Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Environment

Van Jones: "This Is Not Your Grandma's Environmental Movement Anymore"

By Ariane Conrad, The Rumpus. Posted February 5, 2009.


The tanking economy is also changing the environmental movement. Van Jones talks about what we should be doing next.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Van Jones is an award-winning activist, best-selling author, orator and political advisor. I helped him birth his first book, The Green Collar Economy (Harper One, 2008).

The book launched at No. 12 on the New York Times best-seller list. Its central claim, that green jobs can save both our economy and our environment, has lodged itself in the public debate. Jones' organization, Green For All, helped write (and then pass) the Green Jobs Act 2007. The act authorizes $125 million in green-collar job training in emerging green sectors like solar and wind industries, energy retrofitting and green building construction, biofuel production and more. Twenty percent of the funds support a green Pathways Out of Poverty Program to provide targeted resources and support to low-income individuals.

Ariane Conrad: So, last year you founded a national advocacy organization, wrote & released a NYT best-seller (with me), advised the Obama team, and witnessed the birth of your second son. How are you gonna top that?

Van Jones: Well, it's not a goal to top it. I think it would be good to get somebody a job. Right now, we're in a bubble of green rhetoric and a bowl of actual green investment and job creation. So my goal for next year is to move from inspiration to implementation on this stuff.

AC: You were one of Time magazine's (and other place's) "environmental heroes." Yet you eat meat, drive a gas-powered car … and you're black! How is this happening?

VJ: Well, this is not your grandma's environmental movement any more. We're now moving into a stage where the green economy isn't just going to be the place for people to spend money. It's going to become a place where a lot more people can earn money, and also save more money. These kind of solutions require collective action and government action. So as an advocate for government change, even somebody like me gets to have a role.

AC: A starring role. Aren't you, in point of fact, a superhero?

VJ: I am not, in fact, a superhero. Just a humble, mild-mannered civil rights attorney.

AC: I insist you reveal your true identity.

VJ: Well my true identity, of course, is Anthony Jones from Jackson, Tenn. One might be able to use a search engine to figure that out.

AC: Or the New Yorker.

VJ: Right -- or the New Yorker, which outed me! Just goes to show you shouldn't let a reporter hang around you for 37 hours.

But as you know, I do feel kind of like I have a split identity in that there's Van Jones, who has this big public role and tries to inspire millions of people to do new stuff together. And then there's just me: a pretty quiet, shy, retiring person. I used to go to all these environmental conferences when I wasn't an invited speaker. I was just somebody in the back taking a lot of notes. It was when I was least visible that I came up with the most cool stuff. Now, because I don't get to be Clark Kent, I feel like my learning curve is slowing way down. I'm always afraid the conversation will move on and I'll be up at the front of the room saying last year's speech.

AC: You've been invited to, and attended, the World Economic Forum in Davos a number of times. You were also in the streets of Seattle 10 years ago getting teargassed. How do those experiences relate to where you are today?

VJ: I literally came out of protesting on the streets of Seattle in 1999 and getting run over by a police car in 2000 while protesting against the World Bank in Washington, D.C. … and then in 2002, I was part of the World Economic Forum as a so-called young global leader. So within 48 months, I got a chance to be on both sides of the barricades. What I realized very quickly is that we (on the left) live in a very small world. Those of us seeking social justice and solutions to the world's problems live in a very small world but imagine it to be a much bigger. And the people who seem to us to be a very tiny elite, far off and mysterious, actually live in a fairly big world. The way they look at the planet is like they're looking at an index card covered in supply routes.  We (protestors) had imagined ourselves this huge threat. But we were, at best, bemusing. To the extent that the people inside did care, it was almost like we were paying them a compliment -- it reinforced their sense of power.

So for one thing, I got a different perspective. I realized that those of us who want change and see a desperate need for it from a human and planetary point of view -- we need to think bigger, dream bigger and get bigger. We can't be proud of ourselves for having a collective that includes 12 people, or for organizing a rally at which we're able to get a couple hundred or even thousands of people. The question needs to be: How do you have a daily conversation with millions of people?


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: green economy, van jones, green jobs, green for all

Ariane Conrad is a writer and editor based in Oakland, CA. She collaborated with Van Jones on the New York Times bestselling The Green Collar Economy (Harper One, 2008), and with Christabel Zamor on HOOPING! (forthcoming from Workman Publishing in June 2009).

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Environment! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Now days, the way to create a daily conversation with the public
Posted by: blondesprite on Feb 5, 2009 4:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
is to create a blog. Interaction with and answering questions for the public is essential.
Four years ago I attended a town hall meeting with my Rep. Ted Poe. (S.E. Texas). When I asked why we did not have tax breaks and other incentives, like Austin, for green tech. in our area I was laughed out of the room.
Last year, I was told by my local commissioner they are not laughing any more.
In a recent press release, Gov. Rick Perry announced that Texas must get on board the green tech boat or be left economically behind.
I imagine the financial impacts of Hurricanes Katrina, Rita and Ike had roles in changing their minds.
If I may suggest, you make want to connect with the Apollo Group. I recieve regular action notices from them and this might be a another good avenue for promoting your book. Good Luck to you!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

van- please go vegetarian or vegan ...
Posted by: veggiegrrrl on Feb 5, 2009 6:47 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
van- please go vegetarian or vegan ... you will be a role model for a generation plagued by heart disease, diabetes, junk-food addiction, etc..

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Green" and "Economy" need a linkage
Posted by: PaulK on Feb 5, 2009 7:40 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The only greenback link between "green" and "economy" is greenwashing. Jerk companies clean up one playground because the ad agency said its a cute thing to do, they claim it's green, then they spend $100 million on advertising their good deed.

During the computer revolution, consumers put down many, many billions for newer, easier computers. People in garages could invent computers like the Apple or better spreadsheets or anything, and it sold. Steve Jobs could sell 10 or 100 of his little Apple computers to friends, then scale up. Jonathan Dell could sell computer boxes to his classmates from his dorm room until he flunked out, then he set up shop off-campus.

Japan poured billions into computer R&D and the American garages still swamped the world.

Now, let's say a guy in a garage, ok, a basement because this is the frost belt, wants to make transit a factor of 10 cheaper or better. Where's the way up? There isn't a way up! Transit systems aren't personal computers. The corporate entry fee is $100 million. Japan is sure to win.

How about a little device which inhibits global warming? That's nice, but where's the economics of developing one? The inventor starves.

It's not all bad. The markets for better solar home and hot water heating and for growing biofuel for algae are still wide open for garage inventors. Invent a better system, try it out on a house across town, scale up.

Large-scale electricity generation is the one spot where government has stepped in. I can get grant money to design and build a 10 kw prototype, because a specific research and development fund comes from your electric bill. Because of this fund, we're almost certainly going to see steadily declining prices for wind, solar and geothermal electricity in the next five years. Congratulations to whoever forged this one connection between "Green" and "Economy".

Now, let's make the other 99 aspects of the imaginary green "economy" a bit more bottom line. Your local two guys in a garage need to develop better community-sized electricity storage and better electricity transmission (none of which is covered by the electricity generation funding!) Then your local garage needs to race farther ahead in green transit than you could imagine.

Environmentally friendly geoengineering is when global warming is inhibited or reversed. The dead simple example would be a California law encouraging people to put white roofs on their houses. The color white reflects heat back into space. Now was that too hard? Next they'll come up with whiter roads. Then someone will think of environmentally benign ways to make the Arctic more white, like restoring some of the Arctic Ocean's ice floes. Will that really bother the polar bears?

There are other areas of the green non-economy which I haven't named, and there may be niches which no one has yet imagined.

We need an all-encompassing green policy, running from Eureka! to product rollout. Put this in place using the electricity generation R&D model, and the country shall have a vibrant green economy. Fail to put this in place, and that green object flying towards you is a green shoe.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Thermodynamics
Posted by: ClassAct on Feb 5, 2009 11:17 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All will be in vain without a true science of economy. In Wealth of Nations published in 1776, Adam Smith found labor to be the source of all value. The scientific measurement of labor, however, was not complete until Lord Kelvin promulgated the laws of thermodynamics in 1850. The second law prohibits the concept of profits. If some value, i.e. labor, is realized as profit, then there must have been a source that provided that unrewarded labor. The big losers in order are: the animal kingdom, the workers, the public, the customers, all other persons in the world forever.
The tracing out of where all that labor-value comes from and where it goes is a very complex process, but without it we are doomed to bandy about empty ideologies, debating the capacity of the boat of Ra.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The enviornmental movement
Posted by: willymack on Feb 5, 2009 1:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Isn't just a frivolous fad for tree-huggers and latte sipping diletantes any more; it's absolutely essential for our survival. If some bonehead calls you a tree-hugger in a derisive, sneering manner, say "you're damn right I am, and you should be too", then explain yourself. Who knows? We may save ourselves yet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Get this farce Van Jones out of here.
Posted by: cindyn on Feb 5, 2009 2:11 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Nothing but a empty suit grandstander.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Very nice, but bad assumptions
Posted by: evasta7 on Feb 6, 2009 12:58 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This program seems to assume that there is plenty of time and that population growth does not matter. Gradual moderate "green" changes will be (and are now) overtaken and rendered meaningless by population increase, often in months if not weeks.

There is no valid environmental policy without a population policy.

Suggested resources:

Bandura etc.
http://growthmadness.org/2008/02/18/

impeding-ecological-sustainability- through-selective-moral-disengagement/

Albert Bartlett on the exponential function as it relates to population and oil:
http://c-realm.blogspot.com/2008/12 /kmo-interview-with-albert-bartlett.html

Approaching the Limits www.paulchefurka.ca

Bruce Sundquist on environmental impact of overpopulation http://home.alltel.net/bsundquist1/

The Oil Drum Peak Oil Overview - June 2007 (www.theoildrum.com/node/2693)

...and of course the classic "Overshoot" by Catton

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Van Jones for president!
Posted by: Georgie on Feb 22, 2009 12:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I really like his work. Van Jones has a new essay in the book from the Progressive Ideas Network (just released) called "An Inclusive Green Economy" - it makes a good case for green collar jobs and the steps the Obama administration needs to take to evolve a green economy. The book is called Thinking Big and also has some other great essays on public policy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement