Ecoterrorism

784 Words2 Pages

The Social Life of a Reactionary, Anarchist, Terrorist Movement: Earth Liberation Front Ecoterrorism is hard to define. It is used by the FBI and other government agencies to describe individuals or groups that use arson and sabotage against property, equipment, materials, or facilities that they feel are being used to destroy the environment. This is known as direct action and many such direct action tactics exist such as ecotage, eco-drama and monkeywrenching. Ecotage Acts of major economic sabotage that are designed to hurt the profits of businesses that radical environmentalists believe are profiting from environmentally harmful practices. Eco-drama (Staging non-violent, often illicit events that cause no property damage, but that are designed for the sake of gaining media attention for an environmental cause or to expose an environmental abuse. This type of action is often designed to spur a law enforcement response to maximize sympathetic media attention. Monkeywrenching was made popular by Edward Abbey's fictional work The Monkey Wrench Gang (1975). It generally refers to minor acts of vandalism or sabotage that are undertaken to frustrate the perpetrators of a perceived environmental harm (CITE). The most well known of these organizations is the ELF or the Earth Liberation Front. They are a reincarnation of an earlier organization that also used the acronym ELF but the earlier version was the Environmental Life Force and did not advocate the use of unlawful methods. It was the later group that published the field guide for monkeywrenching. They were later plagued by the same problems that follow extremist groups across the spectrum. Savoie noted in ‘If a tree falls’ that because they were so critical of outside people ... ... middle of paper ... ...xisted a decade after their first action. The grander version of their goal: "The end goal of the ELF is to save life on this planet, to stop violence." (Elaine Close) The question then is whether they can seriously use unlawful acts to save anybodies lives. Some compare it to a revolution (Randal) Highly motivated individuals with some public support and a moving and convincing platform it can fit that definition. But is the issue serious enough to justify unlawful acts and could it be addressed more effectively by changing laws and hearts not violence? Some employ markedly fatalist logic: if everyone on earth is going to die if so-and-so manufacturers keep throwing so-and-so toxic sludge into so-and-so waterway then how can we just sit back and wait for the courts? Participation in these activities demonstrates extreme distrust of the justice system and lawmakers.

Open Document