I’ve been arguing now for a year and a half that the enactment of bold new climate policies—bold enough to quickly drive US greenhouse-gas emissions down to zero—can succeed only if we defeat the looming threat of far-right authoritarianism. And today, the nation’s anti-democracy, fossil-fuel-loving political minority appears more determined than ever to gain enough power to turn us into a sweltering autocracy. We have just 11 months left to stop them.
But now, suppose for a moment that do succeed and thwart MAGA extremists’ attempt to gain power over the federal government’s three branches. The road from there to bold climate policies, and many other urgently needed measures, will remain as rough and twisty as ever. Groundswells of public pressure will still be required to convince the timid souls on Capitol Hill to defy corporate resistance and enact strong, effective policies. And even then, it will be a long, hard struggle.
And it won’t be a one-and-done victory. Especially with a goal like eliminating greenhouse-gas emissions, laws will have to be protected from repeal for decades, and policies pursued with little or no interruption. That will require defeating anti-climate, anti-democracy forces in the Electoral College every […]
Fascism has always arisen as a response to cushion the working class from the excesses of capitalism. It succeeds in externalizing the blame onto others generally immigrants, and minorities. From a climate perspective, the author is at least honest enough to state that we will need to go on an energy “diet”. Well that’s true, and he doesn’t indicate how serious a diet will be and who will lose out. So long as these aren’t articulated it’s not an honest discussion. Interestingly enough he opines about his worry that that MAGA extremists will win instituting authoritarian rule. In the first 60 percent of the article, his solution? Wait for it….wait for it…..One Party Rule! He makes no proposals for how the system will address the inequities of capitalism for the working class. He briefly nods to the need for a multi-party democracy with no route to get there as if the Democrats in their largess will grant access to the levels of power once they hold one party rule. History is not on his side. But he is at least honest enough to maintain that what we need is not really multiparty democracy but just a replacement for the Republicans. His thesis that it was Roosevelt and the democrats that pulled the US out of recession is not supported by the facts. It was the ramping up of production for WWII which pulled us out. Capitalism its current form requires war to prosper. This is what we have been seeing for decades, with no end in sight. I was heartened that he acknowledged the United States rising as an empire following WWII but no direct criticism that this bipartisan supported empire is one of the reasons we are in our current predicament. Lastly, unless his solutions can address the needs of those in the third world, who also want to live the high energy demand western lifestyle his solutions are bound to fail.