The Whiteness of Green

[Lidia]

In September 2004, I attended a gathering organized by the Youth Environmental Network. Dedicated to a vision of environmental justice, the gathering was a coming together of two estranged friends: anti-racism and environmentalism. The gathering entitled “Green Justice†was meant to discuss this division through workshops on anti-racism, anti-oppression, and strategic planning integrating a stronger anti-racist framework within environmental movements. Typical things happened: a lot of crying, a lot of people storming out, a lot of people of colour patiently explaining racism to wide-eyed earthy types. There was also the occasional “Namaste†from the dreaded, drum-playing white guy. To be expected. But I noticed two things that unsettled me. All the people of colour in attendance (myself included) worked solely in social justice organizations outside of environmental activism: anti-racism activists, counselors, and anti-poverty organizers. Meanwhile, most of the white attendees worked in environmental organizations. I know that all of the issues of environmentalism and social justice are connected. Capitalism thrives off the exploitation of both the environment and labour and the seeds of oppression in our society can be found in capitalist ideologies. I know that a vision of a just world should include principles of social justice and a healthy environment but, in reality, I had never attended a rally or event organized by the Sierra Youth Coalition. I haven’t even mustered any anticipation for more radical, anti-capitalist gatherings, like the annual Wild Earth gathering held in British Columbia. Then again, I can’t remember seeing any environmental organizations coming to support women’s centers or marching with me in anti-poverty marches. The division is almost stifling. It would be very easy to locate the differences in political agendas and visions. After all, activists tend to keep their message to the straight and narrow in order to keep their movement on task. But there is something more than stark differences in politics. The makeup of many environmental organizations in terms of staff or and vision remains devoid of any real analysis or acknowledgement of colonialism, racism, or other forms of oppression. There is a general assumption in the environmental movement that there is a homogenous group of humans who exploit the environment, yet environmentalists work without an understanding of the power relations inherent in the legacy of colonialism and racism. With this absence comes a complete silencing of a more complex analysis and understanding of environmental justice.

Sometimes it doesn’t hit me until I walk by one of their rallies or attend a meeting: why are these environmental movements so white? I wonder if sometimes they stop and look around and ask, “Why are we so white?†I say this with the acknowledgement that there is no monolithic environmental movement, and that there are several strains in the West that have an integrated analysis. When I say “environmental movement,†I speak of the normative discourses of environmentalism presented by the mainstream media and by larger, well-funded environmental organizations that maintain a stronghold in the movement. So, all you Green primitivism and anarchists can relax (not that I see any real anti-racist analysis from you guys either.) It is not a simple coincidence that this division exists. The lack of analysis around race and other forms of oppression has created absolute barriers, preventing anti-racist activists from engaging with and participating in environmental movements. There is an argument from some environmental organizations that protecting the environment is part of Aboriginal justice. Yet when the outreach bug occurs in some of these organizations, issues of racism and colonization remain symbolic or on the periphery. Instead of taking racism seriously, Aboriginal people and people of colour are used to provide either last minute diversity training or safe representation at events. Various cultures are co-opted as drumming circles and didgeridoo jams are given more attention, than discussions of why the movement remains white and void of anti-racism analysis. Representation is relegated to opening ceremonies, entertainment, or shallow roles that reinforce stereotypes.

When I write that environmental exploitation and racism are old friends, I do literally mean that those two relationships are intertwined in our history. Colonization and environmental degradation did not happen separately. With a history (and current system) of colonization, the process of resource extraction and environmental degradation occurred simultaneously with exploiting people of colour and dispossessing Aboriginal peoples of their land. As the Canadian settlers laid the first tracks of the railroad, it was the Chinese Head Tax that enabled such a permanent fixture of colonialism. One can see this connection throughout our history: environmental expropriation and exploitation and the subjugation of the colonized. But, with colonization comes resistance. Often, nationalist and/or anti-colonial movements struggle around and fight for the control of resources-the control of the environment. The affects of colonization through globalization have led to the Rubber-Tapping Movement in Brazil, and struggles against corporate monopolies through crop-burning on Monsanto farms. Colonization displaces people from their means of survival through resource appropriation and the erection of barriers and controls that continue to exploit and marginalize these populations. The major impacts of this relationship have been felt disproportionately by people of colour and Aboriginal peoples.

The historical fact of colonization needs to be at the core of our understanding and analysis of environmental and social justice organizing. But in this specific argument, colonization is equivalent with white supremacy and privilege. In the beginning, I was actually very passionate about environmentalism. In fact, it came before any analysis on anti-racism or feminism. For me, it was the most blatant form of exploitation and oppression that I could articulate. My protest against uranium mining in Northern Saskatchewan and the clear impacts on Aboriginal communities in rural, resource heavy areas moved me to earn a double major in political science and environmental studies. For me, the connection between environmental degradation and colonialism was evident. I entered into programs that struggled to critically analyze race and gender, in the whitest community I had ever lived in. There were several themes I saw in the environmental scene:

 

- The notion of conservation of the pristine and untouched, that we need to fight to keep things the way that they are.

-the importance of individual responsibility in making better consumer choices-without the realization of privilege inherent in these choices (Not everyone can afford to buy a $10 bottle of organic, biodegradable shampoo).

-Growing populations mean growing consumption and more waste, “so we gotta tell them Chinese, Indians and Africans to stop reproducing so much.â€

-****ed-up notions that “the land†belongs to all of us equally. Sorry dudes, this land ain’t ours.

-The romanticisation of Aboriginal peoples as having a child-like innocence and pure relationship and knowledge of nature. This is knowledge that Western environmentalists feel entitled to through research, development and eco-tourism.

There are many questions on how gender, class, race and colonization affect consumer choice, and how the definition of pristine wilderness changes on colonized land. The notion of power is omitted from discussions of these uncomfortable questions. Environmentalism cannot take up power and oppression as a movement because it largely enjoys the safety of Western, middle-class, white support. It’s safe to give money to a rainforest in some far-off corner of Vancouver Island, but to support the rights of the Secwepemc people against ski resorts and sun peaks? Well, that’s a treaty issue, not an environmental one.

However, the examples of sun peaks could actually provide an opportunity to fully realize the connections and contradictions of racism, colonization, sovereignty and environmental struggle. Since the expansion of the SunPeaks Ski Resort began on the traditional territory of Secwepemc, Neskonlith, and Adams lake bands, 54 members of these bands have been arrested while protesting some with court injunctions prohibiting them from entering their own traditional territory. The Secwepemc struggle is not only about traditional land rights, but is against expansion and environmental degradation. Yet, the major environmental organizations remain silent in this struggle, despite the fact that his is as much an environmental issue as it is a sovereignty issue. That environmental degradation and exploitation will affect marginalized communities first-whether it is toxic waste dumping in racialized communities, or the clearcutting of unceded land-does not make the radar of many environmental organizations. A new vision of environmental justice could provide an important step in shifting our concept of environmentalism, in that it names power in a very strategic way. Furthermore, it will reshape our relationship to and understanding of both the environment and of nature- not as things outside of us, but as things that are part of us, of our community and of history. IF we name colonization as the basis of our history and understanding, then land and treaty issues should be treated with the same importance as environmental disputes. In fact, it is ignorance and denial of our colonial history and the continued oppression of Aboriginal communities in our province that is at the base of our environmental fog. It is not due to a minor oversight, but rather, to an historic environmental privilege that issues such as the preservation of pristine wilderness, for camping and bird watching are prioritized. A participant at the Green Justice conference asked me a challenging question. “how do you expect us to take racism and sexism seriously when you don’t take environmentalism seriously?†I was almost ready to agree with them because, in truth, I hadn’t taken environmentalism seriously. But it occurred to me that my work and current passions were actually environmental. My question in return was, “ why is there betterment of our immediate communities not seen as an environmental issue? IF we are organizing against violence against women or for better transit fort he working poor and safe streets for sex-trade workers, why is this not seen as part of environmentalism?†This form of organizing may not be recognized as “environmental activism†according to its standard definition. But, if there was more analysis and organization around racism and colonization, perhaps we could shift the definition of environmentalism, and then I could take it seriously.

The integration of these politics and theories is not as simple as adopting an environmental justice politic or writing some environmental policies integrating a social justice perspective. There must be serious discussion about what constitutes an environmental and what a social issue as well as a deeper analysis of social and economic justice and environmental racism. Our conclusions with regard to these definitions and analyses will change the make-up and campaigns of the environmental movement. There can be no false unity when racism continues to tokenize Aboriginal peoples and peoples of colour. Environmentalists need to be taken to task for a vision that lacks a coherent analysis or practice of anti oppression, because as long as environmentalists organize and rant against Aboriginal peoples using the resources of their land or the working poor making unsustainable choices in their limited purchasing power, they are not in a place where social justice can be assumed. Sadly, as long as they maintain that position, those of us dedicated to social justice and anti-racism will struggle against environmentalists to make our concern heard.

[Animal Farm]

Lidia

 

I would agree with you that environmental groups tent to be prodominatly composed of white people. Indeed racial politics need to be incorporate within environmental lobbying. However, you fail to consider causations, and the conditions which produce this lack of participation.

 

Many blacks, or native people are reluctant to participate in such arena’s. They are more fused on other pressing issues, social rights, as you indicated most of the blacks came from social organizations. Inviting you to the event is a start to begin with. Aside from that, lets look at Somalia and its environmental issues, who is lobbying there, other than Fatima Jibril – our nomadic way of life is degrading, and soon those people will end up in cities, that are already inadequate.

 

Blacks won’t support environmental movements, there was this brother from Kenya, who was trying to rally support for a mine in Kenya, and his view was primarily based on economics, and the exploitation of people based on race, and class. He has similar views as you, but as Lbx who met him can testify, no one was willing to even give ear to his views, simply we just don’t care about environmental politics. And your right in suggesting that there needs to be convergence of ideologies, the environmental and racism. But when you attack environmental groups, I think it’s a bit aggressive, these people are rallying for issues that affect us all, even its not racially motivated, like global warming.

 

 

…yet environmentalists work without an understanding of the power relations inherent in the legacy of colonialism and racism.

 

Most environmentalist understand power relations, many of them are part of the anti globalization movement, they support equal distribution of wealth, and many of them are practical in advocating pressing issues of today, to reminisce historically, they will be merely suspended as being all about theory, instead of the practical.

 

Sadly, as long as they maintain that position, those of us dedicated to social justice and anti-racism will struggle against environmentalists to make our concern heard.

 

I think you attacking those within the same circle as you, I’m tired, and I would rather write more analysis on this claim, but I’ll will say, environmentalist are more welcoming to include other cultures within their activities. I do agree with you that the discourses they employ are often unwelcoming to people with unique postcolonial identities, and sometimes they do view your claims as being passé, because in the end they support all the issues in which your camp is advocating. In term of gender politics, I think we can safely say, environmentalists are leftists generally, and they do embrace the humanist thought.

 

I think the key discussion here should be, who will advocate the environmental abuses that Somali is experiencing, we can debate western activist groups in their methods, and deeply analyzes their internal policies and we can of course try to make a case the racial undertones that they often deploy, but the pressing matter is this, lets get practical, let’s start a movement towards a real social cause that impact millions of people ---- Somalia, for example illegal toxic dumping in our coastline.

 

But good topic, we need to the get the subject going about Somalia, because eventually, what good is a government if the people are unable to inhabit in their own land due to environmental hazards.

[Medley of extemporanea]

Lidia, thanks for bring this up. It's true, protecting the natural environmental must be viewed as it relates to the nature of the global industrial economy and injustices inherent to it.

 

Social justice movements present analyses of the nature of the global economy and the effects global industrial capital has on peoples lives. I believe once some of the principles of the social justice movement gains traction, many of the environmental problems with be solved.

 

On the other hand, a lot of mainstream environmentalist rhetoric tends to be selfish ‘not in my backyard’ kind of talk. So they don’t want to change the system, they just don’t want to be exposed to its negative consequences.