People who want to save the Earth from the ravages of global warming face a perennial problem: How do they translate their concerns into actions that will create real change? One barrier standing in the way of meaningful action is fuzzy-headed thinking on the part of those truly concerned about global warming. So worried are these activists, that their solution to… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (31)Page 1 of 1 pagesIn many ways “global warming” and whatever its causes, possible
solutions, etc. etc. is beside the point. The issues of finite resource
depletion and a population growth that has overshot the renewable
carrying capacity of what is a limited system (the planet, that is)
are far more important to have people fundamentally
understand. Global warming is already being wholly embraced now as a marketing
‘opportunity,’ and though more and more people are becoming aware and
accepting of it’s reality, it is coming to be understood as something we
will solve through the magic of ‘technology’ and by simply altering
our consumer choices to ‘greener’ ones. Without understanding the
mathematics of growth and a system of limited resources there won’t
be acceptance of the unavoidable conclusion that the solution to our
problems is “less.” Less consumption, less economic activity, less
people, less travel, etc. Even if global warming wasn’t an issue at
all we’d still be coming up against all the same fundamental problems
of overpopulation, environmental poisoning, resource depletion.
Personally I don’t see how the tools of our current global system of
activity and interaction are possibly going to even attempt to solve
the problems we face when the very ‘toolbox’ is built of the
impossible notion of perpetual growth.All of which is a windy way of saying global warming is a symptom,
not the disease, and I completely agree that the recent change to Democratic control of Congress is practically meaningless vis a vis real action toward global warming. I firmly believe that focusing on educating people about the fundamental issues stated above (which in fact are ultimately the underlying causes of global warming) rather than the potential horrors of global warming will be a more effective means of inciting action.
Posted by Honeychrome on Apr 14, 2007 at 2:32 PM I’m not sure about your cynacism about the Democrats. Al Gore is a Democrat. At the very least the Democrats are mentally present in the 21st century enough to respect the scientific research behind the claims regarding global warming. They are far more likely to do something than those who are (a) in the pocket of the big corporate energy interests and (b) tending toward a medieval view of modern science.
Posted by cabdriverinchicago on Apr 14, 2007 at 5:28 PM Honeychrome,
Yes, we have a potential problem of finite resources and virtually no limit to population and consumption. However, so far natural and man-made disasters have kept the overall problem from becoming critical.
When I was young, over population was the “Global Warming Scare” of the day. By 2000 it was said we would be unable to feed the huge numbers. As with all crises this is partly true. There are areas which can’t be fed. Mostly because of human intervention preventing humanitarian aid — not due to a total population or lack of food. As usual the human factor prevails.
As you pointed out — the assumption that it can be solved by altering our lifestyle overstates our influence and the effectiveness of the strategy.
This article gives the Freeze Movement as an example of misdirected effort. But, MAD worked because nobody wanted risk starting that chain of events AND… it never accidentally happened. Now we are in a situation where that is no longer necessarily true and still can’t mobilize enough common concern to protect against it. Life is precarious — as always.
In attempting to remove both the nuclear threat and the global warming one, there is a common assumption which I see as erroneous. They target the U.S. as (A) The cause (B) The solution. (We are part of each.)
It is a lot like the gun control issue — the cliché, “If guns are banned, only the criminals will have guns.” One only has to consider the War on Drugs to see the validity of the statement. The uncontrollable (an largely ignored) part in the equation is the human factor.
How can the emerging markets countries be made to comply with the solutions proposed when we cannot even force our own businesses to do so?
The author states the obvious regarding corporations, “They will never willingly sacrifice short-term profits for the long-term common good.” So too, countries such as China, India and others beginning to enter the modern era through manufacturing will act the same.It is a matter of Maslow’s Pyramid — the immediate need of survival — whether an individual, a corporation or a nation will determine the priority.
The author claims, “Political movements work when they mobilize a huge number of like-minded individuals and then use the ballot box to elect leaders who will change laws.”
How many like-minded individuals would it take to change a billion and a half Asians? What political movement will China cater to?
——————————— ;——-
Cabdriver,I fail to see any substantive difference in the parties anymore. Except for the recent short period of Republican Congressional control, the Democrats have ruled. They’ve sponsored and passed legislation very favorable to corporations and the wealthiest Americans at the expense of the rest of us.
Clinton was at least as “Republican” as either of the Bushes. W is about as conservative as a teenager with unlimited access to a credit card. The 36,000 plus lobbyists in DC are bipartisan spenders.
I’m very sure about MY cynicism… Social Security/Medicare, health care, environment, border security, job outsourcing and job quality, education, CEO pay (CEO pay vs avg. employee —1965, 46:1 2004, 411:1)
Both parties are — all talk — no action!
Posted by whattheheck on Apr 15, 2007 at 1:28 PM WTH,
Yes, your cynicism is sure. So utter and complete. So absolute and un-nuanced. In other words, it is the very recipe for the paralysis and inaction of which you despair.
Ironic, isn’t it?
Posted by luminous beauty on Apr 16, 2007 at 2:38 PM WTH, as usual you are right on target. Ignore the cabbie, he has been proven wrong on every issue and there are many, that we have debated.
Gore is full of himself. Anyone who’s a Demo has serious mental problems, not in a spurious medical sense, but epistemologically.
Only reason Dems won was the war and the fact that Bush is the biggest Big Gov Prez since LBJ. It’s scary. But the leftist morons who post here like the unluminous antibeauty and the colostomy bag cabbie
think the election was a mandate for socialism.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 16, 2007 at 3:59 PM LB,
“Yes, your cynicism is sure. So utter and complete. So absolute and un-nuanced. In other words, it is the very recipe for the paralysis and inaction of which you despair.”
I didn’t give them the recipe. I’m just reporting my perusal of the menu.
With no help from me — they’ve cooked the books, fattened their own incomes, passed out “Pork” and sandwiched in a number of perks. (I’d really like to see them stew in their own juice.) Incumbency brings its own reward, so why should they change anything? (It’s time they got their just desserts.)
Do your comments hint you are optimistic?
Which of the problem issues in my list do you expect them to act on responsibly? When? On what do you base this fantasy?
• Social Security
• Medicare
• health care
• environment
• border security
• job outsourcing
• and job quality
• education
• CEO pay
Posted by whattheheck on Apr 16, 2007 at 6:09 PM WTH,
You no doubt have heard before the truism that politics is the art of the possible. If you hold to some idealistic expectation of inerrant perfection from representational democracy, you are clinging to a vain belief and exposing yourself as an abject fool.
Doesn’t Mikey’s endorsement fill your belly with a nice warm and fuzzy feeling? That alone, methinks, would be substantial cause for re-thinking your position.
In the interest of remaining on topic, I will address only the issue of the environment among the grab-bag of subjects you offer.
Sitting on your fat cynical ass is the most effective means of ensuring that nothing that can be done will be done. Or you could take a moment to add your voice to a citizen petition in favor of the Sanders/Boxer Global Warming Pollution Reduction Act . It may not be the best possible law, but it is, in my humble opinion, the best one currently making its way through the Senate.
”...the House has already made some progress on energy issues.
Democrats got the ball rolling in their first 100 hours when the House passed HR 6, known as the CLEAN Energy Act of 2007. With 98 percent of Democrats voting in favor of it and 82 percent of Republicans opposing it, the bill aims ‘to reduce our nation’s dependency on foreign oil by investing in clean, renewable, and alternative energy resources, promoting new emerging energy technologies, developing greater efficiency, and creating a Strategic Energy Efficiency and Renewables Reserve to invest in alternative energy, and for other purposes.’
More succinctly, the bill’s primary goal is to take taxpayer money out of the pockets of the oil industry and put it towards investments in clean energy—which may explain the clear partisan split.”
To pre-empt the inevitable argument that European carbon cap-and-trade laws have been riddled with unexpected negative consequences, allow me to add that the sponsors have consulted with the Europeans extensively to ensure that such things are hopefully to be avoided in the proposed US law. Are such insurances certain to be free from other unintended consequences? No, but that is why legislation is always amendable. To reiterate my basic thesis, it is better to do what one can to solve a problem, than do nothing at all.
As I, so often before, have patiently responded over the years to your intransigent and stubborn embrace of centrist do-nothing moderation, informed mostly by seemingly ignorant opinion (or is it sly cupidity?), may I refer you to the salient words of the great Texas politician and political commentator, eclipsed, perhaps, in the small universe of remarkably sane voices from that particularily benighted state only by the late Molly Ivins, Jim Hightower. Two trenchant sceptics of the status quo who, nonetheless, are remarkable for their unsinkable and eternally progressive optimism:
There’s Nothing in the Middle of the Road but Yellow Stripes and Dead Armadillos.
Posted by luminous beauty on Apr 16, 2007 at 7:53 PM Loonymess,
Your nasty, pompous, reply reveals your simplistic approach as — Make lots of noise, then rally around the petition until they pass legislation which will make you feel as if at least something has been accomplished.
I notice you neatly avoided dealing with the real problem I highlighted — getting the 1 billion person polluter to jump on the green wagon.
China is buying up all the coal she can get. The air in the big cities there is already three times acceptable levels of pollution. They have only begun to join the global market and are not prone to accept advice from westerners no matter how far to the left they sit on our scale. Greed is a universal language, not an exclusively capitalistic trait. (Remember all the summer homes of the Soviet elite?)
As for Mike’s endorsement — to dismiss anyone’s view summarily because of prior disagreements is childish. I have mentioned before that this is only a forum for discussion and I can’t see any reason to get too heated over differing opinions. To use your frame of reference, that is the recipe which keeps congress from doing anything truly useful most of the time.
With the increase in incivility evident in congress and the continuing reduction of working days they show up for, I see absolutely no reason they will begin to accomplish anything in my list.
It may excite you if they manage to take a few dollars from corporations to put toward the environment, but it won’t those who have benefited from past legislation who will suffer the “negative consequences” — their parachutes are packed and ready. It will be the job of some poor middle-aged, middle income, average American that will be cut to offset the expense. That may be too cynical for you to accept, but I seen so much of it in the past 10 to 15 years not to bet on it.
I just did my youngest son’s income tax. At his age I was making at least 50 percent more doing the same kind of work. At his current income my taxes were less than half as much (in 1968 dollars). Congress has been screwing the American public for so long they don’t even feel it anymore.
If politics is the “art of the possible” as you mentioned, it mostly applies to those in office. They are getting everything they possibly can out of the system.
Posted by whattheheck on Apr 16, 2007 at 8:54 PM Unlumionous antibeauty, you have taken, yet again, much space to fart all over the place, spout off a lot of collectivist-statist bullshit. and say absolutely NOTHING. Your leftist sources have all been discredited and I speak for most here when I say that your tarty, farty, old boney countenance here is getting most irritating. Now even a BJ in a pinch ! Europe’s economy is going down the shitter and has been for YEARS, order the book Cowboy Capitalism from amazon. People like you worshipped the Soviets fordecades, then Mao, then Fidel, then Pol Pot, then Ho, then Chavez, now your last fallback the Krauts. PATHETIC ! Socialism has failed everywhere, YOU have failed everywhere, get a life and get out of ours.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 16, 2007 at 8:59 PM WTH,
Looniness? Nasty? Pompous? Simplistic? My, my!
If the above ad hominems and sloppy grammar are any indication, my graciously qualified and conditional statements must have hit a raw nerve. Well, if the shoe fits…
The ‘one billion person polluter’, as you put it, has indeed jumped on the green bandwagon. They are signatories to Kyoto and their responsibilities will increase as does their economic position. They are well on their way to cornering the world PV market. I myself own some SunSolar modules I bought at half the price of comparable US products. Please, also, try to understand that China’s hydrocarbon footprint is still half of that of the USA, roughly 1: 8 per capita.
P.S. All that dirty coal does serve to reduce GW through the high volume of particulate matter released, although that is only a short term and not a very attractive solution.
What are you doing to reduce your carbon footprint?
Please, try to stay on topic.
I don’t disagree with much of your concerns about Congress feeding at the trough. It is the part of the citizenry to hold their feet to the fire. Perhaps you have lost your stomach for it, but that is no reason to preach despair at those of us that remain committed and hopeful.
Mikey,ITT is a democratic socialist publication, dearie. I’m afraid it is you that is being intrusive. Though like a rat in a cellar, you seem to have made yourself something of a home here. What’s the matter? Nobody loves poor Mikey in Galt’s Gulch? I can’t understand why.
Posted by luminous beauty on Apr 16, 2007 at 11:21 PM LB, the objectivist and/or libertarian sites mostly don’t have forums and they are boring to boot. I’m sorry you have a problem with rats in your cellar but if you stop dumping garbage down there it might help. I subscribed to ITT from 1984 to 1997 so I’m aware of its nature. Are you always this condescendingly obnoxious ?
Posted by blondemike on Apr 16, 2007 at 11:45 PM I be nice, Mikey.
Much more than you deserve.
The fact that objective/libertarian sites are boring and don’t allow comments ought to tell you something. What was I saying elsewhere about the unexamined life?
I do appreciate (sometimes) the liveliness that you bring to these discussions. It is just too bad you cannot appreciate my appreciation.
Posted by luminous beauty on Apr 17, 2007 at 12:08 AM LB,
I can see from your last post just how you can manage to be optimistic.
• Kyoto: ”... they (China) are signatories to Kyoto…” (They get a free pass on regulations — The U.S. does not.) ”...and their responsibilities will increase as does their economic position.” (Yes, Dear, of course I’ll love you in the morning.)
The West is so enamored with the prospect of a billion “customers” they are wetting their pants. China’s offenses have been overlooked at every turn. The past three U.S. administrations have gone over to straighten them out on violations of property rights, trade barriers to our stuff, whatever and it’s the same old story every time —
They smile and bow, vowing to be good little capitalists and we smile and kiss ass. After all, they are just learning about “free enterprise.”
• This IS a beauty:
“China’s hydrocarbon footprint is still half of that of the USA, roughly 1: 8 per capita.”Hey, talk about offsets! Per capita China’s at least half of anywhere else. Maybe we can catch up a by letting in a few million more people here.
• “It is the part of the citizenry to hold their feet to the fire. Perhaps you have lost your stomach for it, but that is no reason to preach despair at those of us that remain committed and hopeful.”
When I hear the first “Ouch!” coming from the fire in D.C. you’ll get an apology and a round of applause from me. (Hint…You will need a flamethrower!)
Until then there will be only one hand clapping — over my mouth to stifle a laugh at your youthful naiveté.
Posted by whattheheck on Apr 17, 2007 at 12:58 PM WTH,
The Chinese had ‘free enterprise’ when we European types were living in dirt floor mud and wattle huts. Chinese carbon emissions are not at least half of anywhere else. Africa has much lower per capita numbers. Chinese carbon emissions are actually going down, which is the critical measure, is it not? Our’s, and our’s is by far the largest of any geo-physical region, are continuing to rise.
The first flame in DC was the last election. The RNC has been going “Ouch! Ouch! Ouch!” ever since. Did you miss the slapdown by Barbara Boxer of James Inhofe when Gore testified before the Senate Committee? Priceless! Your apology and applause is overdue. Corruption and incompetence eventually consume themselves. As Lincoln said, “You can’t fool all of the people all of the time.” Some fools, no matter how old they get, never learn.
Laugh all you want. It only shows that you must despise your grandchildren.
Posted by luminous beauty on Apr 17, 2007 at 2:24 PM LB,
You are easily convinced (providing it’s what you want to hear).
Only a few years back, China is where they were shooting their own citizenry in the street for doing just what you advocate for us to do here — trying to pressure the leaders.
They were able to get U.S. tech companies’ cooperation to limit internet information going into China — but you are willing to accept whatever data they allow to go out as truth!
RNC pain: The congressional internal “struggles” between parties are kabuki for people like you. The sad thing is too many of you guys buy into it. It’s just BS! Nothing will essentially change under Democratic control — they vote each other good deals and send our stuff into committee limbo.
I believe it was Clinton who said, “You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, but you only NEED to fool a pluality of them every four years.”
Posted by whattheheck on Apr 17, 2007 at 7:32 PM WTH,
I just realized something. You’re a lot like Twain and Vonnegut.
Except missing the wise and funny parts.
Have you ever heard of Sturgeon’s Law? 90% of everything is bullshit!
You’ve taken it so much to heart, you’ve completely lost sight of the 10% that is rare and beautiful.Such a pity.
Here is a present, from me to you:
Let me know if you can penetrate to the sweet sugar center of this little bitter-coated pill, old man.
Posted by luminous beauty on Apr 18, 2007 at 12:25 PM JB,
If we are going to stay at all near the ITT topics — there is nothing beautiful.
Sturgeon’s Law is an optimistic view of congress. Yesterday I watched Sen. Dorgan and Sen. Brown making the case for a turn around of US economic policy — they are among fewer than 10 percent who are in tune with reality.
IMO they were speaking to a less than half full chamber.
And your opinion?
Posted by whattheheck on Apr 18, 2007 at 1:01 PM At least you benefited from hearing their remarks, I trust?
Posted by luminous beauty on Apr 18, 2007 at 1:37 PM Even a dim bulb is brilliant against a black background.
“You see, you’re just like me. I hope you’re satisfied”
—-Bob Dylan
Posted by luminous beauty on Apr 18, 2007 at 1:51 PM LB,
“At least you benefitted from their remarks, I trust?”
No, not really.
You see, part of the reason I am fed up with congress, US political parties et al, is I have written scores of letters, emails since NAFTA went up for a vote in 1993.
They went to not only my “representatiives”, but to many others, as well as all major financial pubs, the AFL-CIO — anyone I could think of who might be able to get the attention of powerful structure.
The unions told me to mind my own business (which of course was dwindling with the globalization craze). I got several stock answers from congressmen telling me how great this was for US exports, how the consumer is benefitting, all the official data BS that TV spouts endlessly.
I’ve read at least a dozen books from which I can quote better data and examples of what our policies are doing to US workers and to (not for) foreign ones as well. Nobody with any clout gives a shit.
The internet organizations “dedicated to saving the jobs and economy” make it easy to send money and impossible to send an opinion or ask questions.
From here on it’s up to you, LB. Enjoy.
Posted by whattheheck on Apr 18, 2007 at 2:36 PM LB,
The beauty is I am done working and I made it to Social Security/Medicare just as my last client packed up their stock options and bonuses and went out the door.
Now I’m going out to work in my garden. (also beautiful)
Posted by whattheheck on Apr 18, 2007 at 2:40 PM WTH, just a truth in advertising warning, 100% of everything LB says is total bullshit.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 18, 2007 at 11:06 PM Mikey thinks everything beyond his severely limited comprehension is bullshit.
Surprize, surprize.
Posted by luminous beauty on Apr 19, 2007 at 12:35 AM You are right in that I can’t comprehend the incomprehensible which is 99.99% of everything you ever post.
Posted by blondemike on Apr 19, 2007 at 11:12 PM It seems you’re the only one here having such comprehension problems, Mikey. What does that tell you?
Posted by luminous beauty on Apr 20, 2007 at 12:50 AM Whattheheck, gardens are beautiful. I hope you don’t mind me thanking Luminous Beauty for the gift Posted by luminous beauty on Apr 18, 2007 at 6:25 AM .
Luminous Beauty, thanks. It was bitter and sweet. But mostly sweet!
Posted by David in Canuckistan on Apr 20, 2007 at 4:54 AM Hi,Y’all!
luminous beauty,
You poor dear. Don’t you see what you’re doing? You are getting pulled into a ridiculous verbal grappling with blondemike. You will never convince him because he is a myrmidon. He will argue and provoke from now until Lammastide, and you will never convert him.
If I’m not mistaken blondemike is the current incarnation that obnoxious professor from the rectangle state who likes to provoke people on this site for fun using more names than Sybil. He is readily recognized by his choice of vocabulary and the 1960’s insults he uses. Ah,well at least he can’t write under multiple names any more—so confusing and tiresome!
Ta-Ta!
Posted by Aunty Rightwing on Apr 23, 2007 at 6:32 PM Thank you for your concern Auntie F.
It is ridiculous, ain’t it?
Cheers!
Posted by luminous beauty on Apr 23, 2007 at 7:39 PM Compact fluorescents. They generate light but not heat. They last longer and will save you money in the long run. The only downside is the initial investment, which can be made gradually as people replace the old fashioned incandescents.
I use them in all of my fixtures except the ones that have dimmers.
Posted by wolf on Apr 23, 2007 at 9:41 PM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Joel Bleifuss
- Obama’s ‘Ben Tre Logic
- Block ’Em, Sock ’Em
- Buy Back Our Government
- A Specter is Haunting Dems
- Bailout Bandits
- Building Utopia
A new documentary profiles the rise and fall of a Depression-era utopian experiment in the Bronx.
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1979 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
462 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
427 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2007 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
