On Jun 26, 2007, at 10:19 AM, Carrol Cox wrote:
Global warming and other ecological issues seem to present the same difficulty. Consider the number of concerned writers on the topic who, when push comes to shove, can only resort to proclaiming that people must give up their bad habits of consumption! In other words, so far no one has come up with practical theories on the _concrete_ demands _on the state_, around which truly significant mass movements can be organized.
But averting climate catastrophe involves changing the way people live their daily lives, the sooner the better. This sort of stance - we can't do anything until we do everything - could result in stasis and despair. If Americans gave up their SUVs for hybrids, walked more, adjusted the thermostat on the heat and a/c, and did other things along those lines that you regularly disparage, it would make a difference. It wouldn't solve the problem, but it would help, and not trivially.
Just one sticking point: China simply cannot afford to cut down its industrial production unless the U.S. and Europe cut down first. I am sure one can multiply this kind of sticky point endlessly. That's what capitalism is all about -- creating contexts in which someone must first commit suicide before one can seriously organize collective action.
The liberal bourgeoisie is well aware of this problem. Listen to Nicholas Stern talking at <http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/ Radio.html#070419>. Whether they can do anything about it is an open question. But your point wouldn't be news to them. Doug
