John Buell

Recognizing the Global Climate Crisis

California is burning; the Carolinas are drowning. The media routinely inform us that these weather events are unprecedented, storm of the century, hundred-year floods, etc. What they seldom tell us is that these events are ahead of schedule.

Mainstream climate science follows what physicians would call a dose/response pattern. As environmental activist Gordon Clark puts it: “Scientists tell us what the planet will be like in 2100 based on their understanding of the linear process of adding X amount of carbon to the atmosphere.” The problem with this approach is that the carbon process has already warmed the planet to the point where a number of feedback loops have been unleashed. The pattern of climate change is no longer linear but rather has become geometric.

Carbon emissions can at least in theory be reduced and the rate of climate warming slowed. But feedback mechanisms, once initiated, have a momentum of their own. They are self-governing ecologies. If the arctic ice cap melts, more heat will be absorbed into the ocean, raising planetary temperatures and in turn speeding he rate of arctic melting. We might call the convergence and interaction of these forces the two plus two equals five effect. And as we look to the future, small changes in initial position entail big differences in the resulting condition as we move forward in years.

Clark points to more recent work that even adds to this concern: “In an article published in the prestigious Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 16 scientists warned that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s estimates of climate change might be greatly underestimated, based on – you guessed it – the existence and operation of feedback loops.”

Though it may be easy and reassuring to suggest that these scientists exaggerate, we should remember that the midcourse IPCC predictions have consistently understated the pace of climate change and the damage to be expected from it. The situation is dire and likely only to get more so rapidly.

The Pentagon now deems climate change a national security priority. Although it may be comforting to see that some government agency takes the problem seriously, the language in which the problem s characterized is crucial. National conjures up images of a land whose boundaries inscribe and protect a common and glorious history. Many crimes have been committed in the name of romantic nationalism. Security has its own complimentary issues. International Relations theorist James Der Derian reminds us security has a secondary meaning, False or misplaced confidence in one’s position. In Macbeth, Shakespeare wrote that “Security is mortals chiefest enemy.”

I prefer the language of global climate crisis. Crisis in its literal meaning suggests a fundamental turning point. Global invokes the need for collaboration across borders. Cooperation across borders is necessary not merely because environmental problems don’t observe political boundaries but also because we must rebuild and sustain democratic politics within and between citizens on both sides of the border. Extreme weather events and the population flows that often accompany them may occasion attempts to institute authoritarian or fascist response along with the worst forms of neoliberal capitalism. Such an event would be one more instance of Naomi Klein’s shock doctrine.

Perhaps the best response is to explain how we got here and what policy measures might induce a more egalitarian and less dangerous future. Just as climate change suggests in part the role of self governing the emergence of our consumer society is a product of other self-governing ecologies. Understanding these could help us construct alternatives.

Following the Great Depression and World War II, a major goal of US policy was to achieve high employment levels and steady economic growth. Nonetheless, rather than engage in direct job creation, the federal government stimulated various private sector initiatives. These included the GI Bill of Rights with its below market interest housing loans and support for college These policies were further supported by modest social security and unemployment compensation systems. Under Eisenhower, the interstate highway system was financed.

In addition, in order to blunt some of the management/labor conflict that had marked the immediate post-war period, the major industrial giants, especially auto and steel, make a deal. They guarantee collective bargaining rights and cost of living adjustments for wages. In return unions give up rights to control the shop floor and to have any voice in investment decisions. These policies interacted with and supported each other and were in large part responsible for the rapid growth of the so-called golden age of capitalism. They gave even many working class families that middle class suburban life — including the family wage that allowed women to stay at home — outcomes of which they were so proud.

However, like many self-governing systems with a momentum of their own this cluster of policies produced some unintended consequences. When competition squeezed profits of the industrial giants, they responded with speedup and tighter worker monitors and controls on the shop floor. Factories moved — often to suburbs and the upper south. Those suburbs were all white and unions often discriminated. The suburbs were also very energy intensive, making them especially vulnerable to the emergence of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). Suburbia often left women at home alone and extended families became the nuclear family

Workplace turmoil, OPEC, cultural conflict in the late ’60s and early ’70s led to attacks on government spending and regulation and the further development of what came to be known as neoliberalism. Government social welfare and job creation were trimmed. More responsibilities were passed along to the states, facing fiscal difficulties of their own in consequence of the corporate musical chairs. State governments make ad hoc deals with individual corporations and then become committed to competition via permanent tax breaks. In his recent book, On New Terrain, Labor writer Kim Moody shows that:

“Politically this was accomplished mainly through the rise of the Republican Right and its focus on state level organization and power—including new state level think tanks, fundamentalist big-box churches, deepened grass roots party organizations.”

Neoliberalism has opened up unprecedented gaps in income and wealth along with a deficit in the practice of and faith in democracy.

In subsequent columns, I will explore conclusions we can draw from this progression from golden age suburbia to the multi-level consolidation of neoliberalism. In particular I will focus on the role of fundamentalist religion, one factor that is distinctive to US neoliberalism. What reforms and coalitions might be most useful in coping with the likely global climate crisis? And what role does workplace reform play in a democratic response to coming crises? These are questions we are unlikely to ask if we continue to obsess over the national security implications of the unfolding global climate crisis.

John Buell lives in Southwest Harbor, Maine, and writes regularly on labor and environmental issues. Email jbuell@acadia.net.

From The Progressive Populist, November 1, 2018

Populist.com