Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 11:03:54 +0000
From: James Heartfield <James-AT-heartfield.demon.co.uk>
Subject: M-I: Global warming


In message <3467C56B.B3486590-AT-netcomuk.co.uk>, Mark_Jones
<Jones_M-AT-netcomuk.co.uk> writes
> A splitting issue is El Nino, and our
>class analysis thereof.
>
>Do they run articles on the weather in NLR? I haven't seen a copy for more than
>ten years...

A class analysis of the weather! Now I have heard it all. As absurdities
go that ranks alongside Louis P's surreal proposition - 'we are talking
about tumours not alienation'. So why not rename the list 'medical
international' or meteorology international'. 

And what political conclusions arise from a concern with the climate?

This is Mark Jones:

"Only militarised, centralised parties can hope to succeed, and only by
a severe dragooning of the working class and its allies, and only, as
Lenin said, by having a party operate like a political factory, with an
iron division of labour and 'under martial law'."

Forget Lenin, this is Facism. 'Martial law'? 'Dragooning the working
class'? What Mark presents as his conclusion is actually his starting
point - the desire to subject those naughty workers to some spartan
discipline. Playing the petty dictator is the fantasy that he carries
over from his Stalinist childhood. The only difference is that the moral
imperative has changed from 'defence of mother Russia' to 'defence of
mother Earth'. Both slogans are, of course, delusions that only serve to
provide the spurious impetus to Mark's sado-masochistic impulses.

Anyone would think that there were no hurricanes until capitalism made
them. Does capitalism make all the bunny rabbits die too? All of the
high priests of global warming sound off about atmospheric conditions
they just do not understand. Conjunctural events like a hurricane are
not attributable to one factor in atmospheric conditions, but many.
Unless you can isolate all of the likely factors, there is no scientific
basis to assert that it is caused by any of them.

Here are some simple questions anyone who wants to be taken seriously in
the discussion of the climate ought to be able to answer:

1. Abstracting from the supposed effects of CO2 emissions, what was the
trend in average world temperature levels over the last 500 years?

2. In natural historical terms do CO2 levels lead or follow temperature
levels?

3. Is it always the case that CO2 levels move in the same direction as
tmperature levels?

Clearly, if we are unable to answer these simple questions there is no
basis whatsoever for understanding the global warming effect, as there
would be no way of quantifying the impact of CO2 emissions upon
temperature.


Fraternally
-- 
James Heartfield


     --- from list marxism-international-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---