|
10/26/2020 0 Comments Planet of the Colonizers: Victim-Abuse, Narrative-Protection, and Defense of [Green] ProgressBy: Seth Martin (Originally published online on May 4th, 2020)  Now that your big eyes have finally opened As a child, I understood how to give; I have forgotten that grace since I became civilized. I lived the natural life, whereas now I live the artificial. Any pretty pebble was valuable to me then; every growing tree an object of reverence. Now I worship with the white man before a painted landscape whose value is estimated in dollars! Thus the Indian is reconstructed, as the natural rocks are ground to powder, and made into artificial blocks which may be built into the walls of modern society. NOTE: This piece is not a documentary review. It is a response to a much larger conversation and debate around the issues covered in the film, as well as the film's significance at this time. Since it is part of a conversation, before reading further it would be helpful (though not absolutely necessary) to watch Planet of the Humans (POTH) carefully at least once, start to finish, and also to read/familiarize yourself with the interviews and essays linked below in the comments. ********************************************* *********************************************** One tried and true method of silencing an abuse victim is to aggressively question all the smaller details of the story—and if possible to point out any observable inaccuracies in her or his memory of what happened—as a way to discredit the bulk of the victim's major accusations. Another is to cause the victim to question her or his own motives and sanity, and to lead him or her to feel deeply ashamed of being self-centered enough to make some potentially ugly experiences be the cause of social unrest and the destruction of others' reputations. A third is simply to deny the claims loudly, and to use the victim's testimony as a way to defend and make the common perception of the abuser as a "good and honest" person all the more well-known. If one can make the abuser seem a tragic victim—say, of a partner gone mad or jealous of her or his abuser's success—all the better. These strategies are also effectively employed when defending "dominant narratives" against "minority voices" in mainstream culture. All three forms of narrative-silencing have been on full display this past week in the popular criticisms of Planet of the Humans (POTH). Which narratives are being attacked, and which are being defended? In 2020, the "dominant narrative"—the upstanding hero that can no more be deeply critiqued or questioned by its victims than was allowed in past generations when it took different names—is (still!) Progress. And these days around the world, it wears a green suit. And all who question its sincerity must be silenced. Not just silenced, however. Like its earlier manifestations (which I will discuss later on), Progress demands assimilation, allegiance, and expressions of thankfulness from all it dominates. So far what's driving the overwhelming bulk of the vitriol thrown against Planet of the Humans can be summarized fairly simply: defense of Colonizer narratives of Growth and Western Civilization Supremacy; religious faith in Technology as an ever-evolving, universal source of salvation for humans in their battle to master "Nature" and resist death at all costs; and fury on the part of Progress's defenders at the audacity of some of their own calling them out—cloaked in feigned outrage over the producers getting facts wrong, not portraying development fairly (give Progress more time!), and "setting back" the "movement" on which the entire world depends for salvation. True, Progress is being accused of horrific abuse in this documentary. And it seems, as they watch POTH and mull over the details of the charges while sitting through various types of self-isolation or lockdown in response to a global pandemic, millions of stressed-out people are finding the case very compelling. In response, several of the most well-known "green" figures in various movements are employing one, two, or all three forms of victim-silencing, seemingly working round the clock to convince the world that poor Progress and its supporters are getting slandered, and that they should not only turn the documentary off—they should be outraged by the cavalier choice made by Moore and company to endanger the entire world with misinformation, apparently just to get attention. Furthermore, the real serious question we should all be thinking about as we watch this documentary during this Corona-induced global meltdown is: how much should Michael Moore and Jeff Gibbs be punished for betraying our futures? Some of the more popular variants of criticism have been particularly disingenuous, almost comically ironic were they not so dangerous and full of bad faith. For example, the insinuation that Moore, Gibbs and crew are promoting ecofascism and a white supremacist vision of population control are particularly shocking and, based on everything said and shown in the film as well as official responses to criticism after the Earth Day release, categorically false. I am reminded of George Orwell's Animal Farm, when we follow the slow but utter transformation of the collective memory of Snowball as a hero in the Battle of Cowshed to none other than the mastermind conspirator against all animals, who had been secretly working with Mr. Jones all along to destroy the animals' revolutionary dreams. Already I have to look no further than the comment threads below posts by my own friends on social media to find sad and angry folks wondering if, how and why the great Michael Moore has become a right wing pawn for oil and gas? Or... was this really his plan all along? Also maddening is the charge that POTH is ignoring minority voices, especially given one of the obvious goals of the documentary was to hold the words and actions of predominately white and western long-term environmental "movement" leaders up to the light and to highlight their duplicity in some cases, and in others simply their failure to embody and inspire the changes they claim to support. True enough, the producers are white men, and privileged western-centric ones at that. Even given the documentary's targets, though, it should be noted that of all the world famous "celebrity" climate activists featured, Indigenous Indian land-based women's rights activist and lifelong critic of Globalization, Vandana Shiva, is one of the precious few figures marked out for praise for her integrity, despite—not because of—her involvement in the movements being critiqued in the film. Then there is the charge of avoiding or ignoring the incredibly visible and dynamic youth-led resistance of recent years, pointed out as some sort of "aha, gotcha!" proof that the POTH team is out of touch, outdated, and possibly just trying to destroy or discredit the young movement out of spite. I had a very different reaction to the marked absence of well-known younger activists in POTH. As for the silence concerning Greta Thunberg, the Sunrise Movement, and other examples of globally known climate activism led by young folks: given the main premises and accusations of the duplicity and/or failures of the majority of leaders from older generations, it seems much more reasonable to view the non-inclusion of the youth-led movements in POTH's scathing critiques as a sign of respect rather than ignorance or dismissal. Their absence could very well also be seen as a strategic move meant to make it clear that the current carnival of Blood and Gore and its toxic legacy is seen as neither the new generation's fault nor their burden to carry forward. In POTH, there is no attempt being made by old white men to piggyback on the spontaneous and radical struggles of the new generation, nor is there the slightest sense of a desire to self-identify as humble mentors and sages that laid the groundwork for the stern and bold high schoolers striking across the globe. Instead, there is a sense of confession, of penitence, of acknowledging failure in the hopes that the next generation will NOT build on a sagging, rotten foundation. Frankly the same sentiment is nowhere to be found in the most popular criticisms of POTH put out so far, especially by the senior leader most criticised in the documentary (see the “Bomb” op-ed in endnotes). Whatever the original motivation for not featuring youth-led movements, the following is clear. In POTH, the new generation of activist youth and the children are not being lumped in with their abusive "parents", rather they have been left free of any charges, with encouragement to run away--fast!--from the man behind the curtain. This seems to have hit a nerve deeply with many of the supposed elders of the "movement." And understandably so. The youth still have a chance to reconsider and break away from the doomed tactics, talking points and dependency on Globalization, "green" white man's burden narratives, technocratic cultism, and fawning over billionaires and approval from elite establishments that define much of the green "old guard." That there are flaws and even wrong information presented in this documentary is likely (and apparently) true, and for these reasons POTH deserves criticism. That these factual errors, or the muckraking style (so beloved in Moore's previous work) employed to criticize famous environmental leaders by showing their actions and words in unflattering ways with inconvenient footage and documentation, or the film's lack of a "hopeful" 5-point plan of some sort at the end of its critique, should make it worthy of the extraordinary campaign of negativity, smearing, and silencing, it is receiving now is nonsense. And it is fascinating. To me, it exemplifies the extent to which even the "good guys" will go to defend Progress against its critics. There is at least one major criticism, however, that I think could and possibly should be central to the debates currently raging around this documentary: Planet of the Humans would be better titled something along the lines of Planet of the Colonizers, or Planet of the Civilized. In essence, this film is not and should not be thought of as an attack on all "humans." Rather, it is a critique of the dominant system of death being made by powerful people within it. It is a kind of conscious self-sabotage. Perhaps a better description would be a confession or an act of public repentance, which I will touch on more later. So given the nature of the attack, who is attacking who and why, it is tragically apparent yet also understandable in one sense that the POTH team is not looking "outside" for answers as to what to do next. In fact, POTH is a critique of Progress by those benefiting greatly from the system, yet also living in the belly of the beast with little hope of finding a way out. It ends not with a prescription for salvation, but rather a call to simply stop and think and listen. This is something quite unique and possibly among the greatest strengths of the entire project. But more on that at the end of this reflection. POTH is by no means a perfect documentary. Yet its flaws are not nearly so large and destructive to radical environmentalism as most of the critics are claiming. Unless, that is, radical environmentalism depends on the people and narratives and technologies it is most sharply criticizing to realize its ultimate goals. For all of you who have watched Planet of the Humans, whatever your reactions to it so far, can you answer this question honestly: if the success of the environmentalist movement—and more importantly the survival of the not just humanity but most of life on this planet—truly does depend on the further, rapid development and dispersion of the new technologies criticized in POTH, as well as the leadership strategies of those most influential in making these changes happen, can you hold even a shred of hope, in good faith, that we—all of us—have anything but a hellish future awaiting us? Me neither. POTH's basic arguments are in fact old and simple. But they are not "outdated" nor are they stupid. They are in essence very similar to many of the most well-known critiques of Western Civilization that we have heard and continue to hear from Indigenous land-based activists, from tribal warriors of past centuries to decolonization activists around the world today. They are repudiations of the internal logic and values of the White Man's Burden. POTH, by the nature of its premises, is an attack on the still-dominant yet largely unspoken values of colonization and its narrative offspring such as "Progress" and "Kill the Indian, Save the Man"; made manifest through Scientism and Technofetishism and other such ways of seeing and acting toward the natural world that threaten our very survival. Planet of the Humans states the obvious, to those who are paying attention and willing to hear it. We belong to the world. Not vice versa. We in the dominant culture are terrified of death. We in the dominant culture are almost completely unwilling to give up the modern western consumer lifestyle, despite a nearly overwhelming agreement that it is in fact destroying us and the world in which we live. Those of us who are most deeply bound, both as slaves and as leaders, to the dominant culture believe desperately, even religiously, that there is a technological fix for all of this, just beyond our grasp. Or at least we tell ourselves so, to keep from having to face our own addictions and helplessness. However, we are in fact killing everything—and loudly cheering for anything, no matter how outlandish, that we can at least pretend gives evidence to the contrary without cutting us off from the machine. The nearly global subservience to the modern techno-capitalist way of life cannot be redeemed. Globalization, or Progress, as we know and suffer from it today is the logical outgrowth of Western colonization. It depends for its perpetuation on massive amounts of normalized violence. But as much or more than it relies on physical violence, Progress cannot continue without the widespread and constant indoctrination and retelling of its own narrative. It is a narrative of the world that centers western industrial culture and values over the natural world and all land-based and indigenous cultures and ways of knowing that conflict with it. It tolerates no competing narratives; not even the relative absence of a cultural narrative is allowed. And all that conflicts with this exceptionalist narrative and the suicidal charge forward it necessitates—be it green or black, based on killing forests or based on sucking up oil—must be assimilated or otherwise destroyed. In the recent past, in North America this included Indigenous children: kidnapped and taken to boarding schools, where they were forced to cut their hair, adopt western clothing, study about the wonders of Civilization and act in pageants celebrating Manifest Destiny, receive Christian names, and strive to "let all that is Indian in you die" as they "joined" the movement toward a more free and fair world. This was done for their own good, of course. To question this cultural genocide was and is, essentially, to question Progress and Civilization. If you were Indigenous, well, that's understandable: you couldn't know any better due to your backward traditions, and that is exactly why you need "us" to take your children away for awhile. And if you were non-Indigenous, from settler-colonial families, to question the narrative was to show yourself to be cruel and uncaring about helping poor backwards savages get a fair chance at enjoying the benefits of Manifest Destiny. And it was tantamount to a betrayal of your calling, and to bite the hand that fed and blessed you. And now this process applies to those who question any major tenant of modern Progress, also known by many as Globalization. This includes Schooling, of course. It includes Medicine. And it increasingly includes the "green movement" as it is most popularly promoted and marketed with funding and slimy handshakes from billionaire grandkids of many of the most infamous colonizers in world history. In my opinion, the Planet of the Humans team likely had no idea when they were making this documentary just how much they were going to enrage the green-coated beast of Progress. They expected kickback, I am sure. They wanted reaction. But frankly I highly doubt they were prepared for the level of attacks they are currently receiving. Had they fully grasped what they were doing and who they were really up against, they would have made a better, more careful documentary. Or perhaps they would have never tried. They had good, honest questions, rooted in justified rage and anxiety at the failures and duplicity of much of the leadership guiding the Movement they (at least Moore and Gibbs) had supported since the first Earth Day. From a western humanitarian and anti-capitalist framework, as leftists deeply concerned that they and their cause had been "sold out" by their leaders to corporate schemers, they had every reason to be enraged. And they should be applauded for their courage in making and sharing POTH, no matter how flawed parts of it may be. That they provided no "answer" or "way forward" for future generations should not be surprising. They were speaking as anti-Imperialist, anti-Capitalist fighters, from the center, and from places of extreme privilege as wealthy, educated and largely respected white men. So it really should come as no surprise that they will be chewed up and spit out by their own, as they have rightfully attacked the core values of the society that shaped them, blessed them and gave them their voices. For sometimes doing shoddy work, if/when examples can be clearly pointed out of this being the case—the POTH crew and the documentary itself should be criticized, especially given the seriousness of the issues being raised. However, for making and widely distributing POTH, they should be commended. And for not concluding their critique with a new ready-made program for everyone to follow, Moore, Gibbs and crew should be honored. POTH has shown in no uncertain terms to the dominant western culture that, as Greta Thunberg has already been saying for over a year, the building is on fire. And this documentary, far from trying to dominate or "guide" the brave new generation of Climate Activists, has lit up the emergency exit signs in the cathedral of their would-be elders. And outside the flaming building, outside the embrace of the green zombie of growth which so many of the young activists have already tried to remain free of as they seek to include as many voices as possible on their platforms—there are many more elders, with much saner, life-giving ways to share. Thanks to POTH, the chances of the young Climate Activists resisting the compromising embrace of death that many of their movement elders have accepted and are clearly hoping to pass on to them—and the odds of them getting out of the fiery building alive—have been greatly increased. That is hopeful news for all of us. For what to do next, for where to go, for who or what to follow: the young must look elsewhere. Outside of the center. Thankfully, it is clear they are already trying. They, and we, must look to the remaining Indigenous land-based communities and activists who have survived all this time in defiance and despite centuries of attacks and victim-blaming tactics from western missionaries of Progress. The only life-giving answers to the problems of colonization will come from those who know colonization in their bones, not as "normal" or a path to follow, but as the violent and duplicitous monster that it is, their enemy, intent on eating up all that challenges its authority or its sole narrative of how things should be. That narrative has a history, and it has gone by many names. One of those names is Progress. And by following the responses to Planet of the Humans, we are seeing clearly, and to the surprise of many good-hearted folks in the center who consider themselves to be anti-colonial and/or progressive/green/anti-racist/pro-"Indigenous", who some of its most strident supporters are. The picture that unfolds before us is in many ways hard to accept, especially for those of us indoctrinated our whole lives by the Progress narrative. In his April 30th letter of thanks to PEN AMERICA for condemning widespread attempts to censor POTH, Michael Moore states in unambiguous language the premises of and ultimate reason for making the documentary: Sadly, the calls to censor Planet of the Humans also display an arrogance of the elites against three Flint, Michigan filmmakers who are seeking to warn their fellow citizens that a supreme environmental catastrophe is at hand, that the current pandemic is just a small example of the chaos and calamity coming our way. ******************************************* Even if argued poorly in the documentary, can anyone concerned with the climate crisis who is paying the slightest attention to recent developments say with a straight face that any of these premises are wrong? And yet, the main points of POTH's argument are given little to no discussion/air-time by those most loudly criticizing the work. Instead the unforgivable sin of the documentary, according to the chorus, is that it is harmful to the "Movement"—that Moore, Gibbs, and Co. have threatened Green Progress, and in so doing have done a great service to Black Progress, quite literally speeding up the End of Civilization. Is it really so dangerous, though? To those who know decolonization not as theory only, but as survival, nothing in POTH is very controversial. It is self-evident. Nor do any arguably unfair jabs at environmental leaders, or failures to present a decade or so of updates in the green machine narrative, make the basic premises any less true. As to whether or not decolonization activists and their families and loved ones living in daily struggle against the forces and narratives being decried in the film will be willing to lead—or at least share wisdom for—a way forward that truly values all life: that is entirely up to them, and must be on their terms. However, as the Progress Narrative and the destructive behavior of its billions of addicted believers clearly endangers all of us—the likelihood of those with knowledge and experience of a different way being willing and even overjoyed to share their insights with others is likely in most cases. What is far less likely, sadly, is that large numbers of Progress's followers will find the humility and courage to break free from the global cult that protects, promotes, and requires their current lifestyles, and come to be taught, not to teach—in the manner of grateful penitents rather than crusaders. Moore, Gibbs, and crew have taken us to the point of acknowledgement of failure and guilt. The next step is a form of collective repentance—or turning-away from the old path of destruction. This turn from death to life can only happen through a total rejection of the narrative of Colonialism as it now manifests itself through the doctrines of Tech-worship, Western Civilization Supremacy, Globalization, and Continual Progress. Salvation will only be found outside of these narrative variants, and outside of the center. If we wish to survive, all of us must undergo a similar repentance as a kind of concerted act of faith, believing that there are other ways that we can and must learn, humbly, from other voices. But we will never hear those voices until we stop, and face Progress. ******************************************* I will wind down this reflection not by offering anything like my own proposed answer or solution, but rather by sharing two examples of a different way forward, a different narrative, as articulated decades ago by beloved decolonization freedom fighters from Korea and Indigenous North America. 1. The value of freedom does not lie in doing as one pleases; on the contrary, it rests in refraining from doing as one pleases, voluntarily submitting to the will of God. The recent belief that reason and will are ultimate, beyond which there can be no God, is a view that is incomplete and intermediate, like mistaking the window for the sky as a half-awake person might.... 2. Within the traditions, beliefs, and customs of the American Indian people are the guidelines for society's future. It is this spirit of the continent, of all continents, that shines through the Indian anthologies and glimmers in the Indian communities in grotesque and tortured forms. The vision of stability of the community is found by non-Indians who venture into the reservations, and yet in viewing the remnants of Indian religion they understand neither Indians nor themselves. White America and Western industrial societies have not heard the call of either the lands or the aboriginal peoples. In the appalling indices of social disorder and the tribal peoples Westerners see only continued disruption and, being unaccustomed to viewing life as a totality, cannot understand the persistence of tribal peoples in preserving their communities, lands, and religions. Seth Martin May 4th, 2020 Related Links: 1. Planet of the Humans Documentary https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zk11vI-7czE&feature=emb_title 2. 350.org's initial response to POTH https://350.org/response-planet-of-the-humans-documentary/ 3. 20 Films to Watch After (Or Instead Of) Planet of the Humans AND: Post-script (4/26/2020) - A Statement from Tim Hjersted, director of Films For Action https://www.filmsforaction.org/articles/films-to-watch-after-planet-of-the-humans/ 4. Films For Action's Statement on Planet of the Humans Why we took it down. Why we ultimately decided to put it back up (including this note). Plus our critiques and thoughts on the film. https://www.filmsforaction.org/articles/films-for-actions-statement-on-planet-of-the-humans/ 5. Planet of the Humans Comes This Close to Actually Getting the Real Problem, Then Goes Full Ecofascism (Brian Kahn, Earther) https://earther.gizmodo.com/planet-of-the-humans-comes-this-close-to-actually-getti-1843024329 6. Meet the New Flack for Oil and Gas: Michael Moore (Josh Fox, The Nation) https://www.thenation.com/article/environment/planet-humans-film-moore/ 7. Climate experts call for 'dangerous' Michael Moore film to be taken down (Guardian) https://news.yahoo.com/climate-experts-call-dangerous-michael-125419397.html 8. Michael Moore, Jeff Gibbs, and Ozzie Zehner respond to criticisms of POTH on Rising (The Hill) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bop8x24G_o0 9. Josh Fox's critique of POTH on Rising (The Hill) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTYJCAxlOgs 10. ‘A Bomb in the Center of the Climate Movement’: Michael Moore Damages Our Most Important Goal (Bill McKibben, Rolling Stone) https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/political-commentary/bill-mckibben-climate-movement-michael-moore-993073/ 11. Democracy Now coverage of response to POTH, featuring Naomi Klein's tweet: “It is truly demoralizing how much damage this film has done at a moment when many are ready for deep change. There are important critiques of an environmentalism that refuses to reckon with unlimited consumption + growth. But this film ain’t it.” https://www.democracynow.org/2020/4/29/headlines/climate_scientists_environmentalists_call_new_film_planet_of_the_humans_misleading_destructive 12. Why “Planet of the Humans,” Michael Moore’s new film about green energy, is so controversial (Sophia A. McClennen, Salon) https://www.salon.com/2020/05/01/why-planet-of-the-humans-michael-moores-new-film-about-green-energy-is-so-controversial/ 13. Planet of the Humans: A delusion-shattering documentary on how the environmental and green energy movements have been taken over by capitalists. (Frederic and Mary Ann Brussat, Spirituality & Practice) https://www.spiritualityandpractice.com/films/reviews/view/28927/planet-of-the-humans 14. Jeff Gibbs' response to Bill McKibben's criticisms https://planetofthehumans.com/2020/04/30/response-to-bill-mckibben-regarding-planet-of-the-humans/ 15. Jeff Gibbs' Response to the Sierra Club and Aspiration about Planet of the Humans https://planetofthehumans.com/2020/04/29/response-to-the-sierra-club-and-aspiration-about-planet-of-the-humans/ 16. Michael Moore's thank you note to PEN AMERICA and general response to calls to censor POTH https://planetofthehumans.com/2020/04/30/pen-condemns-censorship-michael-moore-backed-film/ ***************** UPDATE: Since originally writing this piece in early May, POTH has been taken down from Youtube, based on a copyright claim following a public pressure campaign to censor it (led by numerous Green New Deal advocates), only to be re-uploaded weeks later. For more on this story, see: "Planet of the Censoring Humans." By Matt Taibbi. https://taibbi.substack.com/p/planet-of-the-censoring-humans Also for two more "responses to the responses" (that I did not come across until after completing the above reflection) see: 1. ‘Planet of the Humans’ A (long-form) review of… the reviews. By Paul Mobbs. http://www.fraw.org.uk/blog/2020/20200501-planet_of_the_humans.html 2. “DAMN DIRTY HUMANS!”: ‘PLANET OF THE HUMANS’ AND PROGRESSIVE DENIAL. By John Halstead (of Gods & Radicals). https://abeautifulresistance.org/site/2020/5/5/damn-dirty-humans-planet-of-the-humans-and-progressive-denial
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |
RSS Feed