ENVIRONMENT  
comments_image -

How the Rich Are Destroying the Earth

We've got to think about our choices for the future collectively, seeking cooperation rather than competition.
 
 
LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?
Join our mailing list:

Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Environment headlines via email.

 
 
 
 

The following is reprinted from the new book How the Rich Are Destroying the Earth by Herve Kempf and published by Chelsea Green.

There is an emergency. In less than a decade we will have to change course -- assuming the collapse of the U.S. economy or the explosion of the Middle East does not impose a change through chaos. To confront the emergency, we must understand the objective: to achieve a sober society; to plot out the way there; to accomplish this transformation equitably, by first making those with the most carry the burden within and between societies; to take inspiration from collective values ascribed to here in France by our nation's motto: "Liberty, ecology, fraternity."

What are the main obstacles that block the way?

First of all, received wisdom -- prejudices really -- so loaded that they orient collective action without anyone really thinking about them. The most powerful of these preconceived ideas is the belief in growth as the sole means of resolving social problems. That position is powerfully defended even as it is contradicted by the facts. And it is always defended by putting ecology aside because the zealots know that growth is incapable of responding to the environmental issue.

The second of these ideas, less cocky although very broadly disseminated, proclaims that technological progress will resolve environmental problems. This idea is propagated because it allows people to hope we will be able to avoid any serious changes in our collective behaviors thanks to technological progress. The development of technology, or rather of certain technical channels to the detriment of others, reinforces the system and fosters solid profits.

The third piece of received wisdom is the inevitability of unemployment. This idea is closely linked to the two previous ideas. Unemployment has become a given, largely manufactured by capitalism to assure the docility of the populace and especially of the lowest level of workers. From a contrary position, the transfer of the oligarchy's wealth for the purpose of public services, a system of taxation that weighed more heavily on pollution and on capital than on employment, sustainable agricultural policies in the countries of the South, and research into energy efficiency are immense sources of employment.

A fourth commonly associates Europe and North America in a community of fortune. But their paths have diverged. Europe is still a standard-bearer for an ideal of universalism, the validity of which it demonstrates by its ability to unite -- despite problems -- very different states and cultures. Energy consumption, cultural values -- for example, the critical significance of food -- the rejection of the death penalty and torture, less pronounced inequality and the maintenance of an ideal of social justice, respect for international law, and support for the Kyoto Protocol on climate are some of the many traits that distinguish Europe from the United States.

Europe must be separated from the obese power and draw closer to the South, unless the United States shows it can really change.

The Oligarchy Could Be Divided

Then there are the forces at work.

The first, of course, is the power of the system itself. The failures that will occur will not in themselves be sufficient to undo the system, since, as we have seen, they could offer the pretext to promote an authoritarian system divested of any show of democracy.

The social movement has woken up, however, and may continue to gain power. But it alone will not be able to carry the day in the face of the rise of repression: it will be necessary for the middle classes and part of the oligarchy -- which is not monolithic -- to clearly take sides for public freedoms and the common good. The mass media constitute a central challenge. Today they support capitalism because of their own economic situation. They depend, for the most part, on advertising. That makes it difficult for them to plead for a reduction in consumption.

submit to reddit

-
Email
Print
Share
LIKED THIS ARTICLE? JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Stay up to date with the latest Environment headlines via email
See more stories tagged with: environment, economics, earth
Alternet Special Coverage - Occupy Wall Street
Advertisement
Most Read
Most Emailed
Most Discussed
On REDDIT
On DIGG
 
loading most read content ..
Advertisement
Dear Wall Street Journal: Your Editorial on Payday Lenders Is Wrong. On Every Point.

By Uriah King | AlterNet

 
 
Shocker! Komen Staff Knew Defunding Planned Parenthood Was a Bad Idea

By Kaili Joy Gray | Daily Kos

 
 
Look Forward to Trump in Charge of Foreign Policy in Romney Administration?

By Sarah Seltzer | AlterNet

 
 
Dozens Dead as Syria Regime Pounds Homs: Activists

By Agence France-Presse

 
 
Which IT Companies Are the Greenest, Asks Greenpeace? Google, Yes, Apple, No.

By Sarah Seltzer | AlterNet

 
 
Is Romney Facing the Prospect of Epic Collapse and Failure?

By BooMan | Booman Tribune

 
 
Michelle Obama and a Spandex-Clad Jimmy Fallon Compete in Feats of Strength (With a Cameo from Bo!)

By Sarah Seltzer | AlterNet

 
 
New Condom Regulations for Porn In LA: Addressing the Right Problem?

By Marianne Møllmann | RH Reality Check

 
 
Guess Who is Financially Invested in Birth Control Companies? Mitt Romney

By Igor Volsky | Think Progress

 
 
For Wall Street Masters of the Universe, The Party's Over

By Digby | Hullabaloo

 
 
 
 
 
loading ...
POWERED BY DIGG'S USERS
 
[ page served from web 1 ]