Thursday, September 16, 2010

A seat at the table

We think a lot about collaboration and cooperation... and facilitation and tacit endorsement. Because the conservation movement of late cares a lot about these things, and we care a lot about conservation.

So, here's the thing: When people say things like, "Yes, but by being collaborative, The Nature Conservancy* has earned a seat at the table," we just feel like tearing out our hair. Look, if the Destroyers of Nature ask you to sit at their table, you (the conservation group) are not doing your job! They wouldn't be asking you to sit at their table if you were really a threat to them. In many scenarios, you are actually an asset; by being flattered to be asked to sit at their table, you're lending them some credibility for being concerned with the environment. Don't sit at the fucking table, people, and don't think that it's somehow progress that they are asking. It's progress in the wrong direction: you've lost the fight by being an non-problematic placeholder for all the plants and animals and soils and future generations who will never be heard from.

Don't give in before the fight starts by offering to play nice. Capitalists are cut-throat motherfuckers, and you should be on the side of the cutthroat trout.

*We're not especially picking on The Nature Conservancy here, mind you. Lots of groups have fallen or are falling into this trap.


Anonymous said...

There's not much to add to this piece, other than a rousing "amen."

There's a reason why the word "collaborator" has often had a negative connotation.

Nabeki said...

Wow, you took the words right out of my mouth. I want them to stop the collaboration BS.If we're talking about wolves why are the environmental groups, who WON THE LAWSUIT, in super secret "talks" with Montana, Idaho and Wyoming?

Are they trying to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory??