Advocacy and Protection Books

My small Indiana "hick town" has recently become the target of a proposed Vera Sun ethanol fuel refinery site. Had it not been for Ms. Perlman's book "Citizen's Primer for Conservation Activism: How to Fight Development in Your Community" I would have sat on my hands and been too timid to take on Big Brother. Having read it I am now involved and prepared to at least put up one helluva fight against it. I was attracted to Ms. Perlman's book because of the words "primer" and "community" in the title. I needed something elementary, something easy, to guide me and educate me in the basics of fighting development in my small community. Her book did just that and more. I now have a foundation of knowledge to build on. Did her example fit my situation perfectly? Am I ready to take on every big corporation in a big metropolis? No, but I feel informed enough to know where to start digging for information and places to go for answers if need be. I didn't get the impression that Ms. Perlman's intention was for this to be "THE" book on conservation activism and one should look no further. I may end up with an ethanol plant in my back yard, literally, but I won't hold Ms. Perlman or her book responsible if my community loses the fight. I feel more empowered as a citizen and come away with more determination to exercise my rights and make my vote count in the upcoming election. This book was the perfect "first step" for me and for others whom I have shared with.
Ms. Perlman has taken the "fire in her belly" and produced something of value. I hope she writes even bigger and better "guide books" on conservation activism. I'll be watching for them.

I was excited about using this book in my own non-profit work---until I had a chance to actually read it. It is only applicable to certain types of activists who fight their fights in small and/or rural communities.

I'm happy that Ms. Perlman and her friends were able to stop counterproductive redevelopment in their own community. However, I am also concerned that she generalizes too readily about the immediate applicability of this book to all people's situations.

Like other reviewers have previously noted, she does not recognize that different environments need adjustments in organizing strategies. This is an embarrassing mantra for somebody who positions herself as an author and activist.

One of my long-standing pet peeves is activists who are ultimately in love with the idea of `being progressive' rather than actually following through on it. Because they will not concede the flaws in their own arguments, these people are often more shallow than the society which they seek to change.

Yes, it worked for her, but many of the tactics would be impractical in a metropolis where activists are expected to work through and with boards in order to impact social change. Increasing gentrification of `redeveloping' urban centers means smart development policies can be a hot seller there too---with the right sales pitch.

Her social justice prescriptions aren't going to provide anything to people who cannot use the remedies in their own organizing environments. Unlike John P. Kretzmann and John L. McKnight (authors of `Building communities from the inside out') she generalizes about communities. What was her point of writing a `practice' book if the tenets cannot actually be put into practice?

This book would be better off repackaged as a handbook for rural and small suburban communities. It has no applicability for the realities of organizers in larger communities. Selling it as a general organizing book does a tremendous disservice to the people who are seriously committed to helping all communities organize.

Pearlman has provided an inspiring and essential guide to preserving valued natural land, especially when under developmental pressure from characteristically greed driven developers who rarely have any vested interest in the post-development future of the land they desicrate.

A must read for caring citizens who will learn thatdevotion and extraordinary teamwork can truly work miracles!

-- JC

The last two statements in Judith Perlman's book, "CONSERVATION ACTIVISM, - "Keep fighting the good fight. The universe will thank you.", should not be taken lightly. Keep fighting" is the most important as it is the theme throughout her book - never give up! Universe can be brought down to state, county, township, etc. - even your own backyard.

The first statement, on the cover - before the title is: "Citizen Primer for" (CONSERVATION ACTIVISM), also explains it all. This is a guide for the preservation of natural areas. Judith Perlman's book will be used by untold numbers of individuals and groups involved with (or planning to be involved with) small and big skirmishes regarding the preservation of unique areas. The subtitle explains that: "How to fight development in your community."

Whether the "good fight" pertains to small local governments (as her book has) or to large governments, this book is a valuable guide. The entire text from the cover to the closing statements is well organized and written in a manner that citizens can understand and follow.

All too often, we are told that "you can't fight City Hall." This thought is put to rest in Judith Perlman's book.

Bernie Brouchoud, Founder and Executive Director (retired), Woodland Dunes Nature Center, Two Rivers, Wisconsin

Judith Perlman has successfully battled development projects, working for the preservation of natural areas and the defeat of sprawling subdivisions. She was involved in three efforts around her small town in Wisconsin, and two were successful while the third was in progress at the time of writing. Perlman's experience makes for a book that can be useful for those who are up against similar battles in their own communities. Some of Perlman's advice is fairly obvious, such as exercising your constitutional rights at public meetings or building coalitions with sympathetic organizations, though Perlman fleshes out these suggestions with strong practical details. Perlman also has some not-so-obvious recommendations as well, such as filming council meetings, or hiring lawyers to simply concoct stalling tactics when a governmental body is trying to rush a vote on a development plan. Such simple tactics can really alter the power balance when local citizens are up against developers and their pocketed local politicians.

However, in the introduction to this book Perlman states that her goal is to extend her personal experiences and successes into general recommendations that can be used in many different types of situations. Unfortunately, this is only true if your battle is in a political environment that is not especially different from that faced by Perlman. Granted, some of her tactics will work anywhere, such as setting up 501(c)(3) tax status or making use of media resources and local experts. But the biggest forms of government ever faced by Perlman and her colleagues were small town planning boards and county commissions. The book offers no practical knowledge on battles that would take place in much different political environments, such as large cities, or public lands in which state or even federal government agencies would be involved. Additionally, the book's expertise is only based on resisting relatively small residential developments, and battles against large-scale commercial or industrial interests would also face much different political realities. So in the end, this book is certainly a practical and detailed primer for the conservation activist, but it is based on limited examples and the details apply mostly to very specific types of local efforts. [~doomsdayer520~]

I'll be honest.I tried to read parts of this trash-book on an internet site.
Pure trash-book.Eugenics now, is called ecology.
How a group of bigots and eugenicists disguised as nature's friends, got support from massive numbers.Here in Brazil, a brazilian told, about thirty years ago:I respect the dumbs, because they are eternal, and I'm not.

This book is a dazzling feat of impassioned storytelling. Weyler conjures the feel of an entire era -- sketching the disparate ideas, the hair-raising events, and the motley crew of inspired eccentrics who precipitated a wild metamorphosis in the collective mindscape. Indeed, his evocation of the visionary fire of these activists -- recounting their personal confusions along with their crazy courage on behalf of a more-than-human world -- may serve as a wake-up jolt to an environmental movement that has today become painfully complacent. And it's a damn good yarn, to boot."

Please consider reading this book. It has changed many people in their views on environmental policy and activism. it has a good analysis and report on how Greenpeace has affected our lives and the benefits of their active roles. Buy it. Its certainly worth the price. I encourage you to also partake in any environmental activism. Environmental information can be found on Greenpeace's website. www.greenpeace.org

I loved this book! The pace never dropped into a boggy, dry account but integrated the adventure of being on board a ship chasing whalers with the political history of the group. The issues are explained, in case you missed out on the 1940 to 1980 time period, as I did. Very educational, but never boring. Wonderful!

I love the fact that this book was printed on forest friendly paper. If more books were made like this we'd have more homes for the wild animals.

Excerpt: International Humanitarian Law has been a predecessor of the protec?tion of human rights in armed conflicts, as proved by the adoption of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and its 1977 Additional Protocols I and II. Subsequently, several treaties on human rights equally protect cer?tain rights, recognized as non-suspendable or non-abolishable, in all cir?cumstances.
Likewise, we'd like to stress that the fight against impunity in armed conflicts has its roots in International Humanitarian Law, without prej?udice to the contribution developed to this end by several treaties on human rights adopted by the United Nations and the Organization of American States, reaching its zenith on a universal level with the adoption of the Statute of the International Criminal Court. The problem stems from the fact that International Humanitarian Law does not con?tain any clear provision to combat impunity in non-international armed conflicts. In spite of this, its silence should not be interpreted as an indication that the Law is in favour of impunity, since the common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions seems to hint towards a "no to impunity". In any case, this gap is now covered by the entry in force of the Statute of Rome of the International Criminal Court, since the latter has the power to judge war crimes, committed during international or internal conflicts. All this apart from the fact that ad hoc International Criminal Courts (former Yugoslavia and Rwanda) and the Special Court for Sierra Leone have the power to judge violations included in the common article 3, and therefore also the violations committed in non-international armed conflicts.
International Humanitarian Law did not recognize the "right of access to justice" to the victims of violations (although it did not deny it either) before national or international bodies. It limited itself to determine the duty of the States to judge the persons responsible of "serious offences" committed during international armed conflicts, but it doesn't say any?thing about internal conflicts, once again emphasizing the scarce impor?tance of these conflicts for this branch of international legislation. This gap as to the access to justice is more or less covered by International Human Rights Law containing provisions applicable in all circumstances, in periods of peace and internal or international armed conflicts. The access to justice of the victims in order to see their rights recognized, is recognized before national bodies and international ones, judicial or not. Nevertheless, what can happen is that the State Party in the treaty, recognizing the right of access to justice before national bodies to vic?tims, suspends this right, since it is not included in the list of non-abol?ishable rights. If this situation occurs, the victims are absolutely defenceless. If we look at the right of access to justice before international bodies, we see that in this case said right cannot be abolished; notwithstand?ing, the rights recognized by the treaty in question can be suspended, except the "core rights", which are those considered non-abolishable. In consequence, the right of access to justice of the victims before inter?national bodies is conditioned by the nature of the violated right. As a result we consider that International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law should make an important effort so as to not leave the victims of human rights violations committed during armed conflicts absolutely defenceless.
The international criminal liability of individuals during armed conflicts was codified by the 1949 Geneva Conventions, affirmed by various treaties on human rights and definitively confirmed by the 1998 Statute of Rome. Nowadays, States have the power to judge war crimes, com?plemented by the International Criminal Court, meaning that the pas?sive legitimation of individuals before the international jurisdiction is not questioned. Nevertheless, International Law does not recognize the right of the victims to exercise penal actions before national criminal courts (although it doesn't deny the right), neither are the victims actively legitimated before the International Criminal Court, which could be considered one of the current failures of International Law. This way,
the "right to justice" is ignored in the sense of the right of the victims to see the authors of violations brought to trial and it is only estab?lished as a duty of the State (investigate, judge and punish the authors) in International Humanitarian Law and as a competence of the Inter?national Criminal Court in the Statute of Rome.
. Up till now, the "right to truth" is not recognized by any international treaty, nevertheless, this right is an autonomous concept comprised in the right of the victims and their relatives (individual dimension) and of society (collective dimension) to know the truth. Since the 1949 Geneva Conventions determines the obligation of the States to judge and punish the authors of "serious offences", the truth shall be known by the international procedure. But here again we are dealing with the issue that this right only exists for international armed conflicts, so that there is an important gap with regard to victims of human rights vio?lations committed during non-international armed conflicts. This gap is covered by the International Human Rights Law, where applicable, and certainly by the Statute of Rome, since the International Criminal Court has the power to judge war crimes committed during both types of armed conflict and whenever the Court judges a case, the truth shall be known.
Since International Humanitarian Law does not recognize the victims' right of access to justice, it cannot recognize their right to obtain a compensation. This gap is covered by International Human Rights Law, although once again we are dealing with the problem that this right is valid or not in accordance with the State's attitude, no longer being valid if the State decides to suspend these rights. In this sense, the Statute of Rome is a great step forward, since the International Criminal Court can determine compensations (indemnity, restitution or rehabili?tation) in favour of victims or their relatives.
The gaps detected when analysing the situation of victims of human rights violations committed during armed conflicts are originated by a possibly erroneous conception of the applicable regulations, because even if it is absolutely true that the Law applied in armed conflicts is the International Humanitarian Law, it is not less true that International Human Rights Law is also applicable, since the latter, apart from estab?lishing a "core" (rights which are not abolishable in any circumstance), contains very strict requisites for the suspension during armed conflicts of rights which are not included in the list of non-abolishable rights.
Finally, we'd like to emphasize the point that although one has to rec?ognize the advances in the protection of victims of human rights vio?lations committed during armed conflicts; it is nevertheless true that many of these advances happened outside International Humanitarian Law, so that we consider that there is still a long way to go. To do this, we shall have to abandon the underlying idea in International Humanitarian Law that the physical person is a legal object worthy of protection (just like material objects), accepting instead the idea of the value and dignity of a human being.

I wanted to love this book, because I wanted to find some hope in the matter of global warming. But I couldn't find much within the covers that I would call practical. There is little here to appeal to ordinary citizens. It makes me think of the Federalist Papers, the theoretical arguments in favor of representative government. It just doesn't have a lot to do with ordinary citizens, trying to earn a living and support a family. "Ignition" is probably a great read for theorists, but if your interests lie more in the realm of practical action, rather than theoretical underpinnings, "Ignition" is going to be a tough slog. It surely was for me.

Combining incisive essays with success stories. It shows how to save our planet and fight global warming.

Rosemary Ruether asks how we ought to respond to terrorist attacks.

She starts by making the point that we need to investigate what happened. That makes sense. When crimes are committed, police and others investigate. That happens for major terrorist attacks as well. I doubt that many people would disagree with her here. But I would certainly disagree with her implication that we're not already doing this.

Next, Ruether wants us to ask what conditions breed terrorism. That's a very good idea indeed. I think a primary problem is the barrage of pro-terrorist propaganda we see. In fact, I think if the international community could help cut down on the lies and hate speech, it would go a long ways in reducing support for terrorism. And I think Ruether herself could actually provide some help in this respect.

Instead, Ruether appears to want Western nations to accept, rather than reject, many pro-terrorist lies. I think that's a mistake, and that it will lead us to appeasing terrorists, thus creating more misery for plenty of people everywhere.