Why I love being at Greenpeace.

Many might be wondering why I work for Greenpeace. Well I know, this is a clichéd start to an article. I often pen my thoughts down, now have I decided to go public with them. So yes, working with GP has a charm of its own.

Its an organization with clearly defined and not-that-flexible portfolios on issues. They say, ‘NO NUKES’, ‘NO GM’. PERIOD. No more discussion. They’re radical people. They have been programmed for fixed opinions, which each employee adheres to. I wonder how they manage to keep up with that.

I mean, throughout my stint at GP, I didn’t meet a single, no wait, A SINGLE, employee, who even slightly disagreed, or dared to have a different opinion, on otherwise controversial issues.

I’m not criticizing. One reason could be, the people there have discussed and debated the issue extensively at home, before declaring it as an official stand. Hence the unified opinions.

But I have second thoughts, considering the GP opinions hardly look like debated or discussed topics. They’re assertive. They do not accept any compromise, or a middle way out.

I’m very prone to wandering away from the point, when I write, or even in real life. I’d get to the point now.

I like working for GP, because everyday it gives a huge void to think.

There is this titanic space for thought, under the roof of their assertive propagandas.

And I have penchant for hypocrisy, you allege, I agree.

At the Actions Training at Bangalore, I was discussing the GM food issue with Kuba Gogolewski( I love this name). Kuba commented, all the money you put into biotechnology, you put it into another science, and you’d get better results and products.

I told Ayesha at Barista, SDA Mkt over coffee, that renewable energy sources can still not be an alternative to nuclear power, as they are costlier, and still not very “reliable.” She commented, “All the money one puts into nukes, you put it to develop these resources, they’d do better”.

They’re right in their own right. Kuba has a degree in economics, and Ayesha is a criminologist.

All economic theories are programmed to work this way, ‘the dynamics of demand and supply’, ‘higher profit in less time’ etc. (I wonder how economists manage to think about money that lot.)

I might be making a controversial statement when I say this, but when it comes to science, these theories are blah. Scientists like Mendeleev were honored with posthumously, because their theories were useless in their period, but changed the face of mankind years later! And point be noted, Nobel prizes aren’t about the greatest discoveries, they’re about discoveries that changed mankind and science the most. The day economics starts to be the chief inspiration for the sciences. Sciences would die.

Take my current project in college for instance. I’m working on “Proteinases.” Why? What’s the use? I have no answer or idea. But that doesn’t make it any less interesting. Just four types of bacterial enzymes, their behavior, and surprises are the driving force. Who knows this ‘project of no use’ is the next AIDS cure. (I’m dreaming about the Nobel right now FYI!!)

I have NO suggestions to make. Perhaps if anything changes with GP, it wouldn’t be even half as beautiful as right now. Perhaps fixed propagandas are stronger propagandas. Let’s just say, “Greenpeace is all about a group of people having fun, saving the planet, in the process!!”