Let's take a sober look at the situation in the environment movement-- A reply to Tord Bjork
Tord Bjork raises a number of important points in his reply to my critique of Al Gore's "24 hours of reality" about global warming, but fantasy about market measures. In particular, he claims that I haven't described the environmental movement properly when I refer to the division between establishment environmentalism which adheres to neo-liberal market solutions such as those put forward by Al Gore, and militant activists fighting to protect the environment and for environmental justice. And in effect, he is critical that, although I support the militant activists, I am calling for a change in various of their orientations. Instead he pictures an environmental movement which is mainly, at least outside the US and "some especially anglo-saxon countries", automatically engaged in class struggle whenever it makes an environmental demand. And he wishes to defend this movement against the meddling of the general political left-wing. But what does he put forward as the left-wing? He is talking about the "established left", the social-democrats, the main trade union leaders, the supporters of state-capitalist regimes, and so forth. He says, quite justly, that "many times the main conflict erupted between environmental protesters and social democratic movements or communist parties in the Soviet bloc and China." He refers to conflicts that broke out at the Copenhagen climate summit between "the traditional reformist and revolutionary left" and militant protesters, and he also refers to various forces that denounced the environmental movement as basically just a middle-class concern, or that seek to defer environmental concerns until a future society. I agree with him in opposing the social-democrats, the class-collaborationist trade union leaders, the parliamentary reformists, and various groups that proclaimed themselves revolutionary but support state-capitalist societies in the Soviet bloc or China. The Communist Voice Organization was founded in 1995, and we laid stress from the start on dealing with the crisis in the established or traditional left, including especially that part of the left that calls itself communist. We are also opposed to the social-democrats, and have exposed their role in imposing austerity on the working, as well as the fact that two of the ruling parties overthrown in the Arab spring were affiliated with the "Socialist International". We regard opposing such bourgeois forces -- no matter in what socialist or revolutionary clothing -- as part of the issue of waging the class struggle. And in particular, with regard to the Copenhagen climate summit, we backed the protesters, not those who repressed them. (See www.communistvoice.org/44cCopenhagen.html) Tord Bjork says that it is necessary to bring the class struggle into the working class movement. And I agree. That's what we have been doing. We want to do that. But Tord Bjork closes his eyes to the situation in the environmental movement when he denies the need to bring the class struggle into the environmental movement. Let's see. Is it really true that establishment environmentalism is only a major force in the US and a few other countries? What about the Kyoto Protocol? Isn't this establishment environmentalism in Europe? Aren't the officials and capitalists who implement this the class brothers and sisters of Al Gore? What about the years when the German Greens and the Social-Democrats ruled Germany in a coalition government? Can we forget Joschka Fischer, Green party member who was Vice-Chancellor of Germany and Foreign Minister in the Schroeder government, and who backed war in Afghanistan? Or the role of the Greens in the imposition of the Hartz IV social cutbacks on the German working masses? Or should one pretend that the Green Party of Germany, and other Green Parties, aren't really part of the environmental movement? One could go on. Establishment environmentalism is quite prominent outside the US. But what isn't so prominent, in the US or outside it, is a good critique of establishment environmentalism. Was there really, for example, a widespread critique of the "24 hours of climate reality" with the purpose of clarifying a path for environmentalism different from that of Al Gore? Tord Bjork doesn't directly address this. But in essence, his answer is, "so what?". He writes that "what is not needed is the claim that ideological understanding is more important than collective action." I find it amazing that a critique of Al Gore could be opposed on the grounds that it supposedly impedes collective action. On the contrary, the more criticism of Al Gore and establishment environmentalism, the more encouragement there will be for mass action. One of the my points of criticism of Al Gore's introduction to the "24 hours" is that he ignores the role of the militant movement; in fact, his presentations are designed to orient people to working with the corporations, not fighting against them. And yet, when I criticize Al Gore for this, I am said to be "claim(ing) that ideological understanding is more important than collective action." We need mass actions, and we also need mass understanding. They go together. We need an orientation that leads to actually preserving the environment. The fact is that the environmental movement is not clear on what such an orientation would be. Al Gore advocates, among other things, the carbon tax. The carbon tax is another neo-liberal market measure. It is going to fail such as badly as "cap and trade" or carbon trading. Moreover, if it is implemented in full severity with the backing of the environmental movement, it is likely to generate mass revulsion at environmentalism. The carbon tax is at best a dead end for the movement, and at worst threatens a major fiasco. So it is a real danger for the movement. It's not just a distant theoretical issue. It's an immediate practical issue in Australia, Canada, France, etc. But the carbon tax is widely supported in the environmental movement. Even groups that oppose various forms of carbon trading often support the carbon tax. The Friends of the Earth International, for example, opposes carbon trading, but supports the carbon tax. Tord Bjork writes off Al Gore's influence. He says that "Al Gore's present attempt at reentering the climate debate is rather a sign of a decline in the neo-liberal effort to create illusions about how problems in our societies and the world can be solved primarily by market mechanisms." But establishment environmentalism has enough influence so that Friends of the Earth International backs one of its main efforts to promote market mechanism, the carbon tax. It seems premature to talk of the irrelevancy of Al Gore and establishment environmentalism when even various organizations that denounce market mechanisms in theory, still support one of the main market mechanisms, the carbon tax, in practice. The carbon tax, and other market mechanisms, are designed to avoid comprehensive environmental and economic regulation and planning. And this market-fundamentalist stand has widespread influence in the present environmental movement. But without a perspective of instituting some regulation and planning, there is no way of avoiding illusions in market measures. Meanwhile, in practical politics, the carbon tax has served as a way of uniting people behind establishment environmentalism. Moreover, it's important to bring the class struggle into the issue of regulation and planning. Overall economic regulation and planning isn't necessary socialist or pro-people in itself. The bourgeoisie (including the state-capitalist bourgeoisie in supposed "socialist" countries) can and does use planning to exploit the masses and impose its plans. There has to be a struggle for a new type of regulation and planning which actually protects the environment. There also has to be a struggle that mass livelihood is regarded as something that has to be planned in its own right, and not as something that will be the automatic consequence of "green jobs". I think these are some of the important issues that come up with regard to Al Gore's agitation. It's not helpful to the building of the mass environmental movement if we overlook the problems that exist, such as the present lack of consistent struggle against establishment environmentalism and the confusion over the general ways to reach environmental goals. There needs to be a frank and sober evaluation of the present state of the environmental movement, as there also has to be of the present state of the general left-wing movement. There needs to be major changes in both. -- Joseph Green [email protected] Communist Voice magazine: www.communistvoice.org > Lets challenge the wrong left wing assumptions about the environmental > movement > > In response to " '24 hours of reality' about global warming, but > continuing fantasy about market-based measures: AL GORE AND THE > CLIMATE REALITY PROJECT" by Josephe Green. > > > Bring the class struggle into the environmental movement is the claim > made in the subhead in an article criticizing Al Gore by Josephe Green > in a coming number of Communist voice. This is a common opinion among > many left wing groups. The critique made by Green against Al Gore is > relevant. Gore uses environmental arguments in a false way to make > claims that market based solutions can solve the climate crisis. The > claim by Green that the class struggle have to be brought into the > environmental movement is not relevant. It can rather be described as > a grave misinterpretation common among main stream left wing > organizations. A misleading interpretation that is a threat against > solving the environmental crisis as the propaganda for market based > solutions above all other solutions that Al Gore and others are > promoting. > > The threat against the solution of the climate and other environmental > crisis by the notion that the class struggle has to be brought into > the environmental movement is at least twofold. Firstly it promotes a > false picture of the environmental movement which helps those that > want to integrate the movement into market and state routines. > Claiming that the class struggle has to be brought into the movement > is wrong. In fact it is the opposite. The class struggle is inherently > built into the very construction of the concept of the environment and > the environmental movement. By claiming that the class struggle have > to be brought into something when it is already there in the very > foundation of the concept and the movement weakens the possibility to > oppose false solutions and the struggle for alternatives. It > undermines the claim that otherwise easily can be made that those that > completly deny the material realities underpinning both social > relations in society as well as the relation between society and > nature are in the periphery or outside of the environmental movement > and those that recognize those material realities are in the core. > > Secondly it promotes a false picture of who can bring a solution to > the environmental crisis by claiming that a force outside of the > environmental movement have to bring the solution into the movement. > The opposite is rather the current state of affairs in the global > political struggle, that the envrionmental movement have to bring in > the class strugle into the workers movement as well as that part of > the left wing that stick to the trade unions as their main allied in > changing society. > > The interesting situation is that those ruling the present world > system have an achilles heel in the environmental issue. Their > hegemony in environmental matters is on the way to collapse in the > face of the double failure of both climate negotiations as well as the > general detoration of biological diversity posing a threat to the > future of humankind. Al Gores present attempt at reentering the > climate debate is rather a sign of a decline in the neoliberal effort > to use environmental politics to create illusions about how problems > in our societies and the world can be solved primarily by market > mechanisms. The problem is not anymore so much to show how these kind > of neoliberal solutions to the environomental crisis is no solution > although of course this excercise is a necessary defensive effort. The > problem is to establish a balance between rural and urban class > struggle which combines both a more united struggle against false > solution to both social and environmental problems as well as > constructive solutions. Without such a better balance between rural > and urban struggle and capability for both defensive struggle as well > as constructive solutions the objective possibilities to challenge the > neoliberal hegemony will not be successfully used. > > In general main stream left wing organizations from socialists to > communists tend to not understand neither the environmental movement > or the present situation. They tend to construct a false image of both > their own role as well as the environmental movement which is > contradictory to the values they claim they represent. This makes it > worth the effort to challenge left wing main stream thinking including > also many radical strands about the the environmental movement and > ways to solve the present global ecological crisis which is inherently > linked to the present social crisis. > > How the class struggle is central to the environmental concept > > The reason why the class struggle is inherently built into the > environmental concept and the environmental movement is that it is > constructed as an understanding of the linkage between health and > nature as a conflict issue which is the reason why the book Silent > Spring by Rachel Carson caused such fury and posed such a threat to > corporations. This linkage is at the core of the working class > struggle that from the very beginning and still today is a main force > in the movement to protect public health. It is also at the core of > the environmental movement. From the very start class alliances among > workers, peasants, entrepreneurs under perfect competion in the bottom > of the profit chains and wage earners recognized environmental issues > as conflicts and started to act, both in the capitalist world and in > countries under communist party rule. This pattern have developed in > similar way and is the basis of the environmental movement while some > but not all environmental organizations reflects this class struggle > and sometimes sees themselves as intermediaries who mainly promotes > pragmatic solutions avoiding to challenge the system. It is no > coincidence that the most radical actions to protect the environment > have been clearly class based and carried out by rural populations as > when all peasant families at the biggest lake Myvatn in Iceland bombed > together a dam which destroyed the biological diversity and their > livelihood or the indigenous people in the Phillippines with bows and > arrows took on a successful violent struggle against the construction > of a dam in alliance with other domestic and international in the late > 1970s. > > One can of course claim that from linking health and nature does not > follow understanding of class struggle. But one can for certain claim > that the linkage recognizes material conditions as well as social and > without addressing those two aspects together with the understanding > that there is a conflict we are back again in the days before the > concept environment was born. Class is a concept inherently linked to > a material understanding of social relations and struggle recognizes > that there is a conflict. The environmental issue is such that at > times there are possibilities for broad class alliances and at times > also there are necessary steps to take that do not include a conflict > to not talk about that it is not only capitalism that can pose a > threat to the environment. But it is no coincidence that class > struggle have been a part of the environmental movement from the very > start and still is in growing importance. > > That some environmental organizations have been constructed or > strongly influenced by forces that tries to dismantle the linkage > between health and nature as well as between politics, economy and > economy is a trivial fact. More interesting is that they have through > the decades lost more and more of their dominance in the environmental > movement and is now weakier than ever in spite of their close > relationship with dominant models for solving societal problems in the > present world system. Joseph Green adds to the false picture of the > environmental movement by dividing it. On the one hand "the > establishment environmentalist organizations" and "mainstream > environmentalist circles" who have the same opinion as Gore. On the > other hand "activists who are fighting militantly to protect the > environment" or "militant activists for environmental justice." > Instead of these "circles" and "activists" Green calls for "the > development of a working-class environmentalism that breaks with > pro-business environmentalism and instead takes part in the class > struggle." In this world view quite common among left wingers but here > explicitly stated there are some parts of the environmental movement > that is acceptable, namely militant activists, while the rest is > mainstream environmental organizations with he same market orientation > as Gore. Friends of the Earth International is a main stream > environmental organizations that oppose offsetting by carbon trading. > FOEI sees the peasant organization Via Campesina as its main allied. > It is true that in some especially anglo-saxon countries and > especially the US there are many mainstream environmental NGOs with > odd pro market positions. But who takes them seriously? It would > certainly not be taken serious in a discussion about the role of > radical left wing parties in world politics to take the US as in some > way a relevant example as these kind of parties are minuscular in the > US but certainly plays are important in many other countries. The same > can be said about the trade unions who are weak both in membership but > especially as a political force in the US. Why the left tend to take > US organizations as examples when they discuss the environmental > movement but not when they discuss left wing parties or trade unions > shows the weakness of their political analysis. That left wing > academicians tend to be equally caught into the false claims made in > the US academic literature about the environmental movement as > something emerging in the US in the 1960s with The Club of Rome and > the book Limits to Growth as the key document makes the left lacking > both theoretical and historical understanding of the environmental > movement. In fact third world activists together with the > environmental movement in most countries opposed the antipolitical > visions of Club of Rome and the dominant US environmentalism 40 years > ago. It is true that this historical defeat of the US environmentalism > is systematically wiped out of the memory of academic literature and > replaced if at all mentioned with stories about how mislead third > world marxists made hilarous attacks on the highly appreciated and > politically neutral scholar Paul Ehrlich. What Paul Ehrlich advocated > is not mentioned. He proposed forced sterilization in the third world > to stop the "population bomb". Others as Anglo-Amercian Friends of the > Earth claimed the tragedy of the commons as the main problem thus > promoting ideas of marketization to solve the global environmental > crisis. These Anglo-American ideas never got accepted by the emerging > global environmental movement and were soon abolished also by Friends > of the Earth. Instead the opinion of third world activists in the > early 1970s and onwards became more and more decisive with the tree > huggers movement in India, Pesticide Action Network, Third World > Network and the entry of many groups from the South in Friends of the > Earth among the important actors. Of course some main stream NGOs are > a problem as WWF which from the very start worked very close with > business or Greenpeace working close with some corporations while at > the same time having a policy to maintain independent funding. So are > NGOs that completely focus on a role as lobbyists within the system as > Climate Action Network. But this is well known facts as much as the > fact that left wing parties including communists promotes neoliberal > policies in some countries or trade unions often cling to social > partnership strategies in spite of no or less and less result for the > working class. > > Collective action more important than ideology > > Since the very beginning of an independent global environmental > movement the established revolutionary and reformist left have had > great problems relating to the emergence of a new independent popular > movement. A common approach shared with the established capitalist > forces in society have been to consider the environmental movement as > a single issue movement in spite of that it is no more single issue > than the workers, peasants, feminist or indigenous movements. By > disclaiming the environmental movement as single issue the established > left as well as capitalist forces have been attempting at reducing the > ecological critique of society and instead promoting their own model > for social change. In the case of the established left this has been > in terms of claiming their own movements focusing on parliamentary > reformism or a socialist or communist revolution are far more advanced > as they are encompassing all issues. At times the position of this > established left have been tragicomical. In the beginning > environmental issues was often seen as a tactic by middle class people > trying to get media attention to divert interest from the real > political struggle in elections or the daily work of trade unions and > political parties. Many times the main conflict erupted between > environmental protesters and social democratic movements or communist > parties in the Soviet bloc and China. Other left wingers looked upon > the environmental movement as an attempt by capitalist forces to > divert interest from class struggle and fighting for a revolution. The > ambigeous relationships to technology and social change made some > revolutionary left wing groups to state that nuclear power in > capitalist societies should be opposed while in the Soviet union > nuclear power had another character due to lack of profit motives and > thus should be approved. Today the traditional reformist and > revolutionary left tries to claim interest in climate justice and > supporting mass movements in the South but in the actual struggle as > during COP15 in Copenhagen they strongly oppose Via Campesina and > others that organized and made non-violent direct action at the UN > conference building seeing this action as a threat to their position > in Danish society. The single issue environmental movement suddenly > turns into a broad political force that even claims to be system > critical which makes the established left nervous as they want to have > monopoly on being system critical and thus they immediately shift > their opinion on the environmental movement from being single issue to > be a violent threat towards democracy. An oscillation between two > contradictory positions that can be hidden from public scrutiny with > the help of capitalist media who have the same way of diverting the > interest for protests with system critical potential to claim that > they are single issue and then when they pose a threat to the existing > order that they are a violent threat to democracy. > > The core of the left wing attempts to claim that the environmental > movement is subaltern to their own more advanced position is the claim > that ideology is central and that activists in the environmental > movement at their best are only on a preparatory stage before > developing a more broad social anticapitalistic understanding. The > capitalist forces have made similar attempts from the other direction > to claim that the environmental movement is a single issue movement > and as such can be useful for society as a way to inform consumers and > reform or one could maybe better say establish a modern governance at > local to global level promoting solutions that enables the flourishing > of new market opportunities for business. Similar to the established > left in Denmark they also see a non-violent direct action at a UN > conference as in Copenhagen 2009 as a threat towards democracy by > potential for instigating political violence. > > In fact there are at the core of the environmental movement > organizations a willingness to support class struggle of importance > for environmental justice as the united efforts by Friends of the > Earth, Via Campesina and other for food sovereignty and the joint > struggle against land grabbing. There are of course many problems > still. The environmental movement is different in different countries. > But at least at the global level in Friends of the Earth International > and Climate Justice Now! we have international movement cooperation of > importance for class struggle. The problem is rather the left clinging > to trade unions and the trade unions themselves. While we in the > environmental movement and the peasant movement can see the emergence > of global democratic organizations this lacks in the trade union > movement and is weak in the left. The international trade union > confederation, ITUC, does not want to have democratic influence by the > working class in its organization. Contrary to FOEI organizations get > influence due to how many members they have while in FOEI each country > have one vote. This means that countries with a long tradition for > membership in trade unions easily can dominate the international > organization and bloc the kind of global democratic organization that > have emerged in organizations as FOEI and Via Campesina. This means > that social partnership strategies dominate the global organizations > and few attempts are made at struggling for constructive alternatives > to solve the present social and ecological crisis. On the defensive > level to stop further detoriation of social rights the trade unions > are probably still the most important actor, but in terms of > struggling for global justice and offensive solutions they are not. > And without offensive solutions to the crisis there will be no class > struggle able to challenge the present world order. > > The environmental movement needs the theoretical discussion carried > forward by the left as well as other ideological critique by feminists > or dissidents under communist rule. But what is not needed is the > claim that ideological understanding is more important than collective > action. Only when the left starts to look at the environmental and > other popular movements as independent forces with system critical > potential of equal importance as their own is it possible to move the > struggle further. A great step at the global level was taken during > the World Summit on Sustainable development in Johannesburg 2002 when > landless, housing and anti privatization movements joined hands with > Via Campesina and was supported by Friends of the Earth when > repression was used against the march against the neoliberal agenda of > the Summit. This brought heavy problems for many of the South African > organizations involved but paved the way for the historically > important split in the Climate Action Network and the creation of > Climate Justice Now! by Via Campesina, Jubilee South, Friends of the > Earth International and others. A network that is of importance for > the class struggle against land grabbing and neoliberal solutions to > environmental crisis and thus challenging capitalism in one of its few > remaining expansion fields. Rather than claiming it is time to bring > left wing ideology into this already existing and growing support for > class struggle and threat against capitalist expansion it is about > time to develop similar offensive struggles also in the industrial > working class movement and find ways to unite urban and rural class > struggle. > > Tord Björk > > active in Friends of the Earth Sweden > > _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
