by Jessica Goad and Stephen Lacey
In keeping with the momentum of the Occupy Wall Street movement, activists took to the streets in Washington, DC today to protest the Keystone XL pipeline outside the State Department, where the final public hearing on the project took place.
Pipeline opponents are drawing a clear connection between the movements, calling their overnight stay at the building where the Keystone hearings were held #OccupyStateDepartment. As activists explained to Climate Progress today, the climate movement and the Occupy Wall Street movement are both made up of a diverse group of people who feel shut out of the political system by the financial and corporate elite.
Tar Sands Action founder Bill McKibben told us that the pipeline is “sort of the poster child for the kind of arrogant corporate power that people are rightly taking to task on Wall Street and elsewhere”:
McKibben will be giving a climate teach-in at the Occupy Wall Street on Saturday at 5 pm:
You could even say Wall Street’s been occupying our atmosphere, since any attempt to do anything about climate change always runs afoul of the biggest corporations on the planet,” says McKibben. “So it’s a damned good thing the tables are starting to turn.”
The increasing opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline (already 2,000 people have signed up to protest at the White House on November 6th) mirrors the Occupy Wall Street and “The Other 99 Percent” movements that have been sweeping the country over the last two weeks.
As climate activists explained, the Keystone XL pipeline is a symbol of everything protesters around the country are concerned about: profits over people and the environment. Bill McKibben, who also co-founded of 350.org, described the sentiment in CP’s exclusive interview:
We’ve already proved this thing’s an environmental disaster. Now it’s becoming clear, it’s sort of the poster child for the kind of arrogant corporate power that people are rightly taking to task on Wall Street and elsewhere. When we find these emails … saying that TransCanada and its lobbyists are working hand and glove with the State Department. When we hear that the State Department has hired to run this hearing a company … one of who’s main clients is TransCanada, the first thing you do is your mind kind of explodes … and the second thing you do is say ‘damn it, I completely understand why people are going crazy. This is just not fair. I guess the way to say it is, we’ve been concentrating on how environmentally dirty this project is, and we’re going to spend a lot of time now also talking about how politically dirty it is.
Tar Sands Action explains on its website, “#occupywallstreet and the Keystone XL—One Movement, One Goal”:
#occupywallstreet was called by a small group with impeccable timing. Americans have seen three years of hard times now and many are at the end of their savings, their unemployment benefits, and their patience. The economy collapsed and our government funneled massive bailouts toward the richest among us while cutting our services and benefits. Republicans and Democrats alike have sold out the people. Those individuals within the government who work hard to make good policies that help Americans are like the little Dutch boy with his finger in the dike. They can’t do this alone. They need the support of the people and they need us to take some responsibility for creating this change ourselves.
That’s why I participated in the Tar Sands Action and it’s why I’m participating in #occpuywallstreet. We’re fighting the same fight, the fight to restore our democracy, the fight to end corporate influence and rebuild a society based on cooperation, trust, and brotherly love. We can’t solve the carbon problem until we solve the power problem. And history has shown time and time again that only way to solve a power problem is for citizens to join together in the street and bring the great machine to a halt. Only then can we find a way forward together. Only then can we begin enacting the policies we need to build our new carbon-free economy.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has declared that a decision on the pipeline will be made at the end of the year. But the President has the sole authority to decide whether to approve the pipeline. So the question becomes: will President Obama stand with “the other 99 percent”?
Jessica Goad is manager of research and outreach for the Public Lands Project at the Center for American Progress. Stephen Lacey is a blogger with Climate Progress. James Barba Nazar and Joe Romm contributed material to this report.
Related Post:
Previous in TP Climate Progress
Language Intelligence: Lessons on persuasion from Jesus, Shakespeare, Lincoln, and Lady Gaga
Wow, i just read the TP frontpage and all the feedback from Republicans.
Incredible political opinions about the financial system and it’s critiques, which use basically freedom of speech here and the right to demonstrate.
The unregulated capitalism is dead because the human race has approached the boundaries of our planets resources.
Go Figure!
I recall Tea Party signs showing anger at big banks and Wall St. Almost the exact same wording as the Occupy Wall St. signs. Many in the two movements agree.
What does that tell us? Chance for a really big movement should the two merge (minus the crazies).
The Tea Party as a group have done fabulously well the last 30 years- they are protesting ‘big government’ the Wall Street Protestors are against ‘big corporations’ who have control over the Government and the masses- a distinct difference.
The Tea Party blames the Government for bailing out Banks and Wall Street. If more regulations had been in place- bail outs would not be needed- and regulations are not something the Tea Party believes in- along with global warming.
Peaceful protests are fine and impressive, but do they every result in anything? The Establishment really does not care or pay attention to our protests – even when they are large.
Example: the protests against the completely bogus and trumped attack on Iraq was HUGE. Millions and millions demonstrated worldwide.
Bush-Cheney went ahead with out hesitating.
It was only after people die in US protests that we have a chance of success: Kent State is one example. Successful union movements down through our history is another.
Peaceful, unfortunately, does not cut it.
Wealth inequality seems to be spurring these protestors. The gap between the haves and have nots has been growing for 3 decades.
The underlying economic problems we have are not going away anytime soon- unless BO takes draconian steps like FDR did in 1935.
More austerity is not going to help- Hoover tried that in 1931- and the economy in early 1933 almost 4 years after the crash fell further.
If this movement grows over both income disparity, unemployment and more climate disasters, it may not be so non violent.
I don’t know that I would call FDR’s programs draconian, progressive might be a better word. And I would not over emphasis the violence that some times occur when large movements take hold. Kent State was a desperate attempt to deter student protest because they were working and it backfired.
For 1935 Draconian
today right of center
A new progressive era will see a huge swing to the left- finishing FDR and Truman’s dreams of so long ago.
Right On!
I think those assumptions are mistaken on a couple of points. A lot of people seemed to lose heart that the anti-war demonstrations did not stop the wars, but we don’t know the whole story. The Bush administration was really reaching. General Clark said he was told by fellow officers in the Pentagon that there were plans draw up for 7 wars in 7 countries, Syria and Iran among them. If we ever know the full history I suspect that the huge protest not only deterred some military adventures but also put the breaks on a march toward an out and out militarist state. Remember the press secretary warning us to “watch what we say,” and that postal carriers among others were going to be enlisted to gather and report information on citizens? Well, we are not out of the woods but things are looking a little brighter.