If we don't ride out in front, who will?

by: Erich Pica

Fri Sep 25, 2009 at 11:36


( - promoted by Nick Berning)

Hi. I’m the new president of Friends of the Earth. I wanted to take the first days of my presidency to write here on OpenLeft about some of the challenges that I think the environmental and progressive movements face, and what we as activists can do to address them.

In my new role at Friends of the Earth, I’m stepping into a 40-year tradition of visionary leadership and hard-hitting advocacy. David Brower – one of the most prominent conservationists of the 20th Century – founded Friends of the Earth with the resolve to speak truth to power and advocate for what our environment and the people living within it need, not what politicians want or choose to hear. This leadership and vision was enhanced time and time again by Brent Blackwelder, our outgoing president. These giants of the environmental community have created a long and proud history of speaking out for what the planet needs, a legacy that I plan to proudly and vociferously maintain.

When I think about the challenges before us in the progressive and environmental movements, it’s clear we have a lot of work to do. The most immediate and critical challenge that Friends of the Earth will be focused on in the coming year should come as no surprise to anyone reading this blog: securing strong domestic and international responses to global warming.

Erich Pica :: If we don't ride out in front, who will?

Most progressives understand the problem (dependence on cheap, dirty energy, and the economic interests and wasteful consumption habits tied to it) and we know what needs to be achieved in a policy sense to avert climate catastrophe (legislation from Congress and an international agreement out of Copenhagen that swiftly and fairly reduce emissions and address climate impacts at home and globally). But the U.S. political leadership — including President Obama and congressional leaders — has so far failed to act with anywhere near the urgency that is required to tackle this huge issue. Our challenge -- the challenge of our generation -- is to make politically possible what science shows is necessary and what justice demands.

The inadequate climate bill passed by the House in June demonstrates that we still have a lot of organizing and educating to do — both within and outside of progressive circles. The House bill -- which gives hundreds of billions to polluting industries and won’t reduce emissions enough to avoid catastrophic climate destabilization — should be a wake-up call for environmental advocates. Friends of the Earth is working with a coalition of more than 300 groups to push Senate leaders to craft a better bill (without relying on offset loopholes and rolling back our flagship environmental laws).

As I was lobbying on the climate bill in the House, I recall several conversations with congressional offices that wanted to take a stronger stand, but were reluctant. With large portions of the progressive community supporting the legislation, there was little political cover for members of Congress to be more aggressive. We need to remember that we are not just presidential or congressional advisers. We have an important role to play by always demanding what’s needed, not simply what’s politically convenient.

Organizing progressive groups is only the first step. We need a clean energy progressive block that will fight for real, aggressive solutions, and oppose proposals that fail to go far enough. To get there we need a bigger grassroots movement like the one that’s coalesced around a public option on health care. We need more than a handful of courageous members of the House voting against bad legislation from the left. A strong collective progressive message will provide cover and credence to allies in the administration and Congress who recognize the need to set the bar higher for U.S. legislation and for the negotiations in Copenhagen.

A higher bar is urgently needed. The impacts of climate change are already being felt by people around the world. Most troubling is the real impact global warming is having on many of the most vulnerable communities in developing countries. These communities have contributed the least to global warming and have the fewest resources to adapt to its impacts, but they are already feeling the real brunt of global inaction. Friends of the Earth U.S. is part of an international network of grassroots groups in 77 countries pushing for the U.S. and other developed countries to take the lead in delivering ambitious emissions cuts and substantial public financing for adaptation and clean energy deployment in developing countries.

To maintain a strong voice and credibility in the global environmental movement, progressives from the U.S. need to take more than a domestic view. It is important to talk about a new green economy and green jobs at home, but we also need to act on our collective responsibility to finance green development in developing nations. Bluntly, this means ending the xenophobic protectionism that currently prevents a rational political debate about China and India. We need to recognize that developing countries, including India and China, are dealing with far higher levels of poverty and are still creating far lower levels of pollution per person than we are. The U.S. has consumed more than its fair share of global natural resources, including the atmosphere. We need to both do our part at home and give back to developing countries.

Of course, if you really want to effect legislative outcomes, you need to effect electoral ones. That’s why under my leadership, Friends of the Earth Action will set its sights on members of Congress who have shown in the climate debate that they’re beholden to polluting special interests — this applies to Republicans and Democrats alike. Senior Democrats like coal crony Rick Boucher and agribusiness buddy Colin Peterson should be primaried and taken out. And even if they can’t be defeated in primaries, while Democrats are generally better than Republicans on environmental issues, the environment, the country, and even the Democratic Party would be better off if these two congressmen were replaced by Republicans. Along the same lines of the AccountabilityNow PAC, we won’t hesitate to challenge Democratic lawmakers who put corporate interests in the status quo before the public interest in a clean energy transformation. This is the sort of hard-nosed advocacy that’s needed if we’re actually going to start winning some legislative victories on climate change.

Preparing for my new role at Friends of the Earth, I read John McPhee’s excellent 1971 book about David Brower, Encounters with the Archdruid. A quote from Russell Train, then-chairman of President Nixon’s Council on Environmental Quality, stuck out as especially pertinent to the struggles we face today in the environmental and progressive movements: "Thank God for Dave Brower. He makes it so easy for the rest of us to be reasonable. Somebody has to be a little extreme. Dave is a little hairy at times, but you do need somebody riding out there in front."

That’s the role we ought to be playing right now, and it’s what you can expect to see more of from Friends of the Earth. If the environmental and progressive movements aren’t willing to speak the truth about the sort of sweeping change that’s needed, how can we believe our political leaders will ever get us there?

As we fight global warming, we must keep “riding out in front” and fighting like hell for every bit of genuine progress we can get. We might get knocked off the saddle occasionally, but if we don’t get back up and keep pushing forward, we’ll never reach our destination. Now I’ve got to get to work. I hope you’ll join me.


Tags: (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
re: energy (4.00 / 1)
Most progressives understand the problem (dependence on cheap, dirty energy,

can we stop calling it cheap? as you know the bill will come


I'm a professional environmental activist (4.00 / 1)
...and I can't tell you how excited I am to see and read this post.

I spent five years working for justice in Bhopal, India, and more recently I've been working domestically to clean up diesel exhaust with Clean Water Action. That's my background.

However I'm definitely not blind to the other work that's going on, particularly around climate change. I've been very excited at the work that FOE has been doing in particular, and bucking the mainstream "anything-is-better" sentiment that seems to be clouding the judgment of most environmental NGOs.

With large portions of the progressive community supporting the legislation, there was little political cover for members of Congress to be more aggressive.

This made me nod excitedly; it's a relief to see this recognized.

We need a clean energy progressive block that will fight for real, aggressive solutions, and oppose proposals that fail to go far enough.

This put me on the edge of my chair.

And even if they can't be defeated in primaries, while Democrats are generally better than Republicans on environmental issues, the environment, the country, and even the Democratic Party would be better off if these two congressmen were replaced by Republicans.

This made me hoop and hollar like a crazy man. Not that I'm crazy; I'm cool-headedly pragmatic. And I consider such strategies to be so - which is why it's so exciting to see FOE embrace them publicly here.

So: please, PLEASE keep up the wonderful work. We really, really need you.  


I want to rejoin FoE, but (0.00 / 0)
according to reports at the time, FoE was aligned with the religious right in opposition to cloning of human stem cells, a few years back.  

IMO that position anti-choice and anti-life, in particular, anti my own life some years down the road.   I am happy to belong to organizations that I agree with most of the time, but for me, anything that slows down progress on organ replacement is the ultimate deal breaker.  

I am counting on stem cell science to be ready in time to replace my most troublesome organs by cloning my own cells.  

As an antinatalist, I can see that artificial cloning of whole people may be ethically problematic.  But that ship has sailed - the use of fertility drugs, leading to multiple births, is already artificial human cloning - cf the Octomom.

There is no such thing as a free market.


What about Stem Cell? Religious Right? (0.00 / 0)
It's unfortunate that on a topic of such importance, which one is drawn, I should find a posting which says FoE aligns with the Religious Right against stem cell research and cloning.

I tried to search the information in FoE web site, but I was unable to find by topic searching.

It would be good to get this point clarified, Mr. FoE President.

A National Progressive Alliance, the viable solution.
http://www.openleft.com/diary/...


clarification (0.00 / 0)
First paragraph reads: "... importance, which one is drawn,.." should read, "... importance, to which I am  drawn,.."  Sorry...

A National Progressive Alliance, the viable solution.
http://www.openleft.com/diary/...


[ Parent ]
Clarification on Friends of the Earth's position on stem cell research (0.00 / 0)

Hi. I want to clarify Friends of the Earth's position on cloning and stem cells.    In March 2009, Friends of the Earth sent out a press release expressing our support for the president’s new stem cell policy, with several caveats.  At the time, Friends of the Earth said,

“While today’s announcement is a step in the right direction, it is imperative for President Obama to pair this action with comprehensive oversight of stem cell research. He must also prohibit human cloning and human genetic engineering, and end the government’s practice of issuing patents for human genes."

 You can read the full release at: http://www.foe.org/obama-overturns-bush-stem-cell-policy  

For many decades, dating back to the first introduction of genetically engineered crops, Friends of the Earth has been a staunch opponent of the use and proliferation of technologies meant to permanently change the genetic code of life.  We feel that time and again, we (the collective we) do not understand the short-term or long-term impacts of these technologies, and run the real risk of creating a genetic pollution that we will never be able to fix.  We have already seen genetic technologies go out of control, including the finding that genetically engineered corn was contaminating native varieties in Central and South America.  

Thinking a bit larger, it is unfortunate that the debate over stem cells, human cloning and human genetic engineering quickly gets eclipsed by the polarizing debate over a woman’s right to choose. From my perspective this really prevents citizen engagement in a larger debate about our role/place in the environment, including our genetic place.  



Donate to Open Left








Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.

As an anti-spam measure, there is a 24-hour waiting period after registering before new users can comment.
blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search