💾 Archived View for gemini.spam.works › mirrors › textfiles › politics › SPUNK › sp001115.txt captured on 2022-04-29 at 02:45:29.
⬅️ Previous capture (2022-03-01)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
******* Earth Summit ************
from Workers Solidarity No 36
(1992)
THE EARTH SUMMIT took place in Rio last
June. In spite of the enormous cost
($123 million) and publicity (8,749
media people.) the final results were
two weak treaties and the agreement of
some "principles" on the environment.
Even this was too much for America who
refused to sign the Bio-Diversity
Treaty, fearing for their bio-technology
industry. In Rio itself an estimated
700 "street children" have been murdered
since January (according to the Centre
for the Mobilisation of Marginalised
Populations) in an attempt to beautify
the city.
Once again the capitalists proved unwilling to tackle
the problems of under-development and environmental
degradation. Given their past record this doesn't come
as much of a surprise. However there are serious
problems and it would be wrong for socialists and
anarchists to down-play them. For example, according to
the World Bank's World Development Report for 1992 well
over one billion people in the so-called developing
nations suffer from water-borne diseases and more then
3.5 million children a year die from diarrhoea alone.
Despite the collapse of Stalinism arms spending has
increased from $680 billion in 1972 to an estimated $800
billion this year, the rainforests are been cut down at
a rate of 170,000 square kilometres per year with an
estimated loss of 50-100 forest species every day.
THE EVE OF DESTRUCTION?
Things are clearly pretty bad. Many would point to
pollution, soil degradation, de-forestation and species
loss and say we are experiencing a devastating crisis.
Some even say that the end is nigh. Are things really
this bad?
Firstly, if you look back it is possible to see where
such doomsday pictures were painted in the past but we
survived. In the 1930s ten record warm years in a row
combined with increasing carbon-dioxide concentrations
led to fears of major global climate changes. Sound
familiar? The 1940s-1970s then proved on average to be
much cooler then expected. This is not to knock the
research of scientists like those on the Inter-
Governmental Panel on Climate Control who believe we are
experiencing a greenhouse effect. However it must be
borne in mind that climate and ecological systems are
extremely complex and to be wary of simple doomsday
scenarios.
In 1972 a book was published by scientists in the 'Club
of Rome' called "Limits to Growth". In this they argued
that key resources such as lead, copper and aluminium
were about to run out. Of course they didn't. In the
recently published sequel "Beyond the Limits" the
scientists admit they were totally wrong. They admit
they should never have used the "if present trends
continue" type argument. The only thing that is certain
about trends is that they rarely do! We weren't on the
eve of destruction then. We aren't now, though we do
face serious problems.
OVER-PRODUCTION?
However the question is still raised by a lot people
concerned with the environment: are we over-developed
and over-producing? For example, at the "alternative"
Earth Summit in Rio a demand was issued for "a cut in
the North's consumption of resources and an immediate
transformation of technology to create ecological
sustainability in the North". Is the problem one of
over-production and consumption in the industrialised
countries?
We would argue that there is a problem of over-
production in capitalism. But it is not real over-
production. Simply that it is an enormously wasteful
system of production geared purely towards competition
and profit. Huge amounts of goods are made to break as
soon as possible, rubbish is sold by advertising, new
inventions which threaten monopoly positions are bought
out as fast as possible to stop their production (the
oil companies are notorious for this). A lot of
production is geared purely to maintaining a competitive
advantage.
Often more is produced then there is a market demand
for. Then the price collapses and recession follows.
This might not mean that too much had been produced for
peoples' needs. Oh, no! All it means is that more has
been produced then can be bought.
So in America, one of the richest countries in the
world, 36 million people (15% of the population) were
living in poverty in 1991 according to Business Week.
Worldwide in 1991 there were 200 million tons of grain
hoarded to preserve prices. The charity Trocaire
estimated that 3 million tons could have eliminated
starvation in Africa for that year.
ARRESTED DEVELOPMENT
Imperialism is one of the ways the capitalists try to
eliminate some of the contradictions involved in
apparent over-production followed by recession. It is a
system were certain countries are kept at a very low
level of development by other well-developed capitalist
nations. During booms they can buy up labour and raw
materials cheaply. They can also off-load huge amounts
of generally inferior products onto these countries to
delay price collapse and recession.
Imperialism is not a thing of the past. The Gulf War
proved that the imperialists will go to any lengths,
including massive use of force, to maintain their
power. At the Summit the so-called developing nations
of the South asked for $40 billion to implement the Bio-
Diversity Treaty. They received just $1 billion. Even
$40 billion is but a small fraction of their
indebtedness to Western banks and governments.
These countries pay twice as much in debt re-payment as
they ever get from development 'aid'. Most so-called
'aid' usually has a cost: total compliance to the wishes
of the donor government. In fact most governmental
development aid is used as a tool to keep the
imperialised countries in line. 93% of the USA's aid
budget goes to Israel where it certainly isn't used for
humanitarian purposes!
CHEMICAL PROSPECTING IN COSTA RICA
When the West's rulers moan about the loss of bio-
diversity they are generally worried about potential
drugs and other new products they wish to extract,
refine and make a profit from. Costa Rica has already
signed "chemical-prospecting" agreements with Western
pharmaceutical companies. Malaysia tries to sell
hardwood products and, indeed, some renewable forest
products on the world market. The West charges massive
tariffs on finished products but virtually nothing on
raw materials which they can process themselves. Other
countries like Brazil are so massively burdened with
debt they are almost entirely committed to deforestation
and disastrous industrial and ranching projects to try
and earn foreign currency.
Another example of how imperialism works is in the
locating of polluting industry. 12% of the total cost
of building a chemical plant in the USA is made up of
pollution controls, 6% in Ireland and presumably even
less in the third world. So industry that wouldn't be
tolerated in the West moves into third world countries.
For this reason, when fighting to prevent location in
countries like Ireland it is important to try to move
beyond the "not in our back-yard" syndrome. You have to
try to make links internationally.
The basic point is that capitalism is not committed to
development. In fact it is based on arresting the
development of most of the world which in turn
contributes to environmental degradation.
POSSIBLE WORLDS
Progress and development are not the problem. Even
severely distorted and uneven (e.g. confined to the
West) as they are at present they still seem to point to
a better future. The possibility of freeing humanity
from poverty and drudgery exists. In the seventeenth
century average life expectancy in the West was 40
years, now it's 75. Access to education, leisure time
and a generally better standard of living has been made
possible.
Most people in the West like the improvement and
wouldn't wish their grandparents' or great grandparents'
lifestyle on anyone. Our aim must be to extend the
possibilities, to widen peoples' experiences and
expectations. Under capitalism we see the potential for
a better way of life but the system can't deliver. It
offers the promise of improvement with one hand but
snatches it away with the other.
THE ANARCHIST ALTERNATIVE: DROP THE PILOT
The problems aren't due to unbridled development. In
fact in most of the world development is urgently
needed. We can't afford to go back but it is
impossible to move forward under capitalism. Therefore
we argue for the overthrow of capitalism. We make the
case for anarchism and workers' management of industry.
We need growth which is finely tuned, highly developed
and responds to peoples' needs.
For now, we focus on immediate action by workers to
address the issue where it arises. Environmental
degradation is a class issue. The working class always
gets the worst effects, the bosses can retreat to the
air-conditioned penthouse or the golf-links. We support
action to reduce pollution from industrial plants or
even for their re-location while attempting to avoid
just making "not in our back-yard" arguments.
In Britain it took industrial action by the National
Union of Seamen to stop nuclear dumping at sea, they
just refused to do it even when threatened with legal
action. Similarly dockers in Liverpool stopped the
importation of toxic chemicals from Canada.
Workers can, in day-to-day struggle, make real gains in
forcing industry to clean up. They have also proved
capable of managing highly centralised and complex
industries in a democratic way. The experience of
Russia (1917-1921), Spain (1936-37), Hungary (1956) and
Portugal (1974) support this case.
Workers can make industry something which can ensure a
better world and begin the massive task of development
that is needed worldwide. This is the only way that
resources can be used sustainably and the problems of
poverty and under-development tackled. Industry has to
be made work for people not profits.
Conor McLoughlin