[DEBATE] : What's the Best Course of Action for People andtheEnvironment?

[David Hallowes]

Dominic wrote:
> At least you are prepared to enter the ball park that Heartfield is in. 

I haven't read Heartfield. Amongst others, I draw on an environmental
tradition critical of Malthus and of the Malthusian strain in other
environmentalisms (Ehrlich etc). For a good piece in that tradition, see
Larry Lohmann's 'Re-imagining the population debate' on the Cornerhouse
website (Briefing 28). The Heartfield snips I have seen suggest that he
thinks any mention of physical / environmental limits to development is
inherently Malthusian. I don't agree. 

> Let me asked, how is the "social control of technology
development" that you speak of to be exercised? If in fact the
prerequisite is a classless society, how do you propose that such a
society is to be brought into existence in time?

I'm not a seer and I don't have a grand narrative. But I'd start with what
Peter Waterman just posted:

> The innovatory aspect of the WSF and the global justice movement (there
are other aspects) is rather the disempowerment of hegemonic forces,
instruments, and ideologies. This applies to capital, state, empire, the
military, patriarchy, racism, environmental destruction, etc.

In terms of production, I'd hope for an expansion of commons regimes
(plural, heterogenous). Whether that's what comes out of the multiplicity of
people's struggles with the beasts of capital, I don't know. But I do think
that capitalism is in trouble - environmental destruction (with climate
change as one rather significant element), resource depletion (particularly
oil), and over-accumulation. 

> In time?

I don't know. I think the world is probably already committed to over 2
degrees - the target currently accepted but too much anyway - by virtue of
the lag effect. But the more we pollute, the worse it gets. So in one sense,
it's already too late and in another sense, it's never too late.