They commissioned a short film to promote their campaign, but yesterday were forced to pull it almost as soon as they’d released it after they realised it had the potentially to massively backfire and piss off a whole lot of people. To their credit, they’ve apologised fully and accepted they’d made a mistake. But this piece is about why it would get made in the first place, and the kind of thinking that underlines it. Check it out below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSTLDel-G9k

Apparently the idea behind this was to be funny and edgy, and to be fair anywhere I’ve seen it being discussed the reaction has been really mixed. Personally I thought it was horrible, and potentially disastrous towards the climate movement. The message according to the filmakers was to “challenge apathy”:

“We ‘killed’ five people to make No Pressure – a mere blip compared to the 300,000 real people who now die each year from climate change,” said one of the creators, filmmaker Franny Armstrong.

The reason I hate this film is because it’s more of what absolutely has not and will not prevent climate catastrophe: personally guilt tripping individuals, so that we all feel personally responsible and shamed about a massive global problem over which we feel we have little control. What I took away from the film is that if you don’t support the 10:10 campaign you are basically an insensitive bastard who deserves to be blown up. The title of the film is ‘No Pressure,’ which is where the joke lies, because in fact the whole point is that you feel massively under pressure to do something. What else are we to take away from Agent Scully’s menacing repeat of the “No pressure” tagline at the end? (And shouldn’t you be telling Mulder his crazy theory is wrong when it’s clearly right?)

Climate change is a massive global crisis. It’s a crisis that’s resulted from an unsustainable socio-economic model which sacrifices the long term survival of civilisation in favour of the short term enrichment of a tiny minority of the human race, i.e. capitalism. As individuals there’s very little we can do about this. Yes, by all means change your lightbulb (my flat is illuminated by them, because they save you money!) and do your recycling. There’s nothing wrong with doing these things, and you are doing something that’s socially responsible. But the fact is that it simply isn’t going to cut it in the face of climate emergency. As isolated individuals we have little power. The power to do something about climate change comes from collective action as part of a mass movement. And this film will not motivate people to create or take part in such a movement.

The Alberta Tar Sands from space: changing your lightbulb is totally the way to go though

Guilt is a crap motivator. A lot of the environmental movement seems to approach the crisis we face as a species as if it was the result of personal sin and what was needed was a good Calvinist cleansing. Some people will respond to the kind of pressure applied to them by this film, but the vast majority will turn off, look away and react negatively. They have, correctly, concluded that they can’t prevent climate change through individual action.

One one level, I don’t want to just be knocking people who apparently donated their time and skills to try and do something about climate change. But unfortunately, this was a typical, middle class, individualist approach to a social problem. The writer of the film is the god awful Richard Curtis, also responsible for such unwatchable toss as ‘Love Actually’ and ‘Notting Hill.’ He also is one of the co-founders of Comic Relief, a “national institution” that has always done my head in. Similarly to this campaign, the message of his previous charity efforts has been to parade misery and suffering before you, in an effort to get you to give up some of your income, or feel really shitty about yourself if you don’t/can’t afford it. As one astute commenter on the Guardian put it:

“The upper middle class patronising the working class. Now with edge.“

Or as another suggested:

“It’s like a parody of something people mocking enviros would do.”

Which basically sums up the heart of my problem with it: it will turn people off, and yet again see those of us who want to prevent the worst of climate disaster as preachy, irrelevant wanks. It is in fact a gift to the worst enemies of humanity today, the climate change deniers and their backers in the fossil fuel industry. Armstrong said (as part of the rapid backtracking operation):

“Richard Curtis wrote what I thought was a funny and satirical tongue-in-cheek little film in the over-the-top style of Monty Python or South Park.”

In fact it did remind me of South Park, like the episodes where they mock Earth Day or more pertinently the one about ‘Smug’:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMhzNdeb1c4

The main charity backer of the ad was ActionAid, who are most well known for their ‘Sponsor a Child’ ads which guilt tripping you into feeling you individually can overcome the results of global poverty, inequality and imperialism by setting up a direct debit. They’re a good example of how a well meaning NGO can actually end up doing more harm than good, particularly when you look at some of the cover they’ve given for US imperialism in Haiti.

The fact is, the strategy of mainstream NGOs, which consists of loading up individuals with guilt and insider lobbying of governments, has failed. If governments and big business were going to sort out the climate emergency, they would have done it already – the facts have been plain for decades, and the world’s leaders have been flying around to talk to each other about it for 20 odd years with no concrete results. Liberal, middle class hand wringing isn’t enough any more, and in fact NGOs are in some ways acting as a block towards us seeing the real extent of the crisis, and how far we need to transform our society to avert it.

We need, as quickly as possible, to put together a mass movement of the majority of the world’s poor and working people to transform our society and stop the dominant social system from taking us all to the brink of apocalypse. We’re not going to be able to build mass support by telling people it’s their fault, and if they’re not taking tokenistic individual action then we’ll blow them up.

Climate hero my arse

After the most vicious battle between two brothers since Van Damme vs Van Damme in Double Impact, the victor for Labour leader has finally been declared. In a surprising result, Ed Miliband has defeated his brother David, despite being much geekier with him, not as good with women and not allowed to stay up as late as him during weeknights.

It’s also surprising given the New Labour/Media campaign against him, with Peter Mandelson denouncing him for losing them the last election. Mandy also declared any candidate – i.e. Ed Miliband – who wasn’t New Labour enough would lose the next election. The Daily Mail got in on the act by labelling him “Red Ed”, in a feat of tabloid literary imagination not seen since the Sun’s classic “Super caley go ballistic Celtic are atrocious”.

The justification for this campaign to brand Ed a dangerous Old Labour style Socialist comes from his left posturing during the leadership election, which includes support from the unions and a call for a living wage. As far as anything the Labour leadership candidates called for (with the exception of possibly Diane Aboott) the living wage was the most eye catching and progressive demand by far. While this might not be saying much now Ed is Labour leader Socialists in the SSP, SSY and Labour should push for him to pressure all Labour controlled councils to enact his living wage policy.

It was this willingness to at least sound a bit left-wing and break from the Blairite vs Brown infighting that won Ed the Labour leadership. Despite losing to his brother in the membership and MP/MEP votes, he had a clear lead in the union votes. Expect this to be used by the Tories and their media allies to attack the Labour Party as a puppet of the Unions.

The reality behind the red-baiting is that Ed Miliband is no Socialist or progressive. His campaign has simply been willing to make left sounding noises without any real substance to back it up. Ed has also had the advantage of not being in New Labour politics long enough to accumulate much dirt on his hands. Unlike his brother, he wasn’t involved in torture flights, or Brown’s economic policy like Ed Balls. He also managed to avoid being in the parliament for the vote on the Iraq war.

In his last position of responsibility in Government as Climate secretary however, Ed managed to reveal his true colours in putting the UK with the rest of the Western world in a campaign to bash the poorer countries over climate change at the Copenhagen summit. Socialist Resistance member Liam Macuaid has an interesting piece on his blog detailing how “Red Ed” tried to coeerce poorer countries into accepting a deal that would allow the US and other developed countries to continue pumping CO2 into the atmosphere. Proposals by Venezuela and Boliva to examine capitalism as an economic system being responsible for he destruction of the environment were dismissed by Ed Miliband, who was much more keen on blaming China and whitewashing the West. So much for “Red Ed”.

Ed’s already been trying to break away from the Unions who got him his position. One of his supporters, ex-Labour leader Neil Kinnock said,

“Ed Miliband owes the trade unions nothing. They haven’t asked and he certainly hasn’t offered, nor will he agree to any form of supportive role or order-taking. He’s certainly not enthralled to the unions, although obviously the support of some of the unions and some of the union members was immensely valuable.”

His first act as Labour leader has been to conduct interviews with the BBC laying down the line immediately that he is “his own man” and not in hoc to the unions. He’s already aiming for the same “middle England centre ground” Tony Blair did when he became Labour Leader.

Ed’s flagship “Left” policy, the campaign for a living wage is also a fraud – it is only about putting pressure on institutions to implement a decent wage, instead of a legal compulsion to do so. That’s quite unlike the SSP and SSY’s demand for an £8 an hour minimum wage to be enshrined by law for every worker over 16.

Labour are already seeing a new lease of life in many areas due to the brutal cuts planned by the Conservatives and the betrayal of the Lib Dems. In Scotland it looks likely that Labour will be the largest party in Holyrood next year. This resurgence in support for Labour has meant a lot of folk on the Left have advocated rejoining Labour, arguing it’s still the natural party of the working class.

But the fact that Miliband is considered a “left” shows how weak the left is in the Labour Party – any candidate not explicitly a Blairite is painted as being red. This is alongside John McDonnell being unable even to get on the ballot, and the candidate of the Socialist left being Diane Abott  - who only got 7% of the vote and was eliminated first.

It’s definitely true that the situation for the Socialist left outside the Labour Party isn’t good – but at least outside Labour you can put forward your own ideas and arguments about how to oppose the condems cuts, withdraw troops from Afghanistan and stop climate change to the general public. In Labour you’re trapped in a party where the left can’t even get on the ballot – and is eliminated first before it’s even able to start reaching out to people.

The reason he does this is to make everyone who reads his wacky ideas think “Fucking hell, Ryanair are cheapskate bastards.” Although maybe this will mean you hate him and his company, you will associate it in your mind with cheapness, and check their site first when you’re going away. His whole public persona is built around basically saying to people “I am a total dick, and YOU FUCKING LOVE IT.” He calls it his “dog and pony show.”

It isn’t just an act though. He actually is a knobhead. Although he likes to paint himself as some kind of champion of the common man, but he attended Clongowes public school, described as “the Eton of Ireland.” He’s tried to completely ban trade unions from representing Ryanair staff – the Irish union Impact say they have 270 outstanding cases of victimising and bullying. Staff have to pay for their own uniforms, training and meals, and office staff have to supply their own pens and are banned from charging their phones at work. He wants total deregulation of the airline industry, meaning your safety at 40,000 feet is in the hands of total free market gangsters – he described the British Airports Authority as “overcharging rapists.”

It’s not just staff he bullies as well – in 2002 a woman who won free flights for life as Ryanair’s millionth customer was awarded €67,500 damages after a judge found she’d been abused and bullied when she tried to complain that she’d started being charged again.

On top of all this he’s also a climate change denier, a position that makes quite a lot of sense for the head of a rapidly expanding airline. “Do I believe there is global warming? No, I believe it’s all a load of bullshit,” he said. Scientists argue there is global warming because they wouldn’t get half of the funding they get now if it turns out to be completely bogus. It’s horsehit.” Yes Michael, it makes total sense for scientists to make up something that runs counter to the interests of almost everyone with money, and who would have a vested interest in influencing research. Scientists give factual scientific opinions, not ones tailored to suit an agenda like you do.

In 2004 he bought a taxi license for his private Mercedes so he could drive it through Dublin bus lanes. As he put it to one interviewer: “I don’t give a shite if nobody likes me.”

His latest brainwave really takes the biscuit though. Last week he went on record saying Ryanair might get rid of co-pilots. Instead he said, if anything happens to the pilot a member of cabin crew can take over because “computers do most of the flying now.”

This may be a step too far for Ryanair passengers. The idea of sitting in a giant metal box a couple of miles in a sky that’s being controlled someone who’s training mainly covers flogging smokeless cigarettes and scratch cards. But Michael tried to re-assure us with the claim “”In 25 years with over about 10m flights, we’ve had one pilot who suffered a heart attack in flight and he landed the plane.”

Not Hogwarts, but Clongowes, the incredibly posh public school where O'Leary went

Which, unsurprisingly, turns out to be TOTAL BOLLOCKS. In a response letter to the Financial Times, Capt. Evan Cullen, President of the Irish Airline Pilot’s Association, spoke up on behalf of the pilot in question’s family, who were quite upset by O’Leary’s claims. The reason they were upset is because the guy in question did actually die. He didn’t get proper help from the cabin crew quickly enough because Ryanair hadn’t trained them in what to do if the pilot was incapacitated (I bet they’ll train them to LAND A PLANE th0ugh.) When doctors finally made it to the cockpit they declared the pilot clinically dead. They managed to revive him after “strenuous effort” but he later died. It may shock you to learn this guy did not land the plane, on account of being dead.

More importantly, what the incident in question does illustrate is the absolute necessity of co-pilots. Although the pilot was clinically dead, the plane landed safely because it had a co-pilot who was able to take over. There is a reason that when you go up in the sky you have a back-up in case anything goes wrong with the main person keeping you all from crashing into the ground.

As Capt. Cullen put it, in dead pan style, “That he [O'Leary] is prepared to make such statements while, apparently, not being fully briefed on these important safety matters is entirely consistent with Ryanair’s ‘innovative’ approach to staff relations, safety, pilot fatigue and related matters.”

But in an even better response, a senior Ryanair pilot came up with another suggestion to help the company save money. Capt. Morgan Fischer, who’s head of pilot training for the company, wrote:

“I would propose that Ryanair replace the chief executive with a probationary cabin crew member currently earning about €13,200 (£11,000) net a year. Ryanair would benefit by saving millions of euros in salary, benefits and stock options. Further, there will be no need to petition either Boeing or governmental aviation regulators for approval to replace the CEO with a cabin crew member; as such approval would not be required.”

We think this is a great idea, although we think that even then cabin crew/CEOs could be perhaps at least be paid a living wage. We’d much rather they were doing his job, which essentially involves being an arse in public on a regular basis, than flying planes. Straight off the bat this would save €241,000 in his salary, not to mention all the other money he rakes in from the company. It’s reckoned that he’s worth about €300 million, but nobody is sure. As he put it himself: “Money used to be my motivation. You always want to make the first million. Then you get to £10m and you think about £100m. But somewhere in the middle – do not ask me where – you stop worrying about money.” What a knob.

We doubt his cabin crew, existing on about £11,000 a year, have stopped worrying about money. Although we’ve been slagging the idea of cabin crew being made into pilots, that doesn’t mean we should disrespect the vital job they do, protecting people’s safety and making sure everything is ok in the body of the plane. The fact that on a Ryanair flight the main thing they have to do is sell stuff to you is an indictment of the company, not them, and they deserve Michael O’Leary’s millions much more than he ever will.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLec3W5csP8

The Others are shocked by the consequences of Michael O’Leary’s penny pinching.

In love with himself: Bjorn Lomborg looks like he used to be in a boy band but then got too old

Bjorn Lomborg is a Danish statistician and political scientist at the Copenhagen Business School who shot to international prominence a couple of years ago with his book ‘The Skeptical Environmentalist.’

In it he basically argued that taking action to tackle climate change would be too expensive and a waste of money. He tried to show that the risks associated with ecological destruction had been overstated; despite having no particular expertise in climate science he thought he knew better than pretty much all the other scientists in the world. As a result he has faced a lot of complaints about the serious scientific flaws in his work, from bodies like the Union of Concerned Scientists and Scientific American magazine (don’t worry, the right wing Economist mag rushed to his defence!)

Basically his argument is that tackling climate change doesn’t amount to value for money, and if governments around the world are going to spend big cash on a major problem they’d be better placed getting to grips with poverty or AIDS (of course ignoring the fact that poverty, climate change and the spread of preventable diseases are all consequences of capitalism). This has rightly led to him being ridiculed for underplaying one of the greatest threats to ever face civilisation. But last week, The Guardian and other papers were delighted to report that he’d changed his mind and has declared that actually spending £100 billion a year on climate change would be good value for money. Thanks for that Bjorn, not like you’ve been wasting our time up until now!

Although he was never an out and out climate change denier, and accepted its reality, Lomborg became a poster boy for the far right effort to deny scientific reality, that at its root is motivated by people who want to defend capitalism in general, and the energy corporations in particular. So the fact that he’s changed his stance is on one level kind of good news. That is, until you look into what he actually proposes doing.

How Lomborg would like to see us spend a good chunk of this money is the exceedingly mental idea of geoengineering. This means gigantic mega-projects by which humans would attempt to take control of the global climate and control the weather, in order to try and counteract global warming. Projects like sending thousands of ships into the Pacific to spray saltwater mist into the air and make clouds more reflective to deflect heat back into space (one that Lomborg seems particularly keen on), or filling the sea with iron filings to encourage the growth of massive algal blooms that would then lock up carbon in themselves.

One of the ships Bjorn would like to see pumping mist into the clouds. The reason it looks like cheap sci fi concept art is no one has been crazy enough to do it yet

What’s wrong with this? Lomborg puts it quite well himself when he says that geoengineering “could lead to really bad stuff.” Basically, the global climate is an incredibly complex system, with huge numbers of different factors affecting it. Already we’re seeing the unexpected impact of our actions through anthropogenic (i.e. caused by humans) global warming. There’s absolutely no way to predict what unforseen consequences would result from mega-projects like these. It’s a bit like pulling a thread from a big complex tapestry, and then trying to repair it by pulling out other threads and tying them together to replace them – you’re almost certain to do more damage that you can’t predict.

His other solutions are generally along the lines of finding techno-fixes that will allow us to keep up capitalist society pretty much as it is, but maybe with some greener technology. This is where we get to the rub of why people like Bjorn Lomborg will be unable to prevent climate catastrophe. Fundamentally, what his work does is apply capitalist economics to the global climate and ecosphere, something that capitalism fundamentally can’t understand.

There are some simple facts about life on Earth. All species evolve in ecosystems that support them, and if they exhaust the capacity of that ecosystem to support them then they’re in trouble; if a predator eats all the prey to extinction, then pretty soon it’s extinct as well. Humans have done very well at using technology to offset our need for the natural environment to support us, but ultimately we are just another species, and need to recognise that we now need to choose between the short term survival of our ever expending, ever impoverishing socio-economic system, and long term survival. Lomborg’s line up until now has been to choose disaster in the long run, because it would be a waste of money to prevent it now. Now he’s changed his tune, but he’s still only a capitalist economist, trying to find ways to make our survival as part of the global ecosystem economically viable.

Even if we pretend for a minute that getting technology to fix everything for us would work, instead of just causing more problems, where does it end? Some scientists have tried to calculate the economic worth of all the tasks that the natural world performs for free that allows human civilisation to carry on as it does – purifying water and air, regulating climate, keeping the soil fertile etc. They found it ran to trillions of dollars every day. The more we damage these natural processes, and the more we rely on ourselves and our machines to do the job, the more we will start to take these costs on to ourselves, instead of just trying to live as a part of natural systems, not as a replacement for them.

The survival of civilisation isn’t economically viable under capitalism. It is completely possible for the human race to choose to live better, more equally and in a way that is sustainable over the long term. But to do that we need to get rid of capitalism. The future has a name, and it’s ecosocialism.

Cairn aren’t a famous name like BP or Shell, but right now they’re at the heart of one of the biggest battles that the environmental movement faces in the next few years: the fight to stop extreme oil extraction.

More and more geologists now suspect that the world is approaching peak oil, the point at which we will have reached the maximum rate of global oil production, after which the rate will decline and oil will become harder and harder to extract. Most of the world’s most easily tapped reserves of oil are in production or in fact have already peaked. With declining availability, the price of oil gets pushed up. This problem is made even worse by the fact that financial speculators on the commodity markets take advantage of the situation, and push the price up even further. In this situation it becomes profitable to get oil from places so extreme that before companies wouldn’t have bothered.

One such place is the Arctic. The Arctic sea ice is melting at a terrifying rate due to the warming experienced as a result of capitalism’s carbon emissions. This is a disaster for the peoples and creatures that live in the Arctic; just take a look at the clip from the BBC’s Planet Earth below to get an idea:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0F-RmOswOs

The BBC filmed a previous documentary about polar bears in the same area 20 years ago, and the entire area was frozen through the summer; indeed the ice at that time extended far south of there.

The melting ice is also a disaster waiting to happen for us, as it will lead to ever rising sea levels. Historically, most human cities are close to the coasts of their countries to have access to the sea and trade, and there are literally billions of people who will have to move to higher ground or drown, and many of the world’s greatest cities and communities that face destruction.

But recently we’ve been hearing less about the disaster that we face as a result of the collapse of the polar ice sheets, and more and more about the advantages. Countries with Arctic coastlines, such as Russia, the US and Canada, have been beefing up their military capability in the region in anticipation of it becoming an important area for strategic control in the world like never before.

One way it could become important is the opening up of sea lanes between the factories of Asia and the consumers of North America and Europe that would be much shorter than the distances traveled by shipping at the moment. But the most important thing for capitalism about the melting Arctic ice is the possibility of gaining access to untapped fossil fuel reserves in the previously inaccessible seabed below. The US Geological Survey reckons there could be 90 billion barrels of oil under the Arctic, and 50 trillion cubic metres of gas.

Here’s where Scottish-based Cairn comes in. This year they began exploratory drilling off the coast of Greenland, in an area known as ‘iceberg alley’ because there are so many. This was funded by public money, funneled their way by the Royal Bank of Scotland. To be precise, Cairn received £117 million of your money in the form of loans and equity from RBS, without which it wouldn’t be possible for them to be doing what they’re doing in iceberg alley.

This same area is currently a pristine habitat, home to 80% of the world’s narwhals, as well as a key feeding ground for blue whales, polar bears and many different migratory birds. If there were to be an industrial accident in iceberg alley, this entire ecosystem would be put in jeopardy. A major cause behind the recent Gulf of Mexico oil mega-disaster is the fact that oil companies are now drilling at depths which we’ve never reached before, and which it’s very difficult to drill safely at. If something similar happened in the Arctic it would be way, way worse though.

Beautiful narwhals, who's future is endangered by Cairn

The cold water would break down oil at a much slower rate. What remains of the ice cap could freeze over the top in winter, meaning huge quantities of oil would be trapped below the surface. And it would be incredibly hard to mount the kind of operations that have been tried in the Gulf to stop the spill due to the extreme conditions – a similar event in iceberg alley could see oil gushing into the sea for years, effectively wiping out many Arctic creatures. Cairn, the trailblazers in this area, have very little experience of dealing with these kinds of extreme accidents, having mainly made their name extracting on-shore oil in India.

Cairn are headed by former Scotland rugby player Sir Bill Gammell, a man who’s very well connected. He was at at school with Tony Blair at Edinburgh’s posh private Fettes. He’s also a family friend of the Bush’s, after his father invested in Bush-Overby in the 50′s, the firm of future US President George Bush Senior. George W. Bush was a guest at his wedding in 1983, and when he became President he was quoted as saying he’d “heard from our Scottish friends, the Gammell’s” that Blair was “a good guy.”

Cairn are now valued at £10 billion and is one of the FTSE 100. But Gammell’s rise to international success isn’t happening without opposition. At climate camp, while SSY members were back at the site getting ready to push a siege tower down the hill at glacial pace, a group of protesters broke off to go into town and take action at the Cairn HQ on Lothian Road.

Well connected knobhead Bill Gammell in supervillain mode

Activists unleashed the Trojan Pig, filled with sticky molasses, on the building, which was triggered by a golden coin representing public money. They also sprayed the building with molasses filled fire extinguishers, as part of the “oil” spill. Incidentally, this is probably what led to the police lies about an “oil spill” on Edinburgh roads, faithfully repeated by a compliant media and right wing internet idiots. Check the video below, which shows the action, as well as traffic and pedestrians continuing to use Lothian Road with no bother afterwards:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XlOWFougIc

But the lies unleashed against these protesters are nothing compared to the risks faced by Greenpeace activists in the Arctic. In the past week, activists based on the Greenpeace ship the Esperanza were able to get round Danish naval commandos (!) to get to the Cairn rig the Stena Don, and suspend themselves from ropes in survival suits and tents directly over the near freezing Arctic ocean. They succeeded in shutting down drilling. Now that’s hardcore activism!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJ8pl4ZHSVM

Yesterday the extreme Arctic weather forced the activists to retreat, at which point they were taken into custody, but not before they’d prevented two days of dangerous drilling.

One thing that should be a priority as part of this campaign for the Scottish pro-independence left is noting the hostile reaction to the rig occupation by the Greenlandic government. Greenland has historically been a colony off Denmark, and remains officially a part of the country. However, today it is largely independent, with control over most of its own affairs. Last year, the Greenland elections brought to power the Inuit Ataqatigiit party. The Inuit are the indigenous people of the area, and their name simply means ‘the people,’ so the party’s name translated is “Community of the People.” They’re a socialist party who want full independence for Greenland, and so should naturally be the kind of people that we would be looking to make links with.

However, the Greenland PM Kuupik Kleist has expressed his anger at the occupation of the rig.

Greenland's PM, Kuupik Kleist

“This is clearly an illegal act, ignoring the rules of democracy,” he said in a statement.

“The cabinet regards Greenpeace’s action as very serious and an illegal attack on the country’s constitutional rights. It is worrying that Greenpeace, in their hunt for media exposure, violate security rules made to protect human lives and the environment.”

I freely have to admit I don’t know as much about the political situation in Greenland as I’d like, or just how left wing Kleist’s party are. But as part of any ongoing campaign against a Scottish based oil company’s devastation of the Arctic, I think it’s absolutely urgent that we seek to make contact with people who are our potential friends in Greenland, and get a dialogue over how they see the future of what is, after all, their country. It seems clear that the government there is prioritising economic development to try and lift their people out of poverty, a dilemma that faces left wing and indigenous based governments around the world, as seen by some of the debates in Bolivia recently for example. What this highlights is that the people of Greenland can’t face this issue alone, and if they’re going to be able to step away from a future based on dangerous fossil fuel extraction then they need international solidarity from sympathetic peoples in struggle.

But in the meantime we shouldn’t let this dissuade us from taking more action in Scotland against Cairn for their reckless actions. Following on from Climate Camp, it’s key that SSY and others build up the level of radical action being taken around the issue of climate change and capitalism’s ecological destruction, and it’s hard to think of a more easily accessible and logical target than Cairn’s HQ. Just in case you’re thinking of something yourself, here’s the details you’d need:

50 Lothian Road, Edinburgh, EH11 2AH. Phone: 0131 475 3000

Bonus: Check out the very funny fake twitter feed activists have made for Cairn head Bill Gammell.

Rumours persist that protesters also had tent pegs, bicycles AND EVEN SILLY STRING

DOZENS of misinformed media outlets yesterday went on a hysterical rampage – going head-to-head with FACTS and SCIENCE – and causing chaos across the country as they poured an oily slick of lies across the nation’s front pages.

At the same time, hundreds of idiots wreaked havoc across the internet, using websites as diverse as Twitter and newspaper comments sections to vent their reactionary opinions and stupid world view.

The occasion was, of course, the weekend’s Climate Camp, and the hyped-up ‘day of action’ which took place on Monday. Inevitably, there wasn’t nearly enough ‘action’ to satisfy a media which had been building up this invasion of anarchists intent on violence and disruption for months, but hey, let’s not let the small matter of FACTS get in the way of some good RIOT coverage!!1!211

Faced with this lack of COP15 style scenes of thousands of riot cops and activists facing it down, they had to make do with total lies and some made-up nonsense about ‘weapons’ – all of which the police obligingly did their best to go along with.

Most of the press coverage of Monday has focused on a supposed ‘oil slick’ which was created by activists pouring ‘oil and vegetable oil’ onto two busy roads. This is a blatant lie which has been spread by Lothian and Borders Police in a bid to discredit the protests and any political points they were trying to make. Two roads were indeed shut by the police for several hours on Monday morning, but there’s no evidence to prove that protesters had poured oil anywhere, let alone over busy roads. In a couple of actions on the day, molasses was used, specifically because it has the appearance of oil, but is sticky and doesn’t present any present any great safety risk, as oil would. Somewhere, wires have obviously got crossed, and news about molasses being poured over the offices of Cairn Energy in the city centre has lead to the Climate Camp being blamed for presumably an accidental leak of oil on two Edinburgh roads – hardly a rare occurrence.

Lethal weapons recovered by the police

In another bout of sensationalism, police were able to provide the media with pictures of supposed ‘weapons’ that they’d retrieved from around the campsite. The key word here being campsite, particularly when it’s revealed that these dangerous weapons were in fact a chisel and a mallot. Leftfield can also exclusively reveal that the site had saws, spades and even pick axes. In fact, a whole marquee was dedicated to storing tools which we’d presumed were for site maintenance and construction – how terribly naive of us.

As well as the police, the media were able to rely on a bunch of populist politicians from the mainstream political parties to come out and call on the police to start beating up peaceful activists who were engaged in a “disturbing” protest according to Labour and an “absolutely unacceptable” one according to the Lib Dems, while the Tories added that “it is time that the police sort this out”. The chair of Lothian & Borders Police Board also came out yesterday and called for protesters to foot the bill for the policing of the entire camp, in a startling display of utter contempt for the democratic right to protest.

As it happens, Monday’s actions were highly successful, closing down the offices of two energy companies in the city centre, as well as various RBS buildings and branches. As we’ve already reported, the camp also managed to close down the entire RBS headquarters for the day, with staff being told to stay at home or work elsewhere. Most of the condemnation of the protests – from the media and equally misinformed idiots on the internet – is coming from people with little understanding of the camp, its aims, or what really went down on the day. From what I saw, the only lives that were endangered during the whole camp were those that risked travelling in a shaky siege tower as it took its lengthy journey down to the front lines…

Your riot cops are no match for our RHINO SIEGE ENGINE

I’ve just returned from 5 days of occupying the land of the Royal Bank of Scotland, a piece of direct action that yesterday successfully achieved its objective of shutting down RBS’ headquarters. On Monday when we looked across at the building we could see there was nobody working there apart from cops and security guards.

Context

A quick recap: for the past few days hundreds of activists affiliated with Climate Camp have targetted the Royal Bank of Scotland. Having previously taken direct action against projects like Kingsnorth coal fired power station and the (now cancelled) third runway at Heathrow, they’ve moved on to a target that’s slightly less obvious.

But for people concerned about climate change, RBS is in fact at the heart of the problem. As a financial institution, they are the biggest UK investors in fossil fuels, styling themselves “the oil and gas bank.” In an economy that is now kept firmly in the stranglehold of financial capitalism, banks and other investors must be held responsible for their leadership role in a socio-economic system that is destroying the ecological basis for civilisation.

This system is now in the early stages of falling apart at the seams, due to the interrelated crises of the environment, the economy and social collapse. In the UK, RBS is at the heart of this process.

The current economic crisis was caused by the fact that the dominant financial institutions, like RBS, had used debt and self-delusion to try and keep the economy going. This bubble lasted for a while, until the myths that underpinned it began to unravel. The UK government then gave RBS and other massive banks huge injections of our money. RBS is now 84% owned by the British state. However, they refused to take any control over the banks in return for this money, leaving RBS under the command of its previous owners.

The people that run RBS have one priority: finding ways to invest their money (which you and I gave them) that will generate them more profits and then more money to invest. That’s what they exist to do as an institution. One of the main ways they can do that is to put our money into energy projects. As the world’s supplies of fossil fuels dwindle, the ones that remain will become more profitable to extract, at least for a while.

So RBS has poured our money into projects and companies like the Alberta Tar Sands, ConocoPhilips who are destroying the Amazon rainforest, and E.ON, the energy corporation looking to cover Europe with new coal fired power stations. They do this not because they’re evil, but because they are designed as an institution to do a specific job, and they’re doing that job.

As it is currently structured, it would be impossible to make RBS act otherwise, which is why we should demand that instead of being controlled by private capitalists the wealth of RBS is used collectively and socially to solve problems in the world, instead of being used to create huge problems that will make the world a less habitable place for humanity in the coming decades.

This is all the more appalling when you remember that the working class is about to face one of the greatest austerity blitzkriegs of all time, after the government chose to facilitate RBS and its chums taking the money that should have been spent on public services, jobs and wages for the people who actually keep our society running – public sector workers. In this context, it’s clearly time for radical action against an institution which is poisoning our society.

Camping it up

The camp itself took place in an incredible location. If you’ve ever got the Glasgow/Edinburgh bus you’ve passed by where the RBS HQ is at Gogarburn, just near Edinburgh airport. You’ll have seen the bridge over the motorway with their logo hanging from it, and the massive office complex. What you can’t see from the road is that it is set in an unbelievably large area of land. At the back of the building is a small river, and then a big expanse of grass and woodland, which obviously must cost them quite a bit to maintain, and it’s not clear what they use it for. This was the site that climate campers were able to claim last week, and where I arrived on Thursday.

I originally went along with the intention of checking it out for the day and then going home to return later in the week, but what greeted me on arrival was too exciting to leave. Everywhere I looked there was practical work underway, with people constructing kitchens, marquees, toilet facilities and a whole infrastructure for a temporary community. To see the ingenuity at work was inspirational. The welcome pack made clear that what was going on here was an attempt to build a mini free society, a space that would prefigure how we would like the rest of our lives to be, without hierarchy and command structures, and with tasks shared equally and through voluntary participation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-j8bW7so6A

To see what the climate campers are able to pull off as a left activist is pretty humbling. There’s pretty much no one in the organised UK socialist movement who could currently pull off getting about 800 people together on a site, making sure they were fed, watered (climate camp was able to plumb in its own water system that ran separate drinking and washing water pipes throughout the massive site) and provided with toilet facilities. Over the initial setting up days, the main contribution I made was as part of security teams, making sure the police couldn’t make an incursion into the territory we had claimed from RBS by guarding the points of entry, and then later helping co-ordinate these different defensive positions by working in the radio tent where we monitored communication from those on the gates.

This was a great thing to be part of – climate camp had a whole system in place to try and give early warning of police activity and be able to mobilise people to counter it. This may not have been necessary in Edinburgh, where Lothian and Borders had decided to take a hands off approach, concentrating their forces as a defensive line around RBS’ actual buildings, and effectively tolerating our presence on the wider grounds. However, this hasn’t always been the case. Talking to people about the repression meted out by the police at previous camps, where riot cops invaded their site night after night to physically attack people was a stark reminder of the militarisation and politicisation of the policing of protests in the UK over the last decades, as the government has used the climate of fear around terrorism to clamp down on any form of dissent.

Two Liams ready to take down monopoly finance capitalism

The point about all these infrastructural achievements is that they were achieved in a way different to how hierarchical capitalism would have met our needs. Nobody was forced to work with the threat of poverty, work got done because as people came together as a community based on solidarity towards a common objective; they recognised the need to collectively accomplish tasks. Although obviously some of the raw materials had to be purchased on the capitalist market (although less than you’d think with some of the scavenging skills that campers have), the building of the camp and its structures was done without money by people working in solidarity. Food wasn’t charged for, and the camp itself was free. Although the organisers clearly needed to raise money, this was done by encouraging those who could afford it to donate, rather than applying flat prices to everything that would have hit poorer participants hardest, in an attempt to facilitate the participation of all.

This was why I decided I wanted to stay on the Thursday, because around me was a real living, breathing attempt to build a new society, albeit for a few days, in a small, restricted space. Nevertheless, being part of that even for a short time was invaluable experience for those SSY members who were able to be there about how to run a huge event in a decentralised, non-hierarchical, anti-capitalist way.

Political discussion began in earnest on the Friday evening with a session that I caught some of, talking about the history of climate camp, how it got to where it is and where it’s going. It was listening in to this that I came to realise that this was quite possibly the biggest gathering of anti-capitalists to take place in Scotland since the G8 protests. The political level of what I heard was great. People clearly understood that climate change is caused by the need of the capitalist system to constantly expand, and that the current economic model is a cancer destroying the global ecological system necessary to ensure human survival. People were talking about the need to establish a new society, founded on ecological sustainability and human solidarity and love. Although maybe not everyone there would describe it as ecosocialism, to me it showed the growing strength of ecosocialist ideas throughout the world as a real alternative to the apocalyptic future we are sleepwalking into under capitalism.

One of the most interesting discussions I got along to at the weekend was about jobs, workers and the role of the working class in a just transition to a sustainable society. Speaking at the workshop were local trade unionists in the form of representatives from the Edinburgh Trades Union Council, the local UNISON branch and the Scottish Hazards campaign, which deals with the right of workers to health and safety at work. There was also a comrade involved with Workers’ Climate Action, an alliance of socialists and trade unionists trying to build an ecological movement based firmly in the workplace and on the power of the organised working class.

Workers’ Climate Action has done some really impressive work, especially around the Vestas dispute on the Isle of Wight. Vestas was a wind turbine factory that its owners decided to close despite the fact they were making huge profits, at the cost of 600 jobs to the community. Thanks to the intervention of WCA and the RMT union, workers were able to carry out an inspirational occupation of the factory, challenging the closure. Although Vestas did eventually withdraw, former workers are now in the process of relaunching the factory, with the formerly unorganised workforce all now members of the RMT.

They also have worked in solidarity with the striking BA cabin crew, and internationally with striking Colombian oil workers. It seems to me that their focus on linking the struggles of workers in industries important to the debate on climate change with the struggle for an ecologically just and sustainable society is the key way to take forward the anti climate change movement, and I hope very much that SSY can have a serious discussion in the next wee while about getting involved and using its resources for similar work in Scotland.

The discussion, involving local trades unionists, was able to talk concretely about the links between the unprecedented cuts being promised by the ConDem government, the bank bailout to RBS and co., and the use of our money to destroy the ecosphere rather than on the priorities outlined by trade unionists – full employment of working class people to tackle the climate emergency.

Outside of formal discussion, perhaps one of the most valuable aspects of climate camp is the ability to network and chat with hundreds of fascinating people from around the UK and the wider world. Night after night I found myself involved in deep chats about class, ecology, racism and how to build a better society. Although there were lots of people coming at things from quite a different perspective from me as a socialist, I frequently felt like I was gaining something important by engaging with them, and that we were learning from each other.

Walking around the camp and chatting to folk gave you a sense of just how much of a broad, direct action based ecology movement there is all over the place, that the socialist left has allowed itself to be ignorant of. Local groups proudly displayed their banners on their tents, and sitting in the toilet you read stickers and posters for campaigns like the occupation of Bilston glen near Dalkeith against a new road bypass, or West Midlands Climate Action digging into tunnels for a long term occupation against a new coal mine, or the local campaigners organising a weekend of education and action for those willing to come help them try and prevent the construction of a new nuclear reactor at Hinkley in Somerset.

On Sunday and Monday I was able to take part in direct action, which had mixed results (more on that later), but ultimately did achieve its objective of shutting down the bank HQ yesterday. By far the most exhilarating piece of action was on Sunday afternoon. A portable soundsystem provided music for what originally looked like a nice friendly dance around the camp, which kept the cops off guard, until a group of activists pushed down to the bridge over the water separating us from the RBS HQ, the principle frontline between our camp and the police held territory.

Taken completely by surprise, the cops were unable to hold back our numbers at the bridge, and we quickly broke through their lines. After days of staring across the river at the mirage of the manicured lawns and offices on the other side I was finally there, giving the police the run around. They struggled for a long time to regroup, although they eventually did, forcing us back to the bridge. However, after that the bridge, which had been held by the police up to our side, became neutral territory, with fencing erected that prevented us from crossing but also stopped the cops idly walking along to try and gather intelligence in conversation with whoever was on guard duty.

In the process of action as well I saw a lot of inspirational stuff, like several successful de-arrests, when the cops tried to snatch someone from our ranks we were powerful enough to get them off and rescue our comrades before they were able to arrest them. Being part of the frontline holding back cops at the bridge while we discussed the way forward was an excellent chance to see the consensus decision making process in action under pressure, and holding the line was something I remain proud to have participated in.

Siege engine FTW!

Yesterday I was part of something I never expected to be able to write up here: I helped push a siege engine into police lines. For days I had walked past what looked like a guard tower at the camp before on Saturday night I wandered up to it in search of the good tunes I heard from those building it. In conversation with these folk, I came to realise that what they were building was actually a mobile tower with wheels and an internal space as well. On the front was a paper mache rhino head. When I first got to go up the tower late at night and look across at the enemy we were going to target was incredible. From the first moment I arrived at the site I had been struck by its similarity to some kind of medieval battlefield, and now here I was on a piece of equipment that wouldn’t have looked out of place laying siege to some 13th century Duke’s castle. Although its eventual deployment wasn’t quite as exciting as I’d been hoping for, that people were able to pull off the construction of such a thing is itself pretty amazing. One of the things I’ve taken away from climate camp for future actions is the need to study a bit more closely olden days wars, and how to build things that can be deployed as a way of coping with the militarised cops.

A couple of criticisms

I hope that all of the above has emphasised how enthusiastic I was about climate camp and how glad I was that I went. However, it is absolutely necessary to raise some criticisms of what I saw there. These are meant with full respect to the people that pulled off such an amazing event, and are intended to be useful for strengthening similar events in the future rather than idle sniping or having a go. They’re also offered with humility, given that I am a latecomer to a movement which has been taking place for several years now.

Eat silly string, riot cops!

The first thing to say is something that was widely discussed and acknowledged at the camp: the participation is very middle class. This is a chicken and egg problem, because if other people don’t come to take part then on one level you can’t apportion too much blame to those that do. But it is discouraging and disheartening to working class people to feel like they are in a space that is not their own, and will drive people away, as it in fact did for some people that visited the Edinburgh camp while we were there. People who aren’t working class will find it hard to understand the subtle psychological processes at work here, but that is part of their unearned privilege that they gained by the accident of being born into a luckier family. We know when we’re in a space full of people posher than us, people who were born with access to greater amounts of social and cultural capital which they absorbed through their upbringing and education and which they deploy effortlessly through the way they speak and act (without even thinking about it) to their own advantage.

People can’t help where they come from, and they shouldn’t end up handwringing and beating themselves up about who they are. I’m not for a minute saying people from these kinds of backgrounds shouldn’t be welcome at climate camp. But real, concrete thought needs to be put into how to encourage the participation of working class people, so that those of us who come are able to connect with more people who look and sound like us. Within the event itself that means paying a lot more attention to people who are new to it, or activism in general, and making sure they’re properly integrated. It also means being respectful, and trying to be aware of your own class privilege as part of combatting it – at least one Scottish activist who came along felt talked down to and patronised at a workshop, and stuff like that will prevent the movement from growing.

A focus on working class activism is essential not just to ensure that the camp itself is a safe and welcoming space for everyone who wants to participate, but is key to an understanding how to properly take forward the movement trying to save civilisation from climate change. The working class are not just another interest group that we should tick off on our list of making sure everybody is happy. They’re the majority of people on planet Earth, and the ones with the power to shut down the economy and transform society if organised and prepared. Climate camp has declared itself as explicitly anti-capitalist, but it hasn’t yet fully understood that the people that have the power to end capitalism and build a better society are, by definition, the working class. The Vestas dispute and the work done by Workers’ Climate Action points to the way climate activists could put the working class at the heart of their strategy.

Aren't you a little short for a stormtrooper?

The other reason this is a chicken and egg problem is that those members of the working class who do have, on some level, a duty to engage with the camp are not doing so. As far as I’m aware, myself, Liam T and Liam M were the only members of the organised socialist left in Scotland to be there consistently there throughout the camp. We were joined on an off by a few different SSY members, and a couple of older SSP members on the Monday day of action. There were comrades from groups down south, and the Socialist Workers’ Party did make an intervention, but it was largely to send their big speakers on the issue along on Saturday for the workshops in order to try and convince people to come along to their latest front projects and demos – they weren’t there consistently from the start like SSY was.

No real significant effort was made by the Scottish socialist movement at large to organise and be there. There are of course barriers to participation, like cash, getting time off work etc., and this is NOT a slagging of individuals with perfectly reasonable individual reasons why they couldn’t be there. Yet again it is an illustration of the fact that the left has lost a lot of its orientation to broader movements that, in Scotland, we were strong on in the earlier part of this decade. Just compare the climate camp to the SSP’s participation in the G8 protests five years ago. If the camp had took place back then there would easily have been a delegation of 20-30 working class activists from the SSP, who would have transformed a lot of the political content of the event. This is a symptom of our weakness compared to a few years ago, when we would have discussed the event in advance and made sure the preparations were in place to allow members to fully participate. The fact that this stuff isn’t happening now means that SSP members are missing out on a lot of the best stuff that’s going on in the wider activist left, like climate camp or the Scottish Anti Fascist Alliance.

The camp was organised by geographical neighbourhoods, and for those of us in the somewhat amorphous ‘Scotland and Newcastle’ region, it was clear there weren’t that many Scottish folk there. I think there are probably organisational reasons for this which I’ll come to in a minute, but a little bit of sensitivity that the majority English participants were in a different country wouldn’t have gone amiss. A big Union Jack tent near the Scottish neighbourhood was pretty grating, but even more annoying was more than once having to say why we weren’t comfortable with a Union Jack being put on the siege engine. We did do this loudly and vocally, and thankfully some folk got the point and confiscated it. Putting the flag of British imperialism in our faces, with everything that connoted for us in Scotland, especially those of us who are of Irish descent, shows a basic lack of a grip of history and sensitivity to where you are, and did discourage Scottish people from participating.

There’s been chat from some quarters that this may be the last climate camp event on this scale for a while, with the group maybe turning to smaller local events as part of an attempt to keep their tactics fresh and stop things getting stale. But another reason may well be what I recognised as classic signs of a movement that hasn’t managed to grow and renew itself – I felt like I had arrived rather late in the life cycle of the climate camp.

This also relates to a problem with the desire to rigorously deny any kind of hierarchy at the camp. There was a hierarchy of sorts. There was a group of organisers who were pretty much the only ones who knew everything that was going on at one time. A lot of these people are clearly exhausted after years of doing the same work again and again, whilst their numbers slowly dwindle. I have a lot of sympathy for them, as I’ve been in a similar position myself more than once. The problem with voluntarism is that when people don’t volunteer easily the same people end up shouldering a disproportionate burden. This understandably leads to disillusionment and frustration, which it’s all too easy to displace on to the wrong targets – those left around you who are trying to help.

These problems were for me reinforced by some of the planning processes involved for direct action. As I said, we achieved our goal of shutting down the bank. But for me personally, I was also attending to get experience in taking part in collective, mass direct action. But when we went to plan for what we would do at an initial session, we were told the plan was that people would form affinity groups, which would then autonomously develop their own plans and then feed back to a wider spokescouncil. This is immediately a difficult thing for anyone who’s new and doesn’t know other people yet, or who has just come along as an individual. There were sessions that were trying to group people together who didn’t have a group, but this kind of defeats the purpose of having affinity groups because the whole point is supposed to be that it is a tight knit group of people who know and trust each other.

We and others argued in the planning session that an overall goal should be set for direct action – are we trying to blockade the building? Enter the building and occupy it? We were basically told by those running the workshop that there wasn’t time to do this, and that the process had already been decided and couldn’t be changed. To argue that these people in this context weren’t acting as leaders clearly isn’t true. Although we did a “temperature check”, where people stood on opposite sides of the room based on whether they wanted to blockade, occupy or somewhere in between, a concrete decision was never taken, and this weakened the action we did take.

When I crossed the river on Sunday it was exciting, but once there I wasn’t at all clear what I was trying to do there, in a chaotic situation trying to outmaneuver police lines. Windows of the building got broken – I wasn’t near by and didn’t see what happened. But later I heard that the intention had been to smash windows in order to enter the building. With proper planning this would have been a totally achievable aim at this point. We had at least 100 people on our side, and the police were in disarray. If we’d known what we were trying to do we could have all piled in and made a serious attempt at taking the building. The possibility of digging in for a longer term occupation would have cost RBS a lot more than a planned one-day shutdown, and possibly would have given us a position to force concessions from them in negotiations.

This didn’t need a detailed battle plan being unveiled to everyone (which obviously would quickly be learned by the cops), but simple clarity on common aims which is needed for mass action to succeed. From our experience confronting the Scottish Defence League, we have been successful because the people involved have had a clear, understandable objective: find the SDL, surround them and prevent them from being able to march, occupying the space.

American feminist Jo Freeman, author of the influential essay ‘The Tyranny of Structurelessness,’ has argued that pretending there is no hierarchy itself is highly pernicious because it allows the hidden leadership to excercise greater control than if leadership was recognised and democratically dealt with. I don’t think anyone wanted this outcome at climate camp, but the fact is because things were not always done in a collective way, it could be pretty alienating for new people like me. There was a large number of people milling about who didn’t know what was going on, waiting for stuff to happen. Those who did have strong affinity groups and experience didn’t plan for a mass action at the site, because they didn’t have a common objective to plan towards, but in the end peeled off to do small actions in town, against the offices of energy companies or the RBS sponsored Fringe festival.

The one and only

I’ll post more about these as I learn more about them, but on the day info was very patchy, so I’m going to find about more on the internet first. This isn’t a criticism of the folk who did stuff in town – good on you, great work. But the point is that there wasn’t ever a collective plan for what the mass of folk should be doing on Monday, and a lot of us spent a lot of time standing around in miserable rain wondering what was going on.

Mass, collective, organised direct action is possible. I know because I’ve been part of it before. It’s very difficult, and mistakes are easy to make, especially when you’re within an easily heard (on a directional mic) distance from a huge police presence. But alongside the denial of the existence of a leadership group comes an incongruous vanguardism from some participants – thinking that they are the enlightened activists ahead of the rest of society, trying to wake them up and drag them forward with what they do.

I am not someone that thinks that direct action per se is elitist, I am very much in favour of it. But there needs to be proper democracy, communication, and sensitivity to varying levels of experience and understanding among participants for it to work. A true commitment to mass action at the weekend could have achieved far more than we did. Direct action should also never be fetishised as a means of struggle, and seen as part of a wider engagement in the everyday lived reality of ordinary people under capitalism, outside of the utopian bubble of the camp. The world where people have to go to work and earn money, pay their rent and buy food. That’s where we need to organise to build the strength we need to make direct action allied to it successful. In alliance with this kind of work, mass action can absolutely achieve dramatic results.

Again, I would like to stress that these are not gripes, but part of a genuine attempt on mine (and SSY’s) part to engage constructively with something that was a successful and inspirational event, in order to strengthen it for the future. Having been part of climate camp has given me a lot of hope that we have the power to organise and defeat a system that is marching us off the edge of a cliff. The best way to take it forward in my humble opinion is to focus more on community and workplace organising, and build up the links between people in struggle in those spaces with the ecological struggle. In the specific case of what we were doing this weekend, I think we could learn from the many people outside (including chatty cops!) who said we should also be talking prominently about the role of RBS in ruining the economy and destroying people’s livelihoods, as well as their naked profiteering from their customers through things like bank charges. We in Scotland need to have a discussion about what we are going to do about this massive national institution of our country putting our national name on the destruction of communities and ecosystems across the globe.

There’s to be a follow up meeting to the camp next month, on the topic of linking of climate and workers’ struggles. I don’t know much about who’s organising it, but I hope it should be an opportunity to take forward organising beyond just the days of the camp. I very much hope we can get representatives of Edinburgh workers in struggle against job losses and wage cuts there again, as we did at the camp. Hope to see you there. The details are:

September 13th, Digger’s Pub, Angle Park Terrace, Edinburgh. More details will be posted as I get them.

After an epic amount of pushing, we stormed RBS headquarters this afternoon. Delicious molasses bombs were thrown, windows were smashed and there was a lot of scuffling with the police. Bear in mind that today was Sunday, and the bank wasn’t even open…! Who knows what’s on the agenda for the rest of the working week…

Most of the SSY delegation are still pitched up in the RBS back garden and will be until the end of the camp – stay tuned for a full climate camp analysis and review in a few days…

Information for those of us outside just now is limited, but we’ll be trying to bring you updates during the day as we find out more. SSY will be part of the swoop today, from 12 a group will be heading from St Andrews square (where the bus station is) to the site. Come along and join us. If you can’t make it, just get to the site whenever you can. See the map on the climate camp site for where to go.

UPDATE: Me, Liam T and Liam M are at the camp now, and it’s fantastic! There’s a couple of hundred folk, and more arriving all the time. Tonight and tomorrow we’ll just be setting up the site, as much help as possible is needed. The grounds of the RBS complex are actually really nice, and it’s a great place to hang out.

The best way to get there from the centre of Edinburgh is to get the 48 or X48 from Princes Street and just get off when you see the massive bridge over the motorway with the RBS logo hanging from it.
View climatecamp in a larger map

I’m adding a couple of pictures so you can see how awesome it is here. If you’re reading this at home you need to get yourself over here ASAP, you’ll be really missing yourself if you don’t get down. If people could post in comments arrangements for getting the train/bus over on Saturday that’d be great.

Over the weekend there’s going to be workshops and discussions on topics like ‘Climate Change and Capitalism: Do we need to destroy capitalism to destroy climate change’ and ‘Workers, Green Jobs and a just transition’, as well as lots of practical training on direct action, legal observing etc.

On Monday we’ll be taking direct action against RBS. This is a really important opportunity for SSY members to get a bit of action under your belt that will set us in good stead for doing similar things in the future, not to mention the importance of what we’re trying to achieve right now.

You don’t want to miss this. More update as and when we can. SEE YOU AT CAMP!

The second set of amazing outdoor compost toilets we've used this month!

THE ENEMY!

Anything up to 1000 people are expected to descend on the capital for five days of discussions, workshops, training and direct action, in the fifth camp of its kind in the UK. Following past camps which have targeted airport expansion and coal power stations, this year the main target will be the ‘oil and gas bank’, the Royal Bank of Scotland, who handily have their huge, James Bond baddie style centre of operations on a site just outside of Edinburgh. RBS have come in for a huge amount of ire recently due to their direct funding of mineral extraction projects that’re hugely damaging to the environment, like the Alberta Tar Sands in Canada. And these are, of course, being funded with our money, given that RBS is now majority owned by the taxpayer following the billions poured into the banks by the Treasury.

The camp kicks off on Thursday, with a ‘swoop’ on the site of the camp from four different locations in the city. The site will then be set up and made ready for the Saturday, when most climate campers are expected to arrive, and when the week’s activities properly begin. Over Saturday and Sunday, there’ll be a wide-ranging discussion on the way forward for the radical environmental movement, and how we can halt the onset of devastating climate change across the globe. Much of the debate will focus on the link between capitalism and climate change, posing such questions as whether we need destroy capitalism to destroy climate change, and whether we should ‘green the banks’ or ‘smash the banks’. There’s also going to be workshops on stuff like fuel poverty, last year’s radical climate change conference in Bolivia, and the role of workers in fighting climate change. It’s not all talk though – there’s also going to be lots of legal training and direct action training in preparation for Monday’s mass day of action against the RBS HQ. With the RBS-sponsored Edinburgh Festival in full-swing at the moment too, the camp also promises a ‘greenwashing guerillas mission’, deep into the heart of the festival!

System Change not Climate Change!

The camp operates on a non-hierarchical basis of mass participation and consensus decision making. Based on geographical location, it’ll be divided into different ‘neighbourhoods’, each with its own kitchen and other facilities. The whole camp is free, but obviously does incur pretty big costs for the organisers – for young people going they’re recommending a donation of £10/15 for the camp, and a small donation for each meal you have.

SSY are planning on fully participating in the camp this weekend – and you should come too! We’ve heard a rumour that this might be the last really big, national climate camp in the UK, at least for a few years anyway,  and seeing as it’s in Scotland, it’s really too good a chance to miss.

The 2010 Camp for Climate Action handbook, containing a full programme of everything that’s happening over the weekend, plus anything else you need to know, is available here.