Green is the New Red

Will Potter
City Lights Books, 2011
Reviewed by Simon Czerwinskyj

 
Scare tactics are very effective in a culture of fear. And if the United States government has been successful in one aspect of the culture, it’s creating a climate of fear. The legal maneuvering—aided and abetted by corporate lobbyists—of the federal government, in the service of cultivating a palpable fear in malcontents, radical activists, dissidents, and contrarians in general, has been effective in a very frightening manner, especially post 9-11. When applied to the animal rights movement, specifically by way of the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, the scare tactics of the federal government go beyond instilling dread in activists; they garner real and scary results. Green Is The New Red is a brisk, but detailed and compelling, investigation of the crackdown on animal rights activists in the face of the US government’s greatest carte-blanche inducing buzz-word: terrorism.

Potter doesn’t spend a lot of time trying to draw parallels between the Red Scare and the current approach the government uses to ferret out and imprison environmentalists they see as a threat. The parallel he does draw is one of atmosphere and climate rather than specific detail. A main focus of the book is Daniel McGowan (an animal rights activist who aided in burning down a lumber company and a tree nursery that allegedly practiced genetic engineering) whose journey through legal hell is a shining example of the government’s tactics towards the new environmental radical. In none of McGowan’s actions was anyone hurt; property damage was the end result of his campaign against genetic engineering and animal experimentation. However, once the “terrorist” label had been slapped on McGowan, the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act gave prosecutors a larger spectrum of punishment they could apply than they would have with your run-of-the-mill vandal. McGowan ended up in an ultra-secret maximum-security prison for “terrorists”, in which his ability to communicate with the outside world was severely limited. The key to prosecuting McGowan as a terrorist was his intent and the explicit campaign behind the actions—disrupting business interests.

A point Potter effectively makes is that the US government does not apply the “terrorist” label to White Power conspirators with plans to bomb federal buildings or anti-abortion activists who murder abortion doctors. The full force of the Patriot Act is typically not applied to these cases. However, with the SHAC (Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty) 7 case, a group of animal rights activists running a website, organizing home demonstrations, and generally putting pressure on businesses to divest from Huntingdon Life Sciences (a company whose bread and butter is based on consistently violating the Animal Welfare Act), but not engaging in any type of vandalism or violence, were slapped with the “terrorism” label and subsequently found guilty on charges of conspiracy (among others). There is a stark disparity between pressuring corporations to stop funding animal torture and explicit violence (planned or otherwise) against other human beings in the name of ideology.

Potter’s familiarity with the animal rights movement helps the authenticity of the narrative. He has engaged in activism and is intimate with activist circles. His insider perspective helps the writing go beyond mere reportage; he is sympathetic, outraged, and well informed. At times, the sheer amount of information and the non-chronological structure can be confusing, but the overall tone and message is cohesive and articulate. Potter’s summation of the motives behind the US government’s targeting and labeling of animal rights activists as terrorists is cogent: the disruption of corporate business-as-usual and direct action against the continuance of that business is an affront to capitalism, and therefore, an affront to the American Way. Potter argues that the government’s interest in protecting business practices—and the profits of those practices—isn’t their only concern. So-called “eco-terrorism” is a threat to the ideological purity of consumer capitalism; our own US citizens defying the very essence, in the government’s eyes, of the United States’ foundation. Scary.