portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary oregon & cascadia

community building | green scare

Follow up to "Green Scare Fallout in the Rogue Valley" letter

With the grace of time and some decent conversations, I'd like to offer a positive take on the issues I posted in my previous Op/Ed letter, 'Green Scare Fallout in the Rogue Valley.'
Taking things down to the most effective simple understandings to find common ground, I think some lessons can be learned from the hot-button issue of informants and the activist culture. KS Wild along with Lomakatsi Forest Restoration, are effective organizations that use the system to affect positive change in the everyday world. They are good kick-ass agencies with very committed members who work very hard. Yet I think it will be useful in this on-going conversation to remember that they operate by "public and professional" means and that is their scope. The issue of India Savoie attending a public fundraiser for KS Wild, in a strict sense, is not an issue that impacts the "public and professional" world; although I can see some debatable questions, it may be that there is no relevant impact outside of her own contributions, again, in a stricter, simpler sense, that Savoie supports KS Wild. With that being said, I want to recognize that there are other worlds that are impacted by the presence of a known federal informant. I think that there are personally held cultures, ethics, and mores, et al that are very close and effected by the nature of this issue.
What blew up initially, as I saw it, were a lot of feelings concerning the betrayal of confidences and perceived alignments between people personally, and that spilled into the related public worlds and the agencies that they work in. In this nature of work people are very identified personally to their work, which is understandable as it is an extension of their personal beliefs more so than the regular work-a-day capitalist world. One must realize though that Lomakatsi and KS Wild use publicly obtained monies to fund their work, among other sources, and even though a lot of us work for and desire a different world, we do enter into the system, a professional world, which isn't congruent with our personal ethos.
So what is to be drawn on to move ahead from here? For me, it is that this issue/event was an illusion destroyer. Relationships that were amicable for some, and tenuous for others, are more clearly defined and even changed. There are two publicly-working agencies with great, deserved reputations, staffed by very dedicated peoples who are quite effective at what they do. What is more clearly defined is that those same peoples are very dedicated individually and personally to their beliefs, and that of course is a much more sensitive issue but one that must be dealt with in an equally sensitive and honest way.
How one sees the acceptance of Savoie is a personal decision, and all previous presumptions and illusions of personal alliances between different people, not so much their organizations, is what one must now reassess, reify, or shed. I for one am very human and fallible yet have high ideals and strive for greater understanding, compassion, and wisdom, for all my relations. Savoie's karma, so to speak, is her deal, not mine and I choose not to be involved. She's human and fallible too, as are everyone else involved. As in all things, choose wisely.