So the selfish impetus to protect home property value, drinking water,
small farms and small businesses is supposed to lead somewhere big,
but I have my doubts. Also if you were ever young growing up in such a
place as a 'small farm community in PA', you quickly realize how the
people are all 'conservative to reactionary', anti-union, completely
contradicted over government and big business (the worst case being
Dept. of Defense workers), and often don't give a toss about job
creation (since so many in E. and So. Central PA live in one place and
commute to another, there is no connection between being a homeowner
and being a worker--unless it's support for building more roads).

It's the CELDF in Chambersburg again:

http://www.yesmagazine.org/issues/stand-up-to-corporate-power/communities-take-power

Beyond Site Fights
With the deck stacked against local control, what are citizens to do
to step outside the regulatory game and take back power? Some bold
communities have banned specific corporate operations, not based on
regulation, but on a declaration that human beings have the right to
control their local resources, and that corporations are not people
and not entitled to rights the Constitution grants to humans.

That happened first in Pennsylvania when farmers and small-town
residents tried to resist the encroachment of corporate feedlots and
the dumping of sewage sludge from other states.

Ruth Caplan, of the Alliance for Democracy's “Defending Water for
Life” program, tells how a Pennsylvania coalition including the Sierra
Club, the Farm Bureau, unions, and the Democratic governor responded
by getting legislation passed limiting pollution from corporate
feedlots.

“The farmers in rural Pennsylvania were furious,” about the new law,
Caplan says, “because they didn't want less pollution. They didn't
want those corporate farms in their area. Period.”

Lawyer Thomas Linzey, founder of the Community Environmental Legal
Defense Fund (CELDF), started getting calls from those outraged
farmers. Linzey, Caplan says, had been working within the regulatory
system, but he and the Pennsylvania farmers realized that they needed
a new strategy. Linzey drafted model ordinances asserting community
rights to self-governance and banning corporations from damaging
operations in townships. More than 100 Pennsylvania townships have
adopted those ordinances.

Linzey and CELDF began offering “Democracy Schools,” intensive weekend
programs presenting the history of corporate power in the United
States, and the history of successful movements, such as the
abolitionists and suffragists, to overturn settled law. Caplan
attended one of those schools. It was “a real wake-up call for me,”
she says, “because most of the work we've done has been through the
regulatory system, with some success. But it's not leading toward a
fundamental change between corporations and the rights of people and
nature.”

Caplan took her newfound knowledge to a U.S.-Canadian meeting on the
problem of bottled water. There she met activists from New Hampshire
who subsequently introduced her to Darrell and St. Germaine. Caplan
told them of CELDF's work, and offered to work with them and the
people of Barnstead on the water issue.

Darrell and St. Germaine made presentations to the town's Select
Board, which had earlier passed a “Warrant Article” declaring the
town's intention to protect its water. Ultimately, they invited CELDF
to make a presentation to the Board. At the end of that presentation,
the Board asked Linzey to draft an ordinance similar to the ones in
Pennsylvania. Linzey told the group that they needed to understand
that they would be taking on settled law, Caplan says.“Well, Mr.
Linzey, we understand that, and we're ready to walk point for you,”
Jack O'Neil replied, using a Vietnam-era term for being out front on
patrol.

Reclaiming Rights
CELDF's model ordinances go beyond zoning or other efforts to control
corporate behavior. They ban corporations from specific operations
altogether, citing the Declaration of Independence, international law,
state law conferring rights on citizens, and the general rights of
human beings to govern themselves and take care of their own
communities.

Darrell says that she and St. Germaine spent the next year educating
Barnstead residents about the proposed ordinance. “We talked to people
about water rights everywhere we met them—at the dump, in parks. We
told them why we needed to have this ordinance be unanimous and in
place before corporations came to town.”

People were receptive to the idea but curious why the ordinance needed
to cite such a broad range of law. “There was a lot of education about
why we needed to deny corporate personhood,” Darrell says, “People
don't understand how we've gotten to this point and how corporations
have gotten so much power.” Darrell credits CELDF's Democracy Schools
with giving her the information she needed to provide that education.

In March 2006, the ordinance came before the town meeting. After final
discussion, Barnstead took its vote: 136-1 in favor. The one “No”
vote, Darrell says, was not in general opposition to the measure, but
was cast by a person who felt declaring that corporations are not
persons went too far.

One Town at a Time
The fight to take back power from corporations continues. Across the
country in Humboldt County, California, the people passed a referendum
banning outside corporations from participating in elections and
declared that corporations are not recognized as people there. Blaine
Township, in southwestern Pennsylvania, outlawed the destructive
practice of longwall coal mining. People in Montgomery County in rural
Virginia are fighting the taking of farmland to build a giant railway
terminal.

These are admittedly radical steps, although, as Ruth Caplan points
out, they are being carried forward by people who are not radicals.
“These are not liberals, not progressives, not activists. But they
don't want corporations to tell them how they should run their
community.”

The courts have not yet ruled on these measures. If they are
challenged, no one knows what the outcome will be. But these new
activists point to the abolitionist and women's suffrage movements.
They were radical. They challenged well-settled law. They lost
repeatedly, until the public saw the truth of their position, and the
law changed.

Darrell and her fellow townsfolk are working on amendments to
strengthen their ordinance if a challenge does come. If they're
defeated in court, she will continue to work to make humans more
important than corporations. She's in it, she says, “to have a clear
conscience. I did what I could after I got educated. I can tell that
to my kids. It's my duty. I'll take that charge and do the best I
can.”
        Photo of Doug Pibel

Doug Pibel is managing editor of YES!

_______________________________________________
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis

Reply via email to