chp1: green rhetoric not to universal 'we' but Western middle classes

1 files changed, 22 insertions, 3 deletions

diff --git a/chapter1.md b/chapter1.md
index 6bb2b29..bd00224 100644
--- a/chapter1.md
+++ b/chapter1.md
@@ -287,9 +287,28 @@ enemy: the powerful private interests that pay him.
 Then, the rhetoric fails to properly identify an audience that can make a
 difference.
 
-In line with its scientistic ideology, it pretends to speak to the universal
-human citizen, as if we all have shared interests. But in fact, it speaks only
-to the professional-managerial class (PMC).
+As I've already shown, green rhetors have atendency to address an unspecified
+'we', suggesting a universal human citizen, implying that for all relevant
+purposes, everyone has the same interests and powers. Thus Chris Packham and
+Megan McCubbin can talk about 'Ape Aware,' explicitly describing the
+environmental movement as the up-and-coming stage in human evolution
+[@cornerstones, p. 202]. Similarly, the word 'Anthropocene,' coined by \[WHO?\]
+in \[WHEN?\], describes the present time as one characterised by human dominion
+over the earth, as if the anti-green actions of some humans represents the
+interests of everyone \[DEMONSTRATE SOMEONE ELSE HAS SAID THIS BEFORE\].
+
+In reality, green rhetoric is primarily addressed to the Western middle classes.
+This makes sense, since the green movement has historically been heavily
+dominated by large non-governmental organisations such as the RSPB, National
+Audubon Society, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, and WWF, to name but a few.
+Typically, such NGOs don't depend on grassroots mass mobilisation, and indeed,
+often struggle to mobilise their members on the rare occasions they try to do so
+\[CITE CHRIS ROOTES\]. Their business model is one of raising funds from mass
+membership and corporate partnerships, even in more activist organisations like
+Greenpeace, which largely function as 'protest businesses' \[CITE ROOTES
+AGAIN\]. Thus, these NGOs are dominated by the Western middle classes who
+provide them with money by taking out membership subscriptions and signing off
+corporate partnerships. \[STATISTICAL EVIDENCE WOULD BE NICE\]
 
 The whole point of the rhetoric is to fight the interests of capitalists, so of
 course it doesn't speak to them. Nor does the condemnation of indulgent