By Randall Restless[1] of Montana Earth First! - Industrial Worker, May 1988
Why should the Industrial Workers of the World care about Earth First!? Though Earth First!’s concern for wilderness and wildlife may seem far removed from the human-centered and largely urban world of the IWW, the EF! movement in fact owes a lot to the Wobblies. In its long fight for better working conditions and freedom from tyranny and oppression, the IWW has established and refined many of the principles of protest, non-violent civil disobedience and direct action that EF! relies upon to wage its campaigns
The two movements are undeniably linked in many ways. Both EF! and the IWW are battling the same enemy: the mind-less industrial technocracy which threatens to irreparably rend the fabric of society and the natural world in the name of profit and power. While the Wobblies fight this ogre for their rights as human beings and workers, EF! struggles to end the rape of Earth by industry. To further their goals both EF! and the IWW seek to limit the power and growth of Big Business. EF! recognizes that there must be a limit to the growth of technology if the natural world is to avoid total collapse under the iron fist of industry. In their fierce fight for workers’ rights, the IWW has successfully limited the power of certain industries, for if a corporation is forced to expend more money and time on improving the welfare of its workers, it will have fewer resources available for expansion and profit.[2]
EF! usually avoids human rights issues, with the notable exception of the rights of indigenous peoples around the world. For EF! environmental concerns come before all else. There are many groups battling for human rights, but too few taking a radical, no-compromise stance in defense of other life-forms. Humankind is not in immediate danger of extinction (except perhaps from nuclear weapons) but, on the contrary, threatens the existence of many other species by being over-successful. Several species of life per day are becoming extinct as a result of the worldwide destruction of tropical rainforest. In the case of native peoples, their fate is often directly linked with the fate areas on which many other life-forms depend, and of which the natives possess unsurpassed knowledge. Unless humans fight to save the environment on which all life depends, human rights issues mean little. What is the value of freedom from political repression if there is no clean air left to breathe, no clean water left to drink, no untainted food left to eat?
EF! and other environmental groups are often accused of threatening the livelihood of workers by demanding too harsh and strict controls on industrial polluters and by advocating limits on access to minerals and timber. However, in this age of disappearing wilderness and proliferating pollution, we must analyze jobs in terms of their ecological appropriateness. Is the trashing of another piece of irreplaceable wilderness worth the creation of a few jobs? How many people benefit from the existence of pristine wilderness as opposed to those who benefit from jobs in a mine, or on a timber sale? For how long? We must also ask how many other species will benefit or suffer. Are the jobs in a pulp plant worth the fouling of the air breathed by thousands or millions? Do workers really benefit from such jobs, or does their labor serve only to further empower the bosses, while enmeshing the workers themselves deeper in the morass of industrial society?[3]
Many of the jobs that EF! “threatens” would not even exist but for massive federal subsidies, paid for by the taxpayer, often without his knowledge. On the Gallatin National Forest in Montana, every timber-related job depends on subsidies of up to $35,000 per job per year. This scenario is repeated on other forests around the country. The subsidies come in the form of extremely destructive, expensive roads and in federal underwriting of harvesting marginal, unprofitable timber. Politicians and forest rangers moan about how we must have a “balance” between wilderness and jobs. Indeed, we must. But 93% of Montana is already roaded [sic] and developed and available for agriculture, industry, or what have you. The remaining 7% hardly balances against that, and in fact even this contributes to the economy by encouraging tourism, not to mention the benefits of clean air and water, healthy wildlife, unspoiled scenery, etc. Yet Montana’s Congressional delegation proposes opening most of the remaining roadless lands to resource extractive industries. For what? You guessed it: jobs.
Far too often, “jobs” is used as a catch-all slogan by industrial corporations wishing to shirk environmental regulations, by politicians lobbying for pork-barrel projects, and by Forest Service bigwigs hoping to maximize federal timber allocations. Workers rarely benefit and the profits derived from such exploitation serve only to make the rich richer.
I urge all IWW members, as enlightened and concerned workingmen and women, to become involved in the environmental movement, or at least to do what you can to see to it that environmental demands become a central part of the labor movement’s demands today. Even minimal involvement will mean you are probably doing more for the Earth than 95% of American citizens. One place to start is in the workplace. Learn more about the company you work for, the products they produce, and the environmental consequences of producing, shipping, and marketing those products. Are hazardous wastes being produced? How are they disposed of? Does the company engage in laboratory testing on animals? Are toxic chemicals being manufactured and shipped abroad? If you work in agriculture, are pesticides being sprayed on crops? If you work in a seafood packing plant, what are the sources of seafood? Are drift nets used to harvest fish? Are dolphins or other sea life killed in the nets?
You may, in your investigation, uncover some appalling information. At this point your level of commitment to the environmental movement must determine your course of action. At the least, pass on the information to national and international clearinghouses like EF! and Greenpeace. This can be done with little risk, anonymously or under a pseudonym. If you are willing to put your job on the line you can confront your boss, spread info in the workplace through printed matter and word of mouth, or even monkeywrenching the works to halt the destructive practices taking place. More and more people are facing the choice between job and commitment. Government workers in the Forest Service, Park Service, and Bureau of Land Management are risking careers to spread info about lawbreaking and abuses within the agencies. Some have actually quit work to take on the issues which concern them without fear of employer repression. Others choose to subvert from within … The exploiters of the working class are also the exploiters of the Earth. Let’s work together to rid the planet of all exploitation!
An injury to one is an injury to all!
Footnotes:
[1] Franklin Rosemont wasn’t able to recall who Randall Restless was and thought that Restless may have submitted this article by mail. Restless still contributed to the Earth First! Journal long after May 1988. See for example, “The Illusion of Security”, Earth First! Journal, Eostar (March 20) 1994. It is not known whether Restless had any further involvement in the IWW, however.
[2] The IWW would—in many cases—use more benign technologies to shorten the workweek and more equitably distribute the workload.
[3] Many jobs can be made more “sustainable” as well as more pleasant to the working class.