Journals
Thursday,Mar 17 2005, 04:36:02 PM20 MONTHLY REVIEW / SEPTEMBER...
20 MONTHLY REVIEW / SEPTEMBER 2004 –ARGENTINA
– Economy and Social Democratic Proposals
… the economy has now recovered with dazzling incomes for the enriched minority. But the afflictions of the majority have not been reversed and have even dramatically worsened for many.
Official statistics indicate that 60 percent of the population lives below the poverty line, 20 percent are unemployed, and 44 percent of those working have only informal, temporary, and very low-paying jobs. Government officials affirm that "the social agenda is pending," but they don't say when it will come about. In fact, they expect, without any foundation, a long-term recovery of employment and salaries. They are betting on continued support from what, for all their efforts, would be several poverty-stricken generations resigned to a miserable fate.
We find this resignation unacceptable. This is the reason why, instead of celebrating the capitalists' benefits and hiding the people's sufferings, we propose a program based on the immediate recovery of the purchasing power of workers, the unemployed, pensioners, and other popular sectors. This plan is based on three pillars: the funds now placed in service of the public debt, a progressive fiscal reform, and an extraordinary tax on recent exceptional gains attained by big business groups.
Universal Grant for Food and Education
The first measure for a popular economic plan is to put into practice without delay a universal plan to offer food and education to all the population. The monthly cost of a basic basket of food for a two-child family is officially estimated to be 327 pesos (us$113). A guarantee of this minimum right to the entire population has to be the first step for any project aiming to reverse the social disaster. This amount should be complemented with a 45 peso (us$15.50) allowance for each child to make it possible for families to pay the basic costs of education.
To establish this subsidy-which many organizations argue should be around 380 pesos-it is vital to make the "right to live" a reality. To eat every day is a fundamental right, and it cannot be made to depend on the contingency and uncertainty of employment. This undisputable basic right must be assured through a universal subsidy. The absence of this right in a country such as Argentina-the fifth leading food exporting country-is particularly reprehensible.
Implementation is urgent, because, since the big devaluation in December 2001, prices have risen 46.7 percent and family food product prices have gone up by 74.9 percent. It is estimated that 35 percent of the population is not getting enough food. Worse yet, experts are detecting a new generation of "socially caused small persons," meaning people whose height has decreased compared with prior generations because of the cumulative effects of malnutrition.
The grant could make possible the immediate elimination of the indigent state of 25 percent of the population and should totally replace the existing plan, called the Head of the Family Plan (Plan Jefes y Jefas de Hogar), with a universal system that abolishes the arbitrariness of the existing system. Social insurance must not depend on the goodwill of public officials or the calculations of political bosses.
The government rejects the implementation of this primary right because it gives priority, in the disposition of its growing resources, to paying public debt. In addition, a universal system is not consistent with the system of patronage crucial to the traditional political parties. And finally, official opposition to a universal grant is supported by the employers, who fear that the subsidy could be a serious hurdle to keeping wages and salaries depressed. If all families could be assured of 380 pesos, no one would work for less.
To keep a big part of the population in absolute misery is a premeditated aim of business sectors opposed to any recovery in wages. Rightwing sectors are devoting great energy to a campaign against "unemployed vagrancy." The government reflects this pressure and supports a proposed grant of 150 pesos per newly employed worker as a subsidy for those firms hiring unemployed persons. This initiative is supported with enthusiasm by the "free market" champions from the World Bank and is presented as an alternative to the universal subsidy.
Any progress toward the universal grant for food and education would be a great victory for the people. The costs of the plan are affordable. If to the actual 2,000,000 beneficiaries of the Head of the Family Plan are added those 900,000 who are registered but not receiving any benefits, 9.5 billion pesos (us$3.275 billion) would be needed yearly to guarantee its total implementation. This should be the real public priority as opposed to insatiable debt payments (12.5 billion pesos), the amount provided to cover losses suffered by the banking sector (20 billion pesos), or the vast subsidies provided openly and covertly to big local and foreign economic groups.
Four Ways to Create Genuine Work Alternatives
Although the government had intended to mask the cruel social drama by claiming that the beneficiaries of the Head of the Family Plan are not unemployed, official statistics place the unemployment rate at 21.3 percent. Even during last year's record-breaking recovery, the situation improved just marginally. This is evidence of the feeble relation between employment and GDP growth that is now a worldwide feature of capitalism and that acutely affects Argentina.
A forecast prepared by international Labor Organization (ILO) experts indicates that at least 20 years with strong expansion would be needed to reverse the brutal reduction in employment suffered in the economic depression of 1999-2002. Recovery cycles do not restore employment in a dependent and peripheral economy to the same degree as in a core industrialized economy. The elasticity, i.e., the strength of the relationship, between employment and GDP has noticeably contracted in the last decades of deindustrialization and re-primarization of Argentina.
Neoliberal economists, and some well-paid comfortable "experts" at various Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), have argued that an expansion of employment in the "informal sector" counteracts the horrors that have everywhere followed imposition of free market neoliberalism. But the terrible prospect of chronic unemployment cannot be reversed with the simple multiplication of informal undertakings. Even less by an impossible "return to the fields," as Argentina is one of the most urbanized societies in Latin America (over 90 percent live in urban centers). These informal undertakings are desperate (but dignified) survival schemes engaged in by millions of people hoping to offer some little comfort to their families. Even the best of these initiatives, organized as cooperatives, lack the necessary tools, credits, technology, and trade networks, and are strangled by the competition of big firms.
The tragedy of mass unemployment cannot be solved spontaneously. However, the creation of genuine employment alternatives could be achieved, in four different ways:
First, the eight-hour working day should be enforced at all employment levels. Ironically the lack of work suffered by "excluded" sectors is the other side of the coin to the overwork imposed on the "included" sectors. Working hours in Argentina (2,000 hours per year) surpass the average annual hours worked in Europe, Brazil, and Mexico. The strict implementation of the normal maximum eight hours of work could create immediately 900,000 jobs.
Second, a public works plan should be implemented, centered in construction, and financed by the three previously mentioned resources of the popular program (debt, fiscal reform, and emergency tax). The generally agreed estimate is that an expenditure of six billion pesos could mean the creation of 200,000 jobs.
Third, a mechanism should be implemented that requires the expansion of employment in those firms with high profitability. Over many years, and with different programs and administrations, it has been demonstrated that "incentives" to promote employment (such as tax breaks and soft credits) have wasted public funds without improving employment levels. For this reason a radically different course should be followed that links profits to the creation of new jobs. The creation of productive work that meets social needs is a challenge to be met by all of society; it cannot and must not depend exclusively on the self-interest of managers or capitalists. It is unacceptable that sackings are synonymous with efficiency. The aim of any economic process should be the expanded organization of work to meet unmet social needs, and not the destruction of jobs in the name of profit.
Finally, public support should be assured to workers' self-administrated factories and small enterprises. Experts in the Ministry of Social Development estimate that under existing conditions just 20 percent of these projects could survive, as most lack basic resources necessary to face capitalist competition. Nonetheless, in a context of genuine employment expansion these enterprises could play a very positive role.
An Overall Improvement of Salaries
The inflation that followed devaluation provoked a general but unequal reduction of real incomes. Informal workers were hurt the most, as their average monthly income is 313 pesos (us$110), and the impact of major hikes in food prices has been terrible. This sector receives miserable wages and is not covered by social security, retirement, or health plans. They are not protected by the laws that govern working conditions and compensation. The world of informal employment that involved 25 percent of the workforce at the beginning of the 1990s is now the fate of 45 percent of all workers. Poverty affects, then, not only the "excluded" but also nearly half of the "included."
To end this situation, it is necessary to force the legal registration of all workers. This step is vital to correct the brutal division of the labor market. Without the incorporation of these workers into the formal universe of social and legal protection, no official measure will have any real effect. The highly publicized announcements of marginal minimum wage increases, absent this step, will continue to reach no more than 20 percent of all workers.
The aim of the popular economic program should not be to legalize the existing misery, but to reverse it through a real increase in minimum salaries. The increase should mean an effective floor for all workers. This level cannot remain at the existing 350 pesos (us$121) established by the government. It must be near the 716 pesos (us$247) officially recognized as necessary to cover a basic total basket of goods and services-the lowest amount needed not to be classified as poor. It makes no sense to speak of a "minimum salary" at any lower level.
Another sector is composed of formal workers, whose average salaries are estimated nowadays to be 718 pesos (us$248). For them the postdevaluation deterioration was not as harsh as in the informal and excluded sectors; some compensation was granted to them. It is estimated that their wages have fallen around 20 percent since the end of 2001. Meanwhile, during the same period, the benefits of the vast gains in productivity that have been observed in most sectors have been completely absorbed by the employers. Wage costs for firms are at the lowest level since 1990.
Public employees comprise another sector. Their salaries have been kept strictly frozen at the demand of the IMF. The fiscal surplus program was established and maintained with this restrictive condition, unmodified in the face of the unexpected increases in public revenues.
A popular economic program must be centered in the recovery of purchasing power. An immediate 20 percent salary hike in the private sector and 30 percent in the public sector, together with the proposals set out above, would engender a recovery that could cover the whole population.
It is false to claim that "there is no money for everybody." More than enough resources are available if debt payments cease (12.5 billion pesos), a progressive tax reform is introduced, and a tax is levied on recent extraordinary profits.
EDI has also elaborated proposals to cope with other basic aspects of Argentina's economy, such as the situation of privatized firms, the collapse of the private financial sector, the situation in the farming and industrial sectors, the problems of the regional economies, and the need to introduce without delay an investment plan addressed to the decaying basic infrastructure. Our commitment is to study alternatives not only as to what must be done, but also how to do it.A Contribution to the Popular Movements
The current political context in Argentina is very different from that of early 2002, when we put forward our first document (published in English by Monthly Review, April 2002). The country is neither living through an explosion such as that of the end of 2001 nor the gigantic collapse of all economic activity that marked 2002. Nonetheless, the misery and suffering of the majority of the population remains the same, and for this reason our proposals are timely and relevant. The members of EDI have set out to analyze the distinct pattern of each phase of the process that has Argentina in its grip, observing cyclical behavior, the evolution of the productive system, and trade and financial trends.
We do not aim to compete with any foundation or consulting firm, to quantify variables, or to make short term forecasts. Our goal is different. We aim to contribute positively to the extensive movements fighting against neoliberalism and capitalism. We gather proposals, programs, and local publications that arise from the popular resistance, and develop their content. Our aim is to transform concepts in programs and local announcements into solid proposals. We seek to offer arguments against fashionable but regressive economic opinion, particularly those presented as "progressive" but justifying exploitation, unemployment, and the degradation of working people.
This ideological battle is much more important (and much more complex) now that the governments of Latin America hide their actions with anti-neoliberal rhetoric, though maintaining the same basic anti-popular political, social, and economic models. As economic free-market orthodoxy has lost leverage, heterodox ideas have taken their place continuing to justify the status quo as inevitable, natural, and without alternative. The members of EDI reject this naturalization of misery and openly oppose those economists who are applauding the existing course. We continue to promote debate of those measures that could make possible economic reconstruction in favor of the popular majority.
This is a favorable moment to advance this project because the dominant classes have partially restored political stability and economic growth but have not been able to deactivate social protest. A new movement to battle for basic social change based on labor, the unemployed (piqueteros), and the parties of the left is today a vital and real possibility. We present this document of the Economistas de Izquierda as a contribution to the elaboration of a common economic program.
Signed by Luis Becerra, Jose Castillo, Eduardo Crespo, Alfonso Florido, Guillermo Gigliani, Eduardo Lucita, Claudio Katz, Jorge Marchini, Andres Mendez, and Pedro Resels -- Buenos Aires, April 2004
Tuesday,Feb 22 2005, 07:33:23 PMTsunamis of Environmentalism's Death: Thefts...
Tsunamis of Environmentalism's Death:
Thefts and Tricks of the
By Rachel Guevara and Jason Martin
1800-2000 wds – (Revised March1, 2005)
*** -See Newest MER Release:
The Call to the International for Post-Capitalist Participatory Democracy and Revolution
http://real-left.tripod.com/index.blog?entry_id=635738
(See Intro in comment section below)
Further righteous attacks on US-EU moderate activism, the Democratic Party or the vagueness of anti-globalization protesters is not necessary. Enough of the people in these groups will see history unfold rapidly in the next year and they will likely grasp the gravity and direction of their actions. Tariq Ali, Hugo Chavez, James Petras and the first two papers in this series: Lessons Learned, have pointed out enough reasons why most groups are lost and dysfunctional. Due to the large financial rewards up for grabs in the US-EU we will document only one more of these serious black holes in thinking and alternative institution building found in the corners of the Empire's last bastions of claimed morality: Environmentalism ( activism en toto?). (2)
In the
A Great Debate rages among the Enviro and Narrow Left elite over the meaning of activism in the USA-EU. The Death of Environmentalism and how to enhance the charade of fighting global warming is the agenda. Three to five billion dollars in donations and the world hang in the balance.
The ecological time bombs of trade (invasive species) and global warming are ticking away. The environmental movement has failed and should die so something better can take its place. We need to address the “real” issues which Ted Nordhaus and Mark Herstgaard have brought to light:
The world cannot change in time to stop global warming. (NOTE 1)
The leaders of USA environmental groups (Enviros) and the US social change groups (Narrow Left) (NOTE 2) will not connect the issues of the poor, the environment, the global economy or the wars of US imperialism because that would require that they risk their careers and lives. Real change violates their idea of change: slow, cautious and all inclusive. Giving the rich essentially vetoes… each day it looks more like the Enviros want the problems to get so big that they can trumpet: “Well we tried, but now it is too late.”
Technical fixes aren't sufficient to deal with climate change, species loss, deforestation or other environmental threats. The global economy has to be transformed which is a bigger problem than environmentalism has faced in the past… Ditto, the single-issue constituencies: labor, women, civil rights. They're faltering and need to think of themselves as a political movement, figure out what values they share and ways to organize accordingly.
In "The Death of Environmentalism" Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger, question the strategies of the US Enviros and the Narrow Left. This is a “double agent attack on single issue politics from the right wing of the Narrow Left.” Nordhaus (Apollo Alliance) pretends to be a broad coalition of groups and ideas but the focus is labor unions, jobs and national political power though elections. Nordhaus only once mentions “Addressing a post-Global Warming world”, but his proposals fit snuggly into the G W Bush program of global domination and surviving a post-Global Warming world. (NOTE 5).
Without a rapid decline in consumption in the rich countries all environmental issues are hopeless and the chances of meaningful social change are non-existent. Resource wars and wars of imperialism will be the only issues left. These are the challenges and time limits that we face (NOTE 8) "It would be foolish to underestimate the challenge of checking the consumption juggernaut," concludes Christopher Flavin. "But as the costs of unbridled appetites grow, the need for innovative responses becomes clearer. In the long run, meeting basic human needs, improving human health, and supporting a natural world that can sustain us will require that we control consumption, rather than allow consumption to control us." -- State of the World 2004. (NOTE 10)
Key Points for Understanding the Death of Environmentalism and Single-Issue Politics
USA Enviros have failed to build political, social or moral power around global warming. They have mis-educated the people about trade, invasive species, mega cities, industrial farming, economics and the trade-offs between growth and sustainability. These are all intimately linked. Disconnected education is everywhere in the
Nordhaus agrees with these points, but the debate over the Death of Environmentalism is a con job – a “Good cop / Bad cop” trick – with both groups (Enviros (Sierra Club)/Apollo Alliance) worried that if they don’t make some noise and act like they are on top of their game then the funders could move on or the gullible members, donors and progressives might figure out how badly they have been tricked and robbed. Citizens might even tie this billion dollar scam into the con jobs done by Democrats for decades.
Fake environmentalists pretend to struggle with Narrow Leftists over billions of dollars in donations and grants (acquired from Imperialism!) Fascist US presidents and “radicals” alike praise democracy (even US-styled democracy) and they all pretend happily – or not so happily – that there is nothing else that can be tried. The real radicals and the Real Left (Hugo Chavez and the Bolivarian Revolution) are attacked or ignored by their natural allies. Greens form coalitions in
The planet is heating up rapidly as is the Global Economy and somehow these issues are kept separate. Technocrats trot around to Global Warming or
If Enviros cannot address the need to reduce consumption in the rich countries then they are assisting the destruction of the planet by misleading people into thinking that tinkering (recycling, bike-riding, ) or cleaning up air and water pollution in the
From an environmental perspective, the most striking thing about the Sierra Club/Pope (and the Apollo group's) response is their love of consumption growth (stability for the
US Anarchists, radicals and Change the World Without Taking the Power advocates lack class consciousness or an appreciation (sympathy, information) of global struggles. They reject alternative economics because that would be planning. They do almost nothing to resist their own country’s plunder and pillaging because they might have to work with communists and the like. The
One cannot have just a simple-minded plan of how the world works or how to resist – not against the uncouth
Everything has to come together – the earth, the sky and the waters and fire. This will happen slower in some ways in
Even if the US joined the Kyoto protocol, that would be only a symbolic step since the agreement only prescribes that the most important industrial states reduce their emissions of six greenhouse gases five percent by 2012 compared to 1990. According to the data of science, a 50 percent reduction by 2050 is necessary. An 80 percent reduction would be necessary if the right of third world societies to catch up in industrialization were considered.
The time of warnings has now expired unused. The catastrophe is at our door. The ecology problem cannot be separated from the economy problem. …An ecological awakening from the middle of society is crucial. This happened in
The Greens wanted to change the consumer mentality of the masses. They discussed the questions about living- and working conditions less dependent on cars and whether less meat consumption leading to less methane output with less livestock breeding wouldn’t be welcome on account of the better health of consumers. All this seems forgotten...
KEY POINTS
1.
2. There is no way to avoid the catastrophe of global warming because the capitalist model of consumption growth and rampant pollution to reduce costs combines with US greed to guarantee massive increases in greenhouse gases.
3. To survive in this post-global warming future of brutal US imperialist wars, the few remaining moral people in the
4. There are billions of dollars in potential funding up for grabs in the
5. There is a process or hierarchy of resistance and movement building that can guide our efforts to stop imperialism and protect the environment. The basis of this hierarchy is that we must be honest and probing about our goals (near term and long run); about the strategies that could achieve them; and deeply open to debate and to clearer thinking than in the past. The Real Left needs to make sense – AND be understandable, with real solutions to all of the linked problems.
NOTES Part II:
1.)) NOTES I.: Part 1 of the Series Lessons Learned: From The Failure of Politics and Vision in North America To the Steady Victories of the Social Movements in South America – George W Bush’s Eternal Triumph
or The Andes to the Rescue of the World - http://mer130.tripod.com/index.blog?entry_id=606875
http://newswire.indymedia.org/en/newswire/2005/01/818213.shtml
http://margotbworldnews.com/archive/2005January/Jan25/rescue.html
2. )) NOTES II. : a.) In this paper we refer to the largest groups of the
b.) For a view of some Enviro leaders see St.Claire’s book review at: http://zmagsite.zmag.org/JulAug2004/mclellan0804.html
“ Jon Roush’s salary is $125,000 annually. He is president of the Wilderness Society whose
c.) We use the term Real Left to denote leaders and groups that make sense in the world of 2005. The standout examples of this type of thinking are the people of
d.) We refer to the leaders and groups working on single or narrow issue social change issues as the Narrow Left. Most of the old left falls into this category too, because of its lack of environmental understanding and its failure to factor in social issues and perspectives. Much of what is referred to as the New Left should also be categorized as the Narrow Left because of their general fuzziness and lack of a well worked-out plan. The only exception we have come up with were the Sandinistas of Nicaragua ( 1978-1990 ) who seemed to have had a very workable and comprehensive plan but were thwarted by massive
e.) Examples of this fuzzy or narrow left in the US are: Global Exchange, CPUSA, the US Green Party, Ralph Nader, WILPF, Move On, Answer, Narco News, Fair Trade Network, Indymedia, Global Action, many more (all?) and many aspects of the WSF.
f.) What is the Organizers’ Collaborative? Information Clearinghouse (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=US+social+change+groups)
Though there are 30,000+ social change groups in the US, these groups often do not feel sufficiently connected to the movement they are a part of. ... www.organizenow.net/pdf/brochurec.pdf
For a huge list of social change activities in the
3.)) NOTES III.: January 19, 2005; http://www.circleoflife.org/blog/julia/
4.)) NOTES IV. .) a.) Mark Hertsgaard see: http://www.markhertsgaard.com/Articles/2004/EnviroChallenge/
b.) "The Death of Environmentalism,” presented to a grant makers meeting, October 2004, by Ted Nordhaus and Michael Schellenberger (S and N) :
http://www.thebreakthrough.org/images/Death_of_Environmentalism.pdf
This report would not have been possible had many of the country’s leading environmental and progressive leaders not been courageous enough to open up their thinking for public scrutiny: Dan Becker, Phil Clapp, Tim Carmichael, Ralph Cavanaugh, Susan Clark, Bernadette Del Chiaro, Shelly Fiddler, Ross Gelbspan, Hal Harvey, David Hawkins, Bracken Hendricks, Roland Hwang, Eric Heitz, Wendy James, Van Jones, Fred Keeley, Lance Lindblom, Elisa Lynch, Jason Mark, Bob Nordhaus, Carl Pope, Josh Reichert, Jeremy Rifkin, Adam Werbach, Greg Wetstone, V. John White, and Carl Zichella. We are especially grateful to George Lakoff for teaching us how to identify category mistakes and to Peter Teague for continually challenging us to question our most basic assumptions,
b.) “The institutions that define what environmentalism means boast large professional staffs and receive tens of millions of dollars every year from foundations and individuals. Given these rewards, it's no surprise that most environmental leaders neither craft nor support proposals that could be tagged "non-environmental." Doing otherwise would do more than threaten their status; it would undermine their brand.
Environmentalists are particularly upbeat about the direction of public opinion thanks in large part to the polling they conduct that shows wide support for their proposals. Yet
c.) S and N: “Part of what's behind America's political turn to the right is the skill with which conservative think tanks, intellectuals and political leaders have crafted proposals that build their power through setting the terms of the debate. Their work has paid off. According to a survey of 1,500 Americans by the market research firm Environics, the number of Americans who agree with the statement, "To preserve people's jobs in this country, we must accept higher levels of pollution in the future," increased from 17 percent in 1996 to 26 percent in 2000. The number of Americans who agreed that, "Most of the people actively involved in environmental groups are extremists, not reasonable people," leapt from 32 percent in 1996 to 41 percent in 2000.
The truth is that for the vast majority of Americans, the environment never makes it into their top ten list of things to worry about. Protecting the environment is indeed supported by a large majority -- it's just not supported very strongly. Once you understand this, it's much easier to understand why it's been so easy for anti-environmental interests to gut 30 years of environmental protections.”
d.) S and N: “Talking about the millions of jobs that will be created by accelerating our transition to a clean energy economy offers more than a good defense against industry attacks: it's a frame that moves the environmental movement away from apocalyptic global warming scenarios that tend to create feelings of helplessness and isolation among would-be supporters.”
e.) S and N: “Consider what would happen if we identified the obstacles [to stopping Global Warming] as:
The radical right's control of all three branches of the
Trade policies that undermine environmental protections.
Our failure to articulate an inspiring and positive vision.
Overpopulation.
The influence of money in American politics.
Our inability to craft legislative proposals that shape the debate around core American values.
Poverty [ Nowhere a mention of reduced consumption in the OECD or the problems of increased consumption in the rest of the world].”
g.) S and N: “And if the political prospects for action on GLOBAL WARMING appear daunting in the U.S., don't look to China for uplift: the 1.2 billion person country, growing at 20 percent a year, intends to quadruple the size of its economy in 30 years and bring 300 gigawatts -- nearly half of what we use each year in the US -- of dirty coal energy on-line.
The challenge for American environmentalists is not just to get the
h.) S and N: "The major national environmental groups focusing on climate -- groups like the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Union of Concerned Scientists, and the World Wildlife Federation -- have agreed to accept what they see as a politically feasible target for 450 parts per million of carbon dioxide ... [That] may be politically realistic, it would likely be environmentally catastrophic."
In our interview, Gelbspan told us that environmentalists' failure to achieve more is "because they operate in
i.) The debate is serious when even the British Economist carries it: Hotting up - Feb 4th 2005
http://www.economist.com/agenda/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3630425
5.)) NOTES V.: a.) How Apollo snuggles up to GW Bush world domination:
http://www.apolloalliance.org/strategy_center/a_bold_energy_and_jobs_policy/ten_point_plan.cfm
The Ten-Point Plan for Good Jobs and Energy Independence
1. Promote Advanced Technology & Hybrid Cars:[ Technology always benefits the
2. Invest In More Efficient Factories: [Helps keep US competitive, the population assuaged and prepares the
3. Encourage High Performance Building: [To save energy since most of the world will embargo
4. Increase Use of Energy Efficient Appliances: [See responses 1,2,3]
5. Modernize Electrical Infrastructure: [Great idea to protect vulnerability of US to domestic terror attacks and a big subsidy to nuclear weapons manufacturers like GE]
6. Expand Renewable Energy Development: [Great domestic PR and would have been a great idea – if implemented – 10 or 20 years ago before Bush (s) went to war in Middle East – now it can only serve as a reminder of our follies and as a defense against energy embargoes/disruption. Renewables outside of hydropower are a tiny fraction of power – many so-called renewables – forests, agricultural biomass fuels and even wind are not really renewable as they require soil mining or a huge industrial infrastructure!]
7. Improve Transportation Options: [Jobs for votes and loyalty- National morale and defense]
8. Reinvest In Smart Urban Growth: [see response 3]
9. Plan For A Hydrogen Future: [Corporate subsides and to help the big oil companies that will go broke when their assets are nationalized or destroyed]
10. Preserve Regulatory Protections: [Thrown in to hold on to the quasi-Green vote, only to be implemented as a moderating growth strategy]
BONUS: # 11. Build 50 Nuclear Power Plants [Not one of their proposals (yet?) – but one they will have to swallow if they do not reduce consumption and energy use 50- 80 percent in the OECD – or the
b.) http://www.apolloalliance.org/strategy_center/podestadoc.cfm
“After all, there are more than 220 million cars, trucks and SUVs in this country logging more than 15 trillion miles annually. The auto industry in this country is responsible for 6.6 million jobs nationwide.
What happens to those jobs -- and what happens to the workers and the families who depend on those jobs -- if
[WRONG, WRONG! – I have shown this statement to several moderate environmentalists and they all laughed without me telling them what point I was interested in. Most people have already debated this when the fuel cell – hydrogen issue came up a few years ago. The underlying problems are not population growth, what kind or how much fuels (or carbon) are burnt – but instead the whole lifestyle of consumption, wealth chasing and the car culture that makes Wall Marts, commuting, sprawl, travel and trade possible and necessary.
c.) NOTES – The Apollo Alliances supporters show how deep this right wing conspiracy reaches and probably what gullible fools many groups are: (Bold De-notes conspirators, Italics denote those whom we hope are just naive) (http://www.apolloalliance.org/about_the_alliance/)
(It would be nice to know why groups like World Watch and the Nature Conservancy did not sign on to Apollo’s industrial proposals)
Supporters include: Senator Maria Cantwell, MS Congress (D-WA); President Leo W. Gerard, The United Steel Workers of America; Representative Jesse Jackson Jr., US Congress (D-IL); Carl Pope, Executive Director of the Sierra Club;
Phil Angelides, California State Treasurer; President Andrew Beebe, Energy Innovations, An Idea Lab Company; Chairman Julian Bond, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP); President Thomas Buffenbarger, International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers; Henry Cisneros, former Mayor of San Antonio, Texas ; Jan Hartke, Executive Director, EarthVoice; Vice President Gerry Hudson, SEIU Local 1199
Rep. Jay Inslee (D-WA); Mitch Kapor, founder of Lotus Systems and Mitchell Kapor Foundation; Bill Lucy, Secretary/Treasurer, AFSCME; William Lynch
William McDonough, Architect, Author, Educator; Kathleen A. McGinty, Secretary, Pennsylvania Department of Energy; President Terence M. O’Sullivan, Laborers’ International Union of North America ; Art Pulaski, Secretary-Treasurer, California Labor Federation; Governor Ed Rendell, Pennsylvania; Anthony Thigpenn, Executive Director AGENDA; President Danny Thompson, Nevada Labor Federation; AFL-CIO; AFL-CIO Industrial Union Council (IUC);
National Heavy and Highway Alliance; Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU)
American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME); Bakery, Confectionary, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers Intl. Union (BCTGM); Boilermakers Union (IBB); California Labor Federation
Graphic Communications Industrial Union (GCIU); Illinois AFL-CIO; Indiana AFL-CIO; International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM)
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW); International Brotherhood of Teamsters (IBT); International Union of Electrical Workers (IUE-CWA); King County Labor Council, AFL-CIO; Laborers' International Union of North America (LIUNA); Minnesota AFL-CIO; Paper and Allied Chemical Employees (PACE); Pennsylvania AFL-CIO; Service Employees International Union (SEIU); Sheet Metal Workers International Association (SMWIA)
Transportation Workers Union (TWU); United Automobile and Aerospace Workers (UAW); United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW); United Mine Workers of America (UMWA); UNITE!; United Steel Workers of America (USWA); Blue Water Network; Center for Environmental Citizenship; Center for Environmental Health; Ceres; Coalition for Environmentally Responsible Conventions; The Detroit Project; Environment 2004; Environmental Law and Policy Center; Greenpeace USA; Healthy School Network; Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy; League of Conservation Voters; National Wildlife Federation; Natural Resources Defense Council; Project Democracy; Rainforest Action Network; Republicans for Environmental Protection; The Sierra Student Coalition; South Carolina Coastal Conservation League; Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS); Alternatives (AGENDA); Black Farmers USA; Coalition of Black Trade Unionists (CBTU); Jim Hightower; Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy; South Carolina Coastal Conservation League; Urban Agenda; Agnus Gund; Beldon Fund; The Belvedere Fund; The Bullitt Foundation; Nathan Cummings Foundation; The Energy Foundation; The Ford Foundation; French American Charitable Trust; General Service Foundation; The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation; The John W. and Clara C. Higgins Foundation; John Hunting; Move On; New Land Foundation; The Overbrook Foundation
Rockefeller Financial Services; Tides Foundation; Town Creek Foundation
The United Nations Better World Fund; The Wallace Global Fund; The Institute for America’s Future; The Center on Wisconsin Strategy; The Common Assets Defense Fund; The Breakthrough Institute (Michael Shellenberger (The S in S and N) is Executive Director of The Breakthrough Institute; Carol/Trevelyan Strategy Group
d.) For a view of a complex and slightly hard to label character see:
http://www.nathannewman.org/log/archives/001957.html
Apollo was no unique victim of the Kerry campaign. I don’t blame Kerry for the campaign he ran. I’ve come to realize that the election was lost years ago.... The obstacles we face are the same obstacles any “progressive”[bold and quotes by ed.] faces when trying to explain the need to think differently about problems and solutions to liberals who insist on putting all problems and solutions in traditional, single-issue categories....
6.)) NOTES VI.: a.) Michael Crichton and the end of radical environmentalism;
http: //www.seacoastonline.com/news/dover/01282005/editoria/61389.htm
b.) http://www.yubanet.com/artman/publish/article_17589.shtml
State of
c. For a more balanced skeptical analysis, see: Hotting up - Feb 4th 2005
http://www.economist.com/agenda/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3630425
7.)) NOTES VII.: Anarchists and US activists first attacked Chavez for being authoritarian. When that proved untrue they said he was a popularity seeking old male. When they realized that it is not a sin to be popular or male – and hard not to be both in a Latin American nation, the
8.)) NOTES VIII.: a.) How could ENVIROS or anyone imagine winning political majorities behind real reform or environmental issues anytime soon – especially anytime soon enough to do anything meaningful about Global Warming? They can’t, they won’t and all of this is a clever con to raise money, protect ENVIRO and Narrow Left careerists and to keep an enraged public from cutting off money or switching their donations to groups that really could do something positive; groups like FSA (See: www.andescircle.facces.com)
b.) http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/1E2507FE-1F0E-499F-8057-B28917BEE59B.htmThe Kyoto Protocol requires industrialised signatories - excluding the
9.)) NOTES IX.: .: a.) August- September 2002, Political Economy of a Narco-Terror State, Zmag by Rachel Guevara or see Znet link at: http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=2261
The Colombia article was begun by Marcel Idels who asked Jason Martin to assist with fact checks and footnotes. Rachel ended up re-writing and re-formatting the whole thing. The credit was to go to Ecosolidaridad Andes – as the web link shows, but Rachel got the print credits – which she totally deserved. She has been the brains and the details behind many of the articles published by myself and other groups on www.Anncol.org and in Earth First Journal for several years.
10.)) NOTES X .: a.) http://www.worldwatch.org/press/news/2004/01/08/
b.)
c.) http://english.epochtimes.com/news/4-9-14/23084.html
d.) http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/news/nts42259.htm
11.)) NOTES XI : a.) income of a few ENVIROS and their Grantors:
Greenpeace: Income $25,152,770 (2001)
Earthsave : Income $330,353 (2002)
Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy : Income $3,623,577 (2001)
Sierra Club: Income $75,441,137 (2001)
Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) : Income : $49,298,504.00 (2002)
Union of Concerned Scientists: Income: $8,113,136 (2002)
Tides Foundation: Income: $151,637,364 (2001)
Agnes Gund Foundation: Grants awarded : $6,225,764. (2003)
Bullitt Foundation: Grants awarded: $6,802,772 (2002)
Audubon Society: Income: $ 80,717,000 (2003)
Nature Conservancy: Income: 865,831,000 (2004)
Sources: IRS form 990s; American
Above
Additional Enviro Groups:
American Canoe Association; The American Canoe Association (ACA); American Rivers; American Water Works Association (AWWA);
American Whitewater Affiliation (AWA); Earth First!; Environmental Defense Fund; Environmental Support Center; Environmental Working Group; For the Sake of the Salmon; Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics; Freshwater Society; International Rivers Network; Izaak Walton League; Know Your Watershed; League of Conservation Voters; National Wildlife Federation
Rainforest Action Network 22. River Management Society; River Resource; World Stewardship Institute; Zero Water
c.) Income of environmental groups: $1.8 billion in 1982 and $3.5 billion in 1999 (http://www.sacbee.com/static/archive/news/projects/environment/graphics/graphic1a.html)
http://www.houstonmarineseminar.com/pdfs/2001/Pyne.pdf.
d.) http://www.sacbee.com/static/archive/news/projects/environment/20011021.html
Information gathered by The Bee, though, shows the volume of federal support for environmental groups is substantial, and growing. Last year, about $137 million flowed to 20 major environmental nonprofit groups -- an average of $377,000 a day -- up 27 percent from 1999. Since 1998, more than $400 million in federal money has been granted to environmental groups. Four groups -- The Nature Conservancy, Ducks Unlimited, the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, and the World Wildlife Fund -- have gotten more than two-thirds of the money since 1998. More than 15 nonprofits received $1 million a year or more. Most large environmental groups take government grants, but some -- such as the Sierra Club and Greenpeace -- do not. More than half of the money is used to help groups purchase, restore or protect land and species. That process, which often involves mingling federal and private dollars to maximize their impact, has achieved dramatic results for fish, wildlife and open space across the
12.)) NOTES XII.: a.) There Is Something Different About Global Warming; Carl Pope (Sierra Club); http://grist.org/news/maindish/2005/01/13/pope-reprint/
Our favorite Pope “papal pap smear is: “Kyoto is an attempt to start down the road that everyone knows will have a very large bill, without ever deciding who will pay for the bill. Which is why, in my view,
This understanding that global warming is mainly a problem about who is going to pay -- which in turn depends on who we assume owned the sky to begin with … But if we frame global warming as pollution, and assert that the polluter should pay, then suddenly this otherwise completely abstruse, overly technical problem becomes much easier for the public to understand.
We can then get people to recognize that you [WHO?] shouldn’t be electrifying villages in
See the debate between Pope, S and N and the Real Left at: www.mer130.tripod.com
b.) As if the limp ideas found on his website were not enough to condemn Adam Werbach’s Narrow Left thinking (a friend of S and N) (http://www.3nov.com/images/awerbach_ied_final.pdf) as hewn from the same fabric as Pope, Werbach's goes on to say –
“Sierra Club Executive Director Carl Pope recently wrote that “environmentalism is part of a broader progressive movement.” If that were true, then we would:
1. Hold ourselves, not immigrants, accountable for the problems we create;
2. End the environmental movement’s population program;
3. Start a new campaign to enhance women’s right globally – for that is the only
ethical, causal way we know to slow the growth of the human population.
I proposed this in 1997, in 1998, and then stepped down from the presidency, frustrated that the organization would continue to invite these attacks until they let die the overpopulation fantasies within the Club.
These attacks continue to grow in strength and frequency because this cancer…”
But to think that you are solving the problems of ecology or of consumption by : “Start a new campaign to enhance women’s right globally – for that is the only ethical, causal way we know to slow the growth of the human population.” Is to utilize the same backdoor thinking that Pope criticizes. It is the economic system of Capitalism and the logic of growth that is the problem not population per se (though Capitalism also causes this as it impoverishes people and kills off their children). Increased consumption by
13.)) NOTES XIII.: a.) Tariq Ali: http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1223
b.) http://www.isreview.org/issues/33/tariqali.shtml
THE THEME at the World Social Forum was "Another World is Possible." One of the things that seem to plague the Left is a lack of a vision. It’s very articulate and clear about what it doesn’t like. It doesn’t like globalization, it doesn’t like imperialism and it doesn’t like American hegemony. What about projecting some genuine alternatives?
I THINK this is very important. It’s a point I stress often. We have a very large movement against global injustice but there’s no vision as to what should replace it. I often say to people that it can always start in a small way. When 45 years ago a bunch of neoliberal economists in Chicago, inspired by Frederick Von Hayek and Milton Friedman, began to articulate the theories of neoliberal economics, all the Keynesians and socialists were just laughing at them, mocking them, calling them nutty. Well, these completely nutty people, I’m afraid, have conquered the world. They utilized the regimes of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher and got close to power and their policies began to be applied. I say we have to get a group of people who actually sit down and work out an alternative plan. Simply stalking the summits–whether the G8, the G10 or whatever–is good, but it’s not going to solve our problems.
The most worrying thing for me is the following: When Argentina collapsed, everyone was triumphant, saying it shows the bankruptcy of neoliberal policies. Argentine politicians stood up and said, "We did everything we were told to do by the U.S. Treasury Department, by the IMF [International Monetary Fund] and the World Bank. Everything we’ve been asked to do for 10 years, we’ve done–and this is the result." Fine, but what’s the alternative? The alternative is not an easy one but the glimmerings of it are there. We have to argue for states in this region not to abdicate their responsibilities to international institutions, to take them on and say, "We are going to fight because that’s what our people need." It should be a very minimal program to start off with. "We don’t care what the IMF and World Bank say. We will intervene to provide free health care, free education and subsidized shelter for the bulk of our populations. And if you don’t do that, we’ll take you on. Come and occupy our countries directly and rule them."
This is the demand of
Friday,Feb 18 2005, 05:32:56 PM1. MASLOW'S HIERARCHY OF NEEDS ; The Search...
1. MASLOW'S HIERARCHY OF NEEDS ; The Search for Understanding; by Janet A. Simons, Donald B. Irwin and Beverly A. Drinnien; West Publishing Company, New York, 1987
Maslow has set up a hierarchic theory of needs. All of his basic needs are instinctoid, equivalent of instincts in animals. Humans start with a very weak disposition that is then fashioned fully as the person grows. If the environment is right, people will grow straight and beautiful, actualizing the potentials they have inherited. If the environment is not "right" (and mostly it is not) they will not grow tall and straight and beautiful.
Maslow has set up a hierarchy of five levels of basic needs. Beyond these needs, higher levels of needs exist. These include needs for understanding, esthetic appreciation and purely spiritual needs. In the levels of the five basic needs, the person does not feel the second need until the demands of the first have been satisfied, nor the third until the second has been satisfied, and so on. Maslow's basic needs are as follows:
Physiological Needs
These are biological needs. They consist of needs for oxygen, food, water, and a relatively constant body temperature. They are the strongest needs because if a person were deprived of all needs, the physiological ones would come first in the person's search for satisfaction.
Safety Needs
When all physiological needs are satisfied and are no longer controlling thoughts and behaviors, the needs for security can become active. Adults have little awareness of their security needs except in times of emergency or periods of disorganization in the social structure (such as widespread rioting). Children often display the signs of insecurity and the need to be safe.
Needs of Love, Affection and Belongingness
When the needs for safety and for physiological well-being are satisfied, the next class of needs for love, affection and belongingness can emerge. Maslow states that people seek to overcome feelings of loneliness and alienation. This involves both giving and receiving love, affection and the sense of belonging.
Needs for Esteem
When the first three classes of needs are satisfied, the needs for esteem can become dominant. These involve needs for both self-esteem and for the esteem a person gets from others. Humans have a need for a stable, firmly based, high level of self-respect, and respect from others. When these needs are satisfied, the person feels self-confident and valuable as a person in the world. When these needs are frustrated, the person feels inferior, weak, helpless and worthless.
Needs for Self-Actualization
When all of the foregoing needs are satisfied, then and only then are the needs for self-actualization activated. Maslow describes self-actualization as a person's need to be and do that which the person was "born to do." "A musician must make music, an artist must paint, and a poet must write." These needs make themselves felt in signs of restlessness. The person feels on edge, tense, lacking something, in short, restless. If a person is hungry, unsafe, not loved or accepted, or lacking self-esteem, it is very easy to know what the person is restless about. It is not always clear what a person wants when there is a need for self-actualization.
The hierarchic theory is often represented as a pyramid, with the larger, lower levels representing the lower needs, and the upper point representing the need for self-actualization. Maslow believes that the only reason that people would not move well in direction of self-actualization is because of hindrances placed in their way by society. He states that education is one of these hindrances. He recommends ways education can switch from its usual person-stunting tactics to person-growing approaches. Maslow states that educators should respond to the potential an individual has for growing into a self-actualizing person of his/her own kind. Ten points that educators should address are listed:
We should teach people to be authentic, to be aware of their inner selves and to hear their inner-feeling voices.
We should teach people to transcend their cultural conditioning and become world citizens.
We should help people discover their vocation in life, their calling, fate or destiny. This is especially focused on finding the right career and the right mate.
We should teach people that life is precious, that there is joy to be experienced in life, and if people are open to seeing the good and joyous in all kinds of situations, it makes life worth living.
We must accept the person as he or she is and help the person learn their inner nature. From real knowledge of aptitudes and limitations we can know what to build upon, what potentials are really there.
We must see that the person's basic needs are satisfied. This includes safety, belongingness, and esteem needs.
We should refreshen consciousness, teaching the person to appreciate beauty and the other good things in nature and in living.
We should teach people that controls are good, and complete abandon is bad. It takes control to improve the quality of life in all areas.
We should teach people to transcend the trifling problems and grapple with the serious problems in life. These include the problems of injustice, of pain, suffering, and death.
We must teach people to be good choosers. They must be given practice in making good choices
For a short discussion on limitations of Maslow see:
http://www.netmba.com/mgmt/ob/motivation/maslow/
RELATED IS ERG THEORY (BELOW)
http://www.netmba.com/mgmt/ob/motivation/erg/
Thom Hartmann writes:
When Abraham Maslow wrote Motivation and Personality back in 1954, he didn’t have the advantage we do now of a reasonably thorough knowledge of neurochemistry. He observed people and the way they interacted with the world, and developed his theory of the "hierarchy of human needs," which ranged from the need for safety to the need for social interaction to the need for what some may call religious experience.
But Maslow had his own particular neurochemistry, which colored his observations...and caused him to overlook a critical point. This overlooked basic human need may, in fact, be so critical to an understanding of human nature that understanding it gives us a revelatory flash of insight into the nature of personality disorders and specifically attention deficit disorder (ADD). This is what I call "The Need To Feel Aliveness," and it also explains why some people have multiple jobs, mates, and lifestyles, whereas others settle into one fixed routine and stay with it their entire lives, apparently quite happy in their stasis.
To understand how Maslow could have overlooked a fundamental human need which drives the behaviors of as much as 30% of our population, it’s important to first understand how a part of the brain is wired.
[Ed. Note: We suspect that this ADD neurosis and the lack of meaning "Need to ZFeel Alive" are modern and artificial problems (ie. symptoms of the general neurotic nature of existence in modern dis-connected/alienated ives) not commonly fouind in humans and not relevant to a sustainable future. ]
http://www.thomhartmann.com/maslow.shtml
Monday,Feb 14 2005, 06:13:03 PMVoices From A Real Left: Tariq Ali, James...
Voices From A Real Left: Tariq Ali, James Petras and the Cry of the Excluded
A Primer for Part III. The Series Lessons learned:
The Real Left is Defined by Decentralization
MARCEL MIRANDA: INTRODUCTIONS: The
Mountain regions are often poor areas involved in border or ethnic/indigenous conflicts. Popular movements in
(See Breakdown in the
The US is militarizing the Colombian borders with Venezuela and
The Global US policies of trade (WTO) are a great disaster and so they seek to penetrate the economies of each region and offer them big investments and trade deals if they go along with the
ALBERT ACOSTA: A global cry against "globalization"!
"Globalization", in quotation marks, is not a new phenomenon. Neither is it a strategy in itself. It is a process which is part of the globalization of capitalism. And as a consequence, the current phase of this process, when one looks at the results, turns out to be fragmented and fragmenting. Thus, globalization as a goal, if we extrapolate from this process as it presents itself today, is impossible: from an ecological standpoint alone, it is impossible to duplicate the standard of living of the wealthiest on a global scale; nor, in the logic of the system, is there productive employment for all the planet's inhabitants.
Nevertheless, through the massive diffusion of elite consumerism - assisted by the media -, and in a pirouette of absolute perversity, its values have infiltrated even those groups without any access to this consumption, those excluded from equity, from clean air and water, from peace, from employment, from rights, from land, from their future, from the media themselves... Nearly all of society has been inoculated by a kind a of global illusion; a phantasm that creates and recreates exclusion, which feeds competition by destroying solidarity, that rewards inhuman wealth. If employment increases - seen as a premonition of inflation - the stock market falls and financial performance suffers, as is happening now in the
If we naively take the perspective that everything is being globalized and that all that remains is for us to globalize ourselves, we fall into a trap. We have known for a while that the world is round, but it seems we don't grasp that its capitalist roundness is exclusionary..." http://movimientos.org/grito/show_text_en.php3?key=242
TARIQ ALI: In an interview (January 2004), the editor of the New left review, Tariq Ali said that he was inspired by the Romain Rolland quote that Gramsci used: Pessimism of the intellect and optimism of the will. "We have to be hard-headed and realistic. In the past there was a lot of fantasy politics. The 1960s were great times. I don’t regret anything we did then. There was a craziness as well. There was this notion by the Weather Underground and the Black Panthers that by challenging the empire by force you could win. It was crazy. You cannot win unless you win over a majority or at least a sizable segment of the population. We have got to win over that consent to our side. Otherwise, we lose. Even when it goes against us, we have to tell the truth, not raise false hopes. Capitalism is not cracking up today, and it may take a long while. It won’t disappear until people see an alternative with which to replace it. The one alternative they saw from 1917 to 1989 was the false dawn of Communism." – Tariq Ali; http://www.isreview.org/issues/33/tariqali.shtml
JAMES J. BRITTAIN: "WHILE STRONGLY SUPPRESSED, information is out there ... examining the social and political dynamics within
Smoke and Mirror Attacks Beyond the
By Marcel Miranda (MER)
On June 18th, 1954, United States-backed Colonel Carlos Castillos Armas attacked
The Last Scramble for Legitimacy and Power
A number of power-political-ideological tendencies have come forward of late to state the harder truths about the political failures on the Left, the certainty of the global warming catastrophe and the dark designs of
“The end of all things is near.
From the religious standpoint, the annihilation of our planet comes by fire. 2 Peter 3:10 says, "The day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also, and the works that are therein, shall be burned up." I take the religious man’s side and believe that though the world will be consumed, humans will have a choice whether to partake in that consumption. I believe everybody secretly wonders when that day will come, but I know that no one will expect it. And when these things begin to come to pass then look up and lift up your heads .... for your redemption draws near.” -- A poor white American waiting for a bus who commented on how he hated Bush but could not vote for the Baby-Killers, the Democrats..
During the Andean-US Free Trade Meetings, December 2004, a group of writers named United Students launched their attack on US-based activism. Before the Seattle WTO protests in 1999, we had tried to raise the issues of goals, planning and a method for prioritizing the revolutionary factors of agency and threat. At the Cancun WTO we witnessed the difficulties in formulating joint global statements and the shock among many EU and third world participants at the near complete ignorance of many US and Australian activists.
We still hold out the hand of open debate and we sincerely seek an honest appraisal of the various movements. But as Ted Dornhaus found there are no avenues for discourse among environmentalist ( or anyone working on change in the
http://grist.org/news/maindish/2005/01/13/werbach-reprint/
If activist groups in the US-EU are honest then they will admit they have no meaningful goals and that their strategies of education or mobilization cannot overcome the strong right wing drift of US political culture. Clinging to outdated techniques of organizing or resisting against such a force is to make yourself and your power meaningless and impotent... Everyone should cease working politically at any level in the
James Petras extends the critique to many of the new quasi-left regimes in Latin America: "History will note 2004 as the Year of Infamy, not only for the crimes and plunder committed by the
Anti-imperialist advocates around the world level similar complaints against the
So, it’s an interesting situation and I think at
Tariq Ali:
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1223
Why He Crushed the Oligarchs: The Importance of Hugo Chávez, By TARIQ ALI
http://www.counterpunch.org/tariq08162004.html
Raise the Banner of Investigating for Truth
James Brittain (Ph.D. candidate in
JAMES PETRAS: US Presidential elections: a view from the left
"The most significant aspect of the
The Patriot Act in its original and revised versions effectively eliminated the Bill of Rights, and the protection of citizens from arbitrary arrest by the State. Both major candidates and Parties endorse it. The
http://www.nadir.org/nadir/initiativ/agp/free/wsf/petras-wsf.htm
February 17, 2002
ALEXANDER COCKBURN: "Year after year the women’s movement, labour unions, the mainstream environmentalists, civil-liberty watchdogs, liberal advocacy groups and public-interest networks stayed mute, as Clinton triangulated Republican positions and sold poor single mothers, working people, forests, mountains and constitutional protections down the river.
Ross Perot and his Reform Party actually cost George Bush Sr his re-election in 1992, yet Perot never drew a tenth of the abuse for his presumption that Nader does. [20] Of course the Democrats richly deserve the challenge. Through the
http://www.newleftreview.net/NLR26301.shtml
http://www.counterpunch.com/cockburn10282004.html
If Alexander Cockburn Tariq Ali, Jeffery St. Claire, Hugo Chavez, the MST in Brazil and Bolivia, Felipe Quispe, JamesPetras, Walden Bello, Vandana Shiva, Arhundati Roy, Ken Livingston, Ward Churchill, someone from the German (or EU) Greens, maybe the Uruguayan Leftists, the Chilean Communist Party, Ruben Zamora, the Cubans, radical ecologists and other activists and professors (Global Exchange?) would come forward with all of their power to support a clear plan for a new type of participatory socialist – or solidaristic economy – then many people, activists and movements would come together from around the world to promote this vision. The deadlock of US-world politics would be broken and with some luck and hard work the South would begin to construct the vibrant models that are possible there. (Who else could help??)
TARIQ ALI: "I think it will be useful if the Global Justice movement—and there are many different strands in it—came and saw what’s going on here. What’s the problem? Go into the shantytowns, see what the lives of the people are, see what their lives were before this regime came into power. And don’t go on the basis of stereotypes. You cannot change the world without taking power, that is the example of
http://www.counterpunch.org/tariq07242004.html
MARCEL MIRANDA: "There is no way to fix the whole world, the choices are: whom to help. This is the big lie behind the Enviro and other Narrow Left groups in the US-Eu wastelands. This silence, the lack of debate and the contrived difficulties of organizing are both masked and recreated through the false slogans that are key to
HUGO CHAVEZ: "Imperialism not invincible"
Chavez added that
"The south also exists... the future of the north depends on the south. If we don't make that better world possible, if we fail, and through the rifles of the U.S. Marines, and through Mr. Bush's murderous bombs, if the is no coincidence and organization necessary in the south to resist the offensive of neo-imperialism, and the Bush doctrine is imposed upon the world, the world will be destroyed,"
Chavez warns of drastic weather changes that would bring catastrophic events if no action is taken soon, in reference to uncontrolled or little regulated industrial activity. Chavez added that perhaps before those drastic changes take place, there will be rebellions everywhere "because the peoples are not going to peacefully accept impositions such as neoliberalism or such as colonialism."
"Everyday I become more convinced, there is no doubt in my mind, and as many intellectuals have said, that it is necessary to transcend capitalism. But capitalism can't be transcended from with capitalism itself, but through socialism, true socialism, with equality and justice. But I'm also convinced that it is possible to do it under democracy, but not in the type of democracy being imposed from
Chavez said that
http://www.nadir.org/nadir/initiativ/agp/cocha/indexfr.htm
End Notes:
http://margotbworldnews.com/archive/2005January/Jan25/rescue.html
10617
Below an analysis of
http://newswire.indymedia.org/en/newswire/2005/02/818538.shtml
Persons interested in reading constructive material surrounding the revolutionary processes being tangibly carried out in Colombia must make certain to acquire materials written by Nazih Richani (Kean University – New York, U.S.), Jim Sacouman (Acadia University – Nova Scotia, Canada), Henry Veltmeyer (Saint Mary’s University – Nova Scotia, Canada), Timothy Wickham-Crowley (Georgetown University, Washington D.C., U.S.), the National Union of Public and General Employees (NUPGE) (Canada), Canadian Union of Postal Workers (CUPW) (Canada), Garry M. Leech (Colombia Journal), Green Left Weekly, Counter Punch, Justice for Colombia, Colombia Peace Association
http://www.anncol.org/side/1071
In 2004, from the oil industry budget we utilized $4 billion in social investments, education, health, micro-credits, scholarships, and housing, aimed at the poorest of the poor, what neoliberals call waste of money. But that is not a waste of money because it is aimed at empowering the poor so that they can defeat poverty. He added that "that money before stayed out of
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/docs.php?dno=1011
Monday, Mar 01, 2004
1. Global Exchange Reality
Wednesday,Feb 9 2005, 12:38:50 AMHERE IS A DRAFT of the long - braod - deep -...
HERE IS A DRAFT of the long - braod - deep - and crazy debate that we want
to get going - will post soon to a site with better dialog boxes - etc...
Intro Readings and Musings:
1.) International Taskforce: Global Warming Close to Tipping Point
By J.R. Pegg http://www.ens-newswire.com/
Latin American debt doubled since 1986 – 200 million people in
2.) David Brower Epicenter
The building could be turn out to be nice looking, relatively speaking,
from the drawings, but as Jim Doherty says (Culture Change's Bike
Blogger), "the building would crowd the sidewalks." What's more, he
reminds us, the plan may violate the
building would be right near a serious earthquake fault. Hence, Jim calls
the proposed complex "the David Brower Epicenter."
>From the architect's website:"Named after the Sierra Club’s founder [sic] , David Brower, the project houses 90 apartments, arts space, a restaurant, underground parking [and above ground parking - ed.], and... (to read remainder of this essay and
see photos, go to
3.) Adam Werbach's
http://www.3nov.com/images/awerbach_ied_final.pdf
Time to say what we now need to do. Some will say that the expansive role I propose is not the job of the environmental movement, that our job is to protect THINGS, like redwoods and parks. If you are one of those people, you have missed the point of my speech tonight. Our role is to bring our core belief – interdependence – to every man, woman, child, politician, institution, investor, corporation, funder, regulator and bureaucrat. I was taught by my grandfather, a deeply religious man, that to be Jewish was to be chosen. Not chosen as in more special, or more important than anyone else, but chosen for the responsibility of tikkun olam – the repair of the world. Likewise, I say to you tonight, that the environmental movement is chosen as well. Our founding principle requires that we break out of our narrowness and inspire the world, the Democratic Party, and every citizen in
Translated from Latin, this means: “This is the place where death rejoices to teach those who live.”
I tremble at them, because this is not an easy speech for me to give. I know in my mind that to forego the examination of death is to fail to honor the dead. But all I can think about right now is my love for what environmentalism was. Nobody enjoys an autopsy, and yet its value to life is indisputable. The word “autopsy” means to "see for yourself.” An autopsy is the key tool that doctors use to determine whether their diagnosis was correct, and to see if the treatment was effective. In the past, autopsies were common – in the 1950s, 50 percent of deaths had autopsies performed. Today, that number is barely 10 percent. (http://www.3nov.com/images/awerbach_ied_final.pdf)”
We need to fight hard to stop the Right from turning back the clock, but resistance won't be enough. If we don't want four -- or eight or twelve -- more years of the same, it's time to be honest with ourselves and ask tough questions about how we helped create the mess we're in. And we need to follow up this soul-searching not with big, amorphous happy dreams but with the pragmatic idealism of Machievelli's skillful archer, who seeing that the object he would hit is distant, and knowing the range of his bow, takes aim much above the destined mark; not intending that his arrow should strike that high, but, in flying high, it may land at the point intended.
Here are some first steps for us to take:
Choose your side: Are you a progressive or a conservative? If you’re a conservative, and believe in dismantling our government, selling off our common assets, and endless war, but you still love nature, we wish you well, but we need you to leave this movement. We invite you to attack the conservatives, but don’t try to make us ignore the plight of immigrants, stay out of gay rights or stay silent on the war. You are making us weak. If you think you’re a conservative and you don’t believe
in these destructive ideas – you are not. Join us if you’re willing to question everything.
Dismantle Environmental Programs in Foundations: Easy money reinforces bad behavior. If our end goal is to change the way Americans think, we need to fund strategic initiatives that move the public’s values. It’s time for the rest of the philanthropic world to start funding long-term strategic initiatives that are measured by their effectiveness at changing the public’s values, not by
protecting a particular thing.
Create a Culture of Learning: Our institutions need feedback mechanisms. They need to become what Peter Senge calls “learning institutions.” In the words of columnist Richard Luov , environmentalism has become a tradition, not a movement. The ad hominem attacks that I’ve witnessed on my friends and colleagues Michael Shellenberger, Ted Nordhaus and Peter Teague for writing the paper Death of Environmentalism: Global Warming Politics in a Post-Environmental World, have made me embarrassed for the environmental movement. I welcome the thoughtful critiques of that paper and this speech. Movements want to move forward; traditions hold on to the past for a sense of security. We need to move forward.
Fire our Lobbyists and Policy-Makers: Our task is not to affect the current Congress – they know what they think, and no amount of nifty policy language will convince them to reduce our carbon output by 70 percent. Leave a few troops to play defense. But, when your R&D department turns out 20 years of losing ideas, it’s time to fire them. Watch The Apprentice if you need some help. Every board should also put their executive director up for review. My board has done it to me.
Make executive directors go to a red state and try to explain environmentalism to the average American. If they don’t have a plan to activate the values we share in the majority of Americans, then they need to move on.
Take over the Democratic Party: We have been deluding ourselves into believing that “everyone”supports the environment. The Republican Party – as an institution – has declared war on us. The Democratic Party claims to be our ally, yet fails us. It’s time for us to drop our veil of bi-partisanship and fight to fix the deeply broken Democratic Party.
GUEVARA Response: As if these limp ideas were not enough to condemn Adam Werbach's (a friend of S and N) as hewn from the same fabric as Pope, Werbach's goes on to say –
“Sierra Club Executive Director Carl Pope recently wrote that “environmentalism is part of a broader progressive movement.” If that were true, then we would:
1. Hold ourselves, not immigrants, accountable for the problems we create;
2. End the environmental movement’s population program;
3. Start a new campaign to enhance women’s right globally – for that is the only
ethical, causal way we know to slow the growth of the human population.
I proposed this in 1997, in 1998, and then stepped down from the presidency, frustrated that the organization would continue to invite these attacks until they let die the overpopulation fantasies within the Club.
These attacks continue to grow in strength and frequency because this cancer…”
4.) http://zmagsite.zmag.org/JulAug2004/mclellan0804.html
St. Clair’s examination of the sorry evolution of environmental organizations is trenchant. The Gang of Ten including, among others, the Natural Resources Defense Council, Friends of the Earth, and the League of Conservation Voters. These once esteemed defenders of our air, water, and ecological diversity have become largely compromised and ineffective. A recently perennial idea of the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), for example, is a “market oriented” approach to the environment that includes selling and trading “pollution credits.” Tacit resignation and surreptitious deal making are the hallmarks of the big greens, says St. Clair. For example they often collude in deals protecting these resources, looking the other way at the depredations of others; often subsequently turning the tables and advocating a trade of the mined, drilled, or clear-cut land for other valuable wilderness. Their modus operandi is such, for example, that they roar at the threatened drilling of the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge, because it is a fundraising cash cow, says St. Clair, but are silent about the equally threatened and ecologically sensitive nearby 23-million-acre National Petroleum Reserve in
The leaders of these groups are real charmers. The salary of G. Jon Roush is $125,000 annually. He is president of the Wilderness Society whose
http://www.worldwatch.org/live/discussion/63/
5.) Michael Renner: Gasoline consumption by automobiles is one of the biggest contributors to what -- The US has, since the 1930s, made a substantial, and rapidly growing commitment to establishing and maintaining political domination of the
6.) UNDER REPORTED DISASTER STORIES – DR No Borders -
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4458401&sourceCode=RSS
7.) Notes from the article Part 2 – NOTES ( FIn)
1.))
To the Steady Victories of the Social Movements in
or The Andes to the Rescue of the World - http://mer130.tripod.com/index.blog?entry_id=606875
http://newswire.indymedia.org/en/newswire/2005/01/818213.shtml
See St.Claire’s book review at: http://zmagsite.zmag.org/JulAug2004/mclellan0804.html
http://zmagsite.zmag.org/JulAug2004/mclellan0804.html
DEATH OF ENVIRONMENTALISM THE D E B A T E ::
Nation magazine (Jan. 3, 05, "Challenge to Enviros," by Mark Hertzand). I saw words that I had uttered and written many times for 20 years: "
"You could write a similar report about all the single-issue constituencies—labor, women, civil rights," Shellenberger says. "They're all faltering now. They all need to think of themselves as part of a larger political movement, figure out what vision and values they share, and find ways to frame their messages and organize accordingly." The only way forward, the authors argue, is for environmentalists to abandon their small-bore, politically neutral approach and launch a more expansive strategy aimed at building a political majority in the
Guevara: This attack on the eviros by Nordahus is an attack from the right. Their points are eminently valid, but rather than move the envors into the center-right wing of the defunct Democratic party, the Real Left would build a great coalition around a plan for changing the
Given the sophistication of the Sierra Club and big ecos and their foundations it should surprise on one if it turns out that this debate is a con job – like good cop – bad cop – with both groups worried that if they don’t make some noise and act like they are on top of their game then the funders could move on – or the guilable US members, donors and progressives might figure out how badly they have been tricked and robbed. They might even tie this eco- phoniness scam into the con job done by Democrats for several decades.
"I have to be very blunt here—they [imperialist US-EU] don’t feel threatened because there is an idealistic slogan within the social movements, which goes like this: ‘We can change the world without taking power.’ This slogan doesn’t threaten anyone; it’s a moral slogan. The Zapatistas—who I admire—you know, when they marched from
Guevara: We maintain that if any of these groups are honest, then they will quickly admit that they have no meaningful goals and that their strategies of education or mobilization cannot overcome the strong right wing drift of
Yes, the only activity of any real value to changing the world – to defeating capitalism and militarism – is to form a fundraising group.
USA people give almost 5 billion a year to environmental and social change groups, in the last year people gave the democratic party over 1 billion in dollars or assistance. – Imagine if just 10 percent of this money went to actually building resistance in
James Petras extends the critique to many og the new quasi-left regimes in Latin America: "History will note 2004 as the Year of Infamy, not only for the crimes and plunder committed by the
Guevara: "Without examples – we get the same old vagueness – political majorities ?? – anything worthwhile would take 20 years – except of course perhaps
Besides we already had a POLITICAL movement like Authors suggest – Ralph Nader and the Green Party – barley left and barely progressive – but pretty feeble even if it got twice the level of votes as in 2000. (4 percent? – would need to get around 20 percent to have a positive effect – and that could take 8 years to achieve and then that is just the beginning of the struggle, as the right wing would – and will anyway - win even more elections, nominate even more judges and institutionalize things that help their cause ( vouchers, homeland check points – national ID , the Draft... etc – many more – WTO plus plus... ) ) ))
Of course the response of the eco-grant fascists denialers is typical - Philip Clapp, president of the National Environmental Trust and a critic of the essay. “the last way to influence people is to start by saying everything you're doing is wrong."
It is this type of thinking – immature and evasive that is at the root of the fascism of the West. Any not mentally ill person would address the content - the challenges and the issues - not the style – the demented ghost of Susan Sontag haunts our culture well – she was another champion of style over content.
Of course the authors (S and N) of this fine salvo do not have much spine either – they think that you can reform the obese fact-cat enviros – any high school kid could see – even before reading the article that these pretend environmental groups need to disappear as fast as possible- and with at least a few sincere apologies.
The authors say that environmentalism's allegiance to single-issue politics and technical-fix solutions is the problem, but we are sure that either when they wrote the article or surely by now after listening to the childish responses of Poe et al – that they would agree – if they could (fear of ostracism, monetary loses, etc) - that the real problem is some kind of mental deformity common in US people and nurtured for decades by the left, the greens and the single issue (simple-minded) US way of learning, living and thinking. "
Guevara response: – Ha! – Of course the enviros and everyone else in the US shies away from tackling the TRANSFORMATION OF THE ENTIRE GLONAL ECONOMY – because that means class war, prolonged struggle and … and well they do not want to talk about he real world…
Anarchism and the decentralized future that the real left pursues are not different things - they may be different times... right now anarchism is decentralization – of decisions and government (power). That is all... or that is all that is different from it and the left, the piqueteros of
Guevara: One can not have just a simple-minded plan of how the world works or how to resist – not against the behemoth and uncouth
Everything has to come together – the earth, the sky and the waters and fire. This will happen slower in some ways in
There are many instances of this – the letters from Tarij Ali, James Petras, MOrEO MORE - and Alexander Cockburn and Almond – trying to show the movement masses that the leaders of US and many EU groups are diluting the seriousness of these times and not deciding how to form a coalition - both internally in their own nations and globally everywhere.
Guevara: Our thesis is that only through extending our conceptions of politics – which is another word for Power – extending it beyond the imaginary borders of nations can we create a better world.
There is nothing political that any
Nowhere could this perspective be more true than in the realm of free trade talks. The only
[7]
http://www.rebelion.org/noticia.php?id=7961
Shellenberger:
The movement has been unable to prevent George W. Bush's rollback of environmental protections; it is not making enough progress against the overarching threat of global climate change. Shellenberger adds, "we've lost all three branches of government to the hard right, which is hostile to the entire environmental project."
The only way forward, the authors argue, is for environmentalists to abandon their small-bore, politically neutral approach. What's needed is a more expansive strategy aimed at building a political majority in the
The authors interviewed 25 advocates and funders with the intention "to start a discussion about the limits of the environmental movement as it's currently conceived." Bill McKibben, (The End of Nature, 1989) applauds the authors for "trying to figure out how environmentalists can do better" and says their essay will be a focus of discussion at a conference on climate-change solutions he's helping to organize in January at
Little formal response emanates from the environmental movement's largest organizations and the foundations that support them. Peter Teague (Nathan Cummings Foundation) and Josh Reichert (head of the Pew Charitable Trust's environmental program, a major funder of climate-change activism) have declined to comment. Nor has the Green Group, a coalition of large environmental organizations working in
"But this is a case for modernizing the left, not for killing environmentalism," Pope writes.
Replies Shellenberger. "He agrees with us that we're losing and we need to rethink things. But he ends his paper by suggesting the same kind of solutions environmentalists have proposed for forty years: pollution controls and a series of NIMBY ["not in my backyard"] campaigns to stop global warming."
Other environmental leaders echoed Pope's claim that they already practice what Shellenberger and Nordhaus preach. "It was unfortunate Michael and Ted framed it the way they do [because] much of the movement already agrees that we have to speak in positive economic language and focus on values that connect us to the American people," says Bracken Hendricks (executive director of Apollo Alliance).
Ironically, Shellenberger and Nordhaus invoke the Apollo
Hal Harvey (heads the Hewlett Foundation's environmental program) says that if Shellenberger and Nordhaus's "strategies were five times stronger and their invective five times weaker, they would have much more effect."
"The implication is that had we tried nicely to have this debate, everything would have gone fine," responds Nordhaus. "Bullshit! This was the only way to get their attention. We're saying there's a dead body in the room, and it's starting to stink. They're saying it's not dead. Did we stir things up? Yes. And we're proud of it."
A SAMPLE of ENVIROS AND CRITICS
http://grist.org/news/maindish/2005/01/13/little-doe/
Death Wish
An interview with authors of the controversial essay "The Death of Environmentalism"
By Amanda Griscom Little (Q)
Q: Your criticisms echo those we're hearing about the progressive movement at large -- criticism that liberals focus too much on precise policy prescriptions rather than communicating a broader values message.
Shellenberger: A critique similar to the one we've made on environmentalism could be made of many other single-issue movements -- women's rights, abortion rights, anti-war, criminal justice, labor, and so on. Each of those so-called movements has turned itself into a special interest in defining the problem so narrowly and offering technical policy solutions instead of an inspiring vision.
Nordhaus: Consider this: Most of those local lawsuits are litigating the Endangered Species Act or the National Environmental Policy Act. Meanwhile, under the new Republican-dominated Congress, it's not inconceivable that we're going to lose the ESA and NEPA. So while we may win a few more local lawsuits, the entire regulatory framework could get repealed.
Shellenberger: Our argument is that you could win all your little lawsuits, we could pass all the legislation we have on the table locally and nationally, but we would be no closer to achieving our larger objectives. Think about how devastating of a critique that is: If we got everything we wanted right now, we would still