A Green New Deal Needs To Be Global, Not Local, Or Something

Remember, the Green New Deal is ostensibly about saving the world from ‘climate change’. Strange how it seems to be about so many other things

A ‘Green New Deal’ Needs to Be Global, Not Local

In the US and the U.K., the Green New Deal movement has galvanized hope for transitioning to the more equitable zero carbon world we so desperately need to address poverty and keep global average temperatures to below 1.5°C. But there has also been criticism of an apparent initial focus on jobs in “every town and city across the U.K.”, rather than on transformational justice globally. The challenge for Green New Deal advocates is to recognize the historical roots of the climate crisis, and avoid being the PR face of ongoing climate colonialism.

In a challenge to current inadequate emissions reductions targets (80 percent by 2050), Green New Deal supporters are calling for Britain to go “zero carbon by 2030”, alongside addressing the social and economic impacts of neoliberalism and inequitable deindustrialization in many parts of the U.K.. Such plans could radically reduce poverty rates and low-paid precarious work across the country, and could be designed to address the fact that poor people and people of color are disproportionately negatively impacted by environmental pollution.

But it can’t stop there. Nathan Thanki argues that a Green New Deal cannot be allowed to be “eco-socialism for [us] and barbarism for the rest of the world”. Thanki argues for a larger transformation of the structure of our energy, housing, food, transport, and health systems, alongside de-growth. And Yanis Varoufakis and David Adler propose an International Green New Deal that would fund a transition to renewable energy and commit to providing climate reparations and energy based on need rather than means or geography.

Anyone getting the idea that this is about all the standard left wing tropes, let’s just call it Modern Socialism, simply wrapped up in the banner of Hotcoldwetdry?

Supply chain justice in Labour’s Green New Deal should be a key demand for members. While a Green New Deal for the U.K. can’t resolve these issues on its own, it can be allied to the workers and communities resisting green colonialism. Public procurement contracts could require the protection of human rights of workers and communities in their supply chains. Changes to the law to allow impacted communities in the Global South easy access to sue companies for damages in the U.K. courts could also be effective.

Interestingly, that is the wrapup from several paragraphs explaining how, to put it bluntly, the push for alternative energy sources has led to massive problems for workers in the nations where the necessary metals, such as cobalt, come from. So, Warmists want “justice” for the people they’ve harmed in the first place? Good grief.

The need for reparations

But just addressing supply chain justice would still not be enough. Countries in the Global North—with high per person consumption habits—used up their fair share of carbon emissions decades ago. Since then, these rich, minority world countries have been delaying their responsibility to decarbonize and provide financing for mitigation, adaptation and loss and damage to countries whose quotas they have eaten into.

Redistribution of your money.

And we must also address the root causes of the injustice multipliers that climate change sits upon, including systemic exclusion due to poverty, gender, age, indigenous or minority status, disability, sexuality, sexual identity, lack of access to sexual reproductive health and rights, national or social origin, birth or other status. It is past time to address the multiple injustices and histories of slavery, colonialism and neocolonialism which have created our current crises.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

5 Responses to “A Green New Deal Needs To Be Global, Not Local, Or Something”

  1. Kye says:

    Heh, you’re gonna love this. I received it yesterday. My Review had been up over 18 months when Yelp decided I needed to be CENSORED by Yelp for defending a business I am familiar with and know to be upstanding from a loud mouthed hate monger. Can you IMAGINE a company like Yelp located in California censoring someone’s free speech which is what their platform asks for?

    Subject: Message from Yelp HQ [ 8414329 ]

    JUN 03, 2019 | 04:03PM PDT

    We’re reaching out to let you know that our moderators removed your review of NAME OF BUSINESS.

    We typically remove reviews that address culturally sensitive subjects in ways that reinforce negative stereotypes or make light of physical or sexual violence.

    In this case, we felt that your content crossed that line, even if you didn’t intend it to. Your review text is copied for reference below, and we hope you’ll continue to share your experiences on Yelp while keeping the Content Guidelines in mind. To learn more, check out our Content Guidelines (https://www.yelp.com/guidelines).

    Removed Content:
    You are very fortunate Teresa that I am not the owner. In one review you accused him of three felonies. Had it been me I would have sued your snotty attitude right off your face. Yelp needs to remove you from reviewing since you are irresponsible. I’ve been going to the NAME OF BUSINESS for years and it’s a fun friendly little place. The crowd runs from mid twenties to older folks and they’re all friendly. But it is a smoking bar so if you’re some kind of smoke Nazi don’t go. It’s that easy. So if you left “smelling like shit” that’s probably the way you smelled going in.

    The Yelp Support Team
    San Francisco, California

  2. Dana says:

    So, we’ll tax away the slavery reparations money we give to black Americans — taxed away from white Americans who had nothing to do with slavery — to turn around and pay climate reparations to those who were not intelligent or industrious enough to lift themselves out of poverty. https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_yahoo.gif

    • Kye says:

      Dana, that’s the Democrat Socialist interpretation of the economic activity known as The Circular Flow of Money. Only with Dem-Socs the circle becomes a straight line from the producers of wealth to the “receivers” of the wealth they produced. It’s good to be rich in any economy but it’s specially good when you can have the government steal other people’s money and just give it to you and if they resist it means jail or death. Hell, even Bezos can’t have you killed for your money. (Maybe Soros can).

Pirate's Cove