Skip to content Skip to footer
|

An Addition to the Climate Movement-Civil Disobedience Toolkit

Local lawmaking efforts like those activists pushed through in Pittsburgh should be taken up on a much larger scale.

Protesters engage in civil disobedience at the White House to demonstrate against the Keystone XL pipeline. (Photo: Cool Revolution)

On February 13, 48 of the nation’s environmental and civil rights leaders got arrested in front of the White House to draw attention to climate change and the proposed Keystone XL Pipeline. Many dubbed the action “civil disobedience.” Four days later some 40,000 people followed with peaceful protest. Peaceful protest, a tactic utilized by the civil rights movement, has been introduced into the climate movement. A similar parallel, however, cannot be drawn between the action of the 48 leaders and the form of civil disobedience performed by the civil rights movement.

Civil disobedience is the conscious refusal to obey an unjust law. Rosa Parks performed this form of civil disobedience when she refused to give up her seat. She broke the unjust law that she wanted to change. The 48 leaders who want to change the laws that privilege

oil and gas corporations to extract, transport and sell North American fossil fuel were arrested for blocking a throughway in front of the White House.

The climate movement’s use of the stricter form of civil disobedience, when the unjust law is the one being broken, is still emerging. Rosa Parks was able to civilly disobey by simply refusing to stand. The body of law that privileges the fossil fuel industry is harder to break, but it can be, with precision.

Should an American community elevate its community right to democratically protect its health, safety and welfare above the legal privileges that permit corporate oil and gas extraction and transportation, the community would confront the body of law that the climate movement is trying to change. Such action would introduce novel rights into America’s legal structure, just as the civil rights movement did, and expose the fact that under current law exercising these rights is illegal.

This type of civil disobedience has been described as “collective, nonviolent, civil disobedience through local lawmaking” by Kai Huschke of the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund, an organizer working to implement the concept in Spokane, Washington. The creation of these laws entails entire cities’ or communities’ defiance of the structure of law that privileges the fossil fuel industry. This might sound far-fetched, but it is not. Over 150 communities in eight states have already passed such a law.

Take Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, for example. On November 16, 2010, the city passed an ordinance that asserts Pittsburgh citizens’ right to water, the inalienable and fundamental rights of natural ecosystems to exist and flourish within the city, and the city’s right to self-government. To protect these rights the ordinance removes legal powers from gas extraction corporations within the city. Just as was Rosa Parks’ refusal to stand, the ordinance is an illegal assertion of rights.

This “collective, nonviolent, civil disobedience” breaks the body of law that privileges corporations to extract, transport, and sell North American fossil fuel. Could this be a flavor of civil disobedience that the climate movement adds to its toolbox?

Pittsburgh is merely trying to protect its drinking water from the hydraulic fracturing (fracking) industry. In doing so it is exposing the unjust law that permits corporate fossil fuel extraction, which as Rosa Parks knows is the first step in changing said law.

We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.

As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.

Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.

As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.

At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.

Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.

You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.