Activists Push to Save Greenpeace

Putting a Canadian Liberal in charge of its international climate change program could put one of the world most successful environmental organizations on the fast track to corporate collaboration

by Ian Angus

I like DeSmogBlog. It does wonderful work exposing the machinations of the climate deniers and their corporate funders. Climate Cover-Up, by DeSmogBlog founder James Hoggan, should be mandatory reading for anyone who to understand that disinformation campaign.

But DeSmogBlog also supports the not-very-green Liberal machine in British Columbia. It exposes lies about global warming, but the most radical corrective measure it espouses is that province’s feeble carbon tax — a measure implemented by a government whose environmental record is otherwise appalling.

So, unfortunately, I wasn’t at all surprised that DeSmogBlog recently published a vicious and ill-informed attack on long-time radical environmentalist and anti-tar-sands campaigner Macdonald Stainsby.

Why?

Because he has had the temerity to suggest that Liberal Party supporter Tzeporah Berman, the woman who organized an absurd environmental award for BC’s Liberal Premier during the Copenhagen conference, is an inappropriate person to head Greenpeace International’s climate change program. The pale greens in B.C. stick together, and they don’t like criticism.

Stainsby says: “Greenpeace’s original approach was confronting corporations and governments at the scenes of their crimes. That approach has softened lately, but if they hire Tzeporah Berman, they’ll be on the fast track to corporate collaboration, beyond the point of no return.”

Stainsby has launched the Save Greenpeace website to encourage Greenpeace supporters to join his campaign to stop the activist organization from becoming “a cog in the corporate greenwashing machine.” He was interviewed about the campaign by CBC Radio on March 5. Click here to listen.

Full disclosure: Climate and Capitalism has published articles by Macdonald Stainsby. (Here and Here) I don’t always agree with him on analysis or tactics, but in this case he is raising the right concerns.

Posted in Greens, NGOs

Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
Marc Evans
6 years 2 months ago

What a load of rubbish. I worked with Tzeporah for many years and nothing that’s being suggested at that Hate On Tzepoarah site is remotely true. I don’t have the slightest question in my mind that she one be one of the best people in the world to run an international climate change program that could help mitigate the coming climate disaster.

Charles
6 years 6 months ago

A couple of years ago I decided to make new regular donations to several worthwhile organisations, but considering my total payments I thought I had to let a couple of less worthy ones go. So I substituted War on Want for Oxfam, because they seemed less liable to flinch from making political statements that most socialists would agree with (although I realize charities have to be careful otherwise they can lose their charitable status). Rather reluctantly I also stopped donations to Greenpeace, which I had made for many years, because I feared they were getting too cozy with governments. What I have just learned from your website seems to confirm my fears. As for DeSmogBlog, I agree with your comments and I have bought Hoggan’s and Littlemore’s book, which is excellent – surprisingly so given their corporate PR connections. But as I commented before, we have to remain vigilant and consider each issue on its merits. On this one I think their website is simply wrong – and rather dangerously wrong.

6 years 6 months ago

I was not aware of the Oil Sands Truth project (why not Tar Sands Truth?) when I wrote the DeSmogBlog post or I would have credited it. I have since done so.

6 years 6 months ago

I expect that this Littlemore guy knows about the Oil Sands Truth project, and refuses to acknowledge its existence. He also has implied that there’s something wrong with setting up a new web site.

Littlemore clearly is resorting to petty rhetorical games — as when he chooses to emphasize relatively insignificant points about the number protestors who were gassed at the Copenhagen COP.

It’s also absurd that Littlemore would say this about Greenpeace –
“Traditionally, Greenpeace has worked near the extreme end of environmental activism.”
I think anyone who’s paying attention can see that Greenpeace is very hollow, vis-a-vis grassroots, radical movements.

But, then, Littlemore suggests that environmentalists should imitate the Fraser Institute and the Heartland Institute.

… and I could go on.
It’s easy to poke holes in that sort of rhetoric.

There’s more substance to disagreements about carbon trading, but I’m not prepared to side with mainstream economists, like Littlemore is.

wpDiscuz