People Power

by Sarah Burton

New Ground 58
Winter 1999

Sarah Burton, Director of Political & Business Affairs at Greenpeace UK, argues that peaceful direct action is not only necessary, but an effective way of communicating with government.

Throughout history when the public have been ignored or disenfranchised they have taken peaceful direct action to challenge and change the rules. There is nothing new about the politics of 'people power': the American civil rights movement, the suffragettes around the world, the movement against the enclosure of common land all found their legitimacy in the public acting together directly. More recently the movements to prevent road building, the destruction of forests and the oppression of indigenous peoples, have peacefully 'trespassed', blockaded and intervened for the common good.

And throughout our history, Greenpeace has successfully challenged and changed the law. Greenpeace took action to stop nuclear testing in advance of a comprehensive test ban treaty, to protect Antarctica from destruction in advance of a global protection Treaty, and to prevent the North Sea become a dumping ground for oil platforms in advance of an international ban. When governments and industry of whatever political persuasion sanction the release of toxic waste into rivers and seas, Greenpeace volunteers block the pipes. When they slaughter whales, Greenpeace volunteers disarm the harpoons. When they promote the growing of genetic pollution Greenpeace volunteers similarly act to disarm the fields.

This non-violent direct action is not lawlessness – on the contrary we act within very strong moral boundaries: our volunteers train in non-violence and react peacefully to violent situations. Both as individuals and as an organisation, we accept responsibility for the consequences of our actions. Those consequences have ranged from the serious injuries caused to a Greenpeace volunteer this summer when he was trying to prevent Norwegian whalers from continuing their bloody jobs; to Greenpeace bank accounts being frozen by oil and nuclear waste companies; and our volunteers being imprisoned for actions such as banner hanging at a toy fair to promote a ban on the use of dangerous chemicals in babies toys – as I write, an emergency ban has been announced by the European Commission.

Most well known of those consequences was when one Greenpeace colleague and friend was murdered by the French Government as he and Greenpeace were about to sail the Rainbow Warrior into the French nuclear testing zone in the Pacific.

On 26th July this year, Greenpeace volunteers chose to put their liberty on the line to protect the fields and nature around Lyng in Norfolk from the irreversible pollution caused by GMOs. Next year, 28 of those people face trial in Norfolk Crown Court in front of a jury of 12 ordinary folk. Ironically those 12 jurors will be the first real people (the Tommy Archer jury aside!) who have ever been asked to "judge" whether or not it is acceptable to grow GM crops in this country.

The decision to act peacefully and responsibly to prevent an immediate threat; or to raise public awareness of an unknown risk; or to protest at the feting of a despot is active citizenship of the kind Tony Blair should be promoting in schools.

Greenpeace has been flooded with calls of support from people thanking them for their action at Lyng. Shaken, the government and chemical industry have predictably attempted to slur those volunteers as thugs and vandals. As former roads Minister Stephen Norris once said "Governments hate direct action and that is why it is so effective".

Governments hate non-violent direct action of this kind because it makes clear when a democracy is failing. Astonishingly the peaceful removal of GM crops before they flower is practically the only democratic veto UK citizens currently have to prevent genetic pollution. At no point does the regulatory system for GM crops consult or seek public permission to proceed with these open air "experiments". At no point has the public given its consent. Government has consistently ignored the overwhelming national mood against GM crops. Tony Blair has placed the private interests of a small handful of chemical companies above the public's right to an uncontaminated environment and access to organic and GM-free food.

There is a common misconception that it is somehow "undemocratic" to take action against the wishes of a democratically elected government.

Why? People vote in general elections for a wide range of complex reasons. Certainly no-one in the UK voted for the Labour party in May 1997 on a platform to "pollute now, ask questions later". In the meantime irreversible genetic pollution is already seeping into our countryside and contaminating our food.

An active citizenship, directly stopping threats and installing solutions themselves, keeps democracy healthy and responsive. Healthy democratic governments should listen to why the public take and support peaceful direct action, not fear it.