This story out of Texas is kind of a double whammy for me: one, because of how corporations now
have ever greater power over our lives and property, and two, because of how we
now allow corporations and their promoters the power over the way we think.
The
story concerns Eleanor Fairchild, a Texas great-grandmother who was arrested for
putting up a fuss over TransCanada’s Keystone XL Pipeline coming through her
property. She owns a 425-acre hay farm and recently stood her ground in front
of a large mechanized shovel as it was being deployed to make way for the
pipeline through her farm.
She,
along with other protesters, including actress and activist Daryl Hannah, were
arrested on misdemeanor trespass charges. She was fingerprinted, photographed,
and held in isolation at the county jail.
Now
here is the part that troubles me. Fairchild is upset because of the way her
land wound up under the blades of a huge mechanized shovel. The state of Texas
took a portion of Fairchild’s land though eminent domain and transferred
ownership to TransCanada. Eminent domain has been around forever. It’s the
ability of a government to seize private property for the public use,
traditionally things like highways and bridges. Of course landowners must be
fairly compensated when their property is taken.
But
it is through a newer and corporate friendly understanding of eminent domain
that Fairchild’s land was taken. The Supreme Court took up a case in 2004, Kelo
vs. City of New London, in
which they ruled that private property could be taken and transferred to
another individual or company for business reasons, as long as there was a
“public benefit,” such as jobs provided or the gentrification of a part of a
city. This opens up a big can of worms for property owners. Like Fairchild, their
land is now vulnerable to any corporation that can say that they are providing
jobs or enhancing economic activity.
TransCanada
says that their XL Pipeline provides jobs and oil, so they get Fairchild’s
land, as well as other folks’ land, too. Fairchild also claims that the oil
company did not compensate her to the degree of their original offer.
The
other part of the story is scary, too. About a week after Fairchild was charged
with misdemeanor trespassing, she was served with legal papers from TransCanada
and their lawyers labeling Fairchild and other protesters as “eco-terrorists.”
I’ve
blogged about the term eco-terrorism before, and it’s awfully upsetting to see
that word rear it’s ugly hyphenated head again. It is believed that Ron Arnold,
who is vehemently opposed to environmental concerns, coined the term in the
late eighties or early nineties as a smear against people like Fairchild. Even
if it was not Arnold’s neologism, the term has been used to make the suggestion
that Fairchild and others like her are somehow equivalent to car bombers
and Osama bin Laden.
The
term has gone from being a smear to taking on the life of a real word with
legal consequences. The FBI now has a definition for it and says it’s a crime.
Which goes to show you how successful the corporations and right wing folks
like Arnold have influenced people’s thinking.
I’m
glad Eleanor Fairchild doesn’t think the way corporations want her to.
No comments:
Post a Comment