What activists INSIDE Greenpeace are Saying: SaveGreenpeace.org
Anonymous Greenpeace Staff and Activists Respond to Greenpeace’s Hiring
Decision:
Work for Greenpeace? Want to share your story? Contact us at
info@savegreenpeace.org. Your anonymity is guaranteed. (the quotations
below are from the front page of the SaveGreenpeace.org website, and
references to other posts are from that same site)
****
I’ve worked for Greenpeace in a variety of capacities over the past 4
years and I have to wholeheartedly agree with #5. There has been a surge
of well-networked people with excellent resumes put into positions of
authority inside Greenpeace who couldn’t seem to care less about the
spirit of activism and non-compromise. To do activism under the Greenpeace
banner is an incredibly difficult and frustrating experience because of
how much these views have changed the internal process of campaigning.
There is a fine line between tactics which are sloppy and unprofessional
and tactics which are so cautious or professional that they become
impossible or completely ineffective. Greenpeace has had an identity
crisis; it decided that it wanted to leave behind it’s hippy roots and
embrace the world of pure professionalism. While a drive to make your work
better is an excellent quality there has been a price to pay for the way
Greenpeace has gone about it. I have seen many people hired who have a
particular skill-set that seems desirable but who have no activist
background or interest. I have worked, and am in fact working now with
people who do not care about the environment but are here for a job. These
people also leave Greenpeace without concern for the timing or the work
that we do and leave departments dysfunctional and broken. But despite the
repeated failures exhibited and the casualties within the Communications
department and Campaigns, specifically the Climate campaign, senior
management continues to decide to bring in cynical professionals who
damage this NGO’s ability to function properly. These bad decisions are
driving out lots of good people and discouraging the best of the new
generation of activists from joining Greenpeace. Greenpeace is losing its
soul to the professional world, and the cost to all of us is huge. It has
the tools and the resources to turn this around, but like so many other
governmental and corporate beasts it can’t seem to see outside of itself
long enough to understand just how far of the path it’s gone. I am still a
part of Greenpeace and I will continue to work in whatever capacity I can
to turn this around but I’m so very frustrated by this terrible
distraction from what huge problems are really looming on the horizon. We
have no time to waste in saving the planet and ourselves but
shortsightedness is endemic these days. If Greenpeace can’t be saved then
I’m ready to keep fighting without it.
Anonymous Greenpeace Activist or Staff #10
****
Hi,
I’m Raluca Dan from Romania. I am former Greenpeace staff member and now
just cyberactivist. I would like to sign the statement against Tzeporah as
I think this decision is completely outrageous. I have faced the corporate
side of Greenpeace in various situations, but this decision will bury the
work of the real activists that stand for the earth’s protection.
All the best,
Raluca Dan
****
Dear Friends
I am a 60 yr old activist and indigenous gay man. If there is one thing I
understand well, it is that the people we associate with in many ways
become indicators of who we are seen as (not necessarily the same as who
we are)
I was forwarded Dru Oja Jay’s article on Greenpeace and Berman. (Which I
think is a brilliant piece of writing)
I come from New Zealand where the French Govt sank the Rainbow Warrior and
was on board the day before it sank. Greenpeace was the first
environmental group I ever joined and the first one I ever worked for.
This whole Berman fiasco makes me incredibly sad beyond belief. It would
appear that there has already been some backing off of Berman by
Greenpeace though. When this was first sent to media attention, Berman was
touted as the new head of climate change, in a recent defence of the
decision to hire her, she is described as the second in charge of climate.
If her appointment goes ahead, I am sure Greenpeace will either lose
members and be forced into accepting corporate funding (maybe disguised)
to survive, or they will literally be placed on public trial by other
environmental movements. Either way, your author is right, this is
indicative of a war to claim back the origins of the environmental
movement, a fact that will not escape public notice.
My organisation, Pacific Indigenous Peoples Environment Coalition has
worked with Greenpeace on Forest issues over the last few years (GP and
PIPEC are the only two NGOs that sit on the Imported Tropical Timber Group
in New Zealand) . PIPEC has never had the facility to attend as much as GP
and their forest campaigner has done some magnificent work in getting
importers organisations here to recognise the folly of importing illegal
timbers into NZ. PIPEC has always supported him whenever a second voice
for the forests was needed. I still believe that he is committed to doing
his very best for the forests but our organisation can not afford to be
associated (no matter how remotely) with the collaboration ethos that
Berman has espoused, and we will formally be withdrawing from membership
of the group.
Again, on a personal level, this saddens me immensely. Greenpeace New
Zealand has always been at the forefront of environmental protection in
our region and has many wonderful and incredible staff members, but the
future of the planet and our children is of much greater importance that
any individual or individual organisation, and very small organisations
like PIPEC must ensure that our ability to articulate our concerns for our
region and our peoples is not compromised by association with larger
organisations where we might not be in agreement.
Sandy Gauntlett, the chairperson of PIPEC – Pacific Indigenous Peoples
Environment Coalition
****
I’ve been involved in Greenpeace for five years. I’ve always looked up to
Greenpeace. I felt that it was a BC heritage item, and I always wanted to
have a lot to do with that. It’s disappointing. I’m only partly surprised.
Moves like that with GPI, they’re just milestones in a trajectory that’s
disappointing in the way that Greenpeace has evolved in the last 10 years.
It’s part of a trend to managerialize the movement, where these corporate
figures are sought after because they’re seen as more efficient.
Hiring Tzeporah is more than counterproductive, it’s an abomination in
terms of where Greenpeace is coming from. It’s a slap in the face to some
of the founding members. I’ve actually been in touch with a couple of the
original founding members, and they’re just apalled. Tzeporah Berman is
the Patrick Moore of today.
It makes me feel bad that I haven’t taken better care of Greenpeace over
the years, but one of the reasons that someone like Tzeporah Berman could
make it into this position is that in Greenpeace Canada, we’re completely
disenfranchised from any consultation into decisions made by Greenpeace
international. There is no transparency, and we don’t feel like we can do
anything.
Anonymous Greenpeace Activist or Staff #1
****
I’m incredibly disappointed in Greenpeace. Greenpeace International is
autonomous from Greenpeace Canada, but there was no consultation with
activists and organizers in Canada. This is not only an insult to the
original founders of Greenpeace and their vision, but an insult to the
environmental movement as a whole. Right now, there is a huge struggle at
Greenpeace. There lots of people within Greenpeace who are fighting this,
but the senior management of Greenpeace Canada hasn’t been willing to push
the issue. The fact that they would just swallow this pill really makes me
question my ability to work with this organization. Even if we have great
staff and good campaigns, if decisions are being made higher up that are
screwing over our work, the whole thing is pointless.
Anonymous Greenpeace Activist or Staff #2
****
It was greatly disappointing. I’m not willing to work for an organization
that is willing to employ her, so I’m looking for alternatives. I was
suprised that they would risk their integrity and values to hire someone
like Berman. They didn’t look into her history as much as they should
have; not enough thought was put into it. There has been a huge blowup
within Greenpeace Canada over this.
Greenpeace actually started the Kyoto Plus campaign to battle Power Up,
the organization the Tzeporah started. And now they’re hiring her. The
hypocrisy blows my mind. It’s astonishing. It’s like they just hired the
devil. No one will take us seriously if they’re not thinking about hiring
decisions like this. The tar sands campaign could very well be fucked
over. I really hope that her hire is revoked.
There has been quite a bit of backlash to the decision already. 15 people
I know have cancelled their memberships. A number of people have decided
to leave, employment-wise, or are members who have left based on her hire.
Some people want to leave because of this decision, but are not because
they don’t have other options.
Anonymous Greenpeace Activist or Staff #3
****
I’m concerned with the lack of consultation from GPI, and what this means
about where the organization is going. It brings up a lot of concerning
questions.
My concern is for potential allies and past allies, and how this reflects
on Greenpeace Canada within the environmental movement, and beyond that,
to where the… allies that are more passive allies now, like climate
justice and social justice activists — I’m worried that Tzeporah’s hire
would hinder their involvement with Greenpeace.
Anonymous Greenpeace Activist or Staff #4
****
I worked for Greenpeace the past several years, and recently left the
organization over concerns of bad decisions and poor management,
specifically in regards to climate and energy campaigning. These decisions
are not simply decisions that I didn’t like – they are major missteps
organizationally and strategically that have been continually raised by
staff across departments – but that senior management continues to push
forward on. There are some incredibly talented and dedicated people
working across the organization, but much of their energy is spent
frustrated by poor management and senior-level decisions being made that
undermine their work, weaken their relationships with communities and
grassroots movements, and ignore their campaign insight. Much of senior
management has become too concerned with brand image and a conservative
and cautious mindset (not necessarily politically – but strategically and
tactically). Greenpeace members and supporters are constantly shown the
images of Greenpeace past – of confrontational direct actions, of
no-compromise campaign wins, of speaking truth to power. But this is not
the Greenpeace of today – the organization is moving closer to being yet
another “Big Green” that sells short it’s mission and it’s supporters. The
hiring of senior staff who know and care little about grassroots social
movements is a major problem. GP is increasingly taking poorly thought out
positions on emissions trading and REDD, and waging climate campaigns that
are more concerned with getting a “seat at the table” with mainstream
NGO’s and politicians (even if it’s the wrong table) than actually waging
strategic campaigns that take cues from the organizations successful,
direct-action and grassroots-supported past victories.
Anonymous Greenpeace Activist or Staff #5
****
As a founding member of Greenpeace in Europe in the 1970’s, the
organisation which went on to become Greenpeace International in 1979, and
as the person who signed the cheque for, and gave the name to, the
flagship of the organisation – the m/v “Rainbow Warrior”, I feel I must
express my deepest sadness at what is currently happening within the
organisation, and with other ENGOs, who now seem to be in coalition with
everyone from Coca Cola through to the nuclear industry.
A mark of integrity is the blunt refusal to be compromised. The movement
we started, based on principles of non-violent direct action, all those
years ago, has now been sold out and I insist that you immediately remove
the image of the original “Rainbow Warrior” – our ship – from your
organisation’s website banner until such day as you earn the moral right
to use it. Those of us who chipped the old Scottish trawler by hand from
bow to stern, who held the vision for a better world based on caring for
our Mother Earth, who have never compromised, will now reclaim our mother
ship before it is too late.
Anonymous Greenpeace Activist or Staff #6
****
i too was shocked or maybe better said confused when i heard that Tzeporah
was hired on to GPI as the Climate Change Campaign Director. why? Mainly
because her of PowerUP Canada and promoting private ‘run-of-river’ power
generation on mainly public land and public resource for private monetary
gains with an explicit energy export plan in mind. In addition, her
working with the BC (neo-)Liberals and receiving phony awards for phony
climate change mitigation policies is my second concern. These 2 things
alone should be enough to NOT hire her for this position. While Tzeporah
is a very good spokesperson, good organizer and mobilizer, i too believe
she has ‘made a deal with the devil’ … why? i tried to understand her
change but gave up – maybe its the mortgage? having to buy organics for
the children? Given the urgency global warming and subsequent climate
change demand, she is not the right person to stand up to short-sighted
power (and money) hungry politicians. But hey, thus said, GPI definitely
has more people like her on staff. I wonder whether GP can be saved???
Anonymous Greenpeace Activist or Staff #7
****
I am a former staff member at Greenpeace Canada, and continue as an
activist with the organization. Senior Management at Greenpeace, both in
Canada and Internationally, speak of the importance of connecting
environmental and social justice. One of the first principles of the
ecology movement is that everything is connected. Tzeporah’s willingness
to compromise is an anathema to this principle. We cannot stand on the
side of GE or Victoria’s Secret one day as they decide introduce recycled
paper or put up a solar panel, and then retain credibility as they
continue to exploit women and profit from war. Tzeporah has tried too long
to straddle this contradiction in the name of achieving “wins”. One can
hope that Greenpeace is able to reform her, and make use of her excellent
organizing and communication skills. I worry however that her hiring
represents a continuation of a trend within the Greenpeace International
Climate campaign to ignore ecology and instead focus on implementing a
narrow vision that can not quite decide if it is really a (r)evolution.
Anonymous Greenpeace Activist or Staff #8
****
We are in total agreement with entry #6. How dare Greenpeace use an image
of the Rainbow Warrior to solicit funds from the public and give the
organisation an activist veneer in order to pay themselves huge salaries
and burn fossil fuels flying around the world to talk about climate
change! Meanwhile grassroot activists in communities around the world are
affecting real change, without media fanfare and the trite photo ops that
Greenpeace uses to further advance its ‘spin’ of ‘direct confrontation’.
Anonymous Greenpeace Activist or Staff #9