---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Marx Laboratory <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 8:51 PM
Subject: Climate Change and the Unrestrained Elite
To: Marx Laboratory <[email protected]>


Climate Change and the Unrestrained Elite

*Neoliberalism **known as market fundamentalism is not the root of the
problem: it is the ideology used to justify a global grab of power, public
assets and natural resources by an unrestrained elite.*


umankind's greatest crisis coincides with the rise of an ideology that
makes it impossible to address. By the late 1980s, when it became clear
that manmade climate change endangered the living planet and its people,
the world was in the grip of an extreme political doctrine, whose tenets
forbid the kind of intervention required to arrest it.

Neoliberalism, also known as market fundamentalism or laissez-faire
economics, purports to liberate the market from political interference. The
state, it asserts, should do little but defend the realm, protect private
property and remove barriers to business. In practice it looks nothing like
this. What neoliberal theorists call shrinking the state looks more like
shrinking democracy: reducing the means by which citizens can restrain the
power of the elite. What they call "the market" looks more like the
interests of corporations and the ultra-rich(1). Neoliberalism appears to
be little more than a justification for plutocracy.

The doctrine was first applied in Chile in 1973, as former students of the
University of Chicago, schooled in Milton Friedman's extreme prescriptions
and funded by the CIA, worked alongside General Pinochet to impose a
programme that would have been impossible in a democratic state. The result
was an economic catastrophe, but one in which the rich - who took over
Chile's privatised industries and unprotected natural resources - prospered
exceedingly(2).

The creed was taken up by Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan. It was
forced upon the poor world by the IMF and the World Bank. By the time James
Hansen presented the first detailed attempt to model future temperature
rises to the US Senate in 1988( 3), the doctrine was being implanted
everywhere.

As we saw in 2007 and 2008 (when neoliberal governments were forced to
abandon their principles to bail out the banks), there could scarcely be a
worse set of circumstances for addressing a crisis of any kind. Until it
has no choice, the self-hating state will not intervene, however acute the
crisis or grave the consequences. Neoliberalism protects the interests of
the elite against all comers.

Preventing climate breakdown - the four, five or six degrees of warming now
predicted for this century by green extremists like, er, the World Bank,
the International Energy Agency and PriceWaterhouseCoopers( 4,5,6) - means
confronting the oil, gas and coal industry. It means forcing that industry
to abandon the four-fifths or more of fossil fuel reserves that we cannot
afford to burn( 7). It means cancelling the prospecting and development of
new reserves - what's the point if we can't use current stocks? - and
reversing the expansion of any infrastructure (such as airports) that
cannot be run without them.

But the self-hating state cannot act. Captured by interests that democracy
is supposed to restrain, it can only sit on the road, ears pricked and
whiskers twitching, as the truck thunders towards it. Confrontation is
forbidden, action is a mortal sin. You may, perhaps, disperse some money
for new energy; you may not legislate against the old.

So Barack Obama pursues what he calls an "all of the above" policy:
promoting wind, solar, oil and gas( 8). Ed Davey, the British climate
change secretary, launched an energy bill in the Commons last week whose
purpose was to decarbonise the energy supply. In the same debate he
promised that he would "maximise the potential" of oil and gas production
in the North Sea and other offshore fields( 9).

Lord Stern described climate change as "the greatest and widest-ranging
market failure ever seen"( 10). The useless Earth Summit in June; the
feeble measures now being debated in Doha; the energy bill( 11) and
electricity demand reduction paper( 12) launched in Britain last week
(better than they might have been but unmatched to the scale of the
problem) expose the greatest and widest ranging failure of market
fundamentalism: its incapacity to address our existential crisis.

The 1000-year legacy of current carbon emissions is long enough to smash
anything resembling human civilisation into splinters( 13). Complex
societies have sometimes survived the rise and fall of empires, plagues,
wars and famines. They won't survive six degrees of climate change,
sustained for a millennium(14). In return for 150 years of explosive
consumption, much of which does nothing to advance human welfare, we are
atomising the natural world and the human systems that depend on it.

The climate summit (or foothill) in Doha and the sound and fury of the
British government's new measures probe the current limits of political
action. Go further and you break your covenant with power, a covenant both
disguised and validated by the neoliberal creed.

Neoliberalism is not the root of the problem: it is the ideology used,
often retrospectively, to justify a global grab of power, public assets and
natural resources by an unrestrained elite. But the problem cannot be
addressed until the doctrine is challenged by effective political
alternatives.

In other words, the struggle against climate change - and all the crises
which now beset both human beings and the natural world - cannot be won
without a wider political fight: a democratic mobilisation against
plutocracy. I believe this should start with an effort to reform campaign
finance: the means by which corporations and the very rich buy policies and
politicians. Some of us will be launching a petition in the UK in the next
few weeks, and I hope you will sign it.

But this is scarcely a beginning. We must start to articulate a new
politics: one that sees intervention as legitimate, that contains a higher
purpose than corporate emancipation disguised as market freedom, that puts
the survival of people and the living world above the survival of a few
favoured industries. In other words, a politics that belongs to us, not
just the super-rich.

*By George Monbiot, Monbiot.com*

10 December 2012

http://www.alternet.org/environment/there-no-stopping-climate-change-unless-we-can-mobilize-against-plutocracy

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB.

Reply via email to