đŸ’Ÿ Archived View for library.inu.red â€ș file â€ș sean-mallory-environmentalism-class-and-community.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 14:05:13. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

âžĄïž Next capture (2024-07-09)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Environmentalism: Class and Community Struggle
Author: Sean Mallory
Date: 2005
Language: en
Topics: environmentalism, class, community, anarchist analysis, Red & Black Revolution, Ireland
Source: Retrieved on 9th August 2021 from http://struggle.ws/wsm/rbr/rbr10/envir.html
Notes: This article is from Red & Black Revolution (no 10, Autumn 2005)

Sean Mallory

Environmentalism: Class and Community Struggle

The economic boom in Ireland and the construction boom that has come

alongside it has led to a growth in the importance of environmental

campaigns. There has frequently been a large gap between the

environmentalists involved in such campaigns and the left — including

anarchists. Sean, one of the ‘Carrickminders’ and now a member of the

WSM gives his view on what can be learnt from the recent struggles.

Capitalism in Ireland is certainly booming. The country in profit based

terms has seen unprecedented growth. This growth is illustrated on the

great barometer of Capitalism- GDP (Gross domestic product) which has

increased each year since 1991.

With this capitalist driven development of the economy, an improved

infrastructure was desperately needed. As the economy developed the

state decided to upgrade the infrastructure of the country as well as

facilitating construction of buildings. This meant several changes to

Ireland. Roads and new housing had to be built. This could have been a

chance to improve the country instead it is leading to environmental

problems. Poor and often corrupt planning (as proven in the Flood/Mahon

tribunals) has lead many communities to take on the state.

Environmental issues are becoming crucial issues for those seeking to

change society in Ireland. We are a generation, which is witnessing the

result of this abuse of the environment by the Irish State and

Corporations. On a local scale we see the effects of this planning

directly. Alongside the construction boom we have also witnessed a

growth in waste. This has lead to a crisis of how we should deal with it

(Irish Times 03/06/2005). Local communities are continually trying to

stop incinerators and super dumps. The State has found its usual

solution to these problems — the poor will bear the brunt.

Despite these problems and social tensions, capitalism in Ireland is

pushing relentlessly forward. The infrastructure being created is

showing this drive. The National Development Plan 2000–2006 (which

“involves an investment of over EUR 52 billion of Public, Private and EU

funds” is the state’s plan to push its development of the country

forward. The plan “involves significant investment in health services,

social housing, education, roads, public transport, rural development,

industry, water and waste services, childcare and local development.” As

part of the NDP Ireland is to get a greatly expanded road network. This

is not necessarily a bad thing but from the outset there were reasons to

be worried.

It seems sensible to most that the government would first finish the

National Spatial Plan — which is “aiming to achieve a balanced,

sustainable form of development for the future of the State” — to

understand where the roads were going to be built. Included with the NSP

is the requirement that “Local Authorities will designate land” for

housing — and one would expect that the new roads would serve the areas

designated for housing.

Not that our enlightened ones were thinking along these lines, they

designed the NDP and then two years later got the report on what the

roads were being built for. This may seem like being “typical Irish”,

but it wasn’t. It was typical capitalism. The politicians knew for whom

the roads were being built to serve, they knew where their friends

businesses and lands were and that their friends in the engineering

firms and construction companies were building the roads. Most

importantly they didn’t care where the public was. Then, when as usual

the plan ran over budget, the Minister for Transport at the time turned

to his cronies in the private sector to fill the two billion euro

deficit through Public — Private Partnership schemes.. They say

motorways such as the M3 (see below) are built to alleviate congestion

that they are so desperately needed that life as we know it can’t

continue without them but yet they place it in the hands of private

corporations to make a profit. This just highlighted again the public’s

role in the NDP 2000–2006 — there wasn’t one. That we will be fitted in

around their agenda is illustrated by the way we are being crammed into

housing estates around the roads rather than vice versa. The

environment, in short, is fast becoming one of the battlegrounds where

communities are coming into conflict with capitalism.

The last few years have seen several campaigns in Ireland revolving

around the environment. Three campaigns, where to one degree or another,

activists and communities overtly tried to take on the State, stand out.

(In this I mean in all three cases the government placed political

capital on defeating the campaign). These were the Dublin Bin Tax, the

Carrickmines/m50 and the Glen of the Downs. These three are different

from most others because the overt nature of their demands led to a

face-off against the state. At the Glen of the Downs and Carrickmines

the issue revolved around transport and sensible (or perhaps unsensible)

planning whilst the bin tax was an issue that revolved around waste

management and taxation.

Analysis of these three campaigns is very useful for our inevitable

further involvement in environmental struggles. They took place in a

similar political climate, where to one degree or another the economy

was in a capitalistic sense “prospering” and Ireland had a right wing

coalition government. The campaigns however were fought very differently

and it is from this activists can learn.

The Dublin bin tax campaign

The bin tax saw a prominent libertarian involvement in the campaign in

some Dublin communities as well as being involved in the central

campaign. The class analysis in the Bin Tax (which was by no means only

argued by libertarians) gave the campaign a very different edge.

Traditionally, an issue such as waste management may have been raised by

environmental groups in a manner not questioning the taxation issue in

itself.

Waste management is a crucial issue and would have to be part of the

focus of any campaign. It is not a great rallying point as it inevitably

ends up in an academic arguments between specialists. The class analysis

of questioning taxation rather than solely the issue of disposal was far

more inclusive. The campaign had many genuinely local groups across

Dublin and seriously challenged the state by fighting implementation of

the tax through mass non-payment and blockades of waste depots. The

campaign ultimately seems to have lost momentum but crucially it could

have won. In an interesting comparison to the Bin tax, another

environmental campaign, reached its critical point simultaneously this

was Carrickmines/M50

Carrickmines/M50 Motorway

This was a campaign that proposed rerouting the final leg of the M50

ring road around Dublin. The opposition was based on the discovery of

the ruins of a medieval castle, which would be destroyed by the

motorway. The campaign revolved around an occupation of the medieval

castle site and later around several legal challenges. It challenged the

right of the state to build a road on the ruins of a medieval castle.

Little attention was paid to the impact of the road on the people and

local community where clear class discrimination in the soundproofing of

the motorways was obvious. Huge banks of earth protected rich areas

whereas only thin cinderblock walls protected working class areas from

the noise.

The castle occupation fell in numbers as it failed to attract widespread

interest. This allowed infighting and personality politics to destroy

the campaign. The campaign also over-concentrated on the legal

challenges whilst failing to engage people. Although we often talked

about leafleting the local area — this was never done. The

over-concentration on the legal case meant a further alienation of those

who were not of a legal mind or willing to be litigants. The dangers of

such an approach is obvious and activists learned the hard way when they

won a legal challenge and the government subsequently changed the law to

suit their ends.

The Glen of the Downs

The Glen of the Downs was a campaign which opposed the widening of the

N11 motorway in Wicklow. This widening was having a detrimental impact

on a nature reserve. Activists occupied the site in 1997 and began what

became a three-year battle. The campaign again fought the authorities

through court action. Their focus was largely based on an ecological

analysis and in many ways it was influenced by “deep ecology”. The

campaign at times engaged the population but mainly as a media driven

spectacle. The campaign, after three years, was isolated enough for the

state to move and forcibly remove protestors.

Both Carrickmines and the Glen of the Downs reached varying degrees of

success but ultimately failed. The Carrickmines campaign almost

collapsed internally due to effect the personality politics could have

on a small group of people. The campaign relied on the support of

history and archaeological enthusiasts and gave the local community

little material interest in the campaign.

The Glen of the Downs was far more successful but when the major cull of

trees happened the campaign had failed to interest enough people to the

point of direct action. The activists courageously did face down the

forces of the state to the point that 13 people went to prison — some

only being released after two months and a hunger strike. However,

largely alienated from society at large, similarly to Carrickmines they

lost. The N11 is completed (problematically as activists predicted). The

M50 at Carrickmines is about to be opened shortly.

These campaign also raised issues which are very much expert based. The

Carrickmines campaign in particular was debated in very technical

language between academics and engineers, thereby isolating itself from

a majority of the population. This obviously alienated people as they

felt they could not aid in any practical way.

Though the Dublin Bin Tax campaign has effectively collapsed it was a

very different campaign, with some local communities having direct

participation. This was because the issues were presented to people in

the context that they had a direct material interest in the campaign

winning. The argument was simple and presented in common language; you

didn’t need to be an expert in commerce to participate.

The Future

Libertarian activists can no longer approach the issue of the

environment as something we lament as an unfortunate victim of

capitalism. The destruction of the environment is intrinsically linked

to the development of capitalism and the oppression of the poor. This

destruction is also having huge ramifications on local communities.

Environmental campaigns, which present the issue of the environment as

something removed from communities, can no longer suffice. A strategy

such as that applied during the Bin Tax is necessary. We must question

the social consequences of environmental destruction. The approach of

many campaigns, regardless of intention, where single issues, such as

archaeology, are put forward as primary are too similar to the

government’s agenda. They sideline local people in favour of individuals

personal interests.

The Bin Tax illustrated the power of a social analysis on environmental

struggles. It gave more people an interest in the issue. This is not to

say that issues such as waste management or nature should be sidelined.

These issues are complementary to a social analysis but the most

important issue is the impact on the lives of ordinary people, as issue

too often sidelined by campaigns.

The success of this strategy is now being seen at the Corrib Gas

Campaign. In Mayo, Shell is trying to build a potentially highly

dangerous pipeline. The local campaign with the support of activists

from elsewhere has concentrated on the issue of safety and then brought

other issues into the struggle such as water pollution, death of

wildlife and visible beauty. This campaign, which has seen five local

people imprisoned, has by no means won but it has currently forced Shell

to withdraw for several months. The campaign as a local lead campaign

has raised local safety issues unlike the campaigns which concentrate on

archaeology history or nature.

A crucial issue to raise is why environmental campaigns which focus on

individual interests are like this. They are often criticised from the

sidelines because they do not incorporate class politics. However, if

archaeologists initiate the campaign it will inevitably be based around

an archaeological analysis. We should not disregard their campaign but

rather work in tandem with them where possible.

This said, it is also important that in certain cases we must realise

our differences, for example, I think it’s impossible for class struggle

libertarian communists to work with primitivists on issues like road or

development because our points of view are so far apart. Our working

together will only heighten tension and weaken campaigns.

Activists in Ireland still lack involvement in what are seen as more

directly environmental issues, such as road projects. There is certainly

a trend within anarchism influenced by ‘deep ecology’ that opposes all

roads and development. We do not oppose all road development but we

should certainly take issue with many of the current proposals where

profit is all and community is nothing. Instead we should support

sustainable development such as the plans suggested for the M1, M2 and

M3 to be replaced by a single motorway with link roads to the major

towns. These also incorporated reopening a disused railway that runs

almost exactly down the route of these motorways.

The case of the M3 illustrates classically how our analysis could

succeed. The M3 is a motorway to nowhere, serving little purpose and

will partially destroy one of Ireland’s and indeed north-western

Europe’s most important prehistoric sites — Tara. The motorway is

supposedly being built to alleviate traffic for commuters to Dublin from

the major towns on the route — Dunshaughlin, Clonee, Kells. The support

for the motorway in some of the local towns is naturally quite high.

People in the area have been told continuously that this road will solve

all the congestion problems. The motorway will however only feed the

commuters to a huge traffic jam where this motorway will meet the ring

motorway around Dublin, the M50.

At the moment the campaign is being fought over the historically and

archaeologically rich valley of Tara- Skryne. That the campaign against

the current route has focused on the archaeological significance of the

sites to be destroyed in many ways shows equal disregard for the people

of Kells, Dunshaughlin and Clonee (the towns most effected by the

traffic congestion). It’s only when the campaign spokespeople are

accused of holding up progress that they challenge the need and

practicality of the motorway.

This approach along with an over-concentration on legal cases alienates

the most crucial people whose support is needed to win these cases — the

local communities.

The arguments being made by the campaign are largely academic and risk

alienating those without the time and money to buy and read archaeology

texts. The government are prepared to change the law, as illustrated at

Carrickmines, should they lose any legal challenges.

There is a danger that once the campaign reaches that stage it will have

alienated a majority of the local support needed to mount a serious

challenge to the motorway. This campaign may well lose in a similar

fashion to the way Carrickmines and the Glen of the Downs lost where a

relatively small group of activists try to face down the State and the

courts through direct action.

However if the campaign were to follow the example of the Mayo pipeline

campaign and concentrate on local people rather than the special

interest of a minority (which, although I hate to admit it, archaeology

is) the campaign could succeed.

Many people of Dunshaughlin and Clonee are now turning to the only

people who are claiming to have their interests at heart — the National

Roads Authority (N.R.A.) and the government. They have not been told the

reality of the motorway, which is that it is really only a faster way to

get people to a super traffic-jam.

Undoubtedly there are going to be more environmental struggles in

Ireland in the next few years. The approach to the Bin Tax was very

positive in many respects. People are perhaps in a strong position to

fight issues like the attempt to implement a water tax in Dublin. We

have seen mistakes but more importantly we have also seen a working

example of how people taking real direct action can really threaten the

power of the State.

They have been parts of a working model of how communities can take on

the power of the state. Crucially these are past examples of how we can

engage the issues around environmentalism. Activists must, however,

broaden our horizons and tackle issues like the National Development

Plan, whilst working with special interest campaigns where possible.

This article is not an attempt to be a pejorative statement from a class

struggle point of view; there is a lot to be learnt on our part from

these campaigns. Primarily the heritage based activists who took on the

authorities at Carrickmines and the ecologists at the Glen of the Downs

were doing something we failed at — taking on the issue of the

environment. The campaign at Carrickmines, which I was directly involved

in, felt resentment at the time due to the lack of participation and

even interest from organised political left-wing groups.

Individuals at the Glen of the Downs felt a similar resentment at the

fact that left-wing political parties used them at the time when the

campaign became high profile. Without help from other groups they

concentrated on what they knew best — at Carrickmines it was

archaeology. In this they were undoubtedly right — they fought the

campaign on their ground. The point I am making is that archaeologists

will do what they do best, as will ecologists. If class struggle

activists feel we have a better approach and analysis then we must act

on it.

The issues of the environment should not be dismissed, but the

preservation of trees or heritage is unlikely to be the main priority of

people who spend up to four hours getting to and from work. But both

sets of issues are crucial to us and should not be mutually exclusive

with sustainable development.