Return to: Home | Blogs | Sian Berry

A green conspiracy against fun?

As a member of a genuine grassroots campaigning group, I have been riveted by the recent articles and Newsnight report by George Monbiot trailing his new book, Heat (now high on my growing reading list). These have been exposing what he calls the denial industry, a wide-ranging “network of fake citizens’ groups and bogus scientific bodies” funded by the oil and motor industries to cast doubt on climate science and inspired by the example of the tobacco industry.

Their strategy of sowing confusion and misinformation is very familiar to me. The Alliance Against Urban 4×4s highlighted the involvement of the Ford Motor Company in funding the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) http://www.cei.org/ in our leaflet for visitors to the British International Motor Show in July, using evidence from the excellent Exxonsecrets website.

The AEI’s big wheeze this year was a set of adverts on US television that praised carbon dioxide build-up as no danger but a friend of nature, essential for life. Scientists whose work was cited by the AEI have since disowned the ads and they thankfully never aired in the UK, but the messages seem to be reaching us anyway. Whenever I take part in a discussion programme or phone-in on 4×4s, similar myths about climate change make an appearance.

The huge sums of money invested in this public relations scam are what astound me most about the evidence Monbiot has collected together. And what makes me most depressed. The carpet cleaning expenses of the AEI alone would have paid for all the activities of the Alliance Against Urban 4×4s in the past few years.

Starting out in a pub with six people and a fifty quid whip-round three years ago, we have kept the campaign going largely by selling t-shirts and applying for small grants from other environmental organisations and foundations. Our most famous ‘school run’ demonstration, where we dressed up as lollipop ladies and teachers and handed out mocked up school reports to 4×4 drivers, cost us £100 – an amount most PR professionals would laugh at – but because our cause was valid and newsworthy it got us six months of regular publicity.

However, despite our modest means, it seems that a certain section of the population now believes we are part of a well-funded, top-down global environmental conspiracy out to ruin everyone’s fun. Michael Crichton’s 2005 novel State of Fear took this fantasy to its ultimate conclusion, depicting the environmental movement as a cabal of jet-setting megalomaniacs prepared to commit mass-murder to achieve their sinister aims.

There’s an obvious logical flaw in this. What possible aims could we have beyond concern for the planet and a desire for a way of life that might last beyond peak oil? People like Crichton will tie themselves up in knots inventing bizarre plots before they will admit that the race to be richer and accumulate more houses and cars may not actually appeal to everyone.

There are two pertinent facts I have noticed since I joined the green movement, which commentators like Crighton simply haven’t grasped. Fact 1 is that no environmentalist I know is in this for personal gain. They would be mad if they were because Fact 2 is that there isn’t any real money in being an environmental campaigner.

I can count the people I know who make their living solely from green campaigning on my fingers and toes. And if there are any greens maintaining a flash luxury lifestyle on the proceeds of their work I haven’t met them.

Instead, as the ecological emergency becomes more urgent, it is notable that more and more of my colleagues are in fact downsizing their careers and lifestyles, living the simplest life they can and deliberately earning and working less in order to find more time and energy for their campaigns.

At the Green Party’s spring conference this year, Scarborough Councillor Jonathan Dixon gave us a lesson in creative downsizing as part of a debate on energy. His advice was to be hard working and very good at your day job. Then, when you are offered a pay rise for being so great, ask to reduce your working hours instead. After a while you will find yourself with an equally rewarding career and, in addition, plenty of time to work on non-paying things like saving the planet - or indeed anything that takes your fancy.

Brilliant and inspiring stuff, even if Jonathan turns out to be sponsored by an international conspiracy intent on making everyone more civilized and contented - at any cost.

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

4 comments from readers


23 October 2006 at 16:10

I sometimes wonder why there are so few environmentalists around. If most of us can see the cataclysmic changes to our climate over the horizon, why are so few people actually responding? Moreover, if I take it to the enth degree, I start to think that there must be something wrong with me for responding!

“If you’re not part of the solution then logic dictates that you must be part of the problem”. Discuss.


24 October 2006 at 16:09

Here, here Sian, it is truly disgraceful that executives in the oil and motor industry can be so disdainful of the realities of CO2 build up (and frankly, immature). The oil/motor industries relentlessy falsifies data (as per the tobacco industry) to push its own agenda with total disregard to any damage they know they are causing, and, they are able to do so thanks to the obscene profits they make. The fact the USA pollutes far more than any other nation and yet their government (or should I say their oil industry!) fervently resist much needed change is staggering in its irresponsibility. As you state, environmental campaigners stand to make no money from their activities and I believe the world at large will notice this more and more, lets hope we can turn it around before its too late.


24 October 2006 at 16:09

It is good to see the contrarians being taken on some more at last. In the internet age, anybody can find a website that will confirm their prejudices or wishful thinking within seconds.

And I agree that Lomborg’s claimed equivalence of industry lobbyists and environmentalists, in terms of interests, is absurd. The few environmentalists who can make a good living out of it are talented enought that they could make even more elsewhere. Fighting the good fight is a sacrifice not a sinecure.

But one word of warning. The AEI praised carbon dioxide as essential to life, and of course it is. Everybody with the slightest understanding of biology knows this. If we were given the option to remove all carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, we should refuse it. But this says nothing about global warming, it is a dishonest misdirection. But it shows how important it is that we stick to good science, evidence, sound economics and so forth. The enemy must not be allowed to get away with appearing more rational, reasonable or scientific, or they will win hearts and minds.


29 October 2006 at 16:11

Actually, a superficial kind of environmentalism is getting quite fashionable in certain quarters these days. The problem is, once people realise that a) their cars and b)their cheap holiday flights may be threatened they tend to back off.The same is true of course of any other pleasure or convenience that they enjoy.

No, Sasha, there’s nothing wrong with people like you and me. Just don’t be surprised if, as always, the vast majority of people wouldn’t dream of actually voting for anyone like us. Our advances will continue to be in leaps of yards rather than miles. Oh well, Green Government by the year 2100…yay!

Post your comment

(Your email address will not be published)

Recent Posts

Berry last blog

14 July 2008 11:18

Oops we broke EU rules

19 June 2008 14:37

Boris's large fiscal hole

10 June 2008 17:03

Farewell Ken

09 May 2008 16:03

I may not actually win...

07 April 2008 10:01

The truth about Brian Paddick

28 March 2008 10:51

Vote Berry... and Livingstone!

19 March 2008 14:54

Past Entries

Follow this blog

Newsletter

Enter your email address here to receive updates from the team

Vote!

Will the next election produce a hung parliament?

Suggest a question

View comments

© New Statesman 1913 - 2009

Tracker