With the help of a decent solar panel, Miranda has turned the tree top platform into a fully functional media center. She has an awesome blog; Observer Tree, which allows the world to keep up with her forest defense work in protecting the beautiful Tasmania forest. The Observer Tree blog is frequently updated with video footage of Miranda and all things forest defense. You should really check it out and keep up to date with her campaign. Miranda has already broken the record for the longest tree sit in a Tasmania forest, and from the looks of it, she is only getting started.

Why?

This area of forest is in an area earmarked as one of Tasmania’s future forest reserves. It was promised protection by the State and Federal governments. Yet, if the logging industry has its way, it is going to be logged this summer! What is really going on in Tasmania’s forests?

A brief history of the Tasmanian Forest Negotiations:

2011 could have been a year of celebration for Tasmania’s wild forest. In October 2010, A statement of principles signed by Environmental NGO’s, industry groups and Unions paved the way for comprehensive forest protection and a restructuring of the logging industry. But, more than a year later, not one tree has been saved, more cash has been delivered to the timber industry and destructive logging continues in some of our island’s most sensitive and iconic forest areas. So what went wrong?

A series of broken promises, industry pressure and Government backpeddling have jeapordised the progress of this historic agreement.

First, in December 2010, the Tasmanian Government failed to implement a promised moratorium on the logging of 572,000 hectares of high conservation value forest. Forestry Tasmania, the State-owned forest management agency, flaunted this failure of leadership by pushing ahead with roading and logging in some of Tasmania’s most contentious forest areas.

In August 2011, the Tasmanian and Federal Governments signed an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) that promised immediate protection for 430,000 hectares of high conservation forest. The IGA stipulated that the Tasmanian Government would ‘ensure that the 430,000 hectares of State Forest identified … is not accessed [for logging]‘ and that the Commonwealth would compensate any contract holder affected by the protection of these areas.

But the agreement also required that hundreds of thousands of cubic metres of sawlogs and veneer peeler logs must continue to be supplied to the industry. Malaysian logging company Ta Ann Holdings has been promised an ongoing supply of over 265,000 cubic metres of timber per year from Tasmania’s forests. Forestry Tasmania argued that they could not supply this timber without continuing to log within the 430,00 hectares. In another backflip, the Tasmanian and Commonwealth Governments have turned a blind eye to the ongoing logging of pristine forests within an area they earmarked for immediate protection.

As 2011 draws to a close, Tasmanians are suffering the loss of hundreds of hectares of native forest that should have been saved from logging. Activists have occupied forests on the flanks of Mt Mueller to document this destruction. Prime Minister Julia Gillard must keep her word before the trail of broken promises undermines this crucial opportunity to protect Tasmania’s forests. 

A brief introduction to WHO is responsible for Tasmanian forest destruction

Ta Ann Tasmania’s wood requirements are driving the continued destruction of vital high conservation value forests. The supply of peeler billets to Ta Ann Tasmania is the major factor stopping forest protection, according to the official reports on the failure to reschedule logging operations. Forestry Tasmania is targeting areas rich in this wood supply, which equates to preferentially targeting high conservation value forests. Furthermore Ta Ann Tasmania received wood from areas containing old growth forest, as defined by the Tasmanian Regional Forest Agreement (RFA), on at least 35 occasions throughout 2009-2011.

The wood used by Ta Ann cannot be described as eco-friendly in any way.

Ta Ann has failed to ensure that their contract be supplied from outside the crucial forest areas, including such iconic areas as the Weld, Styx and Upper Florentine Valleys. Instead the source of their wood has been extensively misrepresented. Ta Ann’s wood supply has laughably been described as a plantation-based supply.

In Tasmania, where Ta Ann is at least forced to admit that their wood supply comes from native forests, they continue a misinformation campaign focused on the fact that they process wood of small dimensions. This material has often originated from high conservation value forests, which were destroyed to fulfill Ta Ann’s requirements, but they imply that the forests were all regrowth and of no conservation value when this is not the case.

Ta Ann has misled its customers in Japan and Europe by falsely promoting some of its Tasmanian products as ‘environmentally friendly’ plywood. Ta Ann, their partner SMKC, and their Japanese customers claim that these ‘eco-products’ are sourced from plantations and forests that have been replanted after logging. However, the reality is that Ta Ann is processing and selling timber products that are sourced from the logging of old growth forests, high conservation value forests, and forest with recognised World Heritage values in Tasmania.

(This information courtesy of taann.net)

Where?

Mount Mueller is a spectacular mountain located near the Styx Valley, Southwest Tasmania. The Weld, Styx and Florentine rivers all flow from this iconic mountain. While the mountain top is protected in the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area, the pristine ancient forests at its base remain under threat from industrial scale logging. The Tree Top Watch Spot lies in the heart of these forests.

This area of forest is known to Forestry Tasmania as “TN044B.” We have affectionately named it “Julia’s Forest.” Named after Prime Minister Julia Gillard. She is, after all, responsible for the life of this forest. On the day she signed the Intergovernmental Agreement, making a promise to protect this forests, she became it’s guardian. Julia will be accountable for every tree that falls in this forest.

Julia’s Forest is a prime example of Tasmania’s spectacular and unique forests. The ridges are lined with giant Eucalpyts, the tallest flowering plant on earth. Steep fern gullies are bursting with tree ferns, sasafrass, leatherwood and other Tasmanian rainforest tree species. Unique and threatened wildlife have been found in Julia’s Forest, including Tasmanian Devils, Spotted Tailed Quolls and the unique Tasmanian White Goshawks. The waterways in this forest are also home to a rare and threatened Hyrdrobiid snail.

The terrain is so steep in this forest that the loggers need to use specialised cable logging machinery. This is despite the historical land-slips that have occurred in the area. This type of logging causes irreparable damage to the soil and waterways.

Who?

Miranda Gibson

Miranda Gibson is one of Tasmania’s most committed front-line forest campaigners. She has been a core member of the grassroots environment group Still Wild Still Threatened for over five years, living high in the trees at Camp Floz, a blockade in the Upper Florentine Valley. Miranda has been the media spokesperson for Still Wild Still Threatened for the past year and half.

Miranda is a qualified high school teacher, specialising in Study of Society and Environment and English. She has put her career on hold to dedicate herself to the campaign to protect Tasmania’s forests.

Miranda was one of 13 forest campaigners who were targeted by woodchipping giant Gunns Ltd when the company attempted to sue these activists for the protesting at a woodchipping facility. The case was eventually dropped after about two years.

In 2008 Miranda was one of two activists assaulted by logging contractors in a vicious attack that was caught on film and made international headlines. Undeterred, Miranda has worked with other Still Wild Still Threatened campaigners to monitor wildlife in Tasmania’s threatened forests using remote-sensor cameras. Their work has documented the presence of threatened species including Tasmanian Devils and Spotted Tailed quolls inside areas scheduled for logging.

In 2008, Miranda also co-authored a guide to the “Flora and Fauna of the Upper Florentine Valley”, the sales of which have helped raised money for the forest campaign. Miranda is passionate about giving young people the opportunity to learn about and learn from the wonders of the natural world. She is an inspiring example of an individual willing to take a stand to ensure that future generations can experience and enjoy our precious natural heritage.

Email: observertree2011@gmail.com

Still Wild Still Threatened

The Observer Tree is a project by Still Wild Still Threatened, a grassroots environment group based in Tasmania. SWST advocates for the immediate formal protection of Tasmania’s precious Southern Forests using a combination of political and corporate lobbying, community education, research, exploration and frontline direct action. We also promote the creation of an equitable and environmentally sustainable forest industry in Tasmania. Apart from supporting The Observer Tree we also run Tasmania’s longest running forest blockade Camp Florentine. And are involved in peaceful community action to highlight the values of Tasmania’s forests and advocate for their protection.

www.stillwildstillthreatened.org or contact us: stillwildstillthreatened@gmail.com

This is our first published workshop video from the 2012 Law and Disorder Conference in Portland, OR. We hope you enjoy this video, and the ones to come! For this video, Rose City Copwatch gives the workshop ‘Abolishing The Police’. Watch a wonderful, thought provoking workshop discussion around the reasons why people believe we need the police in our society, and community alternatives to the police and how to put them into practice.

What are your thoughts? What will need to change in the way our society functions if the police didn’t exist? What are the first steps in achieving this? We would like to see a discussion form in the comment section on this post. Thanks for watching!

I have been doing animal rights activism for the past decade.  I moved from Long Island, New York to Portland, Oregon on May Day 2011.  As some of y’all might be aware, courtesy of The Vegan Police, I have been found responsible in civil court of stalking Leviticus Christian Cole.  “Levi” is a member of the Portland Meat Collective, which butchers animals throughout Oregon.  I have a permanent restraining order against me and was forced to pay $9,500 to Levi’s attorney in legal fees, despite an appeal that Levi’s attorney spent most of his billed time stalking my Facebook wall and searching my lack of criminal history.  The day after the ruling, Levi tried to friend me on Facebook.  This was an entrapment that could have landed me in jail, ala Rod Coronado accepting Mike Roselle’s friend request!  This has been a very traumatic experience for me, something I want to make sure no one in our movement ever experiences again.

It all started with being alerted that a rabbit butchering class was being scheduled.  I was informed of this by a long-time animal rights activist, past snitch jacket and current informant from Portland who is serving a 1-year sentence in an Arkansas prison.  The Portland Meat Collective was selling spots in their class for $100 to learn how to slaughter a rabbit.  Upon hearing the news of the butchering class, I decided to engage in some impromptu street theater where the class was when, unbeknownst to me, I was informed of the liberation of 23 rabbits from the tenant of one of Levi’s properties.  Levi and his goons tracked me down with the help of local police to consider me their top suspect, although they didn’t have sufficient evidence to charge me criminally.  I take solace in knowing that the individual(s) who had amazing compassion in their hearts went unidentified! However, civil suits do not need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.  They merely need a preponderance of evidence.  Levi and his lawyer, Matthew C. Ellis from Kell, Alterman, & Runstein L.L.P., completely made up an encounter I had in front of his other house.   They were straight up calling me the ALF and linked me to actions I had no involvement in nor evidence of, all because I reposted articles from Bite Back with my personal opinion in the status update bar.   Judge Richard “Dick” Baldwin who is running for Supreme Court, was completely swayed by this charade.  Even though the civil trial was not about this, he said he believed that I freed the rabbits and confronted Levi in front of his house later on.   It didn’t help that my intended lawyer was unreachable and I was forced to defend myself.

I am not seeking funds from anyone because I have the funds and know y’all need every penny to wage this fight for animal liberation, but know of 9,500 better places for dollars to go than to Levi and his law firm!  My advice to animal rights activists is to make sure to always have a witness and/or video evidence with you at all times.   Be extremely careful of what you post on Facebook!  The judge used my political beliefs and ideology against me.  Free speech doesn’t exist.  Remember the SHAC 7 trial?  Folks in states where there is abundant sunshine need pay particular interest to this.  Y’all are working on outstanding campaigns, but it won’t help if you get sued or imprisoned simply because of unnecessary rhetoric posted on the Internet.

I intend on attending law school this Fall.  The legal system is extremely backwards.  Many survivors of sexual assault have found it impossible to get a restraining order, as they are often forced to suffer a horrible fate when the system judges them for surviving this traumatic experience.  Privileged white male Levi Cole has never been challenged in his whole life and reacted with extreme gusto to get a permanent restraining order against me!  I have previously been spared from suffering serious criminal complications thanks to the help of pro-bono radical attorneys and am now looking to return the favor.

Without the love and support from folks in our community, I would never have been able to stay sane throughout this ordeal.  Those that supported me by attending my court dates, acting as a bodyguard when I had to deliver a large sum of cash to Levi’s attorney, and checking in with me regularly provided vital mutual aid.  I send you my sincerest gratitude from the bottom of my heart.  They can have my money, but they’ll never take my heart.  Stay strong, y’all!

Love & Liberation,

Jonathan Grindell”

Taken from our comrade Jose Palafox

I HAVE BEEN SUBPOENAED BEFORE A GRAND JURY

On Friday May 4th, I was approached by two FBI agents at the BART Station at 19th and Broadway in Oakland. They asked my name, identified themselves as Carrie and Matt from the FBI, and served me a subpoena to testify before a federal Grand Jury. They informed me that I had been served and left without asking me any other questions.

From the face of the Grand Jury Subpoena, it appears related to an animal rights action that took place in Santa Cruz in August of 2008. I believe this is a political repression and part of a government attempt to gather information on activists and the animal rights movement.

I will be getting a lawyer and plan to exercise my rights to the fullest extent. The National Lawyers Guild in San Francisco can help people subpoenaed before Grand Juries.

This is the second time I have come into contact with the FBI. A couple of years ago, I had to deal with the Oakland Police Department regarding a private criminal matter, unrelated to activism, and without my knowledge was interviewed by an FBI agent. He began to ask me questions about my activism and political affiliations. I asked what agency he was from and I immediately stopped answering any questions. Probably unrelated but you never know.

I feel that it is important to let folks know about this political repression and to let people know that I will be needing support. However, please don’t ask me to speculate about the FBI’s investigation. I can talk about the government’s accusations and what is happening with court appearances but I can’t answer questions about the facts, so please don’t ask. I will update the community if I learn anything further.

In solidarity, Jose Palafox 5/10/12

Have you ever been to the beautiful community of Flagstaff, AZ? If you have, you know something special is in the air. The people of Flagstaff are welcoming and friendly, you can see nature around you nearly wherever you are, and the air is fresh as can be. Even if you haven’t been, you have probably heard about the beautiful environment that surrounds the city.

When most people think of Flagstaff, they may think of college (NAU), or the wonderful hot cup of vegan hot chocolate at Macys. But when we think of Flagstaff, we think of the sacred San Francisco Peaks and the community of resistance to save the beautiful mountains. The campaign to save the San Francisco Peaks has been going on for years, but it has been increasingly active the past year. Right now, the legal campaign to save the peaks is all tied up in the courts, but that hasn’t stopped the passion of the community who decided to take action into their own hands and lock down in an act of civil disobedience. Acts of civil disobedience have successfully halted the daily clear-cutting and pipeline excavation plans on multiple occasions costing Snowbowl, the company at fault a substantial amount of money and resulting in nearly 30 arrests of activists in the past year alone.

After our trip to Flagstaff, and discussing the situation with Jeneda and Clayson, we knew we wanted to help. We decided that we wanted to put together a benefit shirt that do two things; Help with the legal fund of those who locked down, and spread the word about the desecration of the sacred San Francisco Peaks. Our friend Matt Gauck was able to create what we had in mind perfectly with this beautiful design! We are really excited to present the shirt to you all, and we hope you like it too! We hope it helps spread the message of the ‘Save The Peaks’ campaign and we hope you help as well! We hope you check the shirt out in our store. Thank you for your time, and we hope you help us raise money for a good cause! The shirts are %100 organic cotton / USA made/sweatshop free!

As the Occupy movement carries out massive May Day protests around the country, the FBI Joint Terrorism Task force is trumpeting the arrest of “self-proclaimed anarchists” and “terrorists” who allegedly conspired to destroy a bridge in Ohio. Integral to the development and advancement of this plot,

however, were FBI agents themselves and an informant with a drug and robbery record.

Douglas L. Wright, 26; Brandon L. Baxter, 20; and Anthony Hayne, 35, Connor C. Stevens, 20, and Joshua S. Stafford, 23, were arrested by the FBI on April 30, just in time to make the announcement as the nation turns its attention to May Day protests.

The affidavit reveals a plot by the FBI that continues a pattern of behavior in “terrorism” investigations against political activists. Most importantly, undercover FBI agents helped shape the “plot,” offered advice on how and where to use explosives, and allegedly sold explosives to the activists.

Pervasive Use of Informants and Undercover FBI

The informant in the case has been working with the FBI since July 20, 2011, and has a criminal record including possession of cocaine, conviction for robbery, and four convictions for passing bad checks. (The FBI’s proclivity for using down-and-out criminals was a key issue in the “Operation Backfire” Earth Liberation Front cases. The lead arsonist and informant, Jacob Ferguson, had a heroin addiction, and is now back in prison on drug charges).

The informant and the others haphazardly talked about various plans, starting with the use of smoke grenades and destroying bank signs off the top of large buildings.

For instance, on April 10, 2012: ““…BAXTER explained that he does not know what to do with the explosives and he has never considered blowing anything up before.”

Conversation shifted to other outrageous plans. According to the affidavit, “WRIGHT joked that he would wear a suicide vest and walk in and blow himself up, but advised he would have to be very drunk.”

“The CHS [the informant] asked the others what it is they wanted to do… BAXTER said that they had never decided on the bridge, they were just throwing out options and they had never decided on anything.”

FBI Guidance

The defendants flitted between hyperbolic conversations -– some about destroying bank signs, some about destroying a boat, some about a bridge — and various spy tactics such as secret email accounts, wiping computer drives, and disrupting surveillance. At every step of the way, the informant (who was paid nearly $6,000, plus expenses) and undercover FBI agents were there to correct course.

At one point Wright asked the undercover FBI agent “if there was any work he could do… to pay for the items he was going to purchase” from the agent. Later, Connor Stevens told Wright that he no longer wanted to be part of the plan, but wanted to know if the informant might hire him to do some work on his house.

At another point, Wright told the informant that he and others thought one of the individuals involved was an undercover cop (which he was). To allay his fears, the informant said he would help provide the explosives.

Clamoring to Thwart “Terrorist Plots”

U.S. Attorney Dettelbach called this a violent terrorist plot, and said: “The defendants stand charged based not upon any words or beliefs they might espouse, but based upon their own plans and actions.”

What’s troubling is that the government has had a heavy hand in creating the very plot it thwarted.

And on top of that, the defendants, by the admission of the FBI, said repeatedly that they had no intention of harming anyone. At one point Baxter and Wright “stated they don’t want people to think they are terrorists.”

This isn’t an isolated instance.

The criminal complaint reads like the spitting image of the case of Eric McDavid, who was coaxed  by an undercover FBI operative named “Anna.” In that case, like this one, the FBI supplied bomb making recipes, bomb making materials, and attempts to distill activist boasting and hyperbole into a coherent plan.

McDavid did nothing, and was arrested on conspiracy charges, like these defendants have been. As readers of this site know, conspiracy charges are the fall-back for the government when there is not enough evidence to get anything else to “stick.”

Demonization of Anarchism

In addition to a continuation of undercover informants and FBI-manufactured plots, this case also reflects on on-going focus on demonizing anarchists.

The government’s press release proclaims that the defendants are “self-proclaimed anarchists.” The affidavit notes that they attended anarchist protests and carried anarchist flags.

The affidavit also says that the defendants talked about anarchists “rioting and destroying each city” that holds May Day protests, and that it will be “off the hook.”

Demonizing anarchists has gone one for over a century, of course, but in recent years the rhetoric has dovetailed with “War on Terrorism” hysteria.

For example, in Scott Demuth’s case, the government argued that: “Defendant’s writings, literature, and conduct suggest that he is an anarchist and associated with the ALF movement. Therefore, he is a domestic terrorist.”

In another case, the government sought a high cash bond against environmentalist Hugh Farrell because “the defendant has been observed advocating literature and materials which advocate anarchy.”

It should come as no surprise, then, that the announcement of these arrests was carefully unveiled yesterday, so that the top news story this May Day would not be about howanarchists are preventing home foreclosures, starting community gardens, teaching collective organizing skills, and re-framing class consciousness, but about how they were part of an FBI-guided “terrorist plot.”

First, I just want to say thank you for all the support. Even a simple post card that says “Thinking of you” can brighten an inmates day. I look forward to making many more friends and also having much correspondence with all of you. I would love to promise a response to all of you. However , I’m only allowed 100 contacts and I am not able to respond to anyone residing outside of the United States. Luckily, I’ve been able to respond to all non-international letters so far and I want you all to know I will absolutely read every piece of mail that is sent and isn’t denied and I will try my hardest to respond. If I am ever unable to respond please don’t think I am ungrateful or ignoring you.

I was asked by Because We Must to write a bit about grand juries. As I’ve mentioned countless times in the past, I just want to reiterate the need to read up on the grand jury system. I know it may seem overwhelming and like a lot of information at first, but the best way to protect yourself is to learn. Knowledge is power. I think Crescenzo Vellucci said it best.

“To understand the threat and power of grand juries is to empower yourself. And if you can become empowered, you will not feel fear. And without fear, the state and the abusive grand jury system cannot do anything to you.”

I was recently reading about the anti-war group the “Lexington Six” who were jailed for their refusal to collaborate with a grand jury almost half a century ago, yet what they said still holds true today. “People must MOBILIZE AROUND THESE ISSUES. To do this, people must first become familiar with the grand jury and its abuses, PUBLICIZING THE FACTS AND EDUCATING OTHERS AS TO THEIR RIGHTS. Secondly it is important to engender in others a commitment to the resistance of these abuses including, but not limited to ones refusal to testify before the grand jury. Thirdly, it is necessary to keep in mind that while court battles can be fought and sometimes won, these abuses of the law are not abnormalities in a basically good system. They rather illustrate the true intentions of a BAD system more openly and graphically than other insidious practices (and) THIS SHOULD DOMINATE OUR THINKING AS WE ORGANIZE.

The grand jury systems goal aside from harassing and intimidating activists is to gather information on them, their friends, their family, and the community. So, as a community, we should have a similar goal to gather information on the grand jury process. So we will all be prepared to resist its abuse when an agent comes knocking. Another thing we should do is inform our “non-activist” friends, family, and co-workers. Help them learn their rights. Ask them not to cooperate and to let you know if they are ever approached or contacted. For in the end, they are just as much a part of the community as we are.

As was the case with some members in my own community, I was asked “What’s the harm of testifying if you know nothing?” An old lawyers joke use to say “a grand jury could indict a sandwich if it wanted.” Because in a grand jury there is no defense attorney and people can be indicted from mere rumors, innuendo and hearsay. And to choose to just testify and get it over with enables you to be put on a list of people they “know will talk” and your chances of being subpoenaed again and harassed in the future are increased significantly. But even more important is the fact that grand juries are a violation of our basic civil and political rights. And its abuse needs to be addressed and protested. Trust me, I had no desire to go to prison for refusing to testify about something of which I had no knowledge. But, some issues are more important than saving my own skin. And this is one of them.

For the Earth, For the Animals, For Ourselves,

-Jordan Halliday

“Fear of knowledge is natural: all of us experience it, and there is nothing we can do about it. But, no matter how frightening learning is, it is more terrible to think of a man without knowledge.”- Don Juan Matus

George Zimmerman does not exist in a vacuum. It seems important for me to restate this fact at this time.

As I predicted would happen, we have now entered the CSI or Law & Order phase of the Trayvon Martin killing. We are being subjected to a trial by media with reports by Nancy Grace about grand jury testimony, DNA evidence, and whether they will move the venue of any possible future trial. Unfortunately Law & Order Trayvon Martin won’t have a quick nor I predict satisfying ending for the public, the vast majority of whom will soon move on. After all, reality television can only hold the public’s attention (those who are even paying attention in the first place) for so long before people start to change the channel to watch something else.

Ultimately what will be lost in all of this is the memory of Trayvon Martin. However this episode will once again underscore the fact that most people do not actually care about antiblack violence in America. This is as it has always been; nothing new to see here. By virtue of our blackness, we are always perceived as disposable (even more so in the 21st century now that our labor is superfluous to the functioning of capitalism) and as “suspect.”

Larvester Gaither (2000) writes that the “adjective ‘suspicious’ expresses the historical and fundamental status of Africans in American society and partly explains American ambivalence toward the question of black victimization (p.192).” In other words, as Kanye West might say: “America does not care about black people.” It certainly does not care about black pain.

There is something more too. Our citizenship as black people is never taken for granted. It is consistently under assault. Black people are ina perpetual struggle in America not to be disenfranchised. For example, currently the right is pushing new voter ID laws across the country which are specifically intended to suppress black votes. People have called Arizona’s SB1070 the “papers please” law. It’s an apt characterization. However it should be pointed out that black people in America (including our current President) have been and continue to be asked to produce “our papers” regularly and usually there is no “please” attached to the demand.

In the 18th century, slave patterollers were empowered to demand documentation from any black person they came across as proof that they were actually “free.” W. Marvin Dulaney writes about slave patrols in his book Black Police in America (1996):

“By the middle of the eighteenth century, every southern colony had a slave patrol. Although in some communities all white males were required to serve some time as patterollers, their ranks were usually filled with poor whites. The patrols were authorized to stop, search, whip, maim, and even kill any African slave caught off the plantation without a pass, engaged in illegal activities, or running away. The patterollers policed specific geographic areas in southern communities called “beats.” Paramilitary in nature, the slave patrol often cooperated with the militia in the southern colonies to prevent and suppress slave insurrections. To facilitate the rapid mobilization of the patrol and to ensure that every white man supported its activities in emergencies, colonial governments granted all whites the authority to detain, whip, and even kill slaves suspected of illegal activities or conspiracies. The colonial slave patrol exercised awesome powers which were often abused [emphasis mine] (p.2).”

Does this sound eerily familiar? If not, it should. I repeat: George Zimmerman does not exist in a historical vacuum. He felt it perfectly within his rights to demand to know what Trayvon was doing in his gated community. [Please don't mention the fact that Zimmerman is half Peruvian to me as a way to suggest that he cannot be a racist. We all swim in and internalize the toxic soup of American racism on a daily basis.] Political scientist Robert Gooding-Williams, writing in the New York Times, makes an explicit connection between Zimmerman and slave patterollers:

“If it seems a stretch, finally, to paint Zimmerman in the image of the slave catchers of yesteryear, recall that he himself invited the comparison when, while stalking the African-American teenager against the advice of a 911 dispatcher, he complained, using an expletive to refer to Trayvon, that they “always get away.”

Fast forward to 2012, our President is asked to produce his papers on an almost daily basis, when stopped for driving while black we are asked for our licenses and registration, standing on the street corner minding our business we are told to show identification, and walking back from the store with ice tea and Skittles in hand we are questioned about where we are going and asked to prove that we belong in this particular neighborhood. It is within this context of blacks as ‘perpetually criminally suspect’ that George Zimmerman felt empowered to act as an antiblack vigilante. He had historical precedent on his side and he must have known this.

The 3rd Annual Law and Disorder Conference will take place April 6-8th, 2012 at Portland State University.

This conference calls for people, movements, organizations and collectives to present alternative accounts to the political dimensions of civic engagement, mutual aid and revolution as they relate to economics, politics, invention, technology, work, artistic and cultural production, the body, pedagogy and social change. The conference promises to create a provocative space for comparative critical dialogue between activists, revolutionaries, educators, artists, musicians, scholars, dancers, actors and writers.  The conference invites panels and workshop on all aspects of social change from the revolutionary to the academic.

Check out this video promo for the conference this year!

You’ve seen it before. Pictures of dying animals used for food crammed into slaughterhouses juxtaposed with an image of mass graves in concentration camps, or a picture of a lynching victim next to a pig suspended in the air by rope to help drain blood after the throat is cut. These are common, visceral, and almost always used as graphics with little or no context or description.

People who use graphics or arguments like these as part of their advocacy frequently say that people won’t understand the exploitation and abuse of nonhumans unless it’s described in simple terms, or that we should “call it like it is”. Moreover, they say the only people who have problems with such comparisons are speciesist themselves; that is, if the person in question were vegan and a supporter of animal liberation, then they wouldn’t have a problem with such tactics.

To all that I usually say: “wow”. But I can be more specific about why these tactics are problematic, and why dismissal of arguments or anger against them is exactly the kind of privilege we should seek to expose and root out.

It is unethical to hijack narratives or tap into the pain of historical trauma for your “education” project, as seriously as you may take it; you cannot use a story or experience as a point of comparison when that very experience is not taken seriously on its own terms. People of color, and more specifically, Black people, see their current and historical traumas used by a variety of movements as selling points or as “helpful illustrations”. The pain of racism and the violence and damage it causes is objectified as a rhetorical tool, and not understood on its own terms or respected for its uniqueness.

And what we’re really saying, again, is the sources of comparison are really unimportant in the context of nonhuman suffering. It’s just used as a stepping stone to get to an item on our agenda, rather than a separate serious concern that we work on simultaneously with nonhuman liberation struggles. Lynching and the Holocaust become illustrative and figurative; this is continuing the violence and delegitimization the survivors have to continue to experience by our privileged oversight.

We only feel comfortable bringing up lynching and the Holocaust and epidemic gender and sexual violence because they are easy tools to appropriate. It’s easy to be against them, but not so easy to understand the specific conditions that support them, or the implicit attitudes that continue to inform them even in people with the best intentions. It’s not a fair comparison not because nonhumans don’t suffer, but because erasure of difference is not taken seriously and that does significant damage.

Speciesism did not kill Emmett Till, racism did. To deny that root cause by a simplistic graphic you whipped up on publisher in 5 minutes is why we still don’t take racism seriously as a deadly and oppressive force with a history and contemporary record of killing Black people with impunity.

Activism: You're Doing it Wrong

Solidarity does not require us all to be the same. By definition, it implies there is some piece that is inviolable, unique, and worth appreciating from a perspective that will never fully understand its effects or implications. We have the vision of building better coalitions when we rely on true solidarity, rather than doing what’s been done by the very oppressive structures we criticize.

Oppression of nonhumans has a history and quality that is all its own. We do a disservice to the nonhumans we advocate for when we erase their specific experiences in order to hang them on the scaffolding of human experience. We imply that the only meaningful way to talk about pain and suffering is through human terms, and then only those human terms we feel okay with constantly appropriating and co-opting. This is not a good framework for the non-speciesist society we wish to envision.

This really demonstrates, in action, what Breeze Harper describes as the whitewashing of the vegan movement. Whiteness that is by nature, reductionist, consuming, and gains power by co-opting and appropriation is why advocacy tools like these are so popular. Not only does this misrepresent our larger goals of total liberation, it silences PoC vegans and animal liberation advocates who are alienated by such rhetoric and aren’t taken seriously when they promote their own tactics and work.

I’m not saying comparisons or analogies are 100% never helpful. I am saying that they are frequently used without care, without self-reflection, and with the assumption that being anti-speciesist automatically comes with a pass freeing you from checking relevant racial, economic, and gender privilege. I am saying that more often than not, most examples alienate the people you are appropriating for your cause and that does damage to all of our goals. Nuanced examples require research and thoughtfulness that seems impossible to do in a simple graphic or a tweet. So their use following these guidelines would be well researched, vetted for accuracy, come from non-privileged folk, and be used sparingly.

It is not speciesist to ask that your historical and contemporary trauma be respected. It is not speciesist to ask that “abolitionist” not be used to describe anything other than as relevant to the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade (especially when the people appropriating the term frequently know next to nothing about actual abolitionists or racial struggles).

The atrocities that non-humans experience are bad enough (and we have the pictures and the language to capture this horror) without constantly appropriating the pain of others, especially when explicitly asked not to.

We have creative methods that are non-exploitive that deliver our message. Pushing ourselves to do more, rather than relying what’s been done before, seems to be the most effective route to take.