Re: Monsanto: Construction of The Enemy (fwd)

kerry miller (mailto:astingsh@KSU.KSU.EDU)
Tue, 16 Apr 1996 19:57:30 -0500 

Message-ID:  <Pine.SOL.3.91.960416195444.16354D-100000@nbc.ksu.ksu.edu>
Date:         Tue, 16 Apr 1996 19:57:30 -0500
From: kerry miller <mailto:astingsh@KSU.KSU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Monsanto:  Construction of The Enemy (fwd)
To: Multiple recipients of list DEVEL-L <mailto:DEVEL-L@AMERICAN.EDU>


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 13:51:23 +0200
From: Ralph Meima <mailto:fekrme@MAIL.EC.LU.SE>
To: Multiple recipients of list ONE-L <mailto:ONE-L@CLVM.BITNET>
Subject: Item 3: Construction of The Enemy


Dear ONE-L:


A number of events have taken place during the past decade or so which
may have contributed to the construction of the identity of the
radical environmentalist as terrorist, psychopath, or political
subversive.  In particular, the ecotage associated with Earth First!,
the 1989 arrest of Dave Foreman, the 1990 bombing of Judi Bari's car,
and the recent ABC story drawing associations between the Unabomber
and EF! all seem to point in this direction.


Is there a subtle change occurring in how the public construes
"environmentalists"?


Are we moving from a uniform social construction of environmentalists
as essentially "good guys" - heirs to the earlier preservation
and conservation movements - to a differentiated construction
involving radical ecoterrorists on one hand and mainstream
environmentalists on the other (and possibly more categories)?


To what extent is this a chaotic or self-organizing process of
discursive differentiation, and to what extent does it represent a
conscious motive of, for example, the Republican Right or industry
interests?  Is there a divide-and-conquer logic at work?


Richard Welford has recently been presenting ideas based on political
philosopher Johan Galtung's theories which suggest that
environmentalism, which had grouped around a green ideal but which
accomodated both leftist and liberal voices, is in the process of
quite consciously being redefined and derailed by powerful industrial
| interests.  An aspect of this, which he has quite vigorously argued

| at a number of conferences going back to 1994, is that the

| ICC and World Business Council for Sustainable Development are in the

| process, through speeches, publications, lobbying, and project

| funding, of separating the concept of eco-efficiency from that of

| sustainable development (with its wider North-South and

intergenerational implications), and elevating the former to the top
of the priorities of the global environmental agenda.  Welford argues
that this is a deliberate strategy aimed at defusing the implications
of the Rio Summit and re-asserting industry control over an agenda
which, since the 60s, has run out of control.


Jon Entine mentioned the power of "conventional wisdom."  How do
identities, categories, and concepts which happen to serve the
intersts of some more than others become "conventional wisdom," and
thus a taken-for-granted aspect of everyday journalism and
discussion?


Best Regards,


Ralph




Ralph Meima  <mailto:ralph.meima@fek.lu.se>


Department of Business Administration
School of Economics & Management
Lund University
Box 7080
220 07 Lund, SWEDEN


Tel. +46 46 222-9485 / alt. 222-0243
Fax. +46 46 104437 / alt. 222-0300


===========