as the many social justice fronts on which this government has pledged to act, that money must fuel the transformation of our economy. Of our energy system. Of our public sphere so that it meets all of today's complex needs.
Canada needs more than stimulus money. We need catalyst money--investments thoughtfully designed so that they bring down emissions, while making Canada a fairer and better place to live, particularly for the most vulnerable.
Which is where today's launch comes in. Progressives often get asked: we know what you're against, what are you for? Well, this is it, or a big piece of it. We encourage everyone to take a look.
Six months ago we launched The Leap Manifesto, a bold proposal for how we can transition Canada off fossil fuels in a way that battles systemic inequalities. We called for a transition grounded in "caring for the planet and one another"--and this proposal from Canada's postal workers turns that principle into a concrete vision for how to boldly retrofit one of our most ubiquitous and beloved brick-and-mortar institutions.
Since we launched The Leap, more than 30,000 people and close to 200 organizations have endorsed the document, and today dozens of groups are hosting teach-ins, sit-ins, rallies, community events and solar installations to celebrate the Leap Year. And not just in Canada: from Zagreb to Copenhagen to the Bronx.
We all have the same message for decision-makers: small steps are not enough; it's time for a leap. So let's get to work. Thank you.
I'm a climate scientist headed to Paris next week for the 21st round of U.N. Conference of Parties climate talks because I believe this time will be different. Why? Science.
In less than one week, COP21 will establish an international agreement on the reduction of carbon dioxide, methane, and other greenhouse gas emissions required to keep global warming below 2 degrees Celsius. But individually and collectively the commitments countries have made in advance of COP21, even if carried out to the letter, have failed to meet this target, allowing warming to 2.7-3 degrees. I'm making the trip to observe the talks and join in with organizations demanding better commitments than that.
Let's examine the evidence: Has science sufficiently warned the planet so that we can take action? Has the scientific community provoked policy change? Has science inspired and supported movements for climate and social change?
Yes, yes, and yes.
Scientists have been publishing the dire consequences of global warming since the 1970s, when Yale professor William Nordhaus predicted that sea level rise and "hardship in low-lying areas" would accompany 1 C of global temperature warming, a level we recently achieved, according to the UK Met Office.
And what about me, just one scientist? I study the effects of the changing climate on Arctic marine ecosystems. I see that ice is melting sooner, forming later. Spring algae blooms in the Arctic are occurring earlier, lasting longer. I spend weeks on the ice doing field work near indigenous communities that are among the first to suffer from climate-based changes to their food sources, directly aggravating their struggle with poverty and food security. I write papers, create posters, and speak in classrooms about what I do and what I have learned. I am aware that all of my colleagues are also spending each day like this, confronting Earth's changes every hour of their working lives. I think we are learning to do a better job telling the story of what has happened and will happen to the planet, and why.
But that's not enough.
As fascinating as it is to study, I don't want to see climate change. The change I do want to see is nations responding to the widespread calls for limiting carbon emissions from fossil fuels. We can make better choices about agriculture and forest land use, and governments need to assure safe and healthy lives for their citizens. Personal and social transformation go hand-in-hand. One person alone changes very little, but unjust authority can be overturned when many people work together with passion and discipline. I'm driven to discover the path from science to policy to radical change. How does this happen?
One of the most influential papers in the history of climate science was published six years ago, and it was only six pages long. "Greenhouse-Gas Emission Targets for Limiting Global Warming to 2 degC" changed the way scientists and activists alike advocated for climate change policy by shifting the conversation from concentration to accumulation. Malte Meinshausen and colleagues created a carbon budget, showing that we can emit only 565 more gigatonnes of carbon into the atmosphere before 2050 if we want to reliably limit warming to 2 degrees. Further, they found that at current rates of carbon emission, we will blow this 565 gigatonnes budget by 2024. This immediately transformed the science and policy questions to how much coal, oil, and natural gas is unburnableand how can we quickly slow down our burn rate?
By 2012, Bill McKibben and 350.org had seized on this idea of the carbon budget with their brilliant "Do the Math" tour and movie, identifying three simple numbers that activists could use:
1. We need to keep global warming below 2 C.
2. To do that we can only emit roughly 565 more gigatonnes of carbon into the atmosphere.
3. The scariest of all, the amount of fossil fuel recoverable under current economic conditions is five times that, or 2,795 gigatonnes.
The result? The climate movement is successfully promoting a "leave it in the ground" fossil fuel strategy, divestment in the financially risky fossil fuel sector--whose net worth may plummet by 80 percent because of those "stranded assets"--and instigating calls for the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate ExxonMobil and other fossil fuel companies for organizing a sustained deception campaign disputing climate science and failing to disclose truthful information to investors and the public.
These campaigns have led hundreds of thousands of people into the streets to demand specific limits on carbon emissions and helped to topple the Keystone XL pipeline. After the People's Climate March in New York City, in September 2014, President Obama remarked, "Our citizens keep marching. We cannot pretend we do not hear them. We have to answer the call."
For the climate movement, science provided the numbers, and the numbers added up.
Using this carbon budget, science has identified the radical changes needed in how we produce and distribute electricity, in the forms and modes of transportation we use, in the use and care of agricultural and forest land, and in how much energy we must conserve in our homes, buildings, and industries. Unlike at previous climate talks, countries are coming to the table with science-backed contributions that challenge the business-as-usual approach.
Yes, some rich countries will try to buy their way out. Switzerland, for example, proposes to buy 40 percent of its carbon emission reductions on the carbon market rather than making actual reductions itself. Yes, the U.S. moved the goal post by basing their 35 percent reduction on 2005 levels. U.S. carbon emission commitments to 2030 actually represent a 15 percent increase from the internationally recognized benchmark date of 1990.
Yes, some of the reductions we are sold are a lie. For example, greenhouse gas emissions due to movement from coal to fracked natural gas fuels appear lower until you factor in methane leakage from gas drilling sites, pipelines, and flaring. Until such "fugitive emissions" are resolved, the greenhouse gas footprint of fracked gas is larger than coal, and gas plays no transitional role toward real reductions in climate warming.
But science is getting in the way of business-as-usual. COP21 representatives will return home to popular movements increasingly demanding radical change. Outside the formal COP21 talks, popular movements will take advantage of this unique moment in history to engage in important and vigorous debate about how the climate movement and other social movements can unite around common goals. When we consider, for example, the inattention to the physical, environmental, and cultural destruction of the Arctic communities shared by polar bears, whales, walruses, and Inuit alike, the questions and urgency for action are very similar to those raised by Black Lives Matter and Idle No More when discussing human rights.
Popular movements need to take note that science has demonstrated the links between climate change, mass migration, and war in Syria. Similarly, we must link climate, refugee support, and antiwar movements. Green and anti-austerity parties are proposing climate stabilization strategies focused on clean renewable and efficiency investments, demanding large-scale public investment. We, the people, will also win by proposing specific carbon budget objectives.
Scientists have and will continue to get uncomfortably in the way of things, creating a new narrative for change.
For example, climatologist Michael E. Mann, whose 1999 "hockey stick graph" of the mean temperature record of the past 100 years demonstrates the uncharacteristic and rapid nature of current warming, helped establish RealClimate.org, where claims of climate deniers are soundly and scientifically debunked.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change lead author Petra Tschakert has called to task U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change executives on their apparent acceptance of carbon emission targets that lead to a 2 C warmer world, calling the resulting "danger, risk and harm ... utterly unacceptable." Her passionate argument is not just about a specific temperature target. Rather she sees at stake "a commitment to protect the most vulnerable and at-risk populations and ecosystems." Agreeing, former NASA climatologist James Hansen has called the 2 C target "highly dangerous," backing it up with science currently under peer review.
Scientists are "people like you, with hopes and dreams and loved ones," stories from MoreThanScientists.org remind us. "We are mothers, fathers, farmers, fishermen, hikers, hunters ... and we're concerned."
The world depends on continued conversation with scientists. So I'm headed to Paris in a few days to raise my voice.
During this, the longest election campaign in Canadian history, many amazing movements were born and strengthened. People went door-to-door getting their communities to care about issues that matter.
Now that Stephen Harper and the Conservatives are no longer dragging Canada down, we need to continue to build the movements that promise change. Let's get Canada back on track!
Here is a partial list collected of movements that have gathered momentum during this election. Please add more suggestions in the comments section and I will integrate them into the toolkit tools.
During this, the longest election campaign in Canadian history, many amazing movements were born and strengthened. People went door-to-door getting their communities to care about issues that matter.
Now that Stephen Harper and the Conservatives are no longer dragging Canada down, we need to continue to build the movements that promise change. Let's get Canada back on track!
Here is a partial list collected of movements that have gathered momentum during this election. Please add more suggestions in the comments section and I will integrate them into the toolkit tools.
Election reform
This was the longest and most unfair election in Canadian history. The Conservatives used, the so called Fair Voting Act, the disenfranchisement of millions of Canadians, the skewing of Elections Canada finance regulations, and calling the longest election in Canadian history to maximize the money in their coffers, to undermine a fundamental right of Canadians, our right to vote. Justin Trudeau and the Liberals have committed to making the next Canadian election more fair. Read about the Liberal plan for election reform.
Take action:
Support Fair Vote's Campaign 2015 and ensure that the Liberal promise to end the first past the post system is kept. Click here to learn more.
Support Democracy Watch's campaigns calling for investigations into Conservative spending on election ads and other irregularities.
Demand that the so called "Fair Elections Act" is repealed and overturned. Support the Council of Canadians' Charter Challenge related to the Fair Elections Act.
Immigration and refugee policies
In September 2015, No One is Illegal-Vancouver Coast Salish Territories put together Never Home, a multimedia project documenting nine years of changes to Canadian immigration policy. The project provides a comprehensive look at what that the changes to immigration policy have been and the impact of these changes on people. In September, Canadians took actions en masse to say that refugees are welcome in this country, and to demand that Canada accept more refugees. Now that Trudeau is in, the fight for the rights of immigrants and refugees continues.
Take action:
Before the election, Canadasworld.ca put together this summary of each party's position on immigration policy. Let's work to make sure these commitments are realized and expanded. Read No One is Illegal Toronto's post about the impact of this election and stand up for the rights of all the people in Canada.
The crises that sparked the refugees are welcome protests are still going on. Sponsor refugees and donate to organizations working on the ground with refugees. Oliver Sachgau and Affan Chowdhry of the Globe and Mail wrote an article detailing how Canadians can help. Click through and donate.
We need our governments to act, we need to stand up for the Canada we believe in, a Canada that does not turn its back on the world! Want to learn more about how immigration policies have changed, read this great factcheck blog on Canada's recent humanitarian relief record and visit No One Is Illegal's Never Home website.
First Nations and Indigenous peoples
The Harper government was notorious for contemptuously undermining the rights of First Nations communities. The First Nations have been organizing with Idle No More, with campaigns to build internal capacity to challenge the Harper government's action and inaction, and by getting out the vote to get Harper out of office. Here is what Trudeau has committed to during the campaign in regard to First Nations communities. Note that the Liberals have not committed to ending the privatization of collectively-owned indigenous land which was part of the Jobs and Growth Act, Bill C-45.
Take action:
Who is She: The Harper Government asserted that a focused investigation into missing and murdered Indigenous women is unnecessary and defunded the few initiatives that did exist to document cases. Therefore on September 9, the Chiefs of Ontario decided to take matters into their own hands, and launched Who is She? -- a fundraising campaign for a First Nations-led national inquiry. According to Chief Isadore Day, the campaign needs at least $500,000 to begin the inquiry process. Learn more about the initiative by reading rabble.ca's Roshini Nair's interview of Chief Isadore Day. Visit the campaign website to donate, to download materials and to read accounts of families and community members.
Support PullTogether.ca: There is a solid wall of opposition facing the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline project in B.C., and growing opposition to Line 9. One year after the federal government approved the project, the opposition is not only strong and committed, but also growing. Enbridge now faces a total of 18 court proceedings and these cases are shining light on the questionable legal position on which the federal government stands. These legal cases are the best way to stop this pipeline. A coalition called Pull Together has come together to build support for the legal cases. Visit Pull Togetherto support the legal cases.
Support the Unist'ot'en Camp: The Unist'ot'en camp has been standing since 2009. They have been standing up against the incursions into Unist'ot'en territory by mining and oil and gas companies. They need continued support to continue to stand up to threats.
Housing and homelessness
Canada's housing market is considered to be dangerously (~35 per cent) over-valued. Over 235,000 Canadians experience homelessness in a year and nearly 1 in 5 households are facing extreme housing affordability issues, according to a report by the Canadian Observatory on Homelessness.
Take action:
The Canadian Association of Community Health Centres put together the campaign commitments of each party on affordable housing. Sign their petition and read party positions and hold them at account here.
Vancouver is leading the charge to control soaring housing costs by putting stricter controls on foreign investment in real estate. Sign the petition to build controls for foreign investment in Greater Vancouver.
Environment and climate change
The Harper government's record on climate change was pathetic. On July 5, 10,000 people marched in Toronto demanding action on Jobs, Justice and Climate. Now that the Liberals have a majority, what does that mean for the environment, climate, science and transparency? Carol Linnett is on top of things and published this great blog on Desmog.ca outlining the Liberal position on these issues. Obviously we will need to build actions if anything substantial is going to happen on these issues.
Take action:
Support the Leap manifesto: The manifesto warns that: "climate scientists have told us that this is the decade to take decisive action to prevent catastrophic global warming. That means small steps will no longer get us where we need to go...So we need to leap!" Do you agree with this proposition? Sign on to support the Leap Manifesto, and do watch rabble.ca's livestream of the press conference launching the manifesto here.
Sign on to Mission Green's petition on climate change and support Greenpeace's work to keep 99 per cent of the tar sands in the ground.
Science, civil liberties and transparency
Cancelling the long form census, muzzling scientists and destroying research capacity, attacking institutions doing work that did not support the Conservative agenda... these were just a few of the things that the Harper government did to undermine science and transparency. And then of course there was Bill C-51 which shrouded many of the attacks on civil liberties in secrecy, which Trudeau and the Liberals voted for. This blog on Desmog.ca outlining the Liberal position on these issues.
Take action:
Demand access to information reform: The Liberals have committed to take action on this issue and make government records more accessible. If you care about this issue, sign the petition to make acting on it a priority for the new government.
Kill Bill C-51: The Liberals in Parliament voted for Bill C-51. Trudeau promised to amend the bill but not to repeal it in its entirety. This Bill has too many dangerous and ill-considered elements, it needs to be repealed not amended. Sign on to the petition and support the movement against Bill C-51 in your community.
Take the Science Pledge: This pledge is about standing up for science, for the long form census, for data and undoing some of the damage created by the Conservative government. Sign on now.
We need more affordable access to internet and less archaic regulations of internet. Sign on to Open Media's Canada's Digital Future campaign which demands a better internet and digital policy from the federal government.
Stand up for unions
Unions and the right of workers to bargain and to organize have been under attack under the Conservative government. We need to see the anti-union bills repealed.
Repeal Bill C-377: The Conservative government rammed through C-377 which amends the Income Tax Act to require that all labour organizations provide financial information to the Canadian Revenue Agency for public disclosure. The Canadian Revenue Agency has estimated that implementing the new law will cost $2.6 million for the first two years, and $1.5 million every subsequent year, and that money will have to come out of the CRA's existing budget. Conservative backbencher Russ Hiebert, who introduced C-377 as a private member's bill, has said the law is an instrument of transparency. In fact, under provincial labour laws, union members already have the right to request financial records from their union, and most unions make this information available to their members at their annual Conventions. Trudeau has vowed to repeal this bill, let's make sure he does. The Canadian Labour Congress will be taking action to get this bill repealed and take it through the courts if necessary.
Repeal Bill C-525: The Harper Government also made it more difficult for workers covered under the federally regulated sectors to bargain and organize with Bill C-525 the Employees Voting Rights Act. Unsuccessful Liberal candidate in Fort McMurray-Cold Lake Alberta, Ken Harrietha, is on record saying that the Liberals will repeal both bills C-377 and C-525, but we have to hold their feet to the fire to make sure this happens.
Stop Federal interference in the bargaining at Crown Corporations: Bill C-60, the Tories' budget implementation bill, included a clause that allows the prime minister's cabinet to approve salaries, working conditions and collective bargaining positions for the CBC, according to The Hill Times. We have all heard about the courageous fight by the postal workers to fight for home mail delivery. The Trudeau Liberals have been "cagey" about their commitment to fight for home delivery according to the Canadian Union of Postal Workers and while Trudeau did promise to restore CBC funding, so did Chretien and his government gutted CBC funding. Keep on supporting these fights and let the Liberal government know we are watching.
Prisoners rights
Under the Harper government, the number of people in prisons increased, mandatory sentencing was increased, and prison overcrowding increased. According to Statistics Canada, criminal justice spending overall increased nationally by 23 per cent between 2002 and 2012. These are large increases, particularly as the crime rate in Canada has been dropping steadily for over 25 years.
Furthermore, Harper's "Tough on Crime" agenda has undermined the rights of prisoners. These statistics and assertions are excerpted from Paula Mallea's article for Canadian Progressive on Harper's record. During the election, the Union of Canadian Correctional Officers came out against Harper and took an anybody but Harper approach because of the impact of the Harper government policies on both prisoners and the safety of workers. This great article in the Globe and Mail outlines some of what Trudeau should be taking on to undo the damage done by Harper.
Taking action:
Support the distribution of sterile injection equipment in prisons: In Canada, the prevalence of HIV and HCV infection among people in prison is at least 10 and 30 times higher, respectively, than in the overall population. If implemented, prison needle and syringe programs (PNSPs) would give people in prison access to the same health services available outside prisons, and also make workplaces safer for prison staff by reducing the likelihood of accidental injuries via non-sterile injection equipment shared by many people. Despite the overwhelming evidence of the benefits of PNSPs around the world, no Canadian prison currently permits the distribution of sterile injection equipment to prisoners. The Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network developed an election primer on federal party positions on this issue and will be working to make sure that the government reviews their policy on sterile injection equipment.
In Canada, one out of every four prisoners in the federal prison system has spent some time in solitary confinement. At any given time, there are as many as 1,800 people in solitary confinement in federal or provincial prisons. The BC Civil Liberties Association and the John Howard Society of Canada have launched a constitutional challenge to the use of solitary confinement in Canadian federal prisons. Solitary confinement, called "segregation" in the prison system, is the practice of confining a prisoner to a cell and depriving him or her of meaningful human contact for up to 23 hours a day, sometimes for months and years at a time. Support and spread the word about this issue and challenge.
I know I am I'm missing other issues that people were organizing around here, so send me additional issues and I will create another blog. However, this is a long list and should provide some good initiatives to work with. We are not going to get what we want unless we keep on building these movements and supporting the good work people are doing to build a better Canada.