The following is a cross-posted article from SCISSION.
SCISSION provides progressive news and analysis from the breaking point of Capital. SCISSION represents an autonomist Marxist viewpoint. You can read the original post in it’s entirety here:
For ten months the people of Zurawlow, Poland, have been occupying a field near their village attempting to stop Chevron in its tracks. Under the protection of security, and in a very tense atmosphere, Chevron had taken possession of land to install a fence and drill a well last summer.
According to the locals, this land has only been permitted for seismic testing. The authorization for drill testing was canceled in June 2012 and therefore Chevron has no right to drill.
The Polish farmers are opposed to unconventional shale gas drilling because it could lead to the contamination of their water and land; during previous seismic tests on-site explosives were used and had already caused water pollution, it became unfit for consumption.
Earlier in February, Poland ditched plans to use a state company to explore for shale gas, instead deciding to auction off licenses to foreign companies. Exxon Mobil and Marathon Oil are both interested in the country’s shale industry. Some state-controlled companies have also won licenses for exploration.
Maciej Grabowski, Poland’s environment minister, expects the country’s first commercial shale gas well to be drilled this year, and hopes to have over 200 wells in the next few years.
Earlier this year, the European Union’s attempts to set legally binding regulations for shale gas extraction were defeated after the UK and a number of EU states (including Poland) argued that current EU regulations are sufficient to keep fracking safe. Instead companies will be asked to follow voluntary guidelines.
“This is obviously a very disappointing and alarming proposal,” Antoine Simon, shale-gas campaigner for Friends of the Earth Europe was quoted by Bloomberg News in January. It “ignores the studies the commission published and fails to protect Europe’s citizens from the health and environmental risks of unconventional and dirty fossil fuels.”
“I think it is sad that the European Commissioners are protecting the interests of a handful of fossil fuel companies rather than the interests of Europe’s citizens,” the Green MEP Claude Turmes told EurActiv.
The EU proposals have “nothing in the way of real protection for the thousands of ordinary people who will see their lives and local areas turned upside down if the fracking industry gets its way,” Lawrence Carter, a climate campaigner at Greenpeace in London, said in an e-mail to Bloomberg.
“This is likely to be only the beginning,” Caroline May, head of safety and environment at law firm Norton Rose Fulbright LLP in London was quoted by Businessweek. “The difficulties for the regulators are the political differences across member states and the differing reserves, which mean that some countries can ‘afford’ to have no policy or to protest, whereas for others like the UK there is a real resource as well as financial imperative.”
In fact, in the midst of global climate talks held in Poland last November, the Polish government of Prime Minister Donald Tusk flouting the international call for a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions suddenly fired Environment Minister Marcin Korolec and replaced him with a man closely associated with the nation’s gas fracking industry.
Following the firing Maciej Muskat, director of Greenpeace Poland said, “This is nuts. Changing the minister leading the climate negotiations after a race to the bottom by parties of the convention shows Prime Minister Tusk is not sincere about the need for an ambitious climate deal…Furthermore, justifying the change of minister by the need to push the exploitation of another fossil fuel in Poland is beyond words.
All of this is happening despite early reports of bad results in the shale oil game in Poland.
The last line of defense may just be a handful of farmers in a remote back area of Poland…and that may just be enough.
We are happy to share with everyone an interview with Manchester Hunt Sabs! With the growing opposition to hunts in North America around government culls, and the recent rise in organized hunting, they spoke with us to share some tips and information about hunt sabbing, and how people can keep up the fight to defend the wild in their own backyards!
BWM: Can you briefly explain what hunt sabs do for people who might not be familiar with your work, and why you became involved with this particular type of action in your area?
MHS: Hunt Sabotage is a form of direct action that originated in the UK 50 years ago. The basic premise is to disrupt a hunt (fox, deer, hare, rabbit, sometimes shoots) by making it difficult/impossible for the hunters to operate. Generally most sabotage takes place against hunts that use packs of hounds. These are mostly but not always mounted packs (on horseback.)
MHS: Many Hunt sabs work so the constraint is often based around that but it’s during the hunting season (late August – March in most areas) and tends to be weekends though weekdays do happen regularly depending on numbers.
BWM: How long has your group or individuals in your group been involved with this kind of direct action for animals?
MHS: I personally have been doing it for just under 20 years on and off. There was a time when as a form of protest it seemed to be dropping off as most people doing it were getting on a bit! A lot of hunting was banned in the UK in 2005 so many people dropped out as the perception was our job was done but over the years it’s become apparent that the ban is widely ignored by hunters.
Over the last 5 years or so a whole new generation of people have got involved as this reality has become better known and there is a resurgence in the numbers of groups out there. There are probably more now than at any point in the last 20 years.
BWM: In North America, we don’t have organized hunting in the same way that they do in the UK, but something that is happening regularly is culls and government organized killings of wild animals in specific areas during specific time frames. People here are beginning to organize around these hunts and interfere with them on behalf of animals, do you have any advice or wisdom you would share with people who are trying to organize against a sanctioned hunt in north america?
MHS: It’s very difficult to give advice when your law enforcement and hunting culture varies so much from ours. Be adaptable. Be careful. Don’t get caught! Take advantage of social media to sidestep mainstream media to get your message across. Don’t underestimate what a small number of organized people can do.
BWM: Can you take us through some of the victories or successes your group or hunt sabbers you have worked with have experienced in the past?
MHS: Every time an animal is known to escape from a hunt is a victory. Hunt Sabs (alongside other campaigning groups) have been widely blamed for the ‘failure’ of the first round of the badger cull in 2 areas of the UK in 2013. We definitely considered that a victory though the cull continues it was massively over budget and massively below target.
BWM: Do you feel as though there are take-aways or lessons you have learned from doing this work that could be applied broadly across the animal liberation community or perhaps into other forms of resistance and activism?
MHS: It varies from group to group, cause to cause. We, Manchester Sabs, I hope would be seen as pretty straight forward and down to earth people. We try to be open to new recruits but do not accept racists, homophobes or sexists. You have to accept that not everyone will go as far as the next person and that everyone has limits to the commitment they can make and that those that don’t go as far still have very important contributions to make to what we do.
BWM: How does the community, both inside and outside of animal liberation circles respond to work of this kind? Do you find you are well-supported in your work or is this really a labour of love for the individuals involved?
MHS: We are well supported. Hunt sabbing is generally seen as being on the sharp end of direct action in the UK. We’re not a campaign group, we are the last line of defence for the hunted animal. And people respond to that. There’s a historical perception created by the press and the pro hunt side that doesn’t reflect modern sabs which sometimes makes more ‘mainstream’ people wary of us. Our work against the badger cull has brought us in to contact with a lot of these people and I think broadened out not only our support but also the types of people who join us.
BWM: Is there anything individuals can do to help support your group or your efforts from afar?
MHS: Yes. Donations always welcome! Follow what we do on line via twitter and Facebook especially. There is increasingly social media lead actions that can help what we do in the field.
BWM: If you could say one thing to people who hunt for animals as sport or for their own pleasure what would it be?
MHS: It’s a difficult one. We’re not there to argue with them or change their minds. That’s not what we do. Their mindset to me is pretty difficult to comprehend. But probably ‘grow up and get a proper hobby – it’s 2014 your time and your ‘sport’s’ time has gone’ springs to mind.
BWM: Do you have any final words you would like to leave with people who might be considering getting involved with hunt sabbing or organizing against culls/hunts in their own area?
MHS: All the people in our van got there through different routes and for different reasons. Everyone has a first time and most people don’t know anyone when they first get in the van. Sabbing can be frightening, funny, exhilarating, frustrating, boring. But when you see your first fox or hare get away from a hunt because of something you did….it’s hard not to throw yourself in to it.
We are extremely excited to tell you about a new wildlife protection organization that has been brewing in British Columbia, Canada called Wildlife Defence League! WDL has been a year in the making and they are finally ready to show you their new website and tell the world what they have planned for Canadian wildlife. We had the privilege of doing a short interview with Tommy of WDL and he told us everything that we had to know about WDL and how we can help out! Make sure to like WDL on Facebook too!
BWM: Hey Tommy, so why WDL?
Tommy: We came up with the name, Wildlife Defence League, while on a Sea Shepherd campaign to Antarctica to stop the illegal Japanese whale hunt. The name sums up exactly what we do. Plus, we thought the name, Land Shepherd, might raise a few eyebrows.
BWM: Why was it necessary to start this group?
Tommy: It was necessary to start the Wildlife Defence League because of the dire situation that wildlife, especially grizzly bears, black bears and wolves, find themselves in throughout British Columbia. Science has never been the base for policy making in regards to the trophy hunt and in this province, we are on par to lose the iconic grizzly bear if drastic action is not taken to protect the species. As well, a substantial number of black bears hunted in the province carry a recessive gene that produces an all white bear, known as the Spirit Bear. It is estimated that only roughly two hundred Spirit Bears exist in the wild, which makes this sub-species more rare than the panda. Under British Columbian law, Spirit Bears are protected but the black bears that carry the gene are not. Wolves face a very different situation. Law in British Columbia does not protect any wolf. With a hunting license, trophy hunters are allowed to kill cubs, pregnant females and even a pack, should their sick minds desire to.
BWM: Can you describe the trophy hunt?
Tommy: Trophy hunters in British Columbia use rifles and bows to kill wildlife. Sadly, most animals suffer immensely at the hands of the hunters before they succumb to their wounds. Guide outfitters usually have to take the kill shot because of the inexperience of their clients, which results in a prolonged period of suffering due to the animal being shot numerous times. The Internet is full of videos that show this in detail.
BWM: What do you have planned to defend the wolves and bears?
Tommy: The Wildlife Defence League’s mission is to conserve and defend the forests and their inhabitants from destruction of habitat and trophy hunting.
BWM: What are the dangers of this campaign, how are you prepared for them?
Tommy: Carrying out a campaign in one of the wildest places on earth has numerous dangers. We will be at a great distance away from medical attention and search and rescue should something go wrong. The greatest danger we face is, without a doubt, the trophy hunters. These individuals have set out to slaughter an animal, simply for a rug, a wall mount and bragging rights among the disgraceful people they surround themselves with. We are facing a type of hunter with an extremely violent mindset and expect them to use violent tactics to combat us.
We will have crew with medical training, in case a situation arises. In preparing for confrontations with trophy hunters, the camera is our best weapon for self-defence. We will have a documentary team focused on the trophy hunters every move. We did consider bulletproof vests as an option but in British Columbia it is illegal to own a vest and because the actions we take are legal, we cannot compromise. Despite the dangers we may face, the danger of loosing these animals is far greater.
BWM: Why would you risk your life to save these animals?
BWM: How can someone support the WDL or the campaign?
Tommy: Folks can support the Wildlife Defence League in various ways. Becoming a support volunteer, hosting a fundraiser, sharing our website and Facebook page or donating a few dollars to help fund our campaign are all very much appreciated. Donations to the Wildlife Defence League campaign will help cover the cost of camping supplies, hiking gear and food. It will also cover our transportation to and from the area where we will be defending wildlife. The remoteness of our campaign makes it an expensive place to be transported to and from.
On Saturday March 15, Montreal Quebec held it’s 18th annual Anti-Police Brutality March. This year, protesters who were demonstrating in the streets were informed that the police had decalred their protest illegal two days before it was scheduled, using the P-6 laws that were enacted during the massive student strikes in 2012. These laws allow the Montreal police to declare any protest illegal at any time if they are not provided with notice of the route. In Canada, the right to protest and to take a roadway in order to do so is a right protected by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, similar to the Constitution in the USA. There are several court challenges to this law, but it remains used to stifle dissenting voices and protected peaceful assembly. Today we are speaking with a member and supporter from the Collective Opposed to Police Brutality (COBP) about the march they organized on Saturday March 15. This year’s march saw 250+ people kettled, arrested, and ticketed $637 each by the Montreal Police (SVMP).
BWM: Can you please outline for people who may not be familiar, what the present climate towards protest in Montreal is like, and how this differs from the way things were in the past?
COBP: Montreal has always been a city where protest is present. There was a huge popular uprising in 2012; students had declared the general strike and hundreds of events took place. Citizens had managed to take control of the streets for several months. Following the student strike, in order to stop the events, changes to the regulation of Municipal by-law: P-6 by-law was made; one of which says that the organizers must provide their route to the police. Strongly condemned by dozens of organizations of all types, the police began to kettle protesters from the gathering points, preventing people from taking the street. In all, over 3,000 people were arrested under P6, protesters and ordinary citizens who were passing by and had nothing to do with the event. This famous ticket is a fine of $637.
BWM: On this past weekend in Montreal, hundreds of protesters were rounded up and arrested in the city during a non-violent demonstration. Can you outline for us what the march was about, and how over 200 protesters came to find themselves under arrest?
COBP: The 15th of March is an international day against police brutality. Everywhere in the world people are gathering on this day to denounce police abuse. Here in Montreal, the COBP has been organizing the protest for 18 years, whose themes vary from year to year (social cleaning, profiling, police impunity…) this year the theme was police militarization.
This past Saturday, 288 people were kettled because of the P6 by-law, under the premise of not giving the route. In the past 6 months, a lot of protests happened where there were no routes given and the police still let the protest start and finish. The SPVM [Editors note: SPVM stands for Service de police de la Ville de Montréal, and is the city's police department] declared the protest on Saturday illegal 2 days prior to the date of the protest. They are applying political profiling on our protests because the SPVM really hate the COBP and radical militants. Same thing with May 1st, a protest that is organized by the CLAC [Editors note: CLAC is an all-canadian private union that organizes 60,000 workers in many different workplaces]; police are political profiling because it is the CLAC. For them, we (the anarchists), are radical terrorists that should be exterminated.
BWM: Montreal is no stranger to mass arrests these days, how has the implementation of these laws affected organizational structures and charter protected rights to freedom of expression and protest–are these laws changing the way people organize or express their dissent in Quebec?
COBP: That P6 by-law is affecting a lot of organisations. There are many people who do not want to participate in protests anymore because of the by-law. We are officially in a police state. There is no way of expressions anymore, at least not in the street! More and more anarchists are thinking of other possibilities to smash the system, illegal or not. Protests are just one of many ways to express our rage towards the repressive system. Right now, the P6 by-law modifications are being contested by Anarchopanda. [Editor's note: if you aren't familiar with Anarchopanda... you ought to be.] It should start in December but the trial will take several years. There are also 6 class actions for 5 different protests in process, also against P6.
BWM: Many of these shifts occurred during the student protests in Montreal; do you believe that this kind of police power is drying up dissent and political action in Montreal, or is is merely changing and evolving the tactics and structures of those who organize/resist?
COBP: Increasingly, police are trying to silence the voices of the people. The police, the judiciary system and the media all work together to create a climate of fear on citizens. The SPVM are just a bunch of stupid robots with no brains and no hearts. In another way, they can TRY to silence us, but if protests are not a solution anymore, there is many others possibilities; Anarchists have a lot of imagination.
BWM: If you could tell someone outside of Montreal one thing that you have learned from organizing within this political climate, what would it be?
COBP: I learned that no matter what type of repression the state will use on us, it’s a good reason to just keep fighting against it. More and more people are getting angry about all the repression and profiling of the dumbass SPVM and the mass media, all of which are spreading disinformation. The struggle is not local… the struggle is international!
BWM: Can you explain for us what it is your group does, and how people who are both inside and outside of Montreal might show you support or become involved with your work?
COBP: Most people think that the COBP are just a bunch of radical anarchists that are only putting on an annual protest that generates violence (according to the media), but we are doing work year around, with victims of police brutality or abuse. People are calling or writing us because they need help, they need advice, they want to denounce something etc. We are also giving public workshops about knowing your rights towards the police. We also do a working memory of all the victims of the SPVM by putting on vigils when an innocent person has been killed by them or to commemorate the death of a victim killed by the SPVM. We are putting benefit shows for political prisoners, we have also a merchandise table that we are presenting in different events. We are writing publications and documentation in some Anarchist’s zines. People can visit our website: www.cobp.resist.ca
BWM: Is there a particular thing you love about Montreal or the activists and students who have been involved in your community that you’d like to share with people who may only see news stories or small pieces of information about the city on social media?
COBP: Get involved in the movement if you feel angry about the system! By peer group or collective group, together we’re stronger than ever! Here as everywhere else, state repression will not pass! For alternative media I suggest anyone to follow: CUTV, Gappa, Moïse
Stand up, fight back!
BWM: Do you have any final words you wish to share about the march that was organized, the issue it was centered around and/or arrests that followed it on Saturday?
COBP: It is without surprise but rather an enormous amount of rage an indignation that the Collective Opposed to Police Brutality (COBP/Mtl) denounces the mass arrest that ended the 18th annual demonstration against police brutality mere moments before it began. The Montréal police (SPVM), with the help of the Québec police (SQ), encircled the demonstration before it even really begun. According to our initial information, about 250 people were arrested using article 2.1 of the municipal bylaw P-6 that prohibits all protests where the route is not given to the police ahead of time. (Must we remind them that the constitutionality of bylaw P-6 is currently being contested in court)? Many targeted arrests happened, many of which were carried out quite brutally. One demonstrator was sent to the hospital after his head was smashed by police batons. The SPVM countered their reputation of intolerance by declaring the demonstration illegal 2 days before March 15th under the pretext that the route had not been submitted ahead of time. Undercover police working for the SPVM also visited many activists in the days prior, intimidating them and discouraging from participating in the 2014 March 15th demo. As demonstrated arrived at the gathering point of Jean-Talon metro they were greeted by a veritable army of police on foot, on horses, on bicycles, in cars and in helicopters. After a brief but energetic speech by the organizers, which was interrupted by a cop who shouted incomprehensibly, the crowd tried to go west on Jean-Talon road. A line of riot cops was deployed immediately, blocking their route. The people turned right around and took Châteaubriand road towards the south – the only direction that was not blocked by SPVM. On Châteaubriand, between Jean-Talon and Bélanger, the majority of people were arrested when the SPVM did not give them a chance to disperse, contradicting their own “instructions to demonstrators,” published on March 12th on their website. Many other arrests were more or less targeted and took place several blocks away from the kettle. The SPVM’s “Urban Brigade” pursued, provoked and brutally arrested several people for banal reasons such as “impeding sidewalk traffic” and “emitting an audible noise outdoors.” The COBP denounces the fact that the SPVM has proven once again that it is incapable of tolerating demonstrations against its own brutality and police impunity. Many demonstrations that did not reveal their route to police were tolerated in 2013, without counting the innumerable “illegal” demonstrations in 2012. The repressive demonstration on the afternoon of March 15th demonstrates again that no matter what government is in power, liberal or otherwise, it’s always the police who decide who has the right to demonstrate and when, just like in a veritable police state.
“Here is what will happen if you take care of yourself–your body–in those ways; if you will respect your own animal rights in those ways: one, you’ll have more energy for the work that you need to do. Two, moving onto our topic of having to deal with the emotional trauma and the nightmares, etc. you will be less emotionally labile, notice that several of the things we brought up–not eating, not sleeping–are things that make you more emotionally on edge, so if you get enough of those, the reverse happens. If you get enough sleep and you are eating well enough you’re going to be less emotionally vulnerable. Not completely invulnerable, there is no way around some of these feelings, but they are going to be less devastating to you if you are well fed and well rested.” – (Aftershock: Confronting Trauma in Social Movements, Pattrice Jones; Resistance Ecology Conference; Portland, Oregon, 2013)
“I think by being so cut off within ourselves and among ourselves, that has also interfered with our ability to see connections. So really work on that. I think it will pay dividends not just for you but for our movements. So, how we take care of each other–it’s the same three. Okay, it’s almost self evident now with all the things I have said about taking care of yourself with your body, feelings and relationships.
Okay, body: understand that as deranged as most of us are, many of your comrades in social justice movements will need yo to remind them to eat lunch or to drink water or will need you to point out that they’ve got bags under their eyes an need to get more sleep. Be pro-active about doing that. Do not valorize self-neglect. No more applauding people for that. And also you know, make sure everyone has groceries–because they can’t eat if they don’t. By the way that touches on again what Breeze and Lauren were talking about; our social movements making us so proud of how little we pay people and granted there are a lot of material problems–it’s hard to get enough money to pay people decently and we talked about that too, but if you do become in a situation like the sanctuary that me and my partner co-founded, we didn’t take any money for a really really long time, and that was cool, I am fine with that, but the point is that once we started to hire people we didn’t hire anybody until we could pay them a livable wage. We actually have a reverse scale so the two co-founders get the the least and everyone else gets more–because they need it more–we’re older and we have some things already set like housing.
Feelings: okay so again this is a little harder, but you have to invite people to talk about their feelings. And that doesn’t have to be a deep soap-opera-y put your hand onto their hand and look deeply into their eyes and say ‘it looks like you’re having feelings!’ you could just say ‘you seem cranky are you okay?’ or ‘so, that thing yesterday was deep, how’s everybody doing?’ Initiating talk about feelings can be an important thing, particularly after an organization has maybe done something–like say you just went to a demo where everybody was tear-gassed–or maybe you weren’t tear gassed but you were picking and people were shouting at you. ‘How does everybody feel about that?’ and don’t presume you know how people feel, because actually, some people will have absolutely opposite feelings to having been shouted at. Just initiate inquiries into how people are feeling. And it doesn’t have to be deep! If you get that feeling, like you’re talking to somebody and you start to feel uncomfortable, because they’re having some uncomfortable feelings, so what you want to do is get away from it or make it all better or pretend it isn’t happening–that’s exactly when you actually want to talk about it. Like whenever you most don’t want to talk about it, that’s probably when you should. Although I am not sure how good that advice is–just an idea! [laughs]
I’m just going to give you a few really practical tips that I have found useful and that other people have found useful in having conversations before because we all were raised up not to talk about certain things–and no disrespect, but those of us in the animal movement are maybe really good at relationships with animals but maybe not so great with the other people. I am not saying all of us, but some of us are. And these skills don’t come automatically, at least not in this culture. Let me talk about a few things, one thing gets called by people ‘non-violent communication’ and I don’t mind using that phrase, but not surprisingly it got popular because some guy wrote it up calling it NVC but it was actually just the same stuff feminists had been telling people to do for a really long time, so anyways let me tell you some of the basics of what is now called NVC. One: is to use what are called ‘I statements’. When you are–and this is especially important when you have conflicts, because conflicts are a very hard thing and they can stress relationships and they can stress organizations–so ‘I statements’ are basically that you start things with ‘I’, and this might seem like the opposite of what you think you would do as a community oriented person, but the alternative is starting things with ‘you’–’you do this!’ or ‘don’t you do that’ or just stating something as though it were a fact as opposed to as though it were your opinion. Right? This is a dumb example, but there is a difference between saying ‘it’s cold in here’ and ‘I feel cold’–right, because ‘it’s cold in here’ presumes that everybody feels cold. whereas–I’ve experienced my first hot flashes recently, there may be someone who doesn’t feel cold at all in the room–so ‘I feel cold’ is better than ‘It’s cold in the room.’
Where you get into this with non violent communication is where someone comes late to meetings regularly–you could say–and again the thing is to not presume that you know what another person is experiencing, you do not, unless they tell you, all you know is what behaviour you’ve seen. So again, particularly dealing with conflict, non-violent communication involves speaking from your own perspective and focusing on behaviour, rather than on what you presume other people think or feel. So instead of saying ‘you disrespect me when you come late’ or ‘you disrespect the organization when you come late’ you say ‘I feel disrespected when you come late.’ Makes sense? and no, you are not allowed to say ‘I feel that you are dumb’ or ‘I feel that you must hate animals or you wouldn’t do that’ you have to do this with good intentions here. You’ve heard this, in the animal movement right now, what you basically have is people attacking each other’s motives, rather than presuming we are all trying for the same thing here, but we just have some differences.” - (Aftershock: Confronting Trauma in Social Movements, Pattrice Jones; Resistance Ecology Conference; Portland, Oregon, 2013)