Opposition for Opposition’s Sake? Thomas Friedman Gets a Pie in the Face (w/video)
The action, as well as the ensuing discussions over at the blogs It’s Getting Hot in Here, and the Huffington Post, underscore the longstanding divide within the environmental movement between those who believe we should work within the system to address our most pressing environmental issues, and those who believe that the system itself is the cause of the environmental problems.
From the Brown Daily Herald:
“A female audience member ran on stage last night and threw a green pie at New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, who had just begun a lecture on environmentalism in Salomon 101. The woman had been sitting in the south side of the auditorium’s front row when she pulled the pie out of a Brown Bookstore plastic bag that had been tucked in a red backpack and leapt out of her seat.
At the same time the woman threw the pie, a male accomplice seated a few rows back ran down the aisle and onto the stage, throwing small pamphlets explaining the actions into the crowd.
…The pamphlets thrown by the male accomplice identified the pair as the “Greenwash Guerillas,” who wrote that they were acting “on behalf of the earth (sic) and all true environmentalists.”
One side of the pamphlet contains an excerpt from a September 2006 review of Friedman’s book, “The World is Flat,” written by Raymond Lotta for the journal “Revolution,” which styles itself as the “Voice of the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA.” The review is highly critical of Friedman, who the review claims cannot see his own errors while “seated in the business class of his analytical jetliner.”
The other side contains five bullet-points explaining why “Thomas Friedman deserves a pie in the face,” which include reasons like “his sickeningly cheery applaud for free market capitalism’s conquest of the planet,” and “for helping turn environmentalism into a fake plastic consumer product for the privileged.”
The pamphlet declares “Thomas Friedman’s ‘Green’ as fake and toxic to human and planetary health as the cool-whip (sic) covering his face.”
Personally, I think it was a pretty bush-league maneuver. And watching the video, I feel bad for Friedman as a human being, regardless of how I feel about his politics. Running time is 1:39.
I found one comment at It’s Getting Hot in Here particularly poignant, it reads:
“Had you stayed and listened to the speech, you would have learned that Friedman has one of the most comprehensive characterizations of the challenge than I’ve heard in a long time. He spoke about the scale of climate change, global justice and petro-dictatorships, biodiversity loss, energy poverty (i.e. global inequality), and the need for conservation. In fact, he directly addressed most of your complaints, making you come off as reactionary and uninformed. Of course Friedman has major flaws, but if your intention was to start discussion about them, you failed. Instead, you’ve started a discussion on the inappropriateness of your tactics, and left everyone confused as to what you were trying to say.”
See also: “Crazy Acts or Civil Disobedience” :: Green Options (7/2007)
Photo: Charles Haynes
I’ve got a lot of respect for activists in general, but this is just lame. If bad slapstick is the best they can come up with, perhaps it’s time to find some other ways to fill there time…
More importantly, while I definitely don’t agree with every position Thomas Friedman’s ever taken, he’s doing a stellar job of bringing a comprehensive view of sustainable development to a broader audience… that’s something we should praise, and then engage with the details. Pies in the face hardly get a discussion started…
Friedman has the rare ability to conflate any set of complicated issues into a series of trivial metaphors. He is to intellectual analysis what Velveeta is to cheese.
I’m a big fan of Friedman. I’m a realist, a cautious optimist, a capitalist, and an environmentalist. This breed of green fundamentalism gets us nowhere. It’s no better than their religious counterparts. What next? Fly planes into buildings? What is the logical end to these tactics and strategies?
The most effective environmental organizations I’ve been a part of or worked for are those that have lunch with the opposition and talk out their differences. No meaningful change - or policy - will happen when we sit around and yell at each other. This is embarrassing.
Totally disrespectful and ridiculous.
It’s too bad some people aren’t smart enough to find a cordial way to be heard, that they have to resort to stupid stuff like this to make a point. Whatever point they were trying to make is automatically discounted by the method they chose to make it.
@Preston: “find a cordial way to be heard” … yeah, I can relate.
Although I do not agree with throwing pies, I completely understand the frustration and reason why they through the pies. Friedman truly is a dangerous force. He manipulates globalization and with his rhetoric anesthetizes people. This is so frustrating because he convolutes the truth. The food crisis, slum growth, loss of indigenous knowledge, and marginalization of most of the global south, and horrible environmental implications of globalization is disgraceful. Friedman, tells us that the solution to our problems lies in globalization. However, globalization is the source itself! How can an individual find a voice against such a powerful force. The students wanted to make a point… and make it they did. It took balls but it got the idea across.
Adam: The net of globalization is positive. Everything you describe existed before globalization. The only thing that’s changed is that a billion people were lifted from poverty. It’s hurts the US more than the developing world, and there are ways to deal with that w/o resorting to protectionism. Just as capitalism has gone global, so has humanitarianism and other social and environmental movements. You don’t get one without the other.
Video no longer available!? I missed out.
Jeff, I second your assessment of Friedman. I have a number of problems with his overall philosophy, but don’t think that means we should overlook his many contributions to the dialogue on sustainability.
Yeah, the video was pulled. I’m curious as to what their rationale is for doing so, considering the video was uploaded by the “Greenwash Guerillas” themselves.