alanjjohnstone
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
An upbeat article on “democratic socialism”
https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/dsa-socialism-aoc-bernie/
“…But today’s socialists march into the 2020s without the daunting roadblocks of a century ago. They don’t need their own party anymore. They can just take someone else’s…”
summarised here
Is the end of fossil fuels in sight? Is divestment working?
As I asked earlier, will there be alternative financing from less “ethical” investors?
Certainly tobacco has not seriously been affected in decades of “boycotting” – but at a cost of having to pay plenty in dividends if this total novice at reading the stock market reads the data right.
In an alternative reality if the Dutch had not been in the EU
Without EU laws, particle pollution in Amsterdam, Utrecht, Rotterdam and The Hague would have risen steadily to be about 10 times greater than they are today; only slightly better than cities across China, India and Iran.
Average life expectancy across the Netherlands would be about six years shorter;
That equates to about 66,000 extra Dutch deaths annually
Of course, the council rules are absurd when you can’t walk down the High St without dodging tables and chairs on the middle of the pavement.
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-51281986
Something you have been saying for a long time, ALB, about alarmism
“What we’re arguing is that we’ve been misusing the worst climate change scenario,” said author Zeke Hausfather, director of climate and energy at the Breakthrough Institute in California. “Rather than being seen as something that only had a 3% chance of becoming reality, it became known as the “business-as-usual” scenario, by climate scientists and has been used in more than 2,000 research papers since.
The media, taking their steer from scientists, have tended to use the highest impacts when reporting on projections based on emissions scenarios.
“The worst-case scenario for emissions of CO2 this century is no longer plausible, say researchers. Referred to as “business as usual”, the scenario assumes a 500% increase in the use of coal, which is now considered unlikely. Climate models suggest that this level of carbon could see warming of up to 6C by 2100, with severe impacts. Researchers say that on current trends, a rise in temperatures of around 3C is far more likely.”
“So what originally was a sort of worst-case (scenario) with less than 10% chance of happening is today, exceedingly unlikely.”
Very few scientists realised that RCP8.5 was originally a 90th percentile outcome, not a most likely or business-as-usual outcome. They assumed too much, when they should perhaps have checked, say the authors of the review.
“At the end of the day, scientists have to take responsibility for what they choose as input data, and there should be a degree of due diligence,” said Glen Peter, from the CICERO Center for International Climate Research in Norway.
“How many of your average climate scientists know the nuances of RCP8.5? It would certainly be interesting to know.”Nevertheless
“I don’t think we can rule out a world of four degrees or above, because of these uncertainties in climate sensitivity and the uncertainties in carbon cycle feedbacks,” said Zeke Hausfather. “So even under a lower emission scenario, you could have higher sea level rise, higher warming impacts, if climate sensitivity ends up being on the high end.”
I am being constantly surprised at just how well society can mobilise itself world-wide to deal with a potential threat.
This coronavirus outbreak shows what an effective campaign can be put into action when needed and the numbers are not even relatively significant. The mere change in seasons incapacitate and kill more people.
As indicated already by Marcos many pre-existing diseases do not rate the same sort of urgency, often because the cause of those illnesses are systemic to capitalism – poverty and overcrowding.
As ALB has pointed out in his post every district around the world could have a hospital up and working with an airport bringing in the necessary staff and medical supplies, all in a matter of a few weeks – yet under capitalism it takes years and requires financing from PFI so to line the pockets of business.
We see humanitarian responses every time there is a natural disaster. But under capitalism, what we also witness is the first priority is restoring “law and order” and protecting private property. Who can forget that the initial aid and assistance on the scene in New Orleans was the National Guard declaring people to be looters (particularly if you were non-white) for taking food and bottled water from the supermarkets
The potential of the heavy foot-fall of Clapham High St has been talked about many times and we had a monitor and we had some sort of message device that could be programmed in the window. We also had a sandwich board that was put in the door-way when we were open.
Not big enough to capture the attention of bus passengers though.
Two things I have suggested in the past to catch the eye, is that we already have in place metal brackets for a hanging sign that has never been made use of.
And I have suggested that we can simply fly red flags from our building to stand out.
We have repeated debates on employing a full time (even part-time) paid HO organiser whose duty should involve ensuring we take advantage of passers-by and as DC indicated the need for someone having responsibility for the general upkeep of the HO – a care-taker janitor job. Such debates are never resolved.
Did your proposed voluntary deep-clean project which if I recall was due about this time happen, BD? Or is another call required?
Alas, ALB, there also appears to be not a single scientist that thinks socialism will work, either (at least none who have publicly said so and joined us, AFAIK.)
But my post was in the context of the watering down of the even ineffectual GND by the so-called “centrist” wing of the Democratic Party as represented by the far more business-friendly Biden.
As we always point out, the only reforms that succeed are the ones that can be incorporated into the capitalist structure without threatening overall profits. Corporate America believes the GND is a step too far, despite any scientists’ support for it.
I am, however, very curious about all those apparent pledges of disinvestment in fossil fuels that are being reported, whether these will take place or if finance will simply come from other sources taking the business opportunity to fill the gap in the market. Figures appear to say the world is still awash with cash liquidity so will the cost to fossil fuel industry simply be a bit extra on interest charges and a little more dividends paid out as less green capitalists put this cash to work?
After all, any morality or ethical concerns about corruption in poverty-stricken countries has never stopped the multinationals from pillaging and plundering through cross-accounting via tax havens. To hell with people literally starving to death as wealth is looted so will the capitalists as a class actually worry about the human cost of more flooding and drought?
We should keep an eye on it and see what actually transpires in reality. We should try a in-depth analysis (if someone is more versed in the world of stock-market values and banking transactions can take on the task). Put some meat on the bone of our case that capitalism can’t cure the climate crises but only offer some soothing balm to alleviate some of the pain.
As I said the corporations are intent upon getting the GND off the agenda
Biden claims “there’s not a single solitary scientist that thinks” the Green New Deal “can work”
“Third, it is not necessary. Adequate arrangements already exist via the minutes on spintcom to inform members, and even non-members, of what the EC discusses and decides.”
Well, this thread is providing some evidence that this is not seen to be so by a number of people.
EC meetings are not merely boring house-keeping but an integral part of our decision making and the democratic running of our organisation.
Just how are we to give live video conferencing and turn our meetings into online interactive occasions unless we experiment and I suggest that EC meetings should be our test-bed.
To paraphrase another saying, our democracy is not something to be practiced but also seen to be practiced.
Perhaps Summer School may be a better choice. Then, move on to Conference and ADM.
I think you are aware that I am keen for the Party to transcend national boundaries and to become a world socialist party. Unifying our mutual administrations through the internet is one step in that process. Already it seems we have taken on some of the duties of the WSPUS.
Here is the truth of the matter
Nobody no longer cares
Israel isn’t waiting for any agreement. It is acting now
“Netanyahu will bring his plan to annex the Jordan Valley and all settlements in the West Bank to a vote during next week’s cabinet meeting…Furthermore, all previous restrictions on settlement expansions will be lifted, Netanyahu said. “Until now, we coordinated the building with the US. We will no longer have to do that, because all the settlements will be under our sovereignty.” …”
“The next step is for the EC minutes to be less opaque and more detailed, providing details of arguments made and how and why individual EC members reached their decisions. That should greatly assist the party membership when they come to cast their votes in the annual ballot. It may even increase turnout.”
Is there any good reason why EC meetings should not be videoed by some sort of Skype system and placed on the web? EC members already participate via Skype, which I think has limited access for observers but other similar software available are more flexible for viewers.
We can easily create standing orders rules where the videoing can be momentarily suspended on confidentiality grounds when the occasion arises.
A small step towards the introduction of internet interactive conferences and ADMs.
Even judges are now providing some access to cameras
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/tv-cameras-set-allowed-courts-17576114
The first account of the Climate Change Assembly in action from Green Party Lucas that I have read
The corporate Democrats come out with their “Green New Dud”
“…The draft Climate Leadership and Environmental Action for our Nation (CLEAN) Future Act—largely seen as a “competing plan” to the Green New Deal—was announced earlier this month by the committee’s chair, Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.). Crafted after 15 committee hearings, the bill (pdf) aims to ensure that the United States achieves net-zero greenhouse gas pollution by 2050…”
First get the GND off the agenda and then with compromises and concessions dilute this “CLEAN” proposal to make it acceptable to businesses.
