So now I’m thinking that all these orgs need to hook up and
share/exchange information. So if readers know of other websites or
organizations that are connecting the environment and socialism, I’d
like to know about them.
Thus, how about the idea of a ‘clearinghouse’ of everything Green and
Socialist, it need only be a page that could be added, listing as many
environment and socialism resources and activities as possible, so that
readers interested in the subject could access it all from one handy
location.
One of the interesting aspects that was raised at the meeting was the observation that there
is
a ‘movement’, small though it is at present, that is rejecting
consumerism. Predictably it is a largely well-educated and affluent
body of people but so what?
The issue for socialists is
connecting the rejection of consumerism with a positive
alternative—socialism, no easy task given the fact that consumerism is
in reality an addiction, which like cocaine can only be assuaged by
continually consuming in the vain hope that the latest purchase will
make the pain will go away.
And the idea of a ‘green socialism’ necessary though it is, faces
immense obstacles not the least of which are the millions of jobs that
depend on us consuming an endless stream of garbage.
A valid parallel is the arms conversion movement, for although the
abolition of the production of weapons is an obvious objective, again
millions of people depend on weapons-related jobs, simply closing
factories is not the answer without being able to offer a positive
alternative (see the ‘
Project on Defense Alternatives’ for more on this vital issue).
Such an ambitious programme requires a long-term strategy for change
and massive investment in retraining and only makes sense when viewed
in the context of a larger conception for social transformation.
I suppose my real concern is not the objectives of AGS as such but does
it have a viable programme to offer? Slogans are okay for marches and
demos but if we are to stand a chance of surviving the barbarians, we
have to be able to offer a realistic alternative that can stand the
test of debate and analysis and above all, grab peoples’ imaginations
and move them to action.
The other major issue concerns democracy, for any revolutionary
organisation has to be internally democratic else it’s once more a
question of ‘Do as I say, not as I do’. The lessons of the past should
have by now taught us something (have they?).
As ever, the
real
problems are not only devising the alternative but how to realise it,
and let’s not kid ourselves, the obstacles are immense over and above
convincing a ‘critical mass’ that without a radical change, we are
doomed to live out another generation or more under this insane system,
assuming of course that it’s not already too late.
But there
are some signs of an increasing disenchantment with the ‘system’ such
as the one mentioned above, but is it only a passing fad or does it
signify something more, a questioning, let alone a rejection of
fundamental capitalist ‘values’?
One thing is obvious, namely that the ruling elites are only too aware
of their lack of legitimacy and have finally realised that the growing
questioning of capitalist society’s aims and objectives needs to be
redirected. That’s why ‘green’ advertising and propaganda is now
pouring out of the ideas factories in the hope that consumerism by
another name can be kept going. For capitalism the alternative is just
too awful to contemplate.
However unlike earlier attempts at building a socialist society we are back to basics with
values now firmly at the centre. But what kind of values and who and how do we decide what they should be?
For example, what is to replace consumerism? We still need products but
once you remove the arbitrary and profit-driven basis for production
who and how do we decide what should be produced?
“If we’re going to stop the capitalist economic locomotive from driving
us off the cliff, we are going to have to fundamentally rethink our
entire economic life, reassert the visible hand of conscious
scientific, rational economic planning, and implement democratic
control over our economies and resources.” – ‘The Eco-Suicidal
Economics of Adam Smith’ by Richard A. Smith
Certain aspects appear to be obvious, for example, all production has
to use sustainable resources and processes but obviously the creation
of new products and services cannot be based on some kind of ‘vote’.
Currently there are no mechanisms for deciding what or how they should
be produced, the mythical ‘market’ allegedly decides. But demand has to
be created, else why have advertising that feeds off our fears and
insecurities.
After all, what we call innovation is merely another word for the
endless reproduction of capital as markets become saturated with the
last round of ‘innovation’. But once we remove the arbitrary nature of
production an entirely new terrain is exposed for examination.
Rejecting consumerism also challenges our concepts about the nature of
work. Modern production is so prolific and efficient that only a
fraction of the labour force is needed to produce all our basic needs,
so what do we do with our ‘free’ time (or alternatively, do we work
four-hour days or one year on, one year off)? These are concepts that
are alien to capitalism, for it’s not the amount of time we work, but
how productive that time is, in other words how much surplus value can
be extracted from our labours?
And of course the burning question: The existing system is not just
going to sit idly by and accept its own abolition, it will fight back
using all the resources of the state to defend its right to exist.
This may seem an academic question right now but if we are to convince
sufficient numbers of the dire necessity for a radical change, we
should at least have some idea of how we aim to achieve them.
In the UK for example, the entire parliamentary system is fundamentally
anti-democratic, thus the odds of a small political organisation
‘crashing the party’ are all but non-existent, for what we have is
essentially a one-party system with virtually nothing to choose between
the three main political parties.
Even ‘left’ Labour MPs are not going to rock the boat, there is just
too much at stake. Just how bankrupt the system is can be seen from the
fact that more Labour MPs voted to abolish fox-hunting than to oppose
the invasion of Iraq. Clearly foxes have a greater political value than
human beings. How could anybody in his or her right mind vote for
any political party that behaves in such a manner?
It seems reasonable to assume therefore that any changes are going to
come first from extra-parliamentary actions, in particular, mobilising
at the community or locality level. The problem with this is that such
struggles tend to become ‘single-issues’ and once resolved, those
involved tend to revert to form.
However, the burning question of the environment and its connection to
capitalism is universal, it affects everyone to a lesser or greater
degree and it does it on two levels, the first being the obvious
changes to the climate and the second being how capitalism responds to
these changes and in turn, our demands for solutions.
The central dilemma is how best to connect climate change to capitalism because it’s
not
an issue of reducing greenhouse gases by consuming less or driving less
but of challenging the fundamental basis of capitalist production for
the sake of nothing but profit.
If nothing else, the threat
to our climate unleashed by an out-of-control capitalism reveals just
how everything is interconnected and indivisible and just how dependent
we are on Nature for everything. Is it possible that more than anything
else, more even than wars, the threat to our collective home will
motivate us to get rid of the class that is prepared to sacrifice
millions on the altar of profit? After all, just think about the
alternative if we allow things to continue as they are?
* Apparently, Humpty-Dumpty was the nickname for a massive cannon used
by the Royalists during the only real revolution this country’s ever
had, Cromwell’s and which got blown apart during a battle between the
Royalists and the Roundheads.