But what’s really on trial at this moment is Civil Disobedience itself  in Japan.  In a society obsessed with conformity, it was easy for corrupt government officials to turn  Junichi and Toru into the bad guys, and reverse the focus of what should have been an investigation into decades of abuse of billions of yen in public funds into a trial about whether two activists stole a cardboard box.

But when I read stories like the one below, from Kyodo News, I know that regardless of the outcome of this trial, Junichi and Toru have  already won.  They have opened a discussion in Japan about the public’s right to know in a society in which corruption flourishes, and guilty or not guilty, they can hold their heads high that they have blazed a new trail in civil society. The victory may be long in coming, but it will come. Another activist, and another, and another, will follow their example  and challenge the rules of the game. They’ve cracked the floodgates, and once those waters begin to flow, and the public begins to ask more questions of the fat-cat whalers and what they’re doing with Japanese taxes to support a whaling programme nobody wants, for science nobody needs and for whale meat nobody eats, whaling in Japan is doomed.

When I see the grace and courage with which Junichi and Toru, both fathers of small children, face the prospect of ten years in prison, I’ve never been prouder to wear the Greenpeace name. Show your support here and wish them strength and luck for the trial outcome on Monday.

Kyodo News on Civil Disobedience and the Tokyo Two:

The BBC`s “Panorama” is an investigative news program with over a 50-year history. From amongst their cases, a co-worker informed me of the amazing 2003 televised report, “Secret Policeman,” that brought to light racial discrimination within the police department.

A reporter, concealing his identity, entered the police academy. Over the space of 7 months, he was able to record racially discriminatory comments using a hidden mic and camera.

Commendably, the reporter, at the end of his training, became a true policeman. However, perhaps because of some questionable conduct, he was arrested on charges of profiteering. He was suspected of unjustly receiving wages in the role of a policeman.

Despite the reporter`s arrest, the BBC televised a 30 minute documentary, “Secret Policeman,” using the recorded footage. As a result, the discriminatory mindsets of the policemen currently in office were brought to light. The program invoked great repercussions. The police objected to the BBC`s methods of data collection, but in the end, 10 officers resigned, and 10 others incurred punishment. The reporter was not prosecuted.

In this case, I think this is the result of the British citizenry judging that “the right to know” as a fundamental basis of democracy takes precedence. In Japan, the focal point might go in the direction of “is it alright to commit a crime in the name of journalism?” However, the U.K. citizenry judged that “this news contributes to the public good.” The reporter knew the grave risks of investigating a national organization. And even though he was captured, the BBC kept their journalistic stance of televising his findings. This can only be described as phenomenal.

The trial measuring Japan`s awareness of “the right to know” is facing judicial decision before long in the Aomori district court. Two members of the pro-environmental group Greenpeace Japan are facing theft charges for stealing some whale meat that was in the process of being delivered.

The two members learned from former crew members of scientific whaling ships that “whalers are diverting whale meat into illegal channels for profit. Considering the fact that taxes are used for this enterprise, it`s strange.” With comments like these, they started the investigation. Upon arriving at the port, the two members followed after the express home-delivery service the whalers had used, reaching a distribution center in Aomori. They carried off high-class “unesu” whale parts in a cardboard box, presenting it as evidence to the Tokyo District Prosecutor that the scientific whaling crews were committing systematic embezzlement.

However, the sailors were not prosecuted, while the two members were charged with theft and trespassing, and subsequently arrested and prosecuted. At the trial, it was asserted that the two did not take it for personal gain, and so not to treat it as theft. Rather, their conduct was to make it clear that a large amount of tax money is being wasted on scientific whaling, with rampant embezzlement.

Moreover, stories from the defendant, the prosecutor, and witnesses from both sides made clear the reality of the situation about scientific whaling. Concerning this, on the 23rd, the Tokyo Shinbun Newspaper made a detailed report. There were headlines such as “The trial of whale meat theft exposes horrifying realities; Scientific Whaling is diverting to illegal channels after all; Enterprises under the jurisdiction of FAJ are monopolizing?i.e., under an armed convoy of concessions.” Mixed with these were interviews with plaintiffs and scholars, it was an article of great interest that “smoked out” the problems with heavily subsidized enterprises, i.e., scientific whaling.

Greenpeace Japan`s Executive Director, Hoshikawa Jun, said, “from the start, I got a strong sense from authorities that things like NGOs shouldn’t interfere with national policy.” There is also the comment that the members under trial aren’t reporters. However, the European Court of Human Rights say, “whether it’s journalists or NGOs, when observing governmental injustice, the precedent is to observe the same freedom of expression.”

The two men’s action, in which they risked their life only to receive an unfair prosecution, without a doubt contributed to the public good, just as the BBC`s “Secret Policeman” did. I hope to observe the judgment on September 6th.

(2010.8.25 Kyodo News, The 47 Column Editorial Department, Funakoshi Mika)

Tiny little brain. Still gets it right.

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 2010

The unanimous Declaration of the fifty United States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with a dirty, deadly energy source, and to assume among the powers of the Earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all people are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, the pursuit of Happiness, and the right to a secure and unpolluted future for their offspring.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Energy becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute an Energy [R]evolution, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing their  power sources in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Energy Sources long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Energy Sources, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Energy Production. The history of the present Fossil Fuel Economy is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

British Petroleum and the Fossil Fuel Industry have refused Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

They have obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing their Assent to Laws for establishing environmental protection.

They have made judges and elected official dependent on their Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

They affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.

They have combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving their Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

They have quartered large bodies of armed troops on foreign soil, and protected them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of those States

They have used those troops for cutting off Trade with parts of the world,

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

They have plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, and destroyed the lives of our people.

They are at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy of a civilized nation.

They have constrained our fellow Citizens to bear Arms, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. An Energy Source whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the fueler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British Petroleum brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Energy-Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the Fossil Fuel Economy, and that all polluting connections between them and Big Oil, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Energy Independent States, they have full Power to shift to Renewable Energy Sources, to catch up with such investments in Wind, Wave, Solar, and other forms of clean renewable energy as other foreign nations have done, and to aggressively accelerate the transition to clean energy.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

So. BP is not like the other oil companies. It cares about the “small people.” Well I enclose a picture of  two small people that I care about.

If YOU cared about them, you’d be getting your company out of the deadly, dirty fuels business that is coating the dreams of their future in a filthy, oily sludge.

If you cared about these small people, you’d be getting out of the business that sent America to war for more oil, only to have the oil pay back its thanks by invading America’s shores.

If you cared about these small people, you’d admit what you know: that an alternative future is not only possible, it’s happening. That Spain is generating more than half of its power with wind on some days. That China is building a new windmill every four hours. That we could have a 95% renewables energy mix worldwide by 2050 using existing technology and create MORE jobs doing so than on the current dirty, deadly path.That America’s addiction to oil is unnecessary, making the horrific stories of human suffering,  wildlife deaths, and the loss of jobs in the Gulf all the more tragic.

You’d apologise for Katrina, and the more frequent and more deadly Katrina-like events that these small people will see in their lifetimes.

You’d apologise not for an oil spill, but for all the ways you are knowingly screwing up the planet these small people will live in with your crude oily slime.

Apology. Not. Accepted.

Yours Truly,

Brian

But what was best was sitting in a noisy balcony at the Whitehouse press room with a bunch of pals heckling, cheering, and throwing popcorn. At least, that’s what it felt like.

I watched via the Whitehouse App on Facebook, where the live broadcast is accompanied by a live chat stream. Even cooler, I found it via a link on whitehouse.gov itself, which I considered a very clued-up move by the POTUS’s webbies. Next press conference, check it out. Invite your friends. Grab some action links from Greenpeace or other activist sites and kick them into the chat flow. This is the stuff democracy is made of.

“Let’s delay these  permits until we’ve mopped up the oily media mess, shall we?”

That’s the conversation I expect drove US Interior Secretary Salazar’s decision, as yet unannounced, to delay permit applications for Arctic oil drilling for a year.  OK, with my rose-tinted Hippy Glasses I’ll raise a glass with everyone who has been working to stop this insane plan — we have a year to work at killing them off permanently, but with my cynical/pragmatist hat on I’ll say this looks to me more like a decision made to ensure the drilling goes ahead rather than to kill it off, by removing the spotlight of negative media.

As the Arctic ice retreats due to global warming, the oil companies are salivating over rich new fields of more global warming goo they can now access.  We can’t afford to burn the oil we already have — let’s not further extend our fossil fuel addiction while endangering a polar environment already reeling with the impacts of climate change.

The courageous move would have been to ban it, Obama, just ban it.

The polar seas are the common heritage of all humanity. They ought to be a fully protected marine reserve.

I was looking at the logo and suddenly remembered Kurt Vonnegut’s drawing of an asshole in Slaughterhouse Five Breakfast of Champions.  So, given that it’s the emblem of a fossil fuel….

I had to seriously slice up that dinosaur with Photoshop — what’s now the tail used to be the neck. It’s really hard to find a picture of dinosaur’s butt on the internet.

What’s your rebranding of BP? Enter the competition.

Our flagship tactic in this campaign was a parody of a Kit Kat ad, which Nestlé, in what in public relations circles is known as a “Fuck ME, how could you be that stupid?” move, attempted to ban from the internet.  Which virtually guaranteed that “the internet” would strike back and insist that it be seen.  (It finds censorship distasteful, this Internet Thing…)  They created a cause celeb out of a brand attack, and fuelled the fire of their own roasting.

They fanned those fires by a hamfisted handling of the reaction on their Facebook page, where people flocked to protest the clearing of Indonesian rainforest to plant palm trees, or to cry foul over censorship of Greenpeace, or to, frankly, join in the fun of watching a public relations bonfire.  Nestlé’s official voice came across as dictatorial, condescending, and clueless.  Some posters were heckled by the Nestle administrators, some even found the only answer they got to their appeal to the company’s conscience was advice on improving their spelling.

There was something very deep at work here.  Nestlé, no stranger to public criticism, appeared to have no experience in handling it. They profoundly failed to listen to their customers.  They underestimated the brand damage that could be inflicted upon them. They misjudged the speed at which  a social media attack can move.

They thought that an old model was at work here, in which a corporation can manufacture truth, create a demand for it, and then sell it to people, or even force it down their throats. That paradigm is still strong (witness what the oil and coal interests have done by funding and fuelling the climate change denyosphere) but the Kit Kat campaign is a great example of how it can be challenged.

Regular readers will remember that I put together a provocative video paraodying Kit Kat’s initial reaction, based on the Hitler Downfall meme.  I pulled it within 24 hours, though, when I witnessed the misunderstanding of a couple people who were unfamiliar with the meme.  They read a literal accusation of Nazi-ism or Nazi-style evil into it, not realising that the clip had become, within its intended audience of the subculture which lives and works in the Social Media haunts,  a cultural emblem of any situation which provokes an over-the-top response.  (For an exhaustive discussion of this meme as subcultural metaphor, and even why it’s funny, see Alex Leavitt’s thoughtful piece here.)  As negotiations with Nestlé at that moment were, let’s say, tense, I didn’t want to risk the misunderstanding of the top brass there  – who had already demonstrated they were not fellow-travellers in the social media subculture.  But I did promise a couple enthusiastic folks that I’d reintroduce it once the campaign was won.

Ironically, the meme itself has now effectively been shut down by YouTube content ID block as a result of a copyright claim from the producer of Der Untergang, the source for the original clip, despite the fact that all of the instances I’ve seen to date would almost certainly pass the tests of Fair Use.  The copy below is NOT hosted by YouTube, thank you very much.

I’m reposting it as a reminder to others who might find themselves at the pointy end of a social media attack, because the moral of this story is really simple. If your audience/customer base/supporters have a bone to pick with you about your sustainability, your ethics, or the role you play in the ongoing struggle to make this world a better place, deal with the substance of that issue. Respond to it, engage with it. Listen to that voice. Never, ever, try to silence it.

(This video may disappear if someone disagrees that it constitutes Fair Use.  If you want to download a zipped local copy of this flash version you can do so here.)

it’ll look after itself.