National policy and limits to popular dissent: the case of the F-35 Online publication date: Wed, 01-Apr-2020
by Charles R. Simpson
Interdisciplinary Environmental Review (IER), Vol. 20, No. 2, 2020
Abstract: Grassroots movements protecting the environment in the US may gain local political traction when conceptualised as demands for discrete policy modification to remedy local impacts. In such cases, harm is visible and victims motivated. When local demands for reform contradict a national bipartisan consensus however, they are easily blocked irrespective of evidence or local democracy. At that point, activists must directly challenge fundamental tenants of national policy in order to succeed. Opposition to the basing F-35 fighter/bombers in Vermont exemplifies this dynamic. Opponents won municipal victories but were defeated at the federal level. Hesitant to be called unpatriotic, they failed to initially challenge American exceptionalism or the arms industry as foundations for national security and prosperity. Using participant observation, this paper explores the tactical and idelogical constraints faced by local environmental movements whose success requires deep structural change in national ideology and the economy.
Existing subscribers:
Go to Inderscience Online Journals to access the Full Text of this article.
If you are not a subscriber and you just want to read the full contents of this article, buy online access here.Complimentary Subscribers, Editors or Members of the Editorial Board of the Interdisciplinary Environmental Review (IER):
Login with your Inderscience username and password:
Want to subscribe?
A subscription gives you complete access to all articles in the current issue, as well as to all articles in the previous three years (where applicable). See our Orders page to subscribe.
If you still need assistance, please email subs@inderscience.com
Our Blog 
Follow us on Twitter 
Visit us on Facebook