If anti-drillers engage in civil disobedience to prevent drilling, should those who support drilling retaliate and engage in civil disobedience too?
No (63%, 143 Votes)
Yes (33%, 76 Votes)
Not sure (4%, 8 Votes)
Total Voters: 227
Current Poll – No Stomach for Civil Disobedience, but How About a Boycott?
Two weeks ago MDN wrote about a civil disobedience training meeting on the shores of Keuka Lake, NY and mused what if the shoe was on the other foot. Would those who support drilling be willing to engage in civil disobedience against those who civil disobediently try to obstruct legal and lawful drilling? It seems the answer, at least from the MDN audience, is a resounding “no”. Breaking laws, even if it’s in response to those already breaking them, is not in the DNA of most who support drilling.
So this week MDN further muses, what about a boycott instead? On Friday, MDN covered a story about drillers in West Virginia who are growing weary of municipalities in that state enacting Marcellus Shale drilling bans, citing concerns over water supplies (see this MDN article). The West Virginia Independent Oil & Gas Association said they’re not interested in doing business with the businesses of municipalities that ban drilling. A boycott breaks no laws and only changes purchasing behavior. It puts pressure on businesses who in turn fund the political campaigns of local politicians who are enacting the bans. That is, it hits them where it hurts—in the pocketbook.
So what if not only drillers, but landowners and those who support drilling, were to join in and stop doing business (as much as possible) with businesses in municipalities that ban drilling? That’s the question MDN asks in this week’s poll:
Should those who support drilling boycott businesses in municipalities that ban drilling until the ban is lifted?
Register your vote along the right side of any page on the site.
Below are the most recent “top 5” lists and the calendar of Marcellus related events for the next few weeks.
Jim Willis, Editor