Towards an Effective Praxis
Moving Beyond the Violence/Nonviolence Debate

Praxis -- practice, as distinguished from theory; application or use, as in knowledge or skills

This article is written in the spirit of sharing, learning, and opening up dialogue amongst people around the effectiveness of certain direct action tactics and strategy. If a movement is unable to critically examine itself, then it will stagnate and fail. It is a hope that others will write articles in response and addition to this one, furthering discussion around such important issues.

All too often, when people critique the Earth Liberation Front (ELF) or other direct action groups, the criticisms center around the sacredness of property and the "violence" of destroying this property. It becomes an issue of righteousness based upon a morality that has been learned from the oppressor. This violence/nonviolence debate has reared its ugly head to the point of sheer redundancy and is not only stuck, but actually holding back a dialogue which needs to happen:

In issue #8 of the zine Antipathy, the effectiveness issue is raised, and this is where this article gains its inspiration, even though there are many disagreements. In an article entitled "Burning the Church of the Sacred Arsonist: a few reasons parts of the ELF can kiss my ass" (BCSA), the author states, "The only question for those who REALLY care for Earth is: Effective or Ineffective?" and brings up five critiques of the ELF, while making it clear that the actions against the genetics industry have been successful and are not what is being discussed.

On the Effectiveness of Arson
Most opponents of arson hold property sacred and because of that, are unable to ask important questions such as: Did the attack accomplish its goal? Was the goal to shut a place down for good? Is this simply symbolic? The whole violence/nonviolence debate helps create a situation where public proponents of arson (or any tactic) may not criticize it so as not to come across as anti-ELF or anti-direct action. This is a major obstacle in looking critically at tactics and strategy so as to develop a praxis that is effective.

BCSA argues that the torchings of Vail, Superior Lumber, US Timberproducts and Boise Cascade did not really slow any of these companies down, while helping to fuel anti-environmentalist sentiment and the destruction of the Earth. This is based on the idea that these companies are insured and will just rebuild and go on with their practices while communities will be even more pissed off at enviros. Much of that is true. Isolated arsons, like most tactics, are like pissing into the sea. There's a ripple, but then that ripple is absorbed. Where some of that could change is if every time a business was rebuilt, it was torched again to the point where no insurance would cover it. Some fur farms have been hit like this and closed, but some have stayed open too. While BCSA brings up many good questions no solutions are proposed.

Other questions that are relevant are: What tactics do slow business/corporations down, or better yet stop them by destroying them while not alienating everyone around? Is it possible? Until there is a strong enough underground movement, the effectiveness right now may lie in inspiring others while doing major damage to earth killers. This might not be the most effective strategy, but what is?

The arsons mentioned earlier did cause major damage and inspire more action which then caused more damage, which inspire more actions...and so on with the hope that enough could happen to bring down the industry. Can an industry be brought down within the bowels of capitalism? Will it be bailed out by the government, like the timber industry receiving huge subsidies? Yes, there are and will be bailouts, but that doesn't mean a tactic is ineffective. The oppressor will do whatever it takes to keep industry churning and crush inspiration and action. This translates into promoting the ELF as unaccountable to the people, a fringe group, lunatics who are costing taxpayers money. People who are already alienated can have a scapegoat to be angry at, never asking what the exploitation of the planet is "costing" or who has the boot on their necks. Which is why it is so important for both the underground and aboveground to communicate in ways which are as non-alienating as possible.

Communiqués/Press Releases Are a Broken Model
BCSA says the idea of people caring what "terrorists" have to say is flawed because people don't give a shit and the communiqués sound like some rich college kid from Connecticut. This part is not given much attention and seems to fall into a defeatist attitude that no one would be inspired by the communiqués. Some of the problem surely lies in the content of the communiqués, while much of it lies in how many people even read them, not just the media's extracted portions. There is a whole planet of people who have had enough of being exploited and its quite possible some words may resonate with them. How this could be accomplished seems like a good question for those writing communiqués and those speaking publicly to be asking themselves.

Media Obsession Reinforces Apathy
This is an interesting concept which begs the question: Is the ELF obsessed with the media or is the media obsessed with the ELF? This is not mutually exclusive. ELF actions are capitalized upon by the media which promotes the dichotomy of performers and spectators that is already so prevalent in society. It is always someone else who is acting; a hero who will save the day. Which is why it is so important to dispel the myth of direct action being done by some highly trained commandos (while encouraging security and refinement to stay out of jail!). Can ELF-style actions occur in a way that doesn't play into the media? The media loves arson, but stays very quiet around crop pullings, tree spiking, and other sabotage. Asking why that is and how actions could play into sensationalism needs to be discussed.

Where the whole spokesperson/media thing becomes worrisome is when people begin thinking that only ELF-style actions/direct action are worth anything. So unless you are going to engage in these actions, you may as well not do anything or promote others to take action. Direct actions in and of themselves, isolated from any sort of movement, would probably accomplish nothing but jailtime. That being said, it is questionable that such actions would even occur without a movement. When people in the radical scene dismiss anything that is not militant direct action (as defined by them) as liberal, which is equated to worthless, it becomes an excuse to not do anything at all. The whole question of "what is radical" needs to be redefined in terms other than "what is the most extreme action". How many times has it been said: All the tools in the box, and certain tools for certain jobs?!?

Regurgitating Past Failures
Here BCSA focuses on tree spiking. This is a tactic that has publicly reappeared in the last year or two in various parts of the country. It seems very fitting to reopen dialogue about tree spiking. BCSA brings up "the fact that tree spiking itself has never stopped a timber sale in the US and was really only an effective public scare tactic directed against radical environmentalists by the wise-use/timber industry tag team." It goes on to say that since ALL timber mills in Oregon have metal detectors, trees can be felled with spikes in them, and tree spiking alone has NEVER stopped a sale, that "tree spiking is undeniably a tactic with little or no efficacy whatsoever in preserving ecosystems."

An example is given where in March 2001 the Judie Sale outside Cottage Grove, Oregon, was claimed spiked by the ELF, demanding that the Forest Service cancel the sale. BCSA states that since the feds have NEVER cowtowed to the demands of terrorists, they'd be more likely to push the sale ahead. Or Seneca Jones, the mill who purchased the sale, will file a lawsuit , which will lead to a replacement volume sale, which will have even older trees and be a larger size than the Judie sale. Which means the ELF helped "sound the death knell for the ecosystems unfortunate enough to be within the marked units of the Judie sale and potentially for ecosystems further away from the reach of the urban centric activist scene." Wow! Those are some serious charges.

This brings up many questions and analysis. The first is that tree spiking ALONE has never stopped a US sale. What tactic alone, in and of itself, has? Lawsuits? Not without some pressure from somewhere outside the courtroom. Blockades? Treesits? Not without help from a lawsuit. Why is tree spiking vehemently deemed ineffective because it supposedly hasn't stopped a sale on its own? How is it known if tree spiking works or does not? It is very difficult to find any info on spiking that is not totally pro or totally against. What about times where it may work? What would those times be? Like so many tactics, spiking is one more tool that can be used to slow down, and if all goes well, stop trees from being felled. Maybe in time, people will see how spiking affected the Judie sale, and other sales, rather than condemn it right off without knowing what will come about in time. Just because a sale is spiked does not mean a lawsuit cannot be filed on behalf of that sale. Other tactics can possibly work in conjunction with spiking.

Blaming the ELF for the destruction of ecosystems because Seneca Jones or any earth destroyer would push ahead with a sale is ludicrous. When would they not push ahead when challenged? And how is the ELF responsible for actions taken by Seneca Jones? Many times replacement volume sales are awarded after sales are "saved" by lawsuits, blockades, and treesits. And why can't people go and spike the replacement volume sale while other people publicly denounce replacement volume sales and all timber sales? It is similar to the comment about mills having metal detectors which means spiking is ineffective. Maybe using metal spikes would be ineffective if they were all found in the forest, and cut around (which costs a considerable amount of money) and the detector at the mill found all the spikes. So how to foil a metal detector? Use non metallic spikes. The information is out there on how to do this. These would get through metal detectors and break blades, if the trees were even logged. This is not an attempt to promote a tactic that may not work, it is looking at why tree spiking has been discredited and promoted. Yes, it pisses people off. That is certain. But just look at what the Bush administration is pushing in regards to the forest: death. Does that not piss people off, too? So where does one not act because people may be pissed off?

Ineffective Actions Have Landed Comrades In Jail
BCSA says that comrades are going to jail for ineffective actions that are not worth it. That is such a bold statement which really gets to the heart of the questions this article is asking regarding effectiveness. How is it measured and defined? Are people in jail for actions that seem ineffective? Yes and No. People are being stolen by the State because their actions spark something inside people that scares those in power: rebellion, which has the potential to be revolution. Whether those actions themselves are effective has been mentioned already. Another effect is that people will question why someone who torches SUVs gets more prison time than a rapist or murderer. It is such a loss to see comrades go to prison, taken from their communities. So instead of saying what they did was not worth it, creating a movement that makes it worth it is much more appealing, because it must have seemed worth it to them at the time since they undertook the action.

Wrappin' It Up
Having a dialogue about the effectiveness of ELF-type actions that moves beyond the violence/nonviolence debate needs to happen. It is important to abandon the rhetoric and ask challenging questions which lead to creative answers so that effective actions will happen. Do people really know what is effective? How? There are many ideas on what works and what does not, so what are they? Our lives and the lives to come depend on it.

Editor's Note: We hope that this article will help people to think more deeply and critically about the effectiveness of various forms of direct action, tactics, and strategy. While we feel the author of this article brings up many valid criticisms of "Burning the Church of the Sacred Arsonist: a few reasons parts of the ELF can kiss my ass" from issue #8 of the zine Antipathy, we feel that they were not nearly harsh enough. In the past, Antipathy has had some interesting anarchist analysis and personal reflections, but it has always had a (sometimes humorous, but usually annoying) self-righteous, dismissive, and "know it all" approach, without offering anything but ridiculous ideas on how to subvert authority for an insular and nauseating punk scene. The name of the zine could easily be changed to Apathy and most of its inebriated and self-centered following would not even notice. While some are attempting to build a resistance to the death culture, Antipathy seems more interested in building a portfolio as an anarcho-critic and gigolo, while dismissing all meaningful action.