The Euro zone has so far been unable to extract itself from a debt crisis that is expected to have a domino effect in the region. Greece, still teetering on bankruptcy, would be the first block to fall. Meanwhile, the American economy is sputtering along, struggling to boost employment. Even China, the ascending superpower, is experiencing sluggish growth.

It makes me think back to the late 1990s and early 2000s, when globalization was a dirty word in activist circles (recall the Seattle riots of 1999 in response to the World Trade Organization conference.)

Resistance to the then-emerging concept centred on environmental, human rights and income inequality issues. It bears a striking resemblance to the umbrella of issues encompassed by today’s Occupy Movement.

Economics-wise, globalization meant breaking down barriers to international trade, such as uneven regulation between countries (portrayed by activists as a slackening of rules). More generally, it was used to describe the less tangible idea of a growing global interconnectedness.

In Canada, the first sign came in the form of the North American Free Trade Agreement. Then, in 1995, we joined the World Trade Organization.

Lots of free trade agreements later, there is plenty of evidence to support the predictions protestors made: the Pembina Institute has sounded the alarm over surging greenhouse gas emissions as the development of Alberta’s oil sands steams ahead; Canadian mining giants, such as Barrick Gold, have faced allegations of human rights abuses abroad; and a Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives study has shown a rising income gap in the country.

None of this seemed to faze policymakers when economies around the globe were in a state of rapid growth. But now, with economies veering toward what appears to be a double-dip recession, they’re grappling (rather unsuccessfully) with how to course correct what is essentially a systemic problem.

Recessions happened before the phenomenon of globalization, true. But this meltdown is the most severe we’ve had since our economies became so tightly intertwined. Its effects can’t be contained within borders, and in spite of their best efforts, policymakers have yet to put us on a clear path to recovery.

Canada has been relatively insulated from the worst of it so far, thanks to a more tightly-regulated banking system. However, if the Euro zone and U.S. keep backsliding, the effects are sure to bleed across the border.

Herein lies the opportunity to effect change—a period of prolonged crisis, with all other options exhausted.

And as Lia Grainger recently reported in “Among the Rebels,” a May/June 2012 This feature, the Occupy Movement may yet see a second wave—this time with a stronger Canadian contingent.

Scary. The Green Scare, published by Ebarhardt press

An activist in Goteborg, Sweden was attacked this week for his efforts at crippling the fur industry in Sweden. Some of the furs he targeted in his actions were seal furs from Canada. Branded an “eco-terrorist,” his opponents say he is threatening jobs and the economy. But when the “eco-terrorists” are the ones actually being terrorized, who are the real terrorists here?

Alfred Törre, an animal rights activist in his mid-20’s, had a fire bomb smash through his apartment window. Törre was inside his apartment at the time as his window curtains went up in flames; luckily he was able to extinguish the fire before it spread further. But the police believe that the perpetrator is connected with the Swedish fur industry and the crime has been reported as attempted arson. Törre, who could have been sleeping during the arson attack, fears for his life.

Attacks on “eco-terrorists” are not rare. Some attacks have taken the form of imprisonment by governments; others have been physical intimidation or harm by self-styled vigilantes. In the post 9-11 era, radical environmental activists, such as animal rights activists, have been transformed into ‘eco-terrorists’ in the public eye.

In 2005, the FBI “rated eco-terrorists” as the “top domestic terrorism threat. The media inflamed this threat, with reports appearing in ABC News, BBC News and the Globe & Mail. They all talked about the threat of “eco-terrorism” and gave little voice to the side of the alleged perpetrators—the activists, instead demonizing them.

According to the blog Green is the New Red, a “green scare” has been promoted through ad campaigns in newspapers such as a New York Times and public relations campaigns that have turned innocuous literature like Charlotte’s Web into manifestos of eco-extremism.

But the ones facing the real threats are not society at large or civilians, but the activists themselves. Activists face surveillance and infiltration for their environmental efforts which is damaging our civil liberties. Törre himself had his apartment watched for months, then raided by federal police in 2007, for a perceived link to radical animal rights groups. Following the raid, he spent several months in jail without being informed of the charges against him.

Other activists have been physically beaten and their lives endangered by the goons of industry. In 2003, Allison Watson, a Sea Shepherd activist who was protesting the Taiji dolphin hunt, was brutally attacked by some local fishermen. She was run over by a fisherman’s boat while in the water, and another fisherman attempted to strangle the activist with rope.

Some "eco-terrorists" with their beagles.

This kind of green-fear-mongering is not to make us safer, but to promote a corporate agenda, a corporate agenda that the “eco-terrorists” threaten when they protest against dolphin, whale, seal, and fur commodization, among other things. But this message gets slanted to protecting jobs and the economy and much of the public buys into this argument.

Take for example the Canadian seal hunt, before this recent EU ban on seal products, the seal industry brought in $5.5 million to our GDP and 6,000 jobs. Eco-actions against the 300,000 baby seals clubbed every year were deemed as “eco-terrorism” that threatened jobs and the local economy.

But what are the costs to demonizing eco-activists? Beyond the obvious environmental degradation that gets subverted, our rights and democracy are at risk.

Standing up against injustice, being an engaged citizen, and voicing opposition promotes a healthy functioning democracy. Freedom of speech is our basic civil liberty. Threatening these cripples our society.

The attack on Törre is not a simple arson investigation, but part of a larger societal problem. The problem being that the real eco-terrorists, corporations and conservative governments that aid them, are scaring us into inaction, or bullying those who do act, for the sake of private profit.

In a time when Prime Minister Harper is attempting to intimidate the EU with a costly and lengthy legal appeal to the World Trade Organization for their ban on seal products, the questions over what ‘eco-terrorism’ is are more important than ever. On whose behalf is Harper pressuring the WTO, and can we allow this to happen?

Alfred Törre is a pseudonym; names have been changed to protect sources.