A public discussion: Should citizens concerned about climate change consider peaceful civil disobedience?
The "White Rock 13" stopped a coal train to bring attention to the massive increase in coal moving through BC ports.
The 13 people arrested in White Rock for stopping a coal train last May will be present at a public discussion on peaceful civil disobedience as an ethical choice at a time when, according to scientists, the Earth is poised at the brink of irreversible climate change. James MacKinnon, the co-author of The Hundred Mile Diet will moderate the discussion. There will be information regarding the practical, legal and financial implications of this form of action.
The discussion, "Civil Disobedience in a Changing Climate" is taking place on Friday, September 21, from 7:30 - 9:30 pm in The Alice McKay Room, Central Branch at the Vancouver Public Library.
More in Earth Matters
(1) Comments
Hello:
I attended the "Civil Disobedience in a Changing Climate: A public dialogue" at the Vancouver Public Library this September 21st. with interest and was relieved when after some time the two most important words of the evening were spoken. In my opinion, these were not "Civil Disobedience", but instead the words "Non Violent".
That evening I complimented the entire "Mugs Gallery" of panellists personally for carrying through and standing up for their principles and stetting an example. I also pointed to the "Low Hanging Fruit" of stopping Metallurgical Coal Extraction and Truck or Rail Transport on Vancouver Island. Citing this as a case study for their "civil disobedience" movement to address one of their fundamental contradictions- that such resource extraction is being touted as the key way to finance the revival of the E&N Railway. Indeed, rail can deliver mass resource extraction goods - more efficiency.
Left unspoken however is a much deeper and more dangerous contradiction which I believe exists amongst the members of this group of civil disobedience activists. The contradiction is that I believe they all believe - in spite of Fukishima - that Nuclear Power is the answer to the "Global Warming Crisis".
Therefore, I write in public to solicit public statements from each individual Panel Member on where they stand on Canadian Uranium Exports as well the matter of the - little reported affair - damaged ship loaded with depleted uranium foundering in Vancouver's Harbour.
It is my belief that - as the "Mugs Gallery" pointed out - they well chose their issue in "Dirty Coal" as opposed to "Dirty Bitumen" but where do they each stand on Canada's role Global Nuclear Fuel and Waste distribution and Nuclear Weapons Proliferation?
I would suggest that, if the "Mugs Gallery" were forthright about that each of us would have a more genuine opportunity to consider with whom they stand, who their leaders are and why?
Faithfully,
William Gibbens of Influency