The
greenhouse gases heating the planet in 2018 were higher than humans
have ever recorded, according to a report from the American
Meteorological Society and the US government. GHG levels topped 60
years of modern measurements and 800,000 years of ice core data, the
study found.
Sea
levels were the highest on record, as global heating melted
land-based ice and expanded the oceans. Sea surface temperatures were
also near a record high.
Arctic
and Antarctic sea ice extent was near a record low, and glaciers
continued to melt and lose mass for the 30th consecutive year in a
row.
The
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said the report
“found that the major indicators of climate change continued to
reflect trends consistent with a warming planet”.
Mexico
reported its third warmest year in its 48-year record. Alaska
reported its second warmest in its 94-year record. Europe experienced
its second warmest year since at least 1950. Australia had its third
warmest year since 1910. The report finds 2018 was the fourth-warmest
on record for the world overall since the mid-to-late- 1800s. There
were 14 weather and climate events in the US that each caused over
$1bn in damage – the fourth highest since records began in 1980.
To
reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases we need meaningful action in
the way the economy and society works. What is required is the rapid,
far-reaching re-organisation of industry, energy, transport which is
simply not possible under capitalism. Huge amounts of human resources
must be devoted into developing and improving the efficiency of
renewables: solar, wind and tidal power. It is also necessary to rid
the system of all the duplication in production processes with its
competition between similar companies and nation states. The way
goods are distributed globally, the food industry being a prime
example, is in need of radical deep re-organisation.
How
is it possible to plan sustainably the world’s resources,
production and distribution of goods and services when they are owned
and controlled by an unaccountable minority elite?
How
is it possible to have a plan when the vast majority of the world’s
people – who do all the producing, servicing and distributing –
have no say in how the economy is run?
Most
people cannot see beyond the capitalist system. However, the fight to
halt and then reverse profit-driven global warming is the fight to
replace capitalism with a world socialist system based on human
solidarity and respect for the planet on which we live. Most are
likely to dismiss this choice out of hand as utopian or mere
socialist twaddle. In the end, though, facts speak for themselves. As
Robert Burns penned, ‘But
facts are chiels
that
winna ding’
No
matter how well-intentioned, appeals for individuals to change their
personal consumer habits are trivial recommendations when measured
against the real scale of the problem. Extensive private vested
interests have ensured that the vastly more wasteful, inefficient and
polluting industries and products still dominate the market.
Capitalism is a system driven by the single-minded need on the part
of business for ever-greater accumulation of capital. This is why all
schemes based on the hope of a no-growth, sustainable-growth or
de-growth forms of capitalism are pipe dreams. As, too, are campaigns
for consumers to go “green” in order to reform the system. A
“steady-state” capitalism is an impossibility. Investors and
fund-managers are driven by the need to accumulate wealth and to
expand the scale of their operations in order to prosper within a
globally competitive milieu. Many in the environmental movement argue
that with the right policies of taxes, inducements and regulations,
everybody would be winners. Big Business will have cheaper, more
efficient production, and therefore be more profitable, and consumers
will have more environment-friendly products and energy sources. So
goes the story.
In
a rational socialist society innovations would lower the overall
environmental impact in terms of materials and energy substituted for
more harmful technology. Unfortunately, we don’t live in a rational
society. Capitalism approaches technology in the same way as it does
everything else. What will generate the most profits? Whether it is
efficient, clean, safe, environmentally benign has little to do with
it.
A
plethora of proposals for an ecologically sustainable world have been
produced by environmentalists , many containing commonsense policies
to deal with the environmental crisis. They fail not because their
proposals are far-fetched. They fail because they do not accept that
capitalism is incapable of bringing them into being.
Only
a society that places the “associated producers” at its head and
at its heart can build a genuinely feasible sustainable society. A
society run by and for the “associated producers” — a socialist
society — would allow people to think about, discuss and rationally
plan the best way forward for both the planet and all its
inhabitants. Profit will no longer dictate what is produced. Almost
immediately, huge material and human resources would be released to
begin to rapidly reverse problems like global warming as well making
a start on ending the poverty, hunger and disease that affect
billions.
Engels
in Dialectics of Nature wrote to “regulate” our
relationship with nature “requires something more than mere
knowledge. It requires a complete revolution in our hitherto existing
mode of production, and simultaneously a revolution in our whole
contemporary social order.”
Marx
urged a social revolution that would abolish private ownership. Marx
wrote in Capital that only “the associated producers [can] govern
the human metabolism with nature in a rational way, bring it under
their collective control instead of being dominated by it as a blind
power”. Contrary to the assertions by some in the environmental
movement, Marx and Engels were well aware of humanity’s
interconnectedness with the environment, and they recognised that it
was essential for socialism to be ecologically sustainable. Marx
referred to capitalist farming as “an art, not only of robbing the
labourer, but of robbing the soil” that sapped the everlasting
sources of wealth — the soil and the worker. He argued in effect
for the return to ecological sustainability, which had been destroyed
by, and was not possible under, capitalism.
Right
now, the technology is available to theoretically generate
all the clean energy we need. Combined with efficiency targets
throughout the economy, from the industrial level to house-designs
and household appliances, and socially organised recycling,
greenhouse gas emissions could be not only slashed but reversed.
Right
now, advertising and marketing-driven over-packaging of
products could end, saving entire forests, and banishing billions of
tonnes of “disposable” but environmentally indigestible plastic
from land-fill.
Right
now, inbuilt obsolescence could be ended, and the corporate
creation of disposable, throwaway fads and fashions would become a
thing of the past. No more “this year’s new model”. Products
would be built to last for a very long time, designed to be
repairable and reusable and when they are due for replacement they
would be as recyclable as possible.
And
as the “associated producers” build the new society, wants and
needs will inevitable alter, and so too will consumption habits.
Capitalism thrives on the cultivation and celebration of the worst
aspects of human behaviour; selfishness and self-interest; greed and
hoarding; the dog-eat-dog mentality. Capitalism warps normal human
interaction.
Socialism is a society that is organised first and
foremost to work together to produce enough to comfortably ensure
people’s physical and mental well-being and social security —
abundant food, decent housing, full healthcare, inspiring and
stimulating cultural pursuits with lifelong education and in which
new technology, robotics and automation, benefit everybody without
costing the environment. A new social definition of wealth will
evolve. It will not be measured by personal wealth, or by how much
“stuff” you’ve hoarded. It will be not be measured by an
ever-increasing consumption of goods and services, or expanding GDP
figures of “economic growth”, but in the words of Marx, “free
time, disposable time, is wealth itself…free time…for the free
development, intellectual and social, of the individual.”
No comments:
Post a Comment