I appreciate both Hedges and McKibben, and i differ with them both. McKibben writes, here’s where we’ll find out, in the next few months, whether the Obama administration is actually serious or not -- is he serious? Is he still waiting to see if Obama is an environmental president? Does he still hope for social change by appealing to Obama to be a good guy? When asked, do you see any hope anywhere in the world for, in one particular nation or other, where the people have managed to get their governments to tackle this problem? he does *not* bring up British Columbia, who have lowered their carbon emissions greatly through a carbon tax. Why not? Why does he ignore the only success stories? Why does he ignore the whole concept of a carbon tax? James Hansen is a tireless advocate for what people are calling The Hansen Plan -- a fee-and-dividend on carbon. A carbon tax whose revenue goes back to the people. Simple and done. Serious reductions in emissions and a better economy. And yet, Hedges is calling for people to breach police barricades. His idea of direct action is to confront and get arrested. I dont support that either. Its a polarizing move, and is radical in appearance only. The call for a carbon tax would be the serious line-in-the-sand that would polarize the struggle, make evident who is on what side, and what it all means, and is so milquetoast in form that it cannot be demonized as a bunch of anarchists causing trouble but really supported by the most staid citizens who care about the Earth. Im not a middle-of-the-roader. Im a strategist.
Posted on: Sat, 13 Sep 2014 14:07:10 +0000