Cultural Change for the We the People Amendment
[fourth in a series]
Yevgenia Nayberg
Human beings are undeniably part of and dependent on nature. History is filled with stories of people and groups who understood this reality and of others who ignored it, who didn’t care, or who arrogantly believed nature could be made subordinate to humanity.
Religious texts, mythologies and hymes on ecological awareness date back 5000 years. Caring for the natural world, the sacredness of wilderness and the need to control human’s negative impact on nature are among the earliest recorded human stories. “The goal of life is living in agreement with nature,” stated Zeno, the ancient Greek philosopher.
Conversely, anthropological evidence dating back even further documents animal and plant extinctions from human activity. Nomadic communities migrated after exhausting local resources, and once agriculture emerged, destruction of land, water, and climate increased.. Intensive farming led to deforestation, land degradation,soil erosion and desertification in the early civilizations of the Southern Arabian Peninsula, Central Asia, Central America, Peru, and Northern Africa.
The Industrial Revolution sparked a public reaction that helped give birth to the modern environmental movement. Massive coal-fueled factories in Great Britain, and later, the United States, produced unprecedented pollution, leading to the first first large-scale environmental laws in 1863 in Britain. The Revolution also sparked a deeper critique of industrial capitalism’s role in destroying the natural world.
The environmental movement is not easy to define given its global reach. Even within the United States, the focus of this piece, there is enormous diversity and range of organizations, individuals, missions, beliefs, goals, strategies, tactics and cultural elements. Any summary description of and cultural lessons learned from it, even from a U.S.-centric perspective, will be vastly incomplete.
Indigenous people and tribes who preceded Europeans in North America held a deep reverence for nature – and still do. The significance of nature in Native American culture was and is expressed in virtually every dimension of their lives - religion, daily rituals, mythology, writings, art, food, and medicine.
Literature was instrumental in the mid 19th century in informing and inspiring the public to revere nature. Ralph Waldo Emerson, Margaret Fuller, Bronson Alcott, Henry David Thoreau and Walt Whitman were among those who wrote essays, books and poems on the theme of nature being a profound source of moral and spiritual insight, and a route to understanding the divine. Thoreau’s Walden advocated for simplicity and closeness to nature as a path toward deeper understanding.
Among the plethora of prominent works that sparked public awareness and action to protect the natural world post-WWII were Aldo Leopold’s A Sand County Almanac (1949) and Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring (1962). Carson highlighted how DDT and other chemicals harmed humans and animal life. Christopher D. Stone's essay "Should trees have standing?" (1972), not originally prominent, but has become more well known since, posed the question of whether legal rights should be extended to elements of the natural world.
Thousands of books, essays, films, and presentations have been produced in just the past decade documenting local to global environmental harms. The assumption is that increased information will trigger action. But that isn’t always true – especially in the face of climate change that threatens mass extinction of species, including humans. This can overwhelm people with anxiety, despair, anger and paralysis. Few environmental policy-focused groups directly address these emotions, however other organizations both old and new are helping adults and children cope with these feelings.
Cultural support for environmental protection has grown with each new human-made disaster: Large-scale incidents include the Dust Bowl: mid-west, 1930's; Texas City Industrial Disaster: Texas, 1947; Love Canal: New York, 1978; Three Mile Island: Pennsylvania, 1979; Exxon Valdez Oil Spill: Alaska, 1989, Martin County Coal Slurry Spill: Kentucky, 2000; and Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill: Louisiana, 2010. On average, one hundred fifty chemical-related incidents occur each year. Close to where I live in Ohio, multiple fires of the Cuyahoga River and train derailment in East Palestine have been major environmental catastrophes. These events led to increased public awareness and sparked actions for stronger environmental protections.
The desire to protect the environment and to ensure a livable world has led to the formation of hundreds, if not thousands, of local, state-based, national and national affiliates of international organizations. Their focuses range from conservation, health, and justice, to technological solutions, anti-nuclear (both energy and weapons), deep ecology, and legal rights of nature. Major groups include the Sierra Club, Audubon Society, National Wildlife Federation, Environmental Defense Fund, and Friends of the Earth, Earth First, Greenpeace, and the Community Environmental Defense Fund. These groups provide opportunities for individuals to not only learn and take action, but to gain emotional resilience as they work in common cause.
The modern environmental movement has justifiably been criticized for elitism. The “Big Greens” inside the DC beltway are too focused on lobbying over grassroots organizing, ignore the environmental issues and concerns of communities of color, and are led overwhelmingly by middle-class white people. Racism and sexism have been constant features of major environmental organizations for decades. Internal divisions have resulted in organizational paralysis and failure to adequately address environmental justice – that is the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people.
A unique dimension of the environmental movement is individual lifestyle activism. Millions choose to live with a smaller “ecological footprint” regarding housing, transportation, health, food, energy and material possessions – sometimes by itself, other times accompanied by political action. “Reduce, reuse and recycle” is one common motto describing individual decisions. Motivation behind these choices ranges from moral or ethical desires to live in harmony with nature, to limiting the use of climate destruction fossil fuels, reducing material waste that ends up in landfills or oceans, purchasing locally as much as possible to conserve energy, making a public witness of an alternative way of living simply, and/or saving money that comes from our hyper consumer, wasteful and destructive culture.
Environmental political action takes many forms: lobbying, protests, boycotts, electoral efforts (such as the Green Party or pro-environmental Democrats and Republicans), lawsuits, regulatory hearings, and direct action.
Lawsuits target business corporations that violate existing environmental laws (e.g. Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Toxic Substances Control Act., Endangered Species Act, National Environmental Policy Act, Superfund law), or governmental regulatory agencies for not interpreting correctly or enforcing existing laws, or for issuing permits to companies to exploit the environment.
Mandatory public hearings by environmental regulatory agencies prior to making decisions have been for decades a major source of time and organizing energy of environmental activists. They’ve become a political and cultural “right of passage” for activists to speak directly to environmental regulators to protect the environment.
Direct action – sometimes destructive, but mostly nonviolent – has long been part of the movement. Destructive acts include damaging infrastructure of polluters like pipelines or power plants, “monkeywrenching” to ruin chainsaws and other logging equipment, throwing paint or other substances at industrial property or nuclear warheads, and destroying property to halt environmentally destructive projects. Many nonviolent direct actions have been both creative and effective. Examples include blockading financial institutions, occupying forests, disrupting sporting events, slow marching/traffic disruptions, public art interference, skipping school/strikes, and locking themselves to equipment.
Earth Day, celebrated annually on April 22nd, is a globally recognized environmental protest movement that began in 1970. It’s estimated that over 1 billion people worldwide in 190 countries recognize the day each year via decentralized community cleanups, cultural and educational activities, and/or protests calling for environmental protection. Over time, however, corporations have “greenwashed” or co-opted the day by focusing the blame of climate change and other environmental catastrophes away from their capitalist drive to profit by plunder and toward individual actions.
Lessons for Move to Amend
1. The realization that human life and well-being are dependent at the very least on the protection of, if not reverence for, the natural world is nothing new. Climate change and the rapid decline of earth’s capacity to regenerate itself in multiple ways to ensure human existence is awakening more individuals everywhere to take action.
The natural world is decreasingly viewed as a physical sphere separate from human-created “civilization; a “resource” of land, air, water, plants and animals to plunder to exclusively serve humanity; or just a political or economic public policy “issue.” Growing numbers of people recognize the natural world as “Mother Earth,” a sacred entity that sustains all living things found in nature with which humans have an indivisible, interdependent physical and spiritual relationship. It’s a change in identity for many – from humans being separated from nature to inextricably linked.
Is not authentic democracy/self-determination sacred and to be revered? Maybe even spiritual to the extent that affirming the authentic voice of every person in the shaping of their lives and communities and, yes, even the natural world, is sacred and should be treated with reverence? Is there not only a political or institutional dimension of democracy, but a very personal dimension in seeking liberation in our own lives?
Move to Amend needs to describe the We the People Amendment as less about abolishing corporate rule and money defined as free speech and more about what the amendment would achieve: the ability to have a genuine voice in our health care, education, community, food, housing, employment, energy, media, and political representatives. We need to communicate more frequently that we’ve always felt the Amendment was just the first step to constitutional renewal – to liberate all people from the multiple oppressions in our society.
2. Move to Amend should stress the need to “do democracy” in our own organizing and even personal lifestyle as a way of life. The commitment of many environmental activists to live more ecologically sustainable are important smaller steps in preserving the natural world while at the same time legitimately and powerfully reinforcing their work for larger policy or system change.
The equivalent lifestyle changes for democracy for Move to Amend supporters are a commitment to inclusivity and diversity in our group and who we befriend, active listening, clear communication, mutual accountability, developing conflict resolution and consensus decision making skills, and involving others in every aspect of planning, implementing and evaluating activities. Some of these skills are explored in our Movement Education Program. It also means demanding the same in the institutions we relate to in our lives: schools, jobs, places of worship, neighborhood groups, unions, etc. This also includes supporting “democratic” organizations and efforts in our communities: cooperatives, credit unions, community supported agriculture, community gardens,, community currencies, low-power FM radio stations and local businesses. Support for public libraries, schools and municipal ownership of public services like utilities is also relevant.
3. Non-profit environmental organizations spend an enormous amount of time, energy and resources focused on creating, expanding and/or protecting regulations. We’ve been politically and culturally conditioned to see the regulatory state as the main arena for environmental protection. Electing more pro-environmental public officials has been the focus of environmental groups legally permitted to engage in electoral work. They’ve all done incredible work as far as it goes. But we’re all colonized and boxed in, unable to fundamentally ensure a livable world since elections, laws and regulations cannot preempt the power of the super rich and corporations to legally plunder, poison and pollute. Constitutional change is needed. The Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund (CELDF) promotes Rights of Nature.
The same is true in asserting the power of people to acquire authentic self-determination. Elections, laws, regulations and Executive Orders can’t overrule the constitutional shield of corporate entities and massive money in elections. Move to Amend has issued a Call to Democratize Environmental Organizing. The We the People Amendment is the only fundamental solution.
4. More information describing the systemic threats to self-governance and suffering and damage to people, communities and the planet caused by corporate constitutional rights and corruption of billionaire spending of money in elections does not automatically translate to more public action. As with the existential environmental crises, the existential crisis we currently face to avert total authoritarianism backed by mega corporations and many billionaires can paralyze individuals from taking action. This realization is why we’re developing a course Coping With Anger & Despair: Connecting Inner Growth with Outer Change. It will soon be posted on our Movement Education Program site.
5. No movement can afford to be oppressive toward its own participants, especially at a time when race, gender, sexual orientation and physical ability are being weaponized by the Trump administration to divide and conquer people and groups. Authoritarians always start their terror by focusing on constituencies who are on the “edge” of society to see what legally is acceptable to the masses, which then becomes the norm for terrorizing the rest of society.
Move to Amend can’t afford to simply address the We the People Amendment in a vacuum. The creation of real democracy is much greater than merely ending corporate rule and big money in elections. Legal and constitutional barriers abound to people of color (including immigrants), women, the LGTBQ+ community and others. We have remained committed to inclusivity and welcoming to all people in our work and among our affiliates, advocates and volunteers.
6. Direct action, including nonviolent civil disobedience, has become a more common tactic among environmental activists as an expression of the depth of personal sacrifice toward a cause, drawing public attention to the scale of environmental destruction and, in some cases, to directly prevent or block destruction. The destruction of what remnants of democracy we have or have ever had due to the power of corporate constitutional rights and money equaling free speech is equally compelling for Move to Amend supporters to engage in nonviolent civil disobedience when it is strategically appropriate.
7. The global nature of the environmental movement is a major source of its awareness and impact. Earth Day is global. Many actions targeting transnational corporate polluters involve protests everywhere that the company is located. Solidarity among people and organizations across borders is strengthened.
There is no corresponding global solidarity among organizations around money in politics and corporate constitutional rights. Part of the reason is that national rules and constitutions are so different. When it comes to corporate constitutional rights, the U.S. has no equal in constitutionally permitting corporate entities to act so freely beyond the reach of people and their elected representatives. And no nation allows basically unlimited political spending on political elections.
Minus global rules to ensure the subordination of corporations to public authority, corporate entities can play one nation against another given their ability to easily shift resources and assets. The movement of capital, given technology, is easier than ever.
There are two avenues, however, where Move to Amend could play a greater global role in promoting “democracy.”
One is to connect with and support international efforts opposing international trade agreements that contain Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) provisions. These provide a mechanism for resolving disputes between foreign investors and host governments, particularly when it's alleged that a government has breached its obligations under the agreement. ISDS provisions accomplish at the international level what Supreme Court decisions accomplish at the national level: making undemocratic rulings that protect and profit corporations by overturning democratically enacted federal or state laws protecting the health, safety and welfare of people, communities and the natural world.
The other is to connect with the growing movement seeking to democratize national constitutions. Move to Amend has attended several events and is increasingly working with the Next Constitutions project at George Mason University. Their Research Lab “houses a series of research projects on popular constitutionalism, constitutional design, and constitutional change.
8. Finally, as people’s movements become larger and more powerful, elites work to weaken them to protect their own power and privileges. One way is to make them dependent through governmental, billionaire or corporate funding.This has led in the environmental movement to limited agendas within an acceptable range of reducing or maybe even preventing individual harms instead of a focus on redistributing power so that people and their elected representatives possess the authority to define what is environmentally safe, secure and sustainable.
Financial dependency is also responsible for environmental “greenwashing” of events like Earth Day and other environmental activities and events where corporate sponsors are presented as the protectors of the environmental through their marginal activities, as well as where the focus on saving the planet is often placed squarely in the hands of individual decisions rather than corporate destruction of nature, a major part of which is legal due to existing laws and regulations.
Move to Amend has always understood the dangers of governmental and corporate co-optation. It is why to be politically independent to focus on organizing for the systemic change of ending corporate rule and big money in elections one must be economically independent from the super rich, government, corporations, big foundations and political parties. We’re able to continue focusing on asserting people power over corporate power due to grassroots financial support. That has also been our commitment and always will. It’s the only way to authentically build an authentic democracy movement to create for the very first time an authentic democracy.
In solidarity
Greg Coleridge
National Co-Director
