Greenpeace: Corporations 'Govern' Our Desires, So Let's Get Greenwashing
By Dawn - May 25, 2011
Earlier this month in a blog post, Amy Larkin, the Solutions Director of Greenpeace USA asked a question of her organziation that many of us have been wondering about.
"Why are we working so closely with these corporations?" wrote Larkin. "Because corporations now govern how we live, where we live, what we eat, wear, and desire... and also whether or not our natural world retains its bounty, its beauty and its beneficence," she wrote.
Even though I've been critical of Greenpeace for some time now, it still irked me when I read the statement above. Basically, I take it to mean the following: corporations rule the world, and so we're going to "fight" so that they will become greener, friendlier firms with better ads and even smilier faces. Greenpeace might as well be greening jails at this point. Absolute bollocks.
"Business as usual is no longer possible; for corporations, the greenest possible practices ensure a safer and more secure business environment as well," wrote Larkin.
Interesting choice of words, no? Can we take that to mean that Greenpeace is now in the business of making business environments more secure for the very entities that are logging, paving, drilling, and strip mining the earth?
My feeling is that creating a secure business environment is exactly what the Canadian Boreal Forest Agreement was about. Greenpeace was the lead environmental non-governmental organization (ENGO) on that deal, which was between nine ENGOs and 21 forestry firms. The notion fits within a strategy of staging campaign actions against a given company while higher ups in Greenpeace negotiate deals with the same company. Or, as Newsweek dubbed it: Good cop/bad cop goes green.
Larkin's blog goes on, and I'll quote from it again. "Greenpeace believes that economies must thrive – which means that business must thrive," she writes. Then comes the clincher: "Our basic stipulation is that the return on investment of business must be connected to the survival of the natural world. The inverse is equally true -- clean air, water, land and ecosystems are as essential to business as they are to living things."
I'm not even going to start deconstructing that one, it is just too ridiculous. Now I know there's nothing new here. But I think it is useful to hear it straight from the horse's mouth, if only to register the information and continue to put our energy into grassroots struggles -- ones that aren't being fought on a terrain where capitalism and corporate control are taken as a given.