More Rupture and Slime

"there needs to be a qualitative moment of rupture, to break with its treaties and the austerity measures, the privatization, the Semester process [European Commission checks on national budgets] they impose" Peter Merten, leader of the Belgian PTB Party (Marxist-Leninist)

Andreas Malm uses the term "induced implosion" and quotes Benjamin 'The destructive character has the consciousness of historical man, whose deepest emotion is an insuperable mistrust of the course of things and a readiness at all times to recognize that everything can go wrong...What exists he reduces to rubble- not for the sake of the rubble but for that of the way leading through it....It is Nature that dictates his tempo, indirectly at least, for he must forestall her. Otherwise she will take over the destruction herself."

The title of Malm's book; "The Progress of This Storm", refers to Benjamin's thesis around Angelus Novalis,and it is mostly a broadside aimed at Bruno Latour and other "Hybrid" philosophers (most I had never heard of). Instead he re-enforces the ecosocialist arguments put forth by Bellamy-Foster, Clark and York. My only knowledge of Latour comes from TRYING to read Timothy Morton and understand his OOO Object Oriented Ontology and I now feel better about my confusion.

Malm's text is far more accessible' "Devolution in ecosystems- say,'the rise of slime' in the oceans: the ascent of jellyfish and toxic algae, the descent of coral reefs and apex species- has a fitting counterpart in the current state of Western politics."

He quotes Donna Orange: "Blindness to our ancestor's (colonial) crimes, and the way we 'whites' continue to live from these crimes, keeps the suffering of those already exposed to the devestation of climate crisis impossible for us to see or feel".

Solidarity

The contortions of organized labor when confronting climate change are difficult to watch. It was inevitable that the Grand Bargain they had entered with Capital, labor peace for middle class lifestyles, would unravel at some point. Globalization was that point. But the contradiction of industrial production ecological stability is putting the nail in the coffin. All these miners and drillers and refiners and auto workers and pipeline construction workers, the list goes on and on, must have seen the writing on the wall. So they turned a blind eye. A strategy which only gets you so far. Here is a report from COP 24 in Poland, a country dependent on coal fired energy:

"Just hours after Frick invokes 1980s Solidarity as a model for activism, the current Solidarity—whose union headquarters are just blocks from the conference center—releases a joint press release with the Heartland Institute, an American think tank dedicated to climate denialism. The release calls climate science an “international dogma of the United Nations” and affirms Solidarity’s commitment to protecting its workers and the coal they mine."

And of course we know how organized labor is reacting here in the US; totally schizophrenic. On the one hand the leadership is using the language of "just transition" to try to appease the extractors. But if you start to add up the jobs that are linked to the fossil economy you start to see the enormity of the problem. And the old question "which side are you on" takes on new meaning.

Street Fighting Man

The Yellow Vests, like Occupy, are yet another post-modern example of what Mark Fisher described as "ideological rubble" and the images coming out of Paris coincide perfectly with this descriptor. For several days none of the commentariat was willing to hazard an analysis; interviews of participants made clear it was mostly carnivalesque riot in the old French tradition, but because it ostensibly stemmed from a raise in gas taxes, a little political meaning could be attached. depending. Like Occupy, it is the perfect empty signifier, a revolt or rebellion based on wide-ranging grievances, lacking unified manifestos or spokesmen and any consensus is arrived post-event by pundits with their own cause to promote.

The leftist Edourd Louis sees a popular rather than populist formation, but what are these "popular classes" he sees,and does this "rural poor" display any more class-belonging than they do here in the US? Noting the instances of racist and homophobic speech, Louis claims it is "our responsibility to transform this language" into something emancipatory, but this is tricky business at best. It takes slogans and coalescing around demands. Those who still find hope in a vague "horizontalism" or the fact the yellow vests haven't been "hijacked" by established political parties could find the movement disappears as rapidly as it formed.

Less optimistic observers like Daniel Cohn-Bendit see a populist right revolt against "the political class", whatever that is. This would be in line with global trends of rising resentment and fear of the unknown. In either case, it is a movement against. Maybe the problem is the "1%", maybe it is migrants, maybe it is access to credit. Maybe it just feels good to smash something on the weekend, before going back to some bullshit job.

In any case, I can imagine the cops taking this as a practice run for when the real food riots break out. It is increasingly a shadowy line between order and breakdown and I wonder if the fact that in the US the "rural poor" are so well armed that it actually contains and subdues them in some strange, counter-intuitive way?

The Master's House

Ruth Frankenberg writes: "Yet the challenge has remained that of how to, in Audre Lorde's terms, 'dismantle the master's house' while, not only do we live in it but it, by some architectural trick, lives in us" The author is speaking about race and identity but the analogy works for ideology writ large. This is a great way to think of the operation of hegemony, the internalization of various logics and discourses to the point they constitute consent. In this sense, capitalism "lives in us", and yet the task of dismantling remains.

And the process, the path of disidentification with what appears to be, is often throughout life a traumatic rupture, a process that leaves scars. It would be nice if someone came up with a way to treat these psychosocial maladies on a mass scale and better yet if they did it fast. Like yesterday. I remember discussions back in the day of putting LSD in the water supply and crazy shit like that to "turn everyone on". Of course Religion is a form of this mass effect, if not healing at least palliative care and The Church a site for mass therapy of a sort. But disabusing Homo Economicus of the wonders of Free Enterprise is going to be tricky; folks identify as entrepreneurs, as hard workers, and they believe all the shit about competition and incentives and moral hazard in a simplistic, social Darwinian way.

The Master's House is also wrapped in Whiteness. As James Baldwin wrote: "No one was white before he/she came to America". So now you have two unmarked categories; white Christian, in need of marking. As Frankenberg says: "We need a more complex understanding of the process of "whitening'. And of free market identity.

Medicare For All

Having turned 65 last September I can now laze around enjoying my first entitlement from Big Government, Medicare. It definitely has sapped most of the initiative the Free Enterprise system had previously installed and I can't wait to get my social security check this coming birthday so I can stop innovating altogether. I can be a walking moral hazard, waiting for others to do things for me as I sloth around.

But seriously, for the Democratic Socialists to place Medicare for All as their priority policy position seems like an attempt to make "democratic" capitalism more bearable, rather than less. The assumption is that the masses will see that making health insurance a public provision will cause them to question other for-profit sectors, leading them to question the profit motive altogether. Then we can have some form of democratic socialism. But is there any evidence to support this hypothesis? Have social democracies in other parts of the world advanced to true worker ownership of the means of production?

I think such social provision has allowed capital to expand into new sectors and gain increased legitimacy in the mind of workers. Along with the Google-ization of the workplace (relaxed atmosphere, good wages, worker buy-in, etc) this is capital's revolutionary ability to morph and insinuate itself into every cultural and psychological niche.

So if your day is starting to go a little too well you can check out the article on global coal development and then read some of the comments people have posted. The extent to which people can pull the wool over their own eyes is truly remarkable. And along with the ideological rubble there is the total lack of agency; everyone looking to someone else to solve the problem or encouraging us to vote for the right candidate. I'm sure the folks at the Aspen Institute have a plan.

Storm of Progress

I woke the other morning from a vague vision/ dreamscape of Paul Klee's Angelus Novus and Walter Benjamin's prophetic take from his Thesis on the Philosophy of History. Weird, right? I hadn't read the thing in years and then barely understood the basic premise. But then I realized I had been reading about the California fires and wondered if my subconscious was trying to work something out. Benjamin writes:

"a storm is blowing in from Paradise, it has caught in his (Klee;s Angel) wings with such a violence that the angel can no longer close them."

This is the storm of progress and now a whole town and dozens, perhaps hundreds of corpses turned to ash, are part of the "wreckage" piling up at the angel's feet. The wind is that generated by a fire storm so fierce everyone remains stunned just trying to imagine it. We are in what the prophetic thinker called "a moment of danger", a place where "the state of emergency is not the exception but the rule." These fires and floods will be a first world problem but it is unlikely to lead to the kind of food riots we will see in poorer parts of the world. I agree with Benjamin's prescription that "it is our task to bring about a real state of emergency", one which threatens the ruling order.

I really have trouble, therefore, with this emphasis climate groups place on the fossil fuel industry. Framing the conflict as one between them and their customers is a way not to have to confront the actual system of production and its perverse logics, logics which go way beyond a particular economic sector. Are we to believe that it was only Exxon scientists who made the connection between emissions and global warming? That's absurd on its face. Do we expect the corporations to do anything but dissemble and lobby and produce slick campaigns and front groups?


Then there are the true believers who still think the system can deliver justice:
"The central demand of Tuesday's "Green New Deal Day of Action" is for Democratic lawmakers to champion Rep.-elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's (D-N.Y.) proposed Green New Deal select committee and "create a climate plan in line with what science and justice demand."
So far they have nine congresspeople out of how many? 535? How much time will they put into this?

Going Nowhere Fast

The oil industry is in a state of incredible volatility right now with last month's high price of crude suddenly crashing. Record amounts are being produced by the 'majors' USA, Saudi Arabia and Russia with other OPEC partners also going great guns. What's goin on? Geo-political intrigue? Drunken speculators, total chaos, a sign of America's new-found greatness? Who the fuck knows. I thought we were supposed to be running out of oil but they are pumping it as fast as they can. Whatever.

Speaking of crude, Bill McKibben ( can't help it, more Bill Bashing) has a piece in the NY Review of Books where he re-states the standard, worn-out claim that the climate crisis can be traced back to "the power of the fossil fuel industry". And then he ironically goes on to say "we need a major shift in our thinking". This is his idea of a "major shift": turn to "civil society" to "pressure" the policy makers. Whoa! So outside of the box! And so "in an era when politics seems at least temporarily broken" he imagines a "Green New Deal". I suspect this looks a lot like Norway with solar panels, a return to Keynesian "common sense" and a touch of RE-distribution.

But let's not get too nostalgic for a past that never was; the New Deal didn't end the depression (that took war) and it depended on a top-down command and control process, your basic Leviathan, with minimal popular participation. It also saved capitalism from some revolutionary forces which were building real steam. It was "social containment to avoid 'a world transformed'". Which fits into Mc Kibben's agenda as well.

Liberals continue to believe "policy makers", to "provide incentives", thereby managing a transition without a lot of upheaval and turmoil. That ain't how it works. It's a con that they get taken on over and over due to willful blindness and a lack of imagination and desire. Remember: don't be afraid to want what you truly desire.

Arm the Jews

Special Arm the Jews sale; buy any three weapons and we will donate one AR 15 to any synagogue of your choice! Comes fully loaded with extra clips and instruction manual! Better Armed than Harmed!

What we really need in times like these is for Jon Stewart and perhaps Michelle Obama to hold a Return to Sanity Rally. They could plead for some civility and decorum, for rational debate and respect for opposing opinions. Mixed with a little ironic detachment and a smirk or two, of course. Because the thing is, the Republican base understands it is just entertainment, a crazy reality show you get to participate in. The Dems still believe "politics" are some solemn, sacred ritual full of profound meaning. Chris Hedges kind of gets it:

"The efforts by the Democratic Party and much of the press, including CNN and The New York Times, to discredit Trump, as if our problems are embodied in him, are futile. The smug, self-righteousness of this crusade against Trump only contributes to the national reality television show that has replaced journalism and politics."

Hedges tries to explain this in terms of "the cult" but I believe it might be more productive to think of this appeal in terms of joissance. Of course it is horribly tragic that Trump's fans can't see the degradation at the root of their pleasure, that they can't imagine anything beyond spectating. But at least they don't pray for "sanity" to be restored.

And here I am imagining Alex Jones interviewing Steve Bannon and the minister of the Westboro Baptist Church on the subject of the recent Brazilian elections. And wondering how how the #Me too movement might explain all the women supporters of the chauvinist victor, or Trumps adoring female fans.

Grow The Economy

A comrade convinced me to participate in a "discussion" he organized and it was a truly painful ordeal. He had invited local Representatives to our state legislature and a couple of wanna-bees, along with folks who work in social services. These folks were hurt by state budget cuts and would tell their stories. Sounds interesting so far, right? My comrade had expected this confrontation to somehow shame the Republican (who is chairwoman of Appropriations) but instead we all got a lesson in how "ideological rubble" has totally buried US society and any sane notions of political-economy. We are left with a ritualized performance of absurdity and confusion which is almost impossible to watch unfold.

My comrade, who calls himself a socialist but is willing to rely on liberal arguments in mixed company, actually seemed to believe there exists some magic logic which will instantly illuminate the contradictions in Conservative ideology, like Tiny Tim getting Scrooge to "see the light". He felt himself capable of rhetorical ju jitsu which would expose the paucity of the oppositions argument. He also believes in the old Patrick Leahy model of "reaching across the aisle", of pragmatically offering concessions and compromise, as if it were actual politics and not theater. Man, did he get his ass handed to him.

After hearing the sob stories of social workers, of the hellish crisis which is the everyday world of poor and damaged people (and the people who try to help them) the Conservatives simply did their Newt Gingrich impersonations- No New Taxes, Stop Enabling People, Tough Love Works, Entitlements and Bloated Bureaucracy and Accountability and Job Creators, you know the litany and they have it memorized word for word. What can a bleeding heart liberal say in response? Why, he can only nod and concede all those points and then ask: well, what is your solution?

And here is the where the magic part of the show begins: Grow The Economy, stupid! Lift All Boats! I keep looking at the clock, nine o clock and I haven't eaten dinner. Fuck this Spectacle. All agree that of course we need "responsible" growth but neither Amazon nor Boeing are moving here so the Repubs like mining and timber and my stomach is growling and the Dems like tourism and my head will soon explode if I don't get up and leave. And my comrade continues his social justice non-profit roadshow to the next town or village. Come Back Woody Guthrie!

Democracy In Action

As reported in The Hill:
"Polling continually shows that voters rank climate far down on their list of priorities. And although energy prices are lower than they were a decade or so ago, few lawmakers want to be responsible for significant increases in consumers’ costs or job losses that could accompany new policies.

Democrats, who are now favored to seize the House, have crafted their campaign message around issues like increasing working-class wages and lowering the cost of prescription drugs. They think the kitchen-table agenda will resonate more effectively, particularly in conservative-leaning districts where voters tend to be wary of the economic impact of climate legislation."

The first problem of course is basing your strategy on "polling" rather than any ethical considerations. I'm sure that polls would show me that Hugo Chavez was a dictator and that Saddam Husein was stockpiling WMD's. And that Adam and Eve rode dinosaurs. Whatever. I am constantly told that as an organizer I have to "meet people where they are at" which is code for clueless, center-right, and incoherent. And yes, many folks are filled with wacky information, but they are probably also feeling anxious and abused and eager to hear something that might sound half-way candid and honest. And radical. There is no way I can know "where they are at" through some momentary, cursory exchange, much less through some cleverly worded poll.

So the second problem is that if these Dems, who have been wringing their hands about the "huge deficit", do in fact "seize the House", they will cave on climate. As they themselves will tell you, the only way to shrink a deficit is to grow the economy and to do that you have to frack and drill and mine and burn as "a transition phase" to a greener capitalism. And with their higher wages, the working class will be in no hurry to see anyone throw a wrench in the gears. With cheaper prescription drugs, us old people will say "I guess the system has self-corrected itself" and with our savings we can take a cruise ship to Jamaica.

So it is finally time for Extinction Rebellion. Let's fill the jails (as a first step anyway) backed with the explicit threat of more drastic action.

Red Baiting

"You ain't done nothin if you aint been called a Red."

Trump's speechwriter published an op-ed in USA Today claiming "the new Democrats are radical socialists who want to model America's economy after Venezuela." I wish! This type of red-baiting is standard procedure here in the home of the brave and you can just imagine the angst of the DLC centrist Democrats. "Government run health care is just the beginning..." The Donald warns in the time-worn "slippery slope" argument. Starts with some free aspirin and next thing you know you're in a Siberian gulag.

It would be the perfect moment to break out the guillotine and say "Damn right rich fucks, and we're comin for you first" but don't expect anything but snivelling denials and finger pointing from the Dems. The Washington Post put their fact checkers on the case, proudly de-bunking The Donald's absurd argument, but then felt compelled to add their own vicious slander, claiming: "Venezuela is collapsing after years of near-dictatorship and squandering of oil wealth..." Because kicking a poor Latin American country when it is down is how we roll in the land of the free.

Don't be surprised if they initiate something truly original like The House Committee on Un-American Activities.

Legitimacy

" It's a Show You Know- Not Always Entertaining But a Show Even So"

Jurgen Habermas wrote a book called Legitimation Crisis (I lost my copy at Jackson Hot Springs of all places) that describes the current conjuncture pretty well. I was listening to pundit/ law expert Marsha Coyle on PBS NewsHour answer the question: would the Kavanaugh hearings affect the legitimacy of the Supreme Court? ( notice the capital letters!) She answered that the court required the appearance of non-partisanship...then caught herself and said the court needed to BE non-partisan to retain legitimacy. I found the distinction intriguing.

There are scores and scores of articles and op-eds out now asking whether our precious "democratic" institutions have been damaged (de-legitimized) by the hearings, with liberals being the most exercised and nervous. One of the more painful was an interview of Francis Fukuyama and some ex-Ambassador now with the Brookings Institute. The ex insisted history was full of such moments and not to get our panties in a bunch. Fukuyama felt the future hung on "new leadership" (get out and vote). Neither mentioned climate change. Even after watching a psycho clown win the highest office and the Congress getting a 4% approval rating and the Supreme Court openly pushing the corporate agenda, they continue to insist the King IS wearing clothes, the sacred institutions are infinitely resilient and we should all relax and watch the ritual enactment with total credulity. The appearance is enough. Act as if you believe and you will. Put on a black robe and become the wise, impartial Supreme Judge.

A new question arises when we read the new IPCC report on impending climate disaster ( 12 years till we hit 1.5degrees). Will the Kubuki theater provide enough entertainment value that people will ignore the waves lapping on their living room walls? Will those sacred institutions maintain their legitimacy even as Our Leaders stare paralyzed by stupidity at the approaching collapse ( like a cow staring at the image of a cattle guard painted on the highway).

Expect Elizabeth Warren and Corey Booker to call for an incremental carbon tax and research into carbon capture technology. Expect the new Ill Duce of Brazill to pull out of the Paris Accords. And what of the Left? Will the local DSA continue to invade the offices of Republicans even as coal trains continue to roll through town each day? How about national DSA? Will they grab this opportunity to make radical demands or stay with their hope of winning elections?

Big Word Little Man

Poor President Trump. He learns a new word, a big complicated sounding word like "sovereignty", and then when he tries it out in front of the International Important People they just laugh at him. Not nice! The man is obviously not over-burdened by complex thinking and the ridicule will only make him start a new trade war, or maybe nuclear war.

Coincidentally, I happen to be reading a book that starts with a discussion of Hobbes and Carl Schmitt and their thinking around the subjects of sovereignty and Leviathan, "that Mortall God". I suspect Trump learned the word from his new buddy John Bolton, who is tired of seeing poor America get pushed around by The New World Order. See, America doesn't want to be part of this new globalist world order, cause everybody keeps asking for money and they want to send us to the international criminal court for shit we didn't mean to do, and they want us to cut our emissions but that will cut into our economic growth so screw them. America first. We're sovereign so shut up and quit laughing.

Of course the supply chains of all the giant AMERICAN corporations will still be globalized, we still want all that cheap labor and the sweet crude from our newly liberated Iraq (you're welcome). And it's not like we are on board with all those dirty hippies and anarchists that were marching against globalization in Seattle. This is different. This is patriotic. Like Brexit. We are saving our unique, white, national character and you can laugh all you want at his ridiculous hair and weird syntax and tiny hands. He is the sovereign.

Russian Interference

What's this about Russian meddling in our elections? My God, are they saying a country would interfere in another countries internal affairs? Would try to subvert the sacred democratic process and right of self-determination? Unheard of! Outrageous! We know America would never engage in such a nefarious process because we respect sovereignty. They are saying even the damn Iranians are trying to influence us; after all we've done for them!

As for this whole business around Trump and the pay-offs, The Donald clearly miscalculated big time. Had he simply started bragging about the flings with Stormy Daniels and the Playboy bunny, his poll numbers would have skyrocketed, he could have saved some money and his lawyer wouldn't be facing jail time. Sad. He was thinking like a loser.

Speaking of Trump, though it has admittedly taken longer than I expected, I think his writers must be on strike or on Oxy or something. His antics are beginning to bore and the whole sordid Spectacle has lost its entertainment value, to a point where the mainstream commentariat is getting nervous. And it's only season 1! His producers underestimated the difficulty of keeping slapstick/ reality engaging for a more sophisticated audience. The thugs just seem like thugs, there's no pathology. At least with Nixon there was some psycho-drama.

So what's the difference between humans and lemmings? Lemmings just kill themselves; humans try to take every living thing down with them. Soon we will see Global Warming Tours; where the caring bourgeoisie can visit disappearing eco-systems, see soon to be extinct species, have pictures to show their grandkids.

"A Shift in the Structure of Experience"

I have been intrigued for years by this opening line in a poem by Anne Winters titled The Displaced of Capital (2006) It rang true in a way I couldn't quite articulate till recently learning about the "gaming community", about live streaming your life and about Twitch, phenomena that is only new to me thanks to my almost absolute ignorance of popular culture. But awhile ago I watched my grandson sitting on the couch watching a person playing a video game on-line and I was fascinated by his total involvement in this once-removed, virtual experience. At the time I thought it was just incidental, an oddity. Now I am seeing it is the future. I'm just not sure how terrified I should be.


"Unnoticed, the narrative has altered...down to the very molecules in my brain, as I think I'm thinking..." Winters captures the sense of remove, the "shift" which is changing everything, though not in the way Naomi Klein imagined. How then does this new structure, this voyeuristic anti-experience propel new capital accumulation? Apparently video gaming is now a multi-billion industry not just through direct sales but through gaming competition, Leagues, play-offs, superstars with coaches and promoters and lucrative sponsorships, in other words the whole "sports" apparatus now applied to shooter games. In a bizarre twist, as these gaming celebrities are being watched their fans can "chat" on forums like Twitch so that they can feel part of an "inter-active" experience and community. They subscribe and send other financial support and I'm sure they are advertised to. So plenty of exchange.

Then there are the IRL (in real life) professional streamers who have an army of obsessed fans watching them perform life. Their existence, however banal or contrived, is the entertainment for which their fans pay. These fans also have a chat community so that they might be indirectly involved in this reality as such.

Obviously we are dealing with a complex socio-political phenomena, but I start with two questions; Is Capital actually overcoming a barrier through this strange form of production? And who are these people with enough time on their hands to do the observing? The barrier I feel Capital is attempting to push through is the anomie, disaffection and alienation, the estrangement and ennui inherent in modern life. "Drama equals views equals money" is the livestream mantra and the "patch", however temporary, for what Marshall Berman termed the "perpetual disintegration...ambiguity and anguish" felt by so many. This modern milieu is transferred into what Berardi characterized as a "psycho-pathologic economy of ironic detachment", hence the vicious online trolling, the "terrifying digital mobs", a Purple Army of lonely chatroom geeks haunting the Web day and night. A new "spectre" poised on the razor's edge of this new "structure of experience".

Today's Capitalism

In an Op Ed titled "What Are Capitalists Thinking?" Michael Tomasky demonstrates his own lack of thinking. Or maybe he is paid to produce these kinds of apologetics? A good centrist liberal, he appears worried that
"today's" capitalist class is getting greedy and will spoil it for everyone. He is nostalgic for yesterday's kinder, gentler capitalism: "Back in the days when our economy just grew and grew, we had a government and a capitalist class that invested in our people and their future..."he tells us in a fuzzy bedtime story.

Tomasky gets this kind of trite jingoistic drivel published in the NY Times because it is how centrist hegemony is preserved and the Times is invested in exactly this project. Because just think back; you remember the awesome capitalism of the post-war years- don't you?( you're white, straight, male, middle-class aren't you?)

But now a handful of bad apples is going to spoil it for everyone. Tomasky recites the usual litany of abuses; the inequality, the mean-spirited gouging,the reckless gambling, as he puts it; "the kind of capitalism we have today" is driving all these young folks toward SOCIALISM! and as a good liberal it is his duty to send out a warning.

Funny thing; when mentioning the ills of "today's capitalism" he fails to mention global warming. But I'm sure his greener "capitalism with a human face" would have a solution.

Subtle Invisibility

Again, from the NY Times, a headline touting the amazing growth of the US economy next to an article asking why it is so hard for people to talk about climate change. The research director at Climate Outreach finds fault with "journalists" who "struggle to find the right tone, convey the right level of urgency". He is frustrated by climate scientists worried about "being branded activists" as well as movement messengers with "painted faces and placards." The Director is correct there is a messaging problem but his suggestion to enlist "faith leaders, trusted local businesses and culturally credible spokespeople" is both naive and simplistic.

The "collective paralysis" the author identifies is a rationally irrational response to a crisis whose solution we comprehend but cannot enact. We know but we must act as if we do not; therefore it is better to avoid the subject altogether. As Naomi Klein put it: the Right is right. They understand any real solution means a change in the power structure and this the elite will never accept. Species can go extinct, reefs turn brown, millions of humans perish and they won't budge.

Instead we celebrate the surge in economic growth and ignore the corresponding surge in emissions. Environmentalists like the author propose "a conversation" to get things started but this is not a problem of "articulation". This is a problem of power.
Meanwhile the Animus River in southern Colorado fills with ash and massive fish kills are predicted. Trout Unlimited spends millions to restore a small stretch of stream while avoiding any discussion around the real cause of climate change because they don't want to offend their donor base; people who call themselves "conservative" conservationists. They are disappointed in the Republican platform but enjoy watching the stock market rise. They, like the NYTimes, struggle to find the right tone.

Invisibility

The front page of the NYTimes perfectly encapsulates capitalism's inability to deal with it's existential crisis. One article describes how climate change is affecting migrating geese and the next article describes the next big oil boom in Guyana (without once mentioning climate change). While most small children would instantly recognize the disconnect, this deadly dissembling is invisible to adults indoctrinated by capitalist ideology.

The author of the oil boom article presents a trite, sophomoric rundown of all the other problems a "boom" can create for "poor, under-developed" countries but the notion that the emissions from burning the oil will further the current ecocide just never seems to occur. It is cloaked in a way that is terrifying if you stop to think about it. So don't.

How Will You Pay For It?

The first question (after congratulations) a reporter asks the newly elected official with ambitious , progressive plans is: where is the money to pay for all this? This is what they are asking AMLO, Mexico's new "populist" president and it is what they will ask the young, idealistic candidates I met at the recent DSA statewide meeting held in Helena. While campaigning, the rhetoric is filled with new programs to help all the disadvantaged people, all wonderful reforms that would make working class life and/or poverty more tolerable. But in a capitalist democracy the money has to come from somewhere, from an "already tight budget".

You can propose to expand the pie, and most politicians do. More economic growth for everyone will produce a new surplus! It's a win win! Till Capital looks at your "progressive proposals" and decides to go on strike, create a little downturn in the "business cycle", and poof! there goes your surplus, time to tighten belts. Or the Climate Folks start harping about the fossil fuel it takes to bring on your economic growth and you have to lie there at night, knowing the bargain you are making with the devil.

The old song by Alvin Lee goes: Tax the Rich, Feed the Poor, Till there are no, Poor no more. I'd love to change the world, but I don't know what to do.

The DSA has embarked on an ambitious "electoral strategy" because they believe power lies in the government of by and for the people. Democracy at work. Self rule. Leftists and "Progressives" are gaga after the primary win of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez but she will quickly run into the question of "balanced budgets" and raising taxes and the coalition gets strained. This is where you have to bring in all the millions of new "green" jobs to keep the economy humming.

When asked "What is a socialist?", NY state Senate candidate Julia Salazar said: "To have a vision of a world where everyone is taken care of...in which people are valued over profit, in which everyone has access to the things they need..." This is the idealist version, with no mention of ownership of the means of production.

Crypto-capitalism

I saw an article on the local explosion of bit-coin mining operations taking place in our region. Is this not the perfect expression of late-capitalism, a totally abstract, speculative waste of energy and resources which produces absolutely nothing useful yet generates huge profits?

Ans as for that waste, one operator of such a "mine" states he moved here for "cheap" energy and since coal-fired electricity still "competes" on the market he says he is incentivized to use it. To maximize his profit and accumulation. Perfectly rational, right?

Meanwhile, an independent study found that energy customers with net-metered solar on their houses are paying too little per mega-wat, that the "cost" of transmission is being unfairly distributed. the Public Service Commission will use this info to argue these customers should be paying a "competitive" price and the local 350 group will have to argue solar should be subsidized by non-solar customers. Which might not be too popular. NW Energy will just say they are trying to provide the "cheapest, most cost-effective" energy. And around and around they will go.

Once you have locked yourself into capitalist logic/ language ( cheap, competitive, cost-effective, etc) you find yourself in the double-bind house of mirrors. Yes, you can righteously produce studies showing renewables are "cheaper"- but some bean-counter will have his own study showing the "cost" of finance and depreciation and disruption and the population will furrow their collective brows and squint and sigh. As the system is legitimized and mystified at the same time.

General Agreement

I have joined a DSA "working group" set up to formulate a coherent strategy for the organization as concerns climate action. The proposal is to research the history of the climate justice movement and the different players (NGO's, Blockadia, UN COP, etc..)then try to identify ways to be more effective going forward.

I just re-read an essay by Andreas Malm titled Revolution in a Warming World and noticed lots of convergence with my own thinking on strategy. So I would love to see the working group give it a read. Here are some of the main points: "Any climatic spark will always burn through relations between people on its way to an explosion."
Here Malm points to Syria as an example, a place where severe drought heightened already existing tensions and precipitated the implosion of a society. In other words a "climatic impact is articulated through a particular social formation." Malm then claims that because "it is getting hotter at work", class conflict is heating up, at least in the so-called "developing world". Which brings us to the concept of "uneven and combined development", or the way capitalism takes on different modes in the Center and the Periphery and here Malm uses the Russian Revolution to support his argument that war induced threat of famine led to the crisis and the revolution's authoritarian turn. "Climate change is likely to be the accelerator of the twenty-first century, speeding up the contradictions of late capitalism"

This, of course, was Naomi Klein's basic thesis as well, a la Shock Doctrine, that the crisis contains a kernel of opportunity, a very rare opportunity for radical transformation. Many liberal and moderates will call for "adaptation" and peaceful ways to "transition" incrementally but that isn't how it is going to go down. Humans have a remarkable capacity to only see what they want to see until the catastrophe actually grabs them by the throat and starts shaking. Even then they might turn to religion or meditation or fentenyl.

Citizen Participation

I was just invited to "comment" on a proposed expansion of a coal mine. This is part of the "public process" which must legally take place before the coal company starts digging; they apply for a permit, the State decides whether it meets their "standards" then they invite citizens to comment. Sounds pretty damn democratic!

The first thing you need to do is step back and consider a few things like: Mining more coal? Really? Cause I thought there was a climate emergency? So isn't the proposal itself insane? But once we have decided to "participate" in moving the deck chairs around on the Titanic ( to immerse ourselves in the mad dance) we see lots of strange rules. Our comments can't consider how many deck chairs, we can only comment on the configuration: rows, circles, randomly scattered perhaps. We aren't allowed to consider the cumulative arrangement of chairs, only the ones on the deck. In other words there are lots of little parameters already set up by the capitalists and their lobbyists outside of which your "comments" are meaningless, not worthy of consideration by the powers that be.

The beauty of this "process" ( from the capitalist perspective) is that is sucks up tons of activist energy and directs it into a bureaucratic, regulatory black hole. These hearings and decisions all take forever and if you can't take time off work to go attend you get to feel guilty and thankful at the same time that a handful of committed, retired folks can go waste their time for you. This "participatory process" also serves the important function of re-legitimizing "democratic capitalism" as a fair, open system of governing. Look at how they want to include our voices!

Of course at a psychological level it causes all sorts of dissociation and trauma as you get sucked into an "irrational rationality". Arguing about how much poison you should be giving your grandchildren can only result in a psychotic break leading to "President Trump" and reality TV shows and religious cults and mass shootings and Texas. Golf. Christian rock.

More Elections

The email from 350.org says : "the 2018 and 2020 elections will be some of the most important in our lives." So following the disastrous route taken by the labor movement, the climate movement will invest all its energy in the Democrats. The party of Pelosi and Schumer will talk a good game about a new green capitalism of jobs and economic growth and consumption and who knows, the party might even win back a majority in the Senate (if Trump is caught humping a fifteen year old), and liberals will smile with self-satisfaction and say "see you silly revolutionaries, the system really does work just as designed". But don't expect anything close to the radical action required to avert climate catastrophe. Look instead for a new emphasis on nuclear energy ( years of endless debate) and geoengineering (they will let NPR take the lead on this). Maybe a few billion will get put into the Global Climate Fund to help with useless "adaptation". Some solar energy, a few electric cars, another UN COP agreement to reduce emissions.

But after the first year the conservative backlash will grind all action to a halt and all the movement energy will have been dissipated and another generation of activists will go back to their game consoles. You know the drill, anyone backing a carbon tax is labeled a socialist and Capital goes on strike and the economy goes into recession and the fascists point to all the global chaos and on and on it goes. Stuck on the merry-go-round of "capitalist democracy", the terrifying nightmare where you helplessly watch yourself repeat the same mistakes over and over and over. The pathology of disavowal whereby you know you are trapped but you act AS IF you aren't.

I can imagine Bill Mc Kibben and Naomi Klein looking at each other and saying "Well, really there is no alternative", then with slightly embarrassed smiles, heading off to write fundraising letters. And in a tragic twist, we can say that Bernie Sanders and his "political revolution" are to blame for perpetuating the illusion of "progressive" government, an illusion in which DSA and 350.org are now fully invested.

Capitalist elections

In a capitalist democracy "the people" supposedly express their "general will" through capitalist elections. In this sense, The American People chose the tweeting clown prince, the Russian people chose their buff macho prince, the El Salvadorian People just chose a neoliberal, the Italian people chose neoliberals, etc, etc...These results would suggest the interests of Capital and the interests of the People around the globe amazingly just happen to coincide perfectly! Who knew?

Because who can contest the Will of the People, given freely through the miracle of the ballot box? So when Joe Biden considers a possible run for the presidency, or Clint Eastwood or Rebecah Mercer or even me, it demonstrates the wisdom of an inclusive, pluralist system where ideas are debated and contested in the public sphere and the majority eventually rules.

As opposed to that outdated, decrepit system in Saudi Arabia where a royal family just passes down rule through inheritance. How illegitimate! They should let The People decide, like they do in Turkey or Niger or Brazil. Yeah.

The Election Cycle is an elaborate ritual of catharsis, a proscribed event in which to vent and express opinions (within certain boundaries)and let off some steam. It totally absorbs all the energy and sucks all the oxygen out of "social movements" and directs it into the mass drama, the theater of "political" change, acted out by "non-politicians" for the benefit of the colonizers.

"Green" Sunset and Blossoms

If you've never seen Sunset Magazine, picture the ultimate bougie/yuppie "lifestyle" orgy, fine wines, exotic vacations, recipes full of ingredients you'll never afford, all in a casual, attractive, relaxed celebration of the best that money can buy. But of course they have to demonstrate some environmental awareness so the latest issue (yes, I have a subscription, long story) has a piece on how the Western states are doing their bit to save us from climate change. Lots of "renewables getting cheaper" and recycling and Teslas. I especially loved the bit about turning "your next vacation into a trip that does a whole lot of good" by using travel companies that buy carbon offsets. And for every bottle of champagne you buy they will donate one to a family in Somalia. Feel better?

Over at the System Change Not Climate Change site they are clamoring for a "campaign" they can be involved in to make their title a reality. One popular suggestion is working to ban disposable plastic water bottles which to my way of thinking fits perfectly into this Green Sunset article. And in fact there are plenty of people already organized to ban the bottles. My problem with this and other such campaigns is three fold. In the first place, you quickly find radicalism and anti-capitalist critique have no place in these efforts and you will spend endless hours arguing over messaging. The second problem is becoming one of a thousand well meant reforms and finding the public thinks of them all as equivalent ( go through the list starting with food issues: GMOs, factory farms, fast food, pesticides/herbicides, packaging, move on into human rights and education and labor and guns and on and on, let a thousand campaigns blossom, each sending me a fundraising letter each month designed to pull at my liberal bleeding heart strings.) So in this sense plastic bottles and climate change and police violence all get thrown into the Great Non-Profit Blender and come out a social justice smoothie.

My third problem with single-issue campaigns is Capital loves them. They actually strengthen Capital the way resistance strengthened the Black Panther suit in the movie, absorbing the energy and storing it to throw back when needed. Yes, says capitalist ideology, you should make better consumption choices and vote with your dollars, that's how we save the planet and bring goodness: buy an aluminum bottle! Demonstrating once again how flexible and nimble capitalism is, how "green" it can be, so why on earth would you want to "change systems"? It is the same strategy they used to crush unionism; accommodation and flexibility and patience.

A Swiss Economist named Rudolf Meidner saw the whole thing play out. Sweden was a country with a powerful union movement that let their power devolve in the hands of social democratic parties, striking deals with Capital and losing the chance to achieve worker ownership. When it had all played out he said "You must have the experience of a total failure of the system. It must be clearly felt by nearly everyone that the current liberal market approach does not work."
So why prop it up?

From Potentiality to Actuality

This Changes Everything was published, with much fanfare, in 2014. Klein's thesis was that climate change presented the greatest opportunity in many decades to enact deep, structural societal change. We are now well into 2018 and the question must be asked: Has anything really changed?

Many will point to various metrics or events; the Paris Accord, the NY City divestment, the stabilization in the rate of emissions, the falling price of renewable energy, etc..and say yes,a great deal has changed. Others cite these same sources and claim they are the illusion of change, that the climate models are if anything more pessimistic now than in 2014. That, barring much more significant intervention, the over-all ecological degradation and creep toward "planetary boundaries" puts us on a catastrophic trajectory. Glass half full/ half empty? Progress or illusion?

Unfortunately the process of investigation/ interrogation of this question is itself fraught with anxiety, fetishistic attachment and emotional investment. Positions harden and are jealously guarded. Motives are questioned and the band-aids ripped off old historical wounds. Klein herself struggled to navigate these tensions, advocating a range of sometimes contradictory positions because guess what- there are no simple solutions. Electoral politics, movement building, protest, activism, theory- she is correct that EVERYTHING changes, including capitalism and Left praxis. The terms of engagement , the field of struggle, perhaps the "structure of experience" itself, all are in flux and yet at the same time the status quo has a revolutionary immutability: the more things change....

What is crucial is to map the terrain accurately enough so you can locate yourself in some sort of relation to an axis or reference points. And in order to do that you have to be able to step back and establish some distance, some critical, reflective non-attachment. And you have to do it in a time of profound urgency. Klein's critique also called out some folks (what she called Big Green) and their failed strategy. It is part of the work and requires some rigor but this is no time for snowflakes and accommodation just to spare people's feelings.

Democracy 101

There was great liberal excitement around the students speaking out for gun control following the latest school shootings. It was declared that "millenials were waking up!" and demanding action at long last. Demanding accountability from their elected representatives. Demanding sanity (following John Stewart). Surely this time, tragedy could be a catalyst for real change.

Not. The mercurial Jester Presidente deflected action by madly dancing around the issue long enough for the media to go to the next news cycle. Congress played its role by parsing terms and dissembling the issue into smaller Spectacles. The bodies are buried and the passionate students who marched and waved signs and gave emotional speeches hopefully learned a basic lesson in capitalist democracy. Because liberals wont.

The smart money invests in school security businesses.

"It's sundown for the union" wrote B Dylan some time ago but the Janus decision will be much more than that. It will be the long awaited victory dance for Capital celebrating not just Occupy and Wisconsin and Citizens United but now, at long last, Right to Work. Some on the Left are trying to spin this as the beginning of a new bottom-up union militancy and we may see more localized struggles such as the West Virginia school teachers. But the question is: what will they have learned from history? What language will they embrace now that they have little left to lose? What will the response be from the DSA? Will "progressives" begin to question their long cherished theory of change or will they drag Bill Moyers out of retirement?

Another Kind Slave Master

The indigenous people of Canada have been fighting for rights through the courts for decades. Now Canada has a Prime Minister who wants to change the narrative. But facts on the ground? Some Native leaders are not so sure.

“It’s almost easier to fight the bully government than it is the oozing ‘we love you so much’ government,” she says. “But the facts of the matter, and their actions, speak far different.”

And by "the ground" I mean mining, logging, fishing, hunting and building pipelines. I mean tar sands. Justin Trudeau is Canada's Barack Obama- talks a good game, delivers just enough piece meal reform to woo liberals, but falters on the system change level because he believes deep down that it works.

The paradox the Natives must work through, much like the Valve Turners here in the US, is claiming the system is broken while using the courts. Yes courts can provide remedy, yes there is tension between courts, government and capital, but they are also the kindness of the slave master. Many of the tribes are in desperate straits. Like they are down here. And in Latin America. They can't have their old life back- too much has changed. What does the new life look like?

The Gates Foundation saves many many lives through its global health initiative. It relieves suffering "on the ground". But with a warming planet disease will spread and thrive. A walk through the Rohingya refugee camp in Bangladesh will tell you why. Bill and Melinda believe the system works.

Labour's Crucible

From the New Politics site, a discussion of the latest AFL-CIO convention:

On climate change, undoubtedly the victors were a conservative bloc composed of the building trades and the extractive industrial unions. The UMW, despite its militant tradition, from spearheading the CIO to the Miners for Democracy movement, stuck by their immediate interests in defending the coal industry from environmental constraints.

Yeah, this is a big problem in terms of the traditional left or even Democratic Party coalition building. Because beyond just the guys building pipelines or mining coal there are lots of workers spread throughout the entire economy who are justifiably nervous about the coming climate disruption. Because for decades the leadership has tried to have it both ways; in solidarity with the "green turtles" when it come to globalization while also protecting their fossil fuel infrastructure jobs, now they have no allies to turn to. We can cry about a "just transition" all we want but there is no organized labor threat to back it up. It's called long term strategic thinking, something they just never got.

As for background checks and assault weapon bans, that train left the station a long time ago as well. We could put every sociopath who owns weapons under surveillance but that would be tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of citizens you would have to keep track of. There's probably twenty here in my little town, twisted, damaged bastards with arsenals just ready to go off. The NRA is right on this one; if you want to be safe in America you want to be armed.

Roller Coaster

What if the stock markets are sub-consciously reacting to climate change? There are a dozen differing explanations out there for the "sudden volatility" by a dozen different economists with degrees in economics but not a one mentions the thing that actually looms most catastrophically on the horizon. My pet theory is that traders see it, if only in their mind's eye or in their dreams, in the slip-of-the-tongue. All their arcane theories and algorythms and jargon help obscure the fact their monster has unpredictable moods and reacts to signals we mere mortals can't always perceive.

As I write this many serious scientists around the globe are working on geoengineering. They are trained to think rationally and they can see clearly that no major state or government can defy the growth imperative inherent to capitalism and that emissions will continue to rise. They can't say it loudly or they will lose their research funding but they know how this is going down and economists have that same awareness, they run in lots of the same circles, talk candidly over drinks.

The Montana Wilderness Ass. keeps calling me. They want me to go to a meeting and voice opposition to our corporate-lacky-right-wing ideologue Senator and his plan to open up public land for capitalist extraction. These same people have been doing this same thing over and over again ad nauseum but they must actually enjoy the sheer repetitiveness of it, in some perverse way they must find it comforting. They will tell of their soul-enriching experiences in the wilderness, how it is our duty to preserve the last .02% of untrammelled landscape in this lovely museum. The loggers will grouse about "multiple-use" and good paying jobs for their kids. Just re-wind the tape and play it again and again. If I was in need of abuse I would go and say wilderness is actually a dangerous symbol

Never Had It So Good/ Bad

They were the best of times they were the worst....In the upside down world the optimists want us to see "the positive"; global economic growth, rising confidence, soaring stock market, a decrease in "extreme poverty", a decrease in over-all "violence"- the many indicators they will point to as a reason to take heart. They admit there are "problems, of course", but with increasing wealth and new technologies we should be optimistic. Many see this as the triumph of libertarian ideology, getting the administrative state out of the way so that competition can unleash innovation. They read stuff like this from Inc.com: "The scientific case for radical optimism

The soon-to-be-released title is the latest from renowned Harvard linguist Steven Pinker, and it's not hard to see why the book appeals so much to Gates. Lately, the billionaire-turned-philanthropist has been using his popular blog and even the pages of major magazines to argue for more optimism. The world, he insists, might seem like a total mess sometimes, but we're actually making steady progress making it a better place for all of us."

Liberals are basically in agreement although they bemoan the state of our "politics", the mean tone and demeanor; they would like to see poor people have decent shelters to go to while conservatives are fine with cardboard street houses and effective policing. Of course the non-ideological "muddling class" also celebrates economic growth and after all the years of recession, a little happy news. A tax break, maybe a raise. They focus on gains in the cultural sphere; the me-to movement, gay marriage, a DACA deal, solar panels.

Pessimists are much harder to be around. On the right you have preppers, worry over discrimination against whites and conspiracy kooks, on the left it's those with all the gloomy studies and statistics, those using C words like catastrophic and collapse and crisis and capitalism. They blame America and "The West" and think technologies all have hidden problems. They don't even like the good leaders like Obama.They read stuff like this, from David Spratt in Resilience:

"The problems posed are wickedly exquisite. The former NASA climate science chief James Hansen has long warned that 2°C is a “recipe for disaster”. It is clear that we now face an existential threat to human civilisation as the climate teeters on the edge of passing further system tipping points that would make the task of avoiding that threat tremendously difficult."

Sagebrush Redux

Groundhog Day! The alarm clock rings and we keep waking up to the same wretched farce day after day after year after year after decade after decade ad nauseum. Instead of Reagan and Watt we have Trump and Zinke and Cliven Bundy. Who will no doubt soon have his own line of survival gear and western wear. Grazing rights, States rights, Sagebrush rebellion, blah blah on and on.Cliven is now on the lecture circuit and just gave a talk in Big Sky Country. Our local Patriot Representative Theresa Manzella was there, reassuring the crowd that she was "not a politician, I am one of you." Except of course she holds political office and does politics. Luckily the crowd is not overly burdened with discernment or coherent thinking.

The crux of the matter is private property and the individual vs the collective. The classic Left/ Right antagonism, though rarely articulated, because it is so contentious and divisive. Bundy, who just visited Sanders County Montana, came at the behest of a group calling itself the Coalition of Western Property Owners. Other sponsors are the American Lands Council and Freedom Works and Western Tradition Partnership (there are dozens of these)whose guiding philosophy is: "strongly protected property rights are the key to any free society." It is also the key to capitalism itself.

In Latin America social movements still talk about latifundia, or land reform in terms of redistribution. Every once in a while you might hear about workers occupying a factory and taking over production. In the USA private ownership of productive property is sacred and supported by every class. We can talk about socialized medicine or public utilities, Obama can even take control of a car company for a while, but no one talks about nationalization or collectivization. No one.

Because the individual and their individual rights are the supreme law of the land. Their is no "collective" subject, except when it comes to public land, where "We the People" are owners. Which is why Bundy & Co. have their eye on it. Bundy, not unlike ISIS or the Taliban, sees his mandate coming from God (manifested in the US Constitution) How can he lose?

Goodbye Tuna

Flyfishing magazines are not known for their radical critique but I stumbled across an article on salt water fishing that surprised me. Bemoaning declining sport fishing opportunities, the author takes on the environmental movement in general, writing: "the environmental movement hasn't even managed to slow down the rate of destruction, never mind halt it...as with regulatory bodies everywhere, the pressure from politicians and industry ensured it (the ICCAT) never followed the recommendations made by environmentalists."

From here it would only be a short leap for this liberal writer to condemn "democratic capitalism" as a contradiction and the profit system as a failure. Maybe next issue he'll write that the state is subservient to capital, is not just "captured" by lobbyists but ideologically integrated at every level. So wild fish don't stand a chance in the race for economic growth.

Trout fishing magazines, their "conservation" writers and the organizations still cling to the belief they are "winning" the fight to save habitat and fish stocks but they choose not to mention climate change. Since they are not struggling against industry profits in a direct sense ( no commercial trout fishing) they can pretend their regulatory efforts and volunteer stream restoration projects will preserve the resource.

Shitholes

Does Trump really imagine there is some big line of Norwegians waiting to get into this shithole country? People tired of good healthcare and education and public transportation and clean energy? People looking for a place with no vacation pay or retirement or maternity leave. Just not enough gun crime in Oslo, I'm headed for Philly.

As for all the outrage, if you elect Rodney Dangerfield to be your President you should expect some embarrassingly candid moments. Since he has no filters, he's going to say out loud what everyone thinks. It's all about ratings. Like when Rodney claimed Mexico is going to pay for the wall, you get a big bump, and then you move on to other topics, a little shape shifting, some sleight of hand.

I just finished a book about the early tribes that inhabited the San Francisco Bay Area. Talk about blessed- abundant game, fisheries, acorns, grass seeds, you name it- the perfect climate and relative peace among neighbors. They had the technologies they needed but no more. And then came the Spanish with all their "civilization" and religion and the psychosis that went with it. Turned Paradise into a shithole in a little over two hundred years. You're welcome.

Optimists and Conservationists

Time magazine is the pop music of journalism. It gives you a predictable,simplified,uncontroversial picture of the world and the latest issue on Optimism, edited by Bill and Melinda Gates is a perfect sedative. It was the first time a civilian got to edit the magazine but Bill is special, as we all know. Special wealth, special altruism/philanthropy, special insight into the state of the planet. And according to Bill, things are on the up and up! There is no crisis,in fact, we've never had it so good! The crisis is a matter of perception, fostered by naysaying media that only reports on the bad. But according to Bill and Melinda democratic capitalism is saving the planet one child at a time and we should be checking our bad attitudes at the door.

I also picked up a copy of the magazine put out by Trout Unlimited where they describe all the great conservation work done by these great conservationists. They are conserving the shit out of trout streams. In one piece they interviewed a big donor named Charlie Johnson, a retired corporate whore who likes to fish. Charlie recalled how he called the CEO of TU and said: "Chris, Charlie Johnson here. I want you to know I will be watching you, I don't want to see TU become one of those commie-pinko organizations." Because Charlie is a millionaire conservationist who won't mention climate change and won't give money to TU if they mention it. So they plant willows in creeks that will soon be dry. Using Charlie's money (tax deductible)


I also saw that the son of Wallace Stegner just died and the obit talked about what a great conservationist (and probably optimist) he was, dedicating his life to conserving landscapes and species that are rapidly disappearing. No commie-pinko, thank God. Then there is National Geographic magazine's latest, with all the articles about all the bird species that are disappearing despite all the conservation work they have done and the articles they have written and the legislation passed and conservation yeah. Because they have conserved the shit out of it and still the ice is melting.