Monkey wrenching is to activism as intramurals is to varsity. The former: unorganized, almost sloppy, often more rough. The latter: structured, hierarchical, far more serious. Dave Foreman inspired me to create this analogy with chapter 11 of his book, Confessions of an Eco-Warrior. He gives very strictnon-flexible guidelines on everything that monkey wrenching is and is not. Among other things, he describes it as non-organized, simple, and fun. After completing The Monkey Wrench Gang by Edward Abbey, I see exactly how these definitions fit in. Hayduke, Doc, Bonnie and Seldom seemed to wreck havoc on expensive equipment because it was fun for them, among other things.

However, I would never argue that monkey wrenching is 100% effective. Although a fictional tale, Abbey’s story concludes with no concrete changes being made to environmental policy. The gang destroyed bridges and bulldozers, but to what avail? The government became increasingly angry, not attempting to make any change, but rather devoting a lot of time and energy into catching these criminals. 

On the contrary, look at Bidder 70, an inspiring documentary about activist Tim DeChristopher.  DeChristopher attends an auction where he bids on (and wins) 12 separate land leases worth close to $2M. Obviously, he does not intend to pay for them, which results in a brutally long and painful legal case which ends with him serving two years in federal prison. In several instances, he describes the process as “annoying”, “lengthy”, and “cumbersome”. However, I believe that if he could go back in time and make the decision again, he would do the exact same thing.

DeChristopher demonstrates, to me, the difference between monkey wrenching and mass activism. To sum it up in one sentence: impactful activism ain’t always easy. In Abbey’s tale, the gang generally has an easy and fun time, despite toward the end where they get continually chased by authorities. In DeChristopher’s story, he bids not because he particularly enjoys bidding on land leases, but rather to make a political statement. He did what he did not for himself, but for the betterment of the human condition. The former is far easier than the latter – hence why the latter is more rare.

Activism that stems from one person sacrificing his/herself for the future of our environment and society (as in DeChristopher’s case) often succeeds more. As I talked about last week, people plant the seeds for large-scale movements by relating to people – and this is exactly why sacrifice works so well. People will always rally behind a hero(ine) (like DeChristopher) who puts his/herself in danger just to help others. His campaign succeeded in creating a large scale movement because people appreciated what he did and as a result, joined him in his cause.

I do not intend to disdain monkey wrenching; any action – small or large – toward the improvement of our environmental condition helps. However, activism ain’t easy – large-scale, impactful movements are never born from a gang just “having fun”. They are birthed by unselfish people that brave through difficult times knowing that better things lie ahead.