Richard Mellor
AFSCME Local 444 retired
Oakland CA
11-11-06

On a visit to Macedonia a few years ago I stood on the famous stone bridge in the capital Skopje’s main square. It crosses the Vardar River and as I looked down I noticed wave upon wave of bottles, cans, and other assorted trash flowing rapidly beneath me. The Vardar begins near the Albanian border, just north of Gostivar, the small town I had just left; it flows from west to east and eventually empties in to the Aegean Sea.

It was a depressing sight. I couldn’t help thinking to myself that this was just a small corner of the earth, a tiny glimpse of what is a huge environmental catastrophe in the making. What must the Ganges be like? The Yangtze? The thought of the beautiful oceans came to mind; surely they are the largest garbage dumps on earth. For a moment I felt a mixture of sadness, hopelessness and anger.

The issue of garbage and other human waste is not the only major environmental issue we face. Global warming is front and center in the debate on the future of the planet and its ability to sustain life as we know it. Most scientists agree that the rise in the earth’s temperature, 0.7 degrees C since 1900, is due to what they call the Greenhouse effect, gases in the earth’s atmosphere that trap heat. This is a natural process that warms the earth and contributes to the abundance of life on the planet. However, human activity, industry, the burning of fossil fuels etc., is increasing the quantity of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere such as carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and others. These gases are trapping more heat in the atmosphere causing temperatures to rise. The growth of the Chinese, Indian and other economies of the “developing” world have deepened the crisis. According to research released yesterday by UNESCO, the rate of increase in emissions from burning fossil fuels was four times greater from 2000-2005 than between 1990 and 2000. (1)

A recently released report by the British government: The economics of Climate Change (2), has added to the debate. The report argues that unless immediate action is taken to slow the process of climate change caused by carbon emissions, it is quite likely that the earth’s temperature will rise by between 3 degrees C and 10 degrees C by 2100. Nicholas Stern, the author of the report points out that his estimates, “point to significant risks of temperature increases above 5 degrees C under a business-as-usual scenario by the early part of the next century. Commenting on the report in the Financial Times, Martin Wolf writes. “By the middle of this century and, so, within the life span of many now alive, warming could be between 2 degrees C and 5 degrees C. Since the earth is only 5 degrees warmer today than during the ice age, a change of that magnitude would be enormous.” (3)

Wolf, as others have done, goes on to describe the devastating social consequences of taking no action, floods, drought, rising water levels due to the melting ice caps and deforestation and massive population shifts due to flooding or areas that are no longer inhabitable. (The UNESCO data makes the Stern report’s goal of keeping levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere below 550 parts per million more difficult and the consequences direr)

But it is clear that the capitalist class, at least their more astute thinkers, economists and scientists alike, have drawn the conclusion that economic activity, life under the so-called “free market” has serious environmental consequences. Failure to act on this issue will create a global disaster of unprecedented proportions which is not good for business.

Workers are well aware of this as we feel the effects of it on our daily lives, in the workplace, our health care, the poisoning of our rivers and streams from California to Nigeria and East Timor where workers have occupied oil refineries and had running battles with armed militias employed by the corporations.

I have to confess that I have not read the above report in its entirety but the main points are clear; unless something is done there will be severe consequences, not just through social degradation and the environment but to the world economy. Failure to act now, the report argues, could mean that fixing the problem in the future could cost upward of 20% of global consumption; this is the main issue driving the capitalist class to pay some attention to this problem and they are beginning to see there might be some profit in what they call the green economy; “you can be green and grow” says Stern. (4)

Many environmentalists argue that we cannot reverse the process. Many believe we are doomed and that nothing can be done. (They never attribute environmental degradation to the economic system itself rather to a collective “we” meaning all humans, as if a worker in a mine in Indonesia has the same social influence as the owner of it.)

But the report is more optimistic. If we act now, we, meaning governments and policy makers, can reduce the cost of slowing global warming. “Reducing the expected adverse impacts of climate change is both highly desirable and feasible.” the report argues. (5). The main issue for the capitalist class is cost. Stern tells them that it will be cost effective; by acting now, the report maintains, the cost of mitigating the effect of greenhouse gases would be a mere 1% of global GDP per year, what amounts to a few months economic growth.

Whether or not capitalism can avert a disaster, can prevent society from reaching a point of no return is a subject for debate. But for me, the answer is clear, it cannot; only socialism can do that.

But capitalism is capable of slowing the day of reckoning. This does not mean that damage already done is not extensive, that there are not scars that will take time to heal. But it is clear that capitalism is making inroads in to such fields as bio fuel and alternative energy and, dealing with global warming as the report indicates. The issue that warrants the most concern is not that the technology and resources are not there to solve the problem. It is that the ideas of socialism have been weakened, that a vision of an alternative form of social organization has been clouded. The monstrous regime of Stalin contributed greatly to this as has the increased exploitation of the former colonial world and the ability of capitalism to sustain a certain amount of growth, a factor strengthened by the technology boom in the US, the expansion in to China and India and other developments. And not least, the propaganda of the capitalist class itself that owns and controls the means of communication the workplace, and the universities.

But the resources at our disposal are immense it is only the restraint that the market economy puts on them that refuses to set them free. Ethanol and wind power has increased to such levels in Iowa that the state produces so much biofuel and “green” electricity that it has gone from a net importer to a major supplier to other states. (6) Business Week estimates that wind power could go from 1% of the US power supply today to 20% and ethanol and biodiesel from 4% to 20% of transportation fuels. There are even trees that can be planted that trap carbon emissions as they grow.

The potential for energy sources alone is staggering. According to business week, “For each unit of energy consumed in planting, fertilizing, harvesting, and distilling, ethanol yields about 1.5 units. At 3.0, biodiesel’s energy balance is even better. But the Holy Grail is so called cellulosic ethanol made from woody crops and plant waste. It has an energy balance of 36.” (7)

The Business Week article points out that there is a fuel blend that is 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline. But engines need to be upgraded to burn this. Carmakers are promoting this blend but capital will not flow in to this area of production until the profit margins are sufficient. They have to be sufficient enough to pay for all the luxury yachts, the residential palaces, and the speculation on art that the owners of capital need to make their lives fulfilling.

Even Bush has raised the issue. The regime’s planned energy independence initiative is emphasizing bio-fuels, in particular cellulosic ethanol mentioned above. The regime simply wants to ensure there exists the right “incentives to invest.” says director of the National Economic Council, John Hubbard. (8)

Business week comments on the “incentives”, “Ethanol’s high profit margins, even in light of recent drops in oil prices, have attracted the attention of Wall Street.” It has attracted their attention all right, like a shark is attracted to a wounded swimmer. It is not the attention we want but it shows that the resources are there if the profit is. It shows that the capital is there but while the labor of workers produces capital, we don’t own it. But even if the capitalist class saw little profit or no profit in dealing with the environmental crisis, they will attempt to deal with it and will look to public funds, make the working class pay just as they do when they nationalize unprofitable but necessary industries. This will further impoverish workers and increase the class divide and lead to further class conflict and social unrest.

The figure that would significantly mitigate climate change quoted in the British government report, 1% of global GDP, is about $44 billion of today’s global GDP. But by big business’ own reckoning, there is $11.5 trillion stashed away in off shore accounts, hidden by rich individuals in order to avoid taxes. This is around 25% of global GDP and this $11 trillion does not include cash hidden by corporations. (9)
This example is just the tip of the iceberg. The money is there; the technology is there or close to being there and would be a lot closer if society collectively determined what technology should receive capital.

If we consider the issue of de-forestation, a victim of climate change, if this can be slowed it can have a very powerful affect in slowing and rolling back global warming. But this demands a transfer of wealth from North to South as most of the de-forestation is in the South and this means a reorganization of the world economy which capitalism cannot bring about; it demands international socialist revolution and an integrated world plan of production based on the democratic collective ownership and control and management of the world’s resources for and by the working class. There is no other way out.

The most difficult obstacle for us to overcome is the view that society can only be organized on the basis of profit. The potential that can be unlocked with the elimination of the profit motive, of the ownership and control of global societies’ resources by a few hundred individuals and their families, is immense. And not just natural resources but human resources and human potential that is suppressed and excluded from the governing and administration of society under the dictatorship of capital unless it is in the business of profiteering.

The capitalist class, that constitutes a dictatorship over society will drag out all the old scare tactics when the idea of an alternative to the market is raised. They will point to the old Soviet Union and claim this was socialism. People won’t work if there is not a profit motive, and universal laziness would infect us all. Capitalism is the only economic system that can exist and has ever existed and on and on. Their best weapon is that humans are greedy. They look at us with their own characteristics in mind. To them, everything is a commodity to be bought or sold, water, land, air and humans themselves; they assume we are like them in our relationship to each other and the world around us. They ignore the fact that the human species has existed and survived for so long due to collective society.

Every worker should think about how we act in our family life or with friends. When we have only two pieces of candy and three kids playing, what do we do? We either break the candy in to three or we don't bring it out because we know the consequences of this. It is a more a part of human nature to share than to hoard and accumulate individual wealth at the expense of others; it is how we have survived. We are collective creatures.

It is not the lack of technology and science that prevents a solution to the environmental crises; it is the obstacle of capitalism.

(1) Financial Times 11-12-06
(2) The economics of Climate Change:  http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk
(3) A compelling case for action to avoid a catastrophe: FT 11-1-06
(4) Financial Times 11-8-06
(5) The economics of Climate Change Part 111 Chap. 13
(6) Business Week: Harvesting Green Power 11-13-06
(7) Ibid
(8) Financial Times 11-10-06
(9) The Observer 3-27-05