Humans are naturally flawed beings so even the purest of all are bound to make mistakes. Take Greenpeace for example, a non-profit global organization founded in 1971 in Vancouver, BC to bring peace to the earth in the most sustainable way. They have generated world-wide praise for their campaigns and initiatives. However, they have also done some questionable things that haven’t gone unnoticed.
Inception:
The organization was started by a group of university students with a focus on ending nuclear bomb testings. Incidentally, their first protest focused on sailing to an island in Alaska to stop the U.S’ nuclear bomb testing in Amchitka. Their efforts were unsuccessful but their act had the attention of the media which eventually stopped the U.S from testing any more nuclear bombs there.
They have since expanded globally and mission wise to include other environmental issues. They now aim to: Protect the earth’s biodiversity and the ocean, land air from pollution; find solutions for climate change; end the hunt for threatened oceans and land species; & reject GMO products and harmful chemicals that jeopardize a toxic free future.
Check out their promotional video below:
Criticism:
If you watched the video above, you probably agree that it made you feel something-whether it was anger, sadness, or hope, the video served its purpose. It made you believe in the message of Greenpeace and it gave you a good impression. However, it is always important to do further research. For example, had I not scrolled down to the comments on the video, I wouldn’t have realized that Greenpeace might have problems.
Therefore, I decided to investigate a little further by watching more videos. One of the videos I stumbled on was by Patrick Moore, co-founder of the Greenpeace, on why he left Greenpeace. In the video, he raised many interesting points that showed the other side to the things Greenpeace were protesting/rejecting. Being a huge global organization, they have a lot of influence and that can be a bad thing sometimes as they often see things as black and white.
For example, Greenpeace’s campaigns against GMO products is damaging as some GMO products such as the golden brown rice, help feed 2 million+ starving children in developing countries. Their stance against it makes it much harder to provide these children with adequate food. In addition, at some point during their campaign, they banned Chlorine. This is a chemical that brings water to most parts of the world. You can see why this could be problematic.
These are just some examples, if you have others, feel free to share them with us. This post is not meant to undermine the work that Greenpeace has been down. It is, however, a reminder to always fact check and to do your own research.
—————————-
What is your opinion on Greenpeace? Do you have a favorite non-profit organizations? We’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments below!
Related:
2 Comments
Greenpeace is great, but these are not good things to do.
Not an apologist for greenpeace, but if you do even the most basic “research” via wikipedia, you will see that the allegation that GP wanted to stop starving people from receiving golden rice is false and the issue is not quite so simple. It’s my understanding that they were advocating for a more diverse, sustainable approach, such as helping people establish and grow more diverse, sustainable sources of food -in other words, helping them to be more self sufficient. That may seem idealistic but as a principal it is a very good one.
I believe they also recommended that people mill the golden rice, rather than plant it, posdibly due to concerns around dependency on the seeds or GM crop impact in general. IMO their ethical concerns against GM crops are not misplaced.
Who stands to profit from the widespread consumption of golden rice? That’s not a question you can ignore.