Author: Emily Kian (Page 2 of 2)

Bidder 70 was both incredibly inspiring and disheartening. It gave me hope to see someone like Matt DeChristopher risk 10 years in jail in an attempt to stand up for the planet and fight against the greedy gas and oil companies. When he told the story about how he made the decision right then to act in the name of climate change and how a feeling of calmness swept over him as he began bidding, I felt deeply motivated to to be just like him. I thought to myself, “There’s a true hero.”  The film’s emphasis on The Peaceful Uprising group that emerged in support of DeChristopher was also extremely uplifting. The very end of the film, when DeChristopher was found guilty and sentenced to two years in jail, DeChristopher and some of The Peaceful Uprising protesters shared some extraordinarily powerful words about the outcome and the movement as a whole. I found the ending of the film to be extremely poignant; it hit my heart and gut in a way that completely moved me. I felt myself fighting tears, and I was overcome with an overwhelming desire to go out and do something bold in the name of environmental justice, just like DeChristopher. The film was disheartening because of DeChristopher’s sentencing; I was really hoping that he would be found innocent, and when he was found guilty, I was hoping he would be let off with just community service hours. One of the people interviewed in the film said something along the lines of, “When you were faced with two evils, if you acted in a way that was normally against criminal law to fight a greater evil, that could be a defense.” I thought that this made perfect sense. It upsets me that our legal system and the jurors in Utah found his actions to be a crime, but the popularity of The Peaceful Uprising instilled hope in me nonetheless.

In my opinion, Tim DeChristopher is a stellar example of an activist. Despite being found guilty of numerous charges, I don’t think he is considered a “bad activist” as he did not do anything violent, nor did he even disturb anyone’s property. His purpose was to give people hope, not to violate the law or fool anybody; it was an act of civil disobedience. He created an entire environmental group and movement that backed him, and he brought a ton of attention to an auction and issue that probably otherwise would have been largely unnoticed. He evoked passion for environmental justice in a wide group of people. I also think as a piece of work/art itself, Bidder 70 is an extremely effective form of activism. The film was very informative about the issue of selling natural land to oil and gas companies. It was also persuasive and inspiring — the fact that I considered Tim DeChristopher a tremendous role model whose actions I would love to mimic in some way (despite his sentencing to jail time) shows just how effective this film was as a form of activism. In addition to the main environmental justice values that the film advocated for, I also think it shed light on a few structural issues within our legal system. DeChristopher’s extended trial and abuse of his sixth amendment is one example.

“We only impose the law on people like Tim DeChristopher, we never impose the law on people who steal from poor people, destroy the earth, etc.” This was one of the last notes I have written from the film. I don’t remember who said it, but it struck me as one of the most powerful takeaways from the film all the same.

This week in class, our discussions and readings largely revolved around the topic of “good activism” vs “bad activism”. The discussion was particularly relevant for me as I used to be involved with a group of activists who had a bit of a bad activist reputation. We were a small but eclectic group; people of all ages and backgrounds came together to protect the humble Briger Forest from the evil corporate monstrosities, Scripps and Kolter. Their website still remains, although it’s antiquated. While I only participated in the “good activism” — peaceful protests, researching EPA guidelines, calling congressmen — some of the more radical activists made local headlines when they were arrested for creating a blockade that cancelled class for a nearby school. Ironically enough, these activists were with Earth First!, an environmental organization that was inspired by the Monkey Wrench Gang. I had already been familiar with them before reading the Monkey Wrench Gang, so when I learned about its influence on Earth First!, I figured that the wrench in their logo MUST be an homage to the revolutionary novel. A quick google search offered no confirmation, but I still have my suspicions.

I have to admit that while reading this book, I was reminded a bit of my high school self. While I may not have gone through as many cigs or beers as the characters in the Monkey Wrench Gang, I did share the belief that radical eco-activism was the only true solution. I didn’t go around burning bridges or destroying tractors, but I felt that attention-grabbing activism was the way to go. I remember listening with deep admiration whenever my environmental teacher would share stories (in a slightly disapproving tone) of his anarchist daughter, and I had dreams of working with Greenpeace. While the Hayduke, Seldom, Doc, and Bonnie were certainly more extreme and “eco-terrorist”-esque than myself and the eco-activists I admired, I did share a few similar beliefs with them, including the need to protect our natural land and the need to have bring attention to the movement. I have since changed my viewpoints to be a bit more practical and anthropocentric (to clarify — I do not exclusively look out for the needs of humans, I just consider them far more than I used to in the context of environmentalism). I see the benefits of sustainability and urban planning, and I understand that in some circumstances, it’s necessary to lose a Briger Forest here and there to create a sustainable living community.

All of this being said, I still wholeheartedly believe that The Monkey Wrench Gang  had a positive impact on the environmental movement. I don’t think that it necessarily inspired activists to turn to eco-terrorism. While Abbey did provide pretty detailed descriptions of the group’s destructive actions, I don’t think that the environmental movement saw a huge spark in this type of activism. Rather, this book inspired people to ACT. It led to an increase in eco-activism groups and likely inspired some of the greatest environmental justice warriors, most of whom would advocate in peaceful yet attention-grabbing ways. Also, the fact that this book was fictional, rather than the often dense and monotonous nonfiction environmental books, likely caused a great increase in the number engaged with the movement.  If Rachel Carson is the mother of the environmental movement, then Edward Abbey is the crazy uncle who may seem like a bad influence on you but is really exactly what you need to grow and become a stronger person!

I loved Margaret Atwood’s article, It’s Not Climate Change – It’s Everything Change, and our class discussion. I’ve already shared the article with many friends as I think it engages with and educates such a broad audience. Let’s start with the graphics. If I were asked, “What makes an article great?”, graphic design would not have come to mind before I read this article; however, I now consider it extraordinary tool. Atwood’s choice to change the background and text colors as she described our three potential fates greatly transformed the reading experience. The images also made it more interesting.

As for the content, I agreed with much of what Atwood said as well as the ways in which she made her points. Some felt she was too extreme in her images of the future; I disagree. I think that society has accepted this idea that climate change is a problem of the future, and we have plenty of time to mend things before we hit that dangerous dystopia of Atwood’s image #2. I really do not believe that the future she paints in image #2 is too unrealistic (and who’s to say what constitutes “realistic” anyway?) with our current trajectory, and the majority of our country needs this wakeup call. I certainly don’t think that that image #1 would be unrealistic if we were to increase our efforts on environmental technology and innovation; we already are using or researching the types of energy technology she lists and I already own clothing made out of hemp and recycled plastic! Image #3 is the one that we accept to be the most “realistic” as it is most inline with the present, which only feeds into the “global warming is a problem of the future” mentality. Atwood has a quote that sums up my beliefs perfectly: “If we don’t start aiming for Picture One, we’ll end up with some version of Picture Two.“

I’m already reaching the word count, and I only covered the beginning of the article! I’ll conclude by saying that through the article, class conversation, and group research, I learned a lot, both about climate change itself and about how to discuss it effectively. Also, the article gave a shout out to algae, and I’m always happy to see that! 🙂

Name: Emily Kian

Hometown: Boca Raton, FL

Major: Environmental Studies

Three topics/ideas/issues that intrigue me: Marine conservation, sustainable food systems, environmental activism

Interesting/exciting bit of news I read today (or lately): My friend recently mentioned an article that discussed how macroalgae/seaweed cultivation could drastically offset carbon emissions, but I can’t find the source! It said something like if we were to use a small percent of our ocean surface for macroalgae cultivation, we could offset our carbon emissions each year.