In Monday’s Hili Dialogue I called attention to a notice from The Forward that the Sierra Club had apparently canceled its trips to Israel after pressure from anti-Zionist (i.e., anti-Semitic) groups. As I wrote, quoting the site:
*According to The Forward, the Sierra Club has canceled several trips to Israel because of pressure from “anti-Zionist” groups (h/t Orli)
The decision came after activists alleged the organization was “greenwashing the conflict” and “providing legitimacy to the Israeli state, which is engaged in apartheid against the Palestinian people,” a volunteer leader with the nonprofit summarized in an email this week.
“Greenwashing,” like “pinkwashing” which refers to LGBTQ rights, is a term used by critics of Israel to refer to the act of obscuring Israel’s treatment of Palestinians by focusing on the country’s liberal environmental values or policies.
News of the Sierra Club’s decision came in a mass email obtained by J. that was sent out by Mary Owens, the chair of the Sierra Club’s National Outings team, to hundreds of volunteers who lead part-recreational, part-educational, conservation-focused trips around the world.
. . . The email from Owens, who said she was not authorized to speak to the press, described the Sierra Club’s decision to cancel its trips — one scheduled for this month, and another for March 2023 — as the result of an advocacy push from one “Jewish American activist” and a host of both progressive and anti-Zionist groups, including the pro-Palestinian Adalah Justice Project, the Indigenous rights group the NDN Collective, the Campaign for the Boycott of Israel, Jewish Voice for Peace, the Sunrise Movement and the Movement for Black Lives.
Note that some trips were scheduled for next year, so they can’t use the excuse of the pandemic for the cancellation. I noted as well that in this case the Sierra Club was beginning to engage in partisan political activity: in effect becoming party to the BDS’s intention to boycott and eventually get rid of Israel, using the term that applies much more aptly to Palestine than to Israel: “apartheid state”.
In a couple of emails I got from a well-placed Sierra Club (SC) member, the organization, in a list of “talking points”, declared that this decision didn’t really reflect anti-Semitism or a political position about the conflict, but was just “done in ways that created confusion and frustration.” The SC did not admit that it had caved to pressure from anti-Israel activists.
However, I think they lied, or at least dissimulated. Dan Chu, the executive director of the SC, has just issued a new “clarifying” statement, which I’ve put below the fold (i have a pdf but the statement doesn’t seem to be on the organization’s website). They also said they’ve reinstated their trips to Israel.
But the new “explanation” still doesn’t clarify why the SC canceled the Israel trips but no others, and deliberately obfuscates that reason. It does tender a groveling apology, which to me is cloying; but it seems obvious that the SC did indeed cancel its trips this as a kneejerk political response to anti-Israel organizations. Here’s their “explanation”—as clear as mud:
Recently, the Sierra Club hastily made a decision, without consulting a robust set of stakeholders, to postpone two planned outings to Israel. The process that led to this was done in ways that created confusion, anger, and frustration. Let me be clear: the Sierra Club’s mission is to enjoy, explore and protect the planet, and we do not take positions on foreign policy matters that are beyond that scope. We do not have a deep understanding or knowledge necessary to do so, nor is it our place to do so. Furthermore, we have and always will continue to loudly condemn anti-semitism and any and all acts of hate. We are committed to working more intentionally, thoroughly and thoughtfully so we can prevent this from happening again.
This is basically a lie, for by canceling the trips to Israel but no other places, they were indeed “taking a position on foreign policy matters”. And yes, those matters are beyond their scope. Their actions, at least to me, aren’t mitigated by what seems to be an over-the-top apology, which contains this (again, see below the fold for the full statement):
As we continue on our journey of transformation, we are bound to make mistakes. By failing to engage all stakeholders, from our members and supporters, to a wide range of allies, traditional and otherwise, we caused deep pain on a personal and spiritual level. Since then, we have engaged with our community and have taken accountability for the pain and anguish we created. We can and should have been more deliberate and engaging and will ensure that we meet the standards we have set for ourselves and others expect from us.
The Sierra Club is beginning a holistic review of our outings process to better guide the destination of our trips and the itineraries of them. The process is in its early stages, and we will be holding a thoughtful stakeholder engagement process, which will include Sierra Club Outings volunteer leaders, staff, our Board of Directors, and a wide array of partners and organizations, to create future outings to Israel and other countries around the world that are strongly aligned with our conservation policies and our core values.
Ah, behold the words meant to placate the offended, including “stakeholders” (a staple word of the woke”) and “holisitic” (ditto).
Well, the Sierra club doesn’t explicitly mention, as do the Times of Israel or The Forward that the revision of the SC’s decision came after strong pushback from Jewish groups, who, unlike the muddled SC leadership, clearly saw what was going on. From The Forward:
The announcement followed a concerted advocacy campaign from Jewish and pro-Israel organizations, spurred by Friday’s report by J. The Jewish News of Northern California about the group’s decision to cancel trips to Israel following the urging of several pro-Palestinian groups. The advocacy included an outpouring of public statements, open letters and a virtual meeting with Sierra Club leadership.
California Jewish advocacy groups and state politicians met virtually with Sierra Club officials Monday afternoon. Tye Gregory, who heads the San Francisco Jewish Community Relations Council, attended the meeting and said he was “encouraged” by the response of Sierra Club leadership.
Sierra Club’s trips to Israel include tours of the country’s ancient ruins, natural landscapes and bird populations.
I’m glad that people pushed back on this ideological and unwise decision, and that the SC at least changed its mind. However, their public explanation leaves a lot to be desired. They should have admitted that the decision came after public pressure from anti-Israel groups, that it was indeed a political statement, and that it changed its mind after counter-pressure from Jewish groups. (They do note that “By failing to engage all stakeholders, from our members and supporters, to a wide range of allies, traditional and otherwise, we caused deep pain on a personal and spiritual level.”).
This is the typical Cultural-Revolution apology by someone who’s violated the tenets of Wokeism, and in this case it’s similar. The SC’s decision to cancel trips to Israel is a sign of Wokeism, for progressives demonize Israel, while the SC’s changing its mind means it has to apologize to the anti-Woke: those Jews and others who think Israel should remain as a sovereign country. Things had come to a pretty pass when the Sierra Club joined up with anti-Zionists as a political statement. Thank Yahweh it came to its senses.
Were I a member of the Sierra Club, I would write the leadership demanding to know exactly why they canceled the trip in the first place, something they’re not clear about. And I wouldn’t really want to be a member of a group that’s so malleable to social-media pressure from the Woke.
Sierra Club, Schmierra Club!
Click on “read more” to see the whole statement by the Sierra Club.
h/t: Orli
Sierra Club Outings
By Dan Chu March 15, 2022
From exploration treks to backpack journeys to leisurely vacations in far-off destinations, the Sierra Club has offered outings opportunities to enjoy and explore culturally and environmentally rich corners of the world. For nearly a decade now, Israel is one of the countries we’ve offered outings to. As such, we intend to update our schedule soon to offer new outings to Israel later this year. We are committed to working with stakeholders to ensure these trips are crafted in a way that better reflects the range of diversity in the region.
Recently, the Sierra Club hastily made a decision, without consulting a robust set of stakeholders, to postpone two planned outings to Israel. The process that led to this was done in ways that created confusion, anger, and frustration. Let me be clear: the Sierra Club’s mission is to enjoy, explore and protect the planet, and we do not take positions on foreign policy matters that are beyond that scope. We do not have a deep understanding or knowledge necessary to do so, nor is it our place to do so. Furthermore, we have and always will continue to loudly condemn anti-semitism and any and all acts of hate. We are committed to working more intentionally, thoroughly and thoughtfully so we can prevent this from happening again.
Justice is at the core of our work at the Sierra Club and what it requires is that we treat all individuals and communities with fairness, honesty, respect, and equity. As we plan new outings to Israel later this year, we will do so with input from a wide range of partners to create an itinerary that educates and deepens an understanding and appreciation for the region, just as we will seek to do with all outings. We know that we are powerful together when we collaborate based on just relationships of mutual trust, respect, and solidarity, and the Sierra Club has a key, multifaceted role in the work to transform our society and save our planet. We will lead when we should. We will collaborate when asked. We will work across the movement in the fight for the liveable planet we all deserve. As such, we are committed to implementing a process to ensure that our staff and leaders have the guidance and tools to build outings in alignment with our values.
As we continue on our journey of transformation, we are bound to make mistakes. By failing to engage all stakeholders, from our members and supporters, to a wide range of allies, traditional and otherwise, we caused deep pain on a personal and spiritual level. Since then, we have engaged with our community and have taken accountability for the pain and anguish we created. We can and should have been more deliberate and engaging and will ensure that we meet the standards we have set for ourselves and others expect from us.
The Sierra Club is beginning a holistic review of our outings process to better guide the destination of our trips and the itineraries of them. The process is in its early stages, and we will be holding a thoughtful stakeholder engagement process, which will include Sierra Club Outings volunteer leaders, staff, our Board of Directors, and a wide array of partners and organizations, to create future outings to Israel and other countries around the world that are strongly aligned with our conservation policies and our core values.
Throughout this process, one thing has remained constant: we must do better to educate ourselves and engage our broader community of volunteer leaders, members, supporters, and community partners, as we continue the work to live up to our values. We owe this to our members and supporters, our staff, the community, and ourselves. We are eager to continue this process to ensure that we consistently live up to the values we espouse and be a stronger partner as we work to transform our society to be more just, more equitable, and liveable for each and every one of us.
Dan Chu is the Acting Executive Director of the Sierra Club.
At least the Sierra Club came to their senses, even if they can’t quite bring themselves to admit how the kerfuffle came about in the first place. Let’s hope that other organisations were paying attention and avoid making similar ridiculous decisions.
I, too, have been following this. Yes, the Sierra Club lied. They were influenced by anti-Israel activists (some of them antisemites, arguably) who are using their own lies to demonize and destroy the only democratic state in the region. To avoid further embarrassment, the Sierra Club rescinded its action and apologized.
I want to believe that the the original action was naive and not purposely antisemitic, but it’s hard to be sure. Either way, the Sierra Club has egg on its face. One can only hope that they have learned a lesson to butt out of political controversies they have no reason being in. A performative act of virtue signaling gone wrong. They thought they could win some free virtue points, but they were sadly mistaken.
There was also a recent revelation from the Foundation for Political Innovation in Paris that the Sierra Club was among several environmental organizations that received Russian funding to allegedly lobby against nuclear energy and to increase dependence on Russian gas.
Check out the Sierra Magazine’s article by Rebecca Solnit last year, vilifying John Muir, the club’s founder, and the entire conservation movement and its present groups for their inherent racism. The writer included ONE sentence acknowledging the achievements of all of these and the rest of the article was nothing but scathing insulting attacks on the whole movement! I guarantee this article will give you a very different picture of the Sierra Club. No one should support or join it. It has disappeared down the wormhole of wokeness and betrayed its origins and principles.
To the environmental activist groups, this despicable affair is merely a pawn lost to the game. They are not your friends.
Sorry. This went into moderation perhaps because I mistyped my e-mail address and Jerry had to manually clear it. My mistake.
“the Indigenous rights group the NDN Collective”
Gotta love when groups and activists and academics, etc., say that Palestinians are the “indigenous” people of Israel. The Jews have been there for thousands of years. They’ve been occupied/conquered by every empire that’s ever roamed through the Middle East. But…ah, screw it. Nobody who matters actually cares. The claim that Palestinians — a term that wasn’t even invented until thousands of years after Jews were the people of that land — are “indigenous” is just another word for the Woke to denote to their followers and the cowed masses that they’re the people who are “oppressed” and must be supported at all costs (and any opposition to anything they say or do will not be tolerated).
I’m glad the Sierra Club has rescinded it’s decision even though it’s only because they didn’t get away with something they had hoped to. That’s about all I can find positive in this despicable affair that speaks volumes about where the environmentalist movement is going.
The Sierra Club has been woke for a while now. The SC’s original immigration policy in 1989: “Immigration to the U.S. should be no greater than that which will permit achievement of population stabilization in the U.S.” Their position is now completely pro- open borders. Indeed, the mere suggestion of eg. doing an environmental impact statement on unfettered immigration is now totally out of the question.
Count me in as extremely upset with the Sierra Club’s dismissal of ZPG, and its naive, anti-science belief that the effects of endless planetary population growth will be mitigated by reducing consumption. I ceased my membership in the SC about 10 years ago, after joining during the days of James Watt.
I have canceled my membership after 34 years. The progressive Jewish activist can fund them. Their senior leadership forgot their mission.