Date: Wed, 5 Nov 1997 13:52:33 -0500 (EST)
From: Siddharth Chatterjee <siddhart-AT-mailbox.syr.edu>
Subject: M-I: New List & GCC




On Wed, 5 Nov 1997, Louis Proyect wrote:

> 
> The reason that the "nanny" case is being discussed here is that people
> find it interesting in terms of what it says about class, gender and
> nationality in the context of the jury system. You will not get anywhere by
> saying that it is not a legitimate topic of discussion.

Another reason for the discussion of the "nanny "case is that it is
a safe topic. Besides, it is quite easy and the discussion runs on
predictable lines. We should remember that when "The Bell Curve" came
out, there was a lot of controversy and taking of sides but the lines
were clearly drawn between liberals, progressives and the left on one
side and the reactionaries on the other. It was quite easy to show up
the racist fraud perpetrated by Hernstein and Murray. Besides, beating
up on them gave one a feeling of "accomplishment" of fighting against
injustice and racism. It was good that all this opposition was mustered
but it was relatively easy to do so. Most of us try to move in familar
territory (like the circle traced by a cow tied to a pole) and avoid the
hard, the really pressing questions of the day. And the environmental
disasters looming ahead for the planet and which will remove one of the
planks underneath the world capitalist system is one such issue.  

> Also, your posts on the environment are conversation-stoppers themselves.
> When you crosspost a long, highly technical, densely annotated scientific
> analysis on global warming, the reaction people will have is, "Hmmm,
> interesting." If they read it. You may just have to get used to the idea
> that there is nobody here that you can have a proper conversation with. If
> that is the case, you should consider looking elsewhere.
> 

Actually, I read Mark's post and found it quite alarming. Although due to
the lack of figures, it was difficult to understand some of the
explanations. In contrast to what Louis P says above, this list is
greatly enriched by Mark's presence. And he has a genuine complaint about
the "complacent, pompous, flaccid, self-absorbing etc." nature of the
discussions that take place here.

The issue of "Global Climate Change" is now being increasingly recognized
by researchers and those who work in the air pollution field.
For example in the preface to the second edition of the book
*Air Pollution Control - A Design Approach*, 1994, C. David Cooper and
F. C. Alley write:

--------------------------------------------------------------------

"The authors believe it necessary to offer a few words about *global
climate change* that may not be appropriate for inclusion in the body
of this text. Most scientists and engineers are trained to state
conclusions only with sufficient data to be certain of those conclusions.
However, the issues involved in global climate change are of such
importance, the time lags in the system are so long, and the possible
consequences of inaction are so great that the authors feel that we
must take a stand now, even without complete certainty. Therefore, the
next few sentences represent our beliefs.

We believe that global warming has already started and that events are
already in motion that will result in significant changes in large-scale
weather patterns by the middle of the next century, if not sooner -
changes that many will not welcome. A number of political and scientific
leaders in the world want to begin reducing carbon emissions now.
However, some politicians and special interest groups in the United
States and elsewhere refuse to act, partly because of substantial
economic impacts on particular industries or segments of the economy.

In our view, this attitude is short-sighted, self-serving and dangerous.
The United States needs to be at the forefront of these issues. As
engineers, we must pursue up-to-date information, inform ourselves of
the facts, and act in policy making debates. As individuals, we must
do all we can to try to reduce our emissions of carbon dioxide and
trace gases that are contributing to global climate change. As the
popular phrase goes - *think globally, act locally*."

--------------------------------------------------------------------

In Chapter 1, after presenting some plots of average global temperature
and CO2 levels as functions of time (years), the authors write:

"There is no doubt that greenhouse gases are increasing rapidly in the
atmosphere. AGT (average global temperature - SC) appears to be
increasing as well, but what evidence is there that global climate
change is occurring? There has been much debate among scientists,
engineers, and policy makers on exactly how big the impacts will be, and
when and where they will be felt. It is also recognized that steps to
mitigate GCC are extremely expensive and may require substantial
sacrifice on the parts of many people. It has been argued that to
undertake such solutions prematurely would be foolish.

Because there are so many apparently random influences on the local
weather, and so much natural variation from place to place and from
year to year, most people cannot grasp the concept of climate changes
over a 100- to 200-year period. They want hard scientific  evidence of
cause and effect in weather differences over say a five-year period. So
far, the changes in climate due to GCC have been small enough to be
largely masked by the "noise" in the system. Our global climate models,
while good, are far from perfect. Yet, these models do predict that
major effects will occur within the next several decades. The sad fact
is that the inertia of the earth-atmosphere system is so great that,
once begun, these changes cannot easily or quickly be reversed."

---------------------------------------------------------------------  

These are precisely some of the points that Mark has been making. And
he further adds that since capitalist civilization is a
*hydrocarbon-based* civilization, no matter what temporary patches are
developed, we are heading for disaster in the long run (50-100 yrs)
[as epitomized by depopulation, hunger, sickness - signs already visible]
unless the fossil-fuel basis of this civlilization is changed. And this
cannot be quickly turned around (speed is of great importance here)
unless there is a revolutionary transformation of the production
relations of capitalism worldwide. 

This looming environmental catatstrophe, which is another barrier to
capitalism, certainly adds to the urgency of the class struggle,
an issue which was not of major concern in the past. And a refusal
to pay importance to this topic while at the same time continue to engage
in pleasant discussions about nannies, 1850's India (of what Marx actually
thought and meant), etc. is nothing less but escapism.

S. Chatterjee





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