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.
Sunday, July 29, 2018
Friday, July 20, 2018
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.
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.
Sunday, July 8, 2018
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.
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.
Wednesday, July 4, 2018
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)