Joseph Green writes:

> only if a working class wing of the environmental movement
> develops, will it be possible for the environmental
> struggle to be waged as part of the class struggle.

A merger of the labor movement and the environmental
movement is the holy grail we all should aim for.  Any
efforts you put into this are well spent.  But don't hold
your breath that it is going to happen soon here in the US.
And if you make this as the criterion for success you
set yourself up for failure.

My perception differs from yours in that I think the
environmental movement is a class struggle even if the
working class is not leading it.  It is a struggle which can
only be won if it leads to the dismantling of the capitalist
system.  The most progressive force in this movement is not
the working class but youth everywhere and from every class.
Because they are young they are inexperienced and they can
learn a lot from the seasoned fighters for social justice as
you find on pen-l and elsewhere.

Right now what is on the agenda is not gaining socialism but
preventing climate catastrophe.  For this we simply do not
have time to establish a new social order first.  This has
to be done in the next few years, therefore we have to try
to do it in the social system we have.  I think this is
possible although difficult, and it can become part of the
fight for socialism.  Actually, the most likely positive
outcome in my mind is that we will succeed in instituting
socialism just as the world enters runaway climate change.
This will be infinitely better for 9 billion people than the
climate fascism and geoengineering for the rich planned by
the capitalists.  So it is a worth while goal.  But there is
also a chance that we can prevent runaway climate change, it
is perhaps 10%, and this is what we should aim for.  If we
had socialism, the chances would perhaps be 50%, but the
chances of instituting socialism in time is perhaps 1%.
(This is how I happen to see it.  I may be wrong, I don't
claim to have a crystal ball, and I am willing to learn.)

Preventing climate catastrophe does not remedy species
extinctions, the destruction of our oceans or the overuse of
potable water, the peak of phosphorus, etc.  All this
cannot be done within a capitalist growth paradigm.  This
will be a different society with more health, more security,
more leisure, and less material consumption.

By contrast, what we need to prevent climate catastrophe is
a switch to renewable energy, a switch to energy efficient
buildings, and land use changes---end of deforestation,
urban agriculture, etc.  We will also have to get from 400
ppm back to 350 ppm perhaps by CCS using biofuels etc.
These need more labor instead of less and huge investments
between now and 2030.  This is thinkable within a capitalist
framework.

Hans G Ehrbar
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to