This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
Do extremist tactics push environmentalism forwards or backwards?
Burning down buildings, spiking trees, bombing whaling ships, and poisoning fruit juice. These are examples of protest by groups known as eco-extremist or eco-terrorism groups. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) describes eco-terrorism as, “ the use or threatened use of violence of a criminal nature against innocent victims or property by an environmentally-oriented, subnational group for environmental-political reasons, or aimed at an audience beyond the target, often of a symbolic nature.” Simply, ecoterrorism can be thought of as acts of violence in support of environmentalism.
The documentary-style reality show “Whale Wars” follows an extremist group that throws bombs at whaling ships to discourage them from whaling. Instead of convincing them to stop, the bombs anger the whalers. Groups like Greenpeace have been working peacefully to negotiate the termination of whaling, and they have been successful. For example, in 2010 Greenpeace Japan activists worked with retailers to significantly cut the demand for whale meat, which in turn decreased the number of whales hunted. Also through campaigning, Greenpeace has helped the people of Japan become aware of corruption in the Fisheries Agency of Japan (FAJ) and the whaling industry. The FAJ has since acknowledge this corruption and started to right the wrongs of the Japanese whaling industry, resulting in a reported 30% drop in whale meat sales as of January 2011.
Can extreme tactics ever result in forward progress similar to the progress Greenpeace has made in Japan?
Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.
Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.














Adam Cross
Think of every extremist organization which you hear about everyday. Al Qaeda, Black Hand, KKK, Black Panthers, Nazi's, Bolsheviks, and more are all spawned by and motivated by an ideal. But they kill and destroy to reach a desired effect which is fear and submission.
If you want to make a difference use common sense and statistics. Use Love and Understanding. Don't add more violence to the world. We have enough as it is.
Rishi Patel
As per the topid on hand, I wouldn't say it never works. Extremist acts at least raise awareness which can then further power the movement through the media. I personally didn't know much about whaling until "Whale Wars" came out. I didn't know about chicken farms until PETA started protesting KFC. I didn't know about animal testing until Rodney Coronado fire-bombed a laboratory at Michigan State University. In the short term they are a fantastic method for at least informing the greater public of the issue at hand, but in the long run, I agree it does more harm than good.
Adam Cross
"Eco-terrorism uses small acts of violence to mitigate the damages to the world." I would guess that a small act of violence which affected you would not be so small?
Extremist acts have hurt the cause to a point in which ordinary people (potential activists/advocates) become disgusted by the violent acts and dissociate themselves from the cause.
To suggest an alternative I would recommend documentaries to inform the public as they are quite effective, one documentary on Netflix which outlines problems, solutions, and travesties will reach millions.
Rishi Patel
Amanda Hooper 50+
Adam Cross
Statistics with photos change the world but they must be devoid of emotion upon delivery. I have found that a "matter of fact" approach w/o anger is the most effective.
Drew Thompson 50+
I would aso suggest that there needs to be more public forums for environmental discussion. It would be great is more scientists held public seminars where they could share their knowledge and research with the general public. Not only would this spread awareness, but I believe it could inspire new generations to seek careers in the environmental sciences.
Katie Bergus
Documentaries would be a good tool to get around extremism, but the people who usually watch documentaries tend to be people who decide for themselves that something seems interesting to learn about and then they dive into the subject matter. Since this small group of self-selected individuals does not even approach the majority of society, relying on documentaries to provide public awareness is simply not effective enough. Additionally, for documentaries to be an effective mode of delivering information, a majority of people who need knowledge of and access to the film, which is no simple feat.
Ultimately, extremism is dangerous and destructive, but sends a message and heightens awareness, which is something that other mediums have a difficulty accomplishing.