alanjjohnstone
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
A billionaire figure I hold no respect for, is planning to do a charity concert for Venezuela on the Colombian border. Branson doing a Geldof in the PR war
He is setting up the concert at the request of Juan Guaido and Leopoldo Lopez,
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/venezuela/article226264175.html
As always hard to discover figures
A source you can cite on the high side
On the low side
an estimated 1 million Colombians migrated to Venezuela during the last four decades, making them the largest immigrant group there
https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/colombia-emerges-decades-war-migration-challenges-mount
Colombia has more internally displaced persons (IDPs) than any other country in the world, the result of a 52-year civil war – 7.3 million IDPs -UN figures 2017
Yet another open letter I think will never get the coverage it deserves. This time from Colombians
Can I be directed to a source that is saying that ALL uses of plastic should be banned.
It is the extensive use of throwaway plastic where alternatives exist which is the issue for environmentalists.
I have been to a beautiful cliff-top resort and when you first arrive you see from a distance white flowering bushes….until you get closer and see all these white plastic bags hanging from the bushes. A few hundred miles away another tourist spot has banned shops from using plastic and all kinds of ingenious and attractive packaging has arose.
But there is the hype.
“…Banning plastic bags is more about driving profits than saving the planet, a marketing expert says. University of Auckland head of marketing Bodo Lang said most companies wanted to be perceived as a “good corporate citizen” because it helped attract, and retain, customers and workers….”
However, even when plastic can be re-cycled, it still ends up in land-fill
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-47238220
But my point was not about any lifestyle choice on the use of plastic but the glaring omission by such a global giant with a host of experts at their call not to include the re-usables in its calculations. This was surely not an accidental lapse but as I said a deliberate attempt to confuse the issue by creating fake facts. This is much more serious a transgression of science than any hyperbole you have previously pointed to, ALB. It is a study designed to deceive.
A disappointing read from a supposedly very radical eco-socialist – radical reformism, perhaps but revolutionary change – no.
https://jacobinmag.com/2019/02/kali-akuno-interview-climate-change-cooperation-jackson
“…I’m not arguing for a return to the centralized state-capitalist economies of the twentieth century, but the democratic socialization of the emergent information-based exchange economies, and that would utilize technological innovations to create a regenerative economy.
This would entail, at least in its early stages, various rules and limits, to make sure that exchanges stay within scientific and social limits related to resource extraction and energy utilization, until they become normative — which would take a few generations to undo the century of conspicuous consumption that has been advanced and promoted by late capitalism….”Reading through the gobblygook, he suggests we practice frugality
Nationalization is also on offer, naturally
If this is the best eco-socialism has to offer, then we have out work cut out to change the current understanding and re-focus the goals. He has not heeded any of the critiques of Earth First! from the likes of Bookchin
But to end on a “positive” note
“…We are at the midnight hour, and it’s eco-socialism or death…”
😛
Penning the words isn’t the same as the Party delivering and conveying the message to its audience and I believe that was Dave’s main message.
As for being busy on other forums, a good defence. I know comrades are very active on Quora. I’m not on Facebook or Twitter, so unable to judge those and you may well be right. But….the silence on social media from all the rest of the membership? We are a voluntarist organization and cannot command and instruct members to participate and order their involvement but this is a long way from the days we asked (and got) members to stand on wintry windy street corners selling the Standard as our teeth chattered. All i’m expecting is some armchair revolutionary activity and solidarity from the comfort of ones own home. Is that too much to ask?
My apologies about saying conference not featuring anything about the climate crisis. For some reason I no longer receive e-mails from Spintcom or Spopen although it says the notifications is enabled.
My comments to the discussion item will come as no surprise to the many posts I have already made.
Perhaps there are regions of the world’s population that will escape the worse of the calamities of climate change but for many more people the alarm bells should be ringing because it will have an existential threat to their communities and livelihood and personal lives. And the side-effects of the climate crisis will be as destructive as the after-shocks of an earthquake.
We aren’t concerned with the fortunate few living in countries with GDP economies to take defensive measures but the unlucky many and all predictions suggest that serious social ruptures will be inflicted on those developing and undeveloped countries that are already suffering the consequences of capitalism. If they are already being left to the ravages of capitalism, we cannot have any expectation that capitalism will change its spots and rescue them from the worse of climate change will offer.
When those small island nations present firm evidence for their eventual actual disappearance can they rightly be accused of alarmism? Is bringing home what the supporting statement explains as “disastrous” events going to be egg on our face by its under-statement?
Barring miracles, the planet for many of its inhabitants will face a threat to their existence and many will witness the end of their civilization. We cannot risk presenting an “I’m alright, Jack” narrative.
Citing Debs out of context but in defence of world socialism.
“If Socialism, international, revolutionary Socialism, does not stand staunchly, unflinchingly, and uncompromisingly for the working class and for the exploited and oppressed masses of all lands, then it stands for none”
Another UBI experiment begins
Stockton, Calif., is sending debit cards loaded with $500 to a select group of residents starting Friday. Each month for 18 months, 130 adults living in the city’s lower-income neighborhood will receive $500 to spend however they want. Researchers with SEED will track, study and analyze how the income boost affects residents’ spending and saving habits, and how it influences other factors such as quality of life and financial stability. The program will run until August 2020.
Researchers will regularly check in with recipients to conduct quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews – “How are people feeling? How are people spending money? Are people spending more time with families? How are health outcomes changing?” SEED hopes to feature the stories of some recipients beginning in March.
Presidential hopeful, Kamala Harris, proposed a bill last year what would provide middle class and working families a tax credit of up to $6,000 a year that could be accessed as a monthly check of up to $500.
Tech incubator Y Combinator conducted a feasibility study in Oakland that gave a few dozen residents between $1,500 and $2,000 beginning in 2016, and will soon conduct an expanded trial involving 1,000 people across two U.S. states.
UC Berkeley public policy and economics professor Hilary Hoynes said interpretations of what constitutes success for a universal basic income pilot program vary. Will more individuals be able to shift toward jobs pursuing their interests with fewer worries about living paycheck to paycheck, or will fewer people work in the labor market all together – and is that a good thing? Moreover, to implement a feasible universal basic income program, Hoynes said, policymakers and advocates would need to grapple with whether payments should be pegged to income levels – whether, when “you earn $20,000 or $60,000 or $100,000, (governments) start tapering out benefits,” for example.
“A universal payment of $12,000 per year to each adult U.S. resident over age 18 would cost roughly $3 trillion per year.”
Still, Hoynes said, there could be benefits to a pilot program such as SEED to better understand what recipients spend their money on, and the long-term effects of modest income increases on educational or employment decisions, in spite of its sample size and short duration.
Hoynes isn’t convinced universal basic income will be the solution to mass unemployment spurred by an artificial intelligence revolution, but she does believe the concepts are helpful in discussions about wage stagnation among low-skilled workers.Both programs in Finland and Canada have ended, with no plans to continue or expand.
Cross-posted, Dave, but I agree with your evaluation of where we should focus attention for a more fruitful return.
I fully understand that the forum is failing to involve other members, Matt. I don’t think we recovered the full numbers from the crash.
Apart from the false impression that ALB and I are conducting a personal feud on the forum, which we are emphatically aren’t, don’t you think that the Party is not engaging in a full and proper debate about the effect of climate change will have. I note there are no motions at the up-coming conference on the topic.
My views on the apocalyptical nature of the threat of global warming may not reflect all members thoughts on the matter, but that it will create wars, famines and refugees, is not in doubt.
When schoolkids are showing their concern, our members aren’t bothered to even join a forum to express their opinion because they are “busy elsewhere”. I’m sorry, but such an excuse simply isn’t acceptable to me. If we aren’t even listening to other members views, particularly when we do have a difference on attitudes and approaches that has to be resolved , then what hope have we of getting any sort of dialogue going with fellow-workers. One of the forum’s purposes is to equip members with facts and info to assist their conversations with their friends and families and co-workers.
It isn’t even this thread that is suffering but Brexit too lacks contributors. Venezuela and the prospect of a civil war if not an invasion there and about three people care to regularly say anything on it.
Some members have been determined not to involve themselves on the forum yet they are the most vociferous when it comes to placing motions for conference (yes, you know which branch i mean) and deny any debate except for a limited supporting statement and whatever argument is made at actual conference. So excluding full participation in the process of decision making. I note that EC even declines to use the forum for discussion, preferring SPINTCOM to discuss the WPNZ open-letter, (I thought it should be SPOPEN but there you go)
Party officers and committee members choose not to even join much less visit this forum. I’m not demanding the same frequency of traffic as those like myself who require a medium such as the forum because of our geographic isolation, but surely a once a week click on to see what is concerning other members should not be too much to expect from our “busy elsewhere” members.
And, Matt, you know I am not referring to yourself and some others who put in a valuable load of work back of scenes.
My complaint is the same as I offered in the past regards our blogs. Members don’t view it, don’t link to it, don’t offer feedback, and quite frankly, don’t care about it.
If I despair about my fellow worker apathy, I ten times more, despair about my fellow SPGB member’s indifference.
Morning moan over now and back to my usual trawl of news sites for something worthy to relay.
Is the fossil fuel industry deliberately creating confusion?
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-47255249
Having put their case against alternatives to plastic being harmful to the environment, BP admitted their study didn’t include re-cycle and re-use systems that could reduce the amount of extra emissions required for substitute products.
Even I remember that doorstep delivery of milk involved returning the empties. And every soft drink or beer bottle returned meant getting thruppence back. That every family had a shopping bags. That when you bought something it was wrapped in paper. But an oil giant with highly qualified experts didn’t think it necessary to cite such actions.
Come on, that is BP deliberately poisoning the well of the debate…and they know it…they want to get headlines to add confusion.
Another thing struck me. If climate change is such an important event for humanity, why is it you and I are the only members of the Party that can be arsed to discuss and debate it, ALB.
If some members feel my contributions bore them or put them off, I will gladly take a back seat and let other members take up the baton and engage in the topic and exchange views in my stead.
Okay, it may not be an end of the world catastrophe as some of my posts imply , but certainly for many people it may well mean the end of their world as they know it.
The potential numbers likely to be detrimentally impacted by climate change run into the millions and most likely billions. It’s happening now. Or don’t members watch the news any longer and join up the dots.
Youth Strike 4 Climate said protests took place in more than 60 towns and cities, with an estimated 15,000 taking part.
The group, which helped coordinate the protests, has four key demands:
The government should declare a “climate emergency”
It should also inform the public about the seriousness of the situation
The national curriculum should be reformed to include “the ecological crisis”
The age of voting should be lowered to 16 so younger people can be involved in decision-making around environmental issues.
As an aside, of all the photos I saw, many showed more females than males taking part. I wonder if we can relate this to our upcoming conference, the motion of attracting to the Party more female members. If the environmental movement is the focus of female political activity, perhaps we should go to them, rather than wait for them to discover ourselves.
“Arthur C. Clarke in his 1962 book Profiles of the Future imagined “efficient electrical storage”
Better and more efficient batteries is the goal that many technologists are striving to achieve.
Like nuclear fusion it always appears to be frustratingly just one step beyond being achieved.
We do have a difference in approaches. I wonder if they can be reconciled into a message that resonates with the ecologist audience that we are failing to reach and persuade. We need to communicate the urgency before the tipping points are reached and the climate wars and migrant climate refugees becoming a reality that brings down large parts of civilization. But we have to also emphasise the importance that there exists a rational solution – socialism, a steady-state economy that satisfies all reasonable needs and wants of a global population.
The Green New Deal is just a position paper, there is no bill that Congress will vote on, it is a wish list. The Democratic Party has so far even rejected its general tone. 2020 prospective presidents make sympathetic sounds but I am sure it will never be adopted. But it might achieve something, as you suggest.
While climate change should be the priority of all governments, I just don’t recognize it commanding any crucial policy in most governments.
That’s what I was getting at, ALB.
We can applaud the protests and demonstrations about climate change Extinction Rebellion here and Sunrise in the US , and the school student walk-outs but rather than system change we witness the Green New Deal as the resolution of the crisis, not revolution.
By not understanding capitalist dynamics, they have not made capitalism their enemy. In fact, the sub-text is a denial that capitalism is the root cause but as you linked to – people and overpopulation and that institutions like governments and corporations are the issue and palliative remedies are the cure.
We witness it in practically every scientific report no matter how damning it is. There is no indictment of the system that has created and still advances climate change. Just optimistic references to “it is not too late” for green policies to be implemented by born-again politicians.
Isn’t this denialism by those who should now know better?
IF we cannot detect an effective environmentalist movement that understands the problem and addresses it rather than treat the symptoms then the idea of system collapse is not simple diagnosis of what ails society but a terminal prognosis (to keep the medical metaphor going) on the future.
But some good news.
The UK has its first carbon capture energy plant at Drax
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-47163840
“…Many scientists believe it will be needed because they don’t trust politicians to curb the CO2 emissions that are over-heating the planet…”
An article on the hypocrisy of the Guardian and its dismissal of Jeremy Hardy for being “too left-wing” to be employed as a columnist.
