Aviation Activism

Perfect sense or just Plane Stupid?

By Paul Gold

With the occupation of Botany House and the involvement of Leeds students in the recent closure of Stansted airport by protestors, the presence of direct action is becoming a growing feature of University life.

I spoke with one of the founding members of Plane Stupid, who wishes to remain anonymous, about the group behind the Stansted protest and many others around the country.  My aim in doing so was to explore the motivations of those involved in direct action and to investigate why it is becoming such a focal point for popular protest
Plane Stupid first came into existence in 2005. Its main intention was to express the growing concern of its members regarding climate change, focusing on the air industry in particular. Back then, however, only a few individuals were involved. It was not until the first Camp for Climate Action and the blockade of Nottingham East Midlands airport in 2006, with just 24 people present, that the group ballooned into the force it has now become.
From that small group it just grew into many all over the country and even further afield. Other groups now claim inspiration from Plane Stupid. After the first climate camp, others appeared around the world, in Australia, the US, Germany. There is no need to link up, only go to a polluter and protest and teach alternatives.”
This is the idea behind the Climate Camps, which have met yearly to protest and draw attention to some of the UK’s biggest polluters, such as the Drax power station and Heathrow airport. The concept of camping came after the 2005 G8 Summit at Gleneagles, when it was realised that “summit hopping’ was no longer an effective

means of protest. It was decided that climate change was not getting the attention it deserved at the head of the global agenda. “We took the idea of a camp that had been used before: non hierarchical, an autonomous space and as sustainable as possible.”
Climate camp is more than an event now. As a yearly camp targeting a polluter or company, it’s been done. What it is becoming is “...much more of a movement that unites many different groups such as Plane Stupid, an umbrella brand, a forum for ideas. It is a way that anyone, any member of the public, can get involved with direct action.”
Plane Stupid concentrates on the aviation industry, but other groups at climate camp are campaigning against bio fuels, or the continued use of coal. The Workers Climate Action group concentrates on “”...what happens to workers in industries that we campaign against. We want these workers to be part of creating the solution and to know why they should be in control of their lives, their jobs, their communities and their energy sources.”
What’s so exciting is that it’s created such a big fuss. After the first climate camp we were excited just to get three pages in the Independent. Now radical climate politics is one of the biggest stories of the past year. Stories about aviation or climate change often have links to Climate Camp or Plane Stupid. Plane Stupid have pushed the idea of using the media for what we want, not what they want.”
But they are not and never wish to be an insider group. They know they will never have millions of people marching to change the government, but that is not what it’s about. “It is about a different sort of politics. It is not changing who is in charge in government but allowing ordinary people to change things from where they are. “
This brings us back round to the question: What is the purpose of direct action? There are many conceptions of direct action, broad and narrow. A broad view is that “...direct action involves doing something yourself rather than asking someone else to do it. Taking responsibility for the world rather than deferring responsibility to an elected representative or a corporation or another authority.  That is the grander political project. Getting people to take back control of their own lives, where they feel that they don’t have the right to make their voices heard.”

A contemporary example is over the expansion of Heathrow. The people directly involved, the constituency members who live around Heathrow, have “...campaigned using acceptable, traditional political channels for years. They have done everything by the book. Petitions, letters, court hearings, speaking to local MPs.  From proposals for a second runway, a fourth terminal, then a fifth. Mostly within less than a year of the government and BAA promising no further development, these promises are broken.

Local people feel completely disenfranchised by the political system. Where is our place? Direct action is the only way they have a say over their homes. The third runway was not voted upon in parliament, despite how controversial it was.”

Here seems to lie a key grievance for the proponents of direct action: “What is democracy in Britain? Once it was thought that democracy meant having a say in the big decisions that affect you.

But actually democracy means voting every five years for someone else to have a say, if they get in, on the big decisions that affect you. And now it seems that you vote for that person every five years who maybe gets to have a say, but they don’t get to vote on the big issues either. Your elected representative doesn’t even get a say. So part of direct action is about direct democracy.”

The resurgence of direct action reflects the huge amount of issues at stake at the moment, not just climate change but issues as diverse as the economic recession to the conflict in Gaza.

2009 will be a critical year for Climate Change and Environmental Direct Action, with the summit at Copenhagen in December perhaps representing the last chance for the world to act decisively and agree on a replacement for Kyoto.

To find out more, check out the following websites: planestupid.com or climatecamp.org.uk.