WARNING: This article discusses violence against Indigenous peoples.

A voyage of “discovery”

On October 8th of 1769, the British ship captain James Cook and his crew first set foot on Aotearoa — the “land of the long white cloud.”^1,2 The last time Europeans had encountered this place was when the Dutch explorer Abel Tasman “discovered” it in 1642; a Dutch mapmaker later named the land “Nieuw Zeeland.”³ Cook and his crew encountered and promptly murdered the Indigenous leaders Te Maro and Te Rakau along with seven other Indigenous people because of some kind of “misunderstanding;” Cook wanted to speak with them (“I just wanna talk, bro!”), but they approached with spears in what may have been a “ceremonial challenge” rather than an attack.^4,5  

We know the Indigenous people of Aotearoa as Māori today. According to Te Ara - The Encyclopedia of New Zealand by the New Zealand Government, the Indigenous people of Aotearoa named themselves Māori (“ordinary”) only after the Europeans had arrived, as a marker of collective identity.⁶

In 1770, Cook and his crew traveled to the land he called “New Holland” — later named “Australia” after the mythical “Terra Australis Incognita” that some Europeans had insisted must exist below the Equator to “balance” the mass of the Northern Hemisphere.^7,8 Cook wrote the following about the Indigenous peoples he met there⁹ :

O! They’re so innocent, so childlike. So precious!

They probably won’t even notice if we steal from them. Or if we just ask nicely for them to give us whatever we want, whenever we want, surely they won’t mind? Or if they do mind, we’ll just kill ‘em.

With a perspective like that, it’s no surprise that Indigenous Hawaiians killed James Cook during a “brief fracas” regarding the “theft” of a sailboat in 1779.¹⁰ And yet, the very first statue you’ll encounter upon entry to The Mall in London is a rather prominent rendition of Cook.¹¹

Thank goodness this newsletter is not about that British captain… not directly, anyway.

Who is “we”?

I recently found and read a LinkedIn article by Dave Betke titled, “Why Are We Arguing Whose Sustainability Solution Is Better?”¹² Betke opens the article as follows:

This piece sits squarely within the common “can’t we all just get along” sub-genre of sustainability writing. Indeed, I do believe that the specific approaches listed in Betke’s introduction are more similar than not. But, there’s an implicit framing in the article that deserves surfacing and interrogation… and the word “we” points to what it is:

“Us” vs. “them.”

I’m not writing this newsletter issue to offer a point-by-point rebuttal of someone else’s LinkedIn post. Instead, I’m going to highlight just two areas of text to uncover an “us” vs. “them” framing… and the sinister consequences thereof.

Exhibit A: Unspoiled by humans

Betke states the following about the discipline of conservation:

Let’s talk a bit about a foundational figure in that discipline.

In the year 1889, the naturalist John Muir drew on a map the borders for what would later be named Yosemite National Park in the United States of America.¹³ But this region already had a name, Ahwahnee (“gaping mouth-like place”), because the region already had people in it: the Indigenous Ahwahneechee, who had been living there for possibly 8,000 years.¹⁴ In 1851, a “band of volunteers” sanctioned by the California state government began systematically genociding the Ahwaneechee people, enabling White settlers to steal their home.¹⁵ By the year 1910, over 90% of the Ahwahneechee were “dead or missing.”¹⁶

Muir’s vision of vast “wilderness” unspoiled by humans “was only possible through the erasure of America’s Indigenous peoples, whose villages and way of life had been destroyed.”¹⁷ Throw the native peoples off their own land, then “preserve” and “protect” the land so those peoples can’t come back… but hey “we” can go visit, at the pleasure of the United States Federal Government!

In 1892, John Muir founded the Sierra Club.

After George Floyd was murdered in May of 2020, the Sierra Club finally began a public reckoning with Muir's White supremacist views. But pointing the finger at some dead guy’s belief system detracts from the deeper truth: White supremacy wasn’t unique to Muir, just as it wasn’t unique to those “volunteers” who genocided the Ahwaneechee… and just as it wasn’t unique to James Cook and his crew. They were all vessels for White supremacy.

Therefore, White supremacy formed the ideological foundation of the National Park System specifically, and of conservation broadly. The views of individual practitioners may change; the discipline may become more diverse; but the foundation remains.

There is no “wilderness” without exclusion. There is no conquest without the conquered.

“Us” vs. “them.”

Exhibit B: Those noble savages

Later in his article, Betke talks briefly about “them"¹⁸ :

And:

The above language makes clear that the “we” he's writing for is a Global North readership. I don’t take issue with writing for the Global North, necessarily — the first rule of communication is, “know your audience.” What I take issue with is how listening, learning, and offering become extractive actions within the framework of “us” vs. “them.”

But listening and learning and offering are such good things, aren’t they? Surely we all want to get in a big-ass circle and share wisdom with each other and smile all day and night! We’re all equal; it’s a “round table,” so there’s no extraction… right?

Okay, let’s get to the root just a bit here, by condensing the words in Betke’s text.

1. “By listening to them, we can learn lessons.”

2. “Their perspectives offer us solutions.”

Let’s condense further.

1. “They’ll tell us what we need to know.”

That leads to a natural question:

Why would “we” think that “they” want to talk to us?

The Ahwahneechee lived on their land for 8,000 years before the arrival of White settlers; the Māori lived on theirs for about 500 years before Cook showed up.¹⁹ In both cases, death rapidly followed. Those are just two examples of destruction wrought by Europeans around the world.

Perhaps “they” — that is, the descendants of the survivors of genocide — don’t want to be taken from yet again?

The wisdom of Indigenous peoples and Global South voices does not exist for our extraction and use. They are not obligated to talk to us in any way, especially because their historical ways of life were the message. We saw that message and dismissed it, silenced it.

But o! They’re so innocent, so childlike. So precious! They probably won’t even notice if we steal from them. Or if we just ask nicely for them to give us whatever we want, whenever we want, surely they won’t mind?

They owe us nothing, no matter the urgency

Several weeks ago, I spoke with a member of the Indigenous rights group Cultural Survival. This person described multiple discussions with individuals who believe that the global climate change crisis is so severe, so important, that solving it should take priority over the rights of Indigenous peoples. Because, well… if “we” don’t resolve this crisis in an absolute hurry, then the changing climate will destroy “them” too!

In response to that viewpoint, I'll quote this LinkedIn post from Dr. Autumn BlackDeer²⁰ :

The framing of “us” vs. “them” enables on-demand extraction. That’s not a jargon issue. It isn’t an English language issue. It’s a colonialism issue.

Colonialism is the root. It requires an “us” vs. “them” framework in order to exist. And if we Global North folk are to undo that framework within our culture and within our very minds, then yoooooooo it’s gonna be a long journey. The year 2050 is right around the corner.

The Global North mind

I know I’m not fooling you. I’m no enlightened being; I also struggle with a default “us” vs. “them” framing in all areas of my life. These struggles don’t surprise me; after all, I was born, raised, educated (?), and trained in a settler-colonial state.

I’m sitting on stolen land right at this very moment.

I have a Global North mind. Yet, I truly hope that in observing how the “us” vs. “them” framework enables the sinister, I’m taking the first step to looking at the world in a different way.

I have a Global North mind… but I can change it. We can change our minds — radically change our minds.

Now back to Dave Betke’s introduction for a final moment²² :

"We all share the same fundamental goal" sounds so agreeable because it's so generic. Who wouldn’t want a livable future?

QUESTION: "Why are we arguing whose sustainability solution is better?"

MY ANSWER: Because some "sustainability solutions" are only "sustainable" for some — not for all. Some “livable futures” are only “livable” for some — not for all.

So yes, it really does matter which specific path we take to get there — especially when not everyone on the planet wants the same “there.”

Don’t be confused by that pesky word “we.”

Here are my questions for you

• How often do you use the word “we,” and in what contexts do you use that word?

• When you use the word “we” to refer to “everyone in the world,” who do you visualize? Are you conscious of who is visible and who is not visible in your mental picture?

• What would you do to practice becoming conscious of who you exclude when you use the word “we”?

Press the “reply” button in your email app and share with me your answers if you like. I’d love to talk to you.

Where to find the sustainability perspectives you’ve been missing

FIRST: Follow these awesome folks on LinkedIn:

• Heather Luna of keduzi: workshopping pro-connectedness and anti-oppression as a way of life

• Lavinia Muth: deconstructing the (un)sustainable fashion industry

• Dr. Vidhya Shankar, Ph.D: decentering whiteness in evaluation of non-governmental organization projects

SECOND: Forward this issue to people you know who work on "sustainability,” especially sustainability frameworks.

Got something to say to me?

Hit the “reply” button and give me a piece of your mind.

Introductory image: Bain News Service, publisher. "Palanquin, India." George Grantham Bain Collection (Library of Congress). 1922. Original link. Archived link.

1  Katz, Brigit. “British Government ‘Expresses Regret’ for Māori Killed After James Cook’s Arrival in New Zealand.” Smithsonian Magazine, October 3, 2019. Last accessed: July 20, 2024. Original link. Archived link.

2  Morrison, Stacey and Morrison, Scotty. “Why Referring to New Zealand as Aotearoa Is a Meaningful Step for Travelers.” Condé Nast Traveler, November 15, 2021. Last accessed: July 20, 2024. Original link. Archived link.

3  Wilson, John. “History - Europeans to 1840.” Te Ara - the Encyclopedia of New Zealand. Story by John Wilson, published February 8, 2005, updated April 1, 2020. Last accessed: July 20, 2024. Original link. Archived link.

4  “The Search for ‘Terra Australis’ – Source 3.” The National Archives. Last accessed: July 20, 2024. Original link. Archived link.

5  “Early meetings between peoples.” Manatū Taonga — Ministry for Culture and Heritage, updated July 17, 2023. Last accessed: July 20, 2024. Original link. Archived link.

6  Wilson, John. “History - Māori arrival and settlement.” Te Ara - the Encyclopedia of New Zealand. Story by John Wilson, published February 8, 2005, updated April 1, 2020. Last accessed: July 20, 2024. Original link. Archived link.

7  “Terra Australis Incognita.” The Oxford Companion to Ships and the Sea. Last accessed: July 20, 2024. Original link. Archived link.

8  “The Search for ‘Terra Australis.’” The National Archives. Last accessed: July 20, 2024. Original link. Archived link.

9  “James Cook’s Endeavor Journal.” National Library of Australia. Last accessed: July 20, 2024. Original link. Archived link.

10  Villiers, Alan John. "James Cook." Encyclopedia Britannica, July 8, 2024. Last accessed: July 20, 2024. Original link. Archived link.

11  “Monuments in St. James’s Park.” The Royal Parks. Last accessed: July 20, 2024. Original link. Archived link.

12  Betke, Dave. “Why Are We Arguing Whose Sustainability Solution Is Better?” LinkedIn, July 17, 2024. Last accessed: July 20, 2024. Original link. Archived link.

13  Fox, Alex. “Sierra Club Grapples With Founder John Muir’s Racism.” Smithsonian Magazine, July 24, 2020. Last accessed: July 20, 2024. Original link. Archived link.

14  “Their Lifeways - Yosemite National Park.” U.S. National Park Service. Last updated: November 21, 2022. Last accessed: July 20, 2024. Original link. Archived link.

15  “Destruction and Disruption - Yosemite National Park.” U.S. National Park Service. Last updated: November 17, 2018. Last accessed: July 20, 2024. Original link. Archived link.

16  “Surviving Communities - Yosemite National Park.” U.S. National Park Service. Last updated: November 21, 2022. Last accessed: July 20, 2024. Original link. Archived link.

17  Ibid. 13.

18  Ibid. 12.

19  Ibid. 6.

20  BlackDeer, Autumn. [LinkedIn post on how Indigenous ancestors survived many apocalypses.] Last accessed: July 20, 2024. Original link.

21  Akómoláfé, Báyò. “The Times are Urgent: Let’s Slow Down.” Last accessed: July 20, 2024. Original link. Archived link.

22  Ibid. 12.