We Blew It!

The latest UN report on greenhouse gas emissions paints a dire picture for the future of life as we know it on Planet Earth.  The report estimates that even if the  most recent action plans submitted by 191 countries to curb greenhouse gas emissions are met, the planet is on track to warm by more than 2.7 degrees Celsius by the end of the century — far above what world leaders have said is the acceptable upper limit of global warming.  That change will not end life on Earth--life will adapt and evolve as it always has but the transition will be ugly.  In the past the kind of changes we can expect within the next century occurred over eons and did not involve highly complex societies designed on the basis of a stable.  Environment.  I won't mourn the demise of homo sapiens.  In general, I think it's a fair reward for our stewardship of our home planet but it's unfair to future generations born into a rapidly changing world for which they have no responsibility.  It's even more unfair to the many other species that will die with us.

As an aging Boomer I can't help but think that my generation blew it.  Oh sure, Boomers didn't create the current political/economic system--it was well under way when we were born--but we didn't live up to the predictions that we would be change agents.  Those predictions were overblown at the time but were still an integral part of our generational identity, either explicitly or in the conventional wisdom.  In reality, we largely accepted things as they were, occasional demonstrations and other resistance notwithstanding, and went on to live our relatively privileged (depending on sex, race, class and other determinants of societal worth) lives.  

What we did not do was take climate change seriously from the beginning.  Early warnings date back to at least 1912 but were not fully understood.  In 1965 The American Association for the Advancement of Science raised concerns about atmospheric carbon dioxide and climate change.  By 1988 the dangers were better understood and pointed to a changing world.  In that same year the first Baby Boomer was elected to national office.  The Boomer was Dan Quayle and the office was Vice-President and, while both are relatively insignificant on their own, the event represents our the Boomers' ascent to power.  We were already well-represented at other levels of government.  From 1993 through 2021 every President has been a Boomer.  You'd think that the generation that celebrated the first Earth Day in 1970 would have been sufficiently aware to recognize the dangers posed by those early warnings.

That's not to say we did nothing.  International conferences and panels and made recommendations and pledges were made but nothing fundamental changed.  America and the rest of the industrial world continued to burn fossil fuels and now we face a much shorter timeline for dealing with what is a rapidly deteriorating situation.  The promise of generational progress is that each generation leaves the world better off than it found it.  That was easy enough when we had an entire world to exploit (and the indigenous peoples of those exploited areas weren't part of the deal).  As I write now at the beginning of the 21st century's third decade, meeting that intergenerational is highly unlikely.  

Unlike my generation, future generations will address the consequences of climate change.  They have no choice.  We did and we blew it.

A Couple of Questions for James Mattis

During his confirmation hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee Defense Secretary-designate James Mattis made two statements that would benefit from further examination and elaboration.

In documents submitted to lawmakers prior to the hearing, Mattis identified Iran as “the primary source of turmoil” in the Middle East. “Its policies are contrary to our interests.”

Turmoil is a rather broad term.  For national security reasons, I would like more definition.  What actions constitute "turmoil"?  What form do these actions take.  What American interests are at risk from these actions?  What risks to our allies' interests and how are those interests aligned with ours?  are the specific risks to the United States?  To our allies?  What are our options for mitigating those risks?

Simply casting Iran (a nation which has its own claim to exceptionalism) as the "primary source of turmoil" no more useful to creating effective American diplomatic and military policy than are Iran's own denunciations of the US as "the Great Satan" for developing its own policy.  Futher elaboration is essential for Americans to understand what our leaders are doing with tax (or borrowed) dollars and, most importantly, the casualties that often result from our actions.  So, give us more and let us discuss it as informed citizens.

Repeatedly, the nominee made reference to the need to improve military readiness, blaming years of budget cuts for an erosion to technology and manpower.

Mattis identifies a single cause for erosion:  budget cuts.  Along with those budget cuts the multiple wars the US is fighting are also a big source of that erosion.  Personnel, ordnance and equipment get chewed up in war.  If we weren't fighting all of those wars(*) and garrisoning the world the military would not be eroding.  So again I ask why?  To what purpose? How do these wars, special operations and empire of bases contribute to American and world security?

We've been doing this sort of thing since World War II and while it may have been sustainable in the past these days must be evalulated in terms of America's  21st century economic prospects and national priorities.  Even if Congress was inclined to tap this country's vast and concentrated wealth, Americans may well find that other needs, like infrastructure or a cost-effective health care system may well be a higher priority.  In order for us to make that decision, we need complete information if we are to make good use of the funds we do allocate to the military.

That brings me back to my questions about Iran, General Mattis.  I can ask you the same questions about each war and about American interests in each region and each country.  I'm sure that your new position can offer a lot of answers to these questions.  But remember that you will need real justification and explanations not just platitudes and catchphrases.

____________
(*)  NPR identifies Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and Lybia.  The US is also active in African wars and in Yemen.

Meanwhile On the Ground

From an eye level view of life under the Islamic State:

Every day they [IS members] increase in number, hold new positions and consolidate their presence, undeterred by the air strikes from coalition forces which do nothing to change things on the ground. It it is actually our reality which has changed and become even more horrific.  (emphasis added)

Airstrikes don't mean much if no one is on the ground to take advantage of the bombardment.  Otherwise it's all just another pointless military charade in the Endless War.

Remembrance Sunday

Britain remembered its war dead today with wreath layings at The Cenotaph in London.  Today's ceremony, Remembrance Sunday, comes three days before the anniversary of the November 1918 Armistice that ended the war.  his is the first I've heard of Remembrance Sunday which means either I am uninformed about British ceremonial customs (very possible) or this is a one-time event since it comes during the first year of the World War I centennial.

Be that as it may, today's wreath-laying, combined with the poppy display at the Tower of London is a fitting remembrance of the almost 900,000 British and Colonial troops who died in The Great War.  Compared to the art and presence of the of the display and British flare for ceremony, American Veterans Day ceremonies will seem kind of pale.  Maybe when the country begins noticing the WWI centennial in the years marking our own entry into the war in 1917 we will do something to match today's event in Britain but all of the eVeterans Day events I am aware of seem pretty routine (along with much of the nation noting the day's significance in passing, if at all).

November 11 has less meaning for me as Veterans Day than it does as Remembrance Day and Armistice Day, its original name.  I don't gainsay veterans recognition for their service and sacrifice, a debt we can should never forget.  But recognizing veterans is only part of the story.  We must also remember how ill-advised were the causes for which they have served.  Maybe World War II was The Good War but it would have never happened but for the vindictive Versailles Treaty ending World War I which itself was certainly pointless.
The many wars and interventions since 1945 reflect a flawed and paranoid American view of the world that buggers our national values and squanders our wealth and our blood. 

That's why we should remember more than our veterans.

At The Cenotaph

I saw the Prince of Darkness, with his Staff,
Standing bare-headed by the Cenotaph:
Unostentatious and respectful, there
He stood, and offered up the following prayer.
'Make them forget, O Lord, what this Memorial
Means; their discredited ideas revive;
Breed new belief that War is purgatorial
Proof of the pride and power of being alive;
Men's biologic urge to readjust
The Map of Europe, Lord of Hosts, increase;
Lift up their hearts in large destructive lust;
And crown their heads with blind vindictive Peace.'
The Prince of Darkness to the Cenotaph
Bowed. As he walked away I heard him laugh.

--Siegfried Sassoon

Makes Sense to Me

The Washington Post reports,

Federal employee and public interest groups are asking key members of Congress to significantly lower the limit on payments to Defense Department contract workers.
During a time when basic pay rates for federal employees have been frozen for nearly two years, the government can pay individual contractors up to $763,029. That amount should be substantially reduced because of “fiscal responsibility and fairness,” said the letter from 10 organizations.
[...]
This is important because of the taxpayers,” said J. David Cox Sr., president of the American Federation of Government Employees, in a telephone interview. “Nobody in the federal government makes that kind of money, so why should we pay contractors that? . . . If you want to find savings for taxpayers, this is a good place to find it.”

Follow the money.  Big dollar amounts identify one of the very first places to look for savings.  The immense  agency budgets like the Department of (War)Defense come most readily to mind but even the smaller amounts like contractor compensation can identify systemic issues that drive up costs.  So it makes sense to look hard at why we pay contractors more than the President of the United States. 

Misanthopic Musings

The most recent dead tree version of The Nation arrived the other day with a couple interesting observations.  An editorial about the Rio + 20 summit noted how difficult dealing with climate change is for a capitalist world where consumption and profit are a primary motivation.  I am a pessimist about the likelihood of any effective solution.  It has the upside that the human species might vanish from the planet or be sufficiently diminished so as to no longer be a threat.  The downside is that we will take most other species along with us.  For that reason alone, it is worth pursuing the mass actions needed to prevent the planet from becoming far less habitable.

It also reminds me yet again of the failure of My Generation.  We came of age during the time of the first Earth Day with dreams of saving the environment.  Forty years on, we are senior citizens who not only failed to live up to that dream but also bought wholly into the myth of capitalist accumulation.   We have lived well as the planet slowly succumbed to our excesses wrapped in the myth that we could deal with systemic environmental problems, just not now when it could be inconvenient.

Katha Pollitt discusses the fact that 46 percent of Americans are creationists, noting that almost half of the nation rejects the overwhelming evidence of evolution.

...[R]ejecting evolution...relies on a fundamentally paranoid worldview.  Think what the world would have to be like for evolution to be false.  Almost every, scientist on earth would have to be engaged in a fraud so complex and extensive it involved every field from archaeology, paleontology, geology and genetics to biology, chemistry and physics. 

We are a society of fools.  And while it is certainly just that we reap what we have sown, Mother Earth and the many species who also share this planet have done nothing to merit the fate that we have prepared for them.

The Logic of Authority

“She is one professor among thousands of professors in Turkey,” he said. “I have difficulty understanding those saying a professor should not be arrested while thousands of other people are being arrested in Turkey.”

Idris Naim Sahin, Turkey’s interior minister, explaining why he does not understand protests about the detention of Busra Ersanli, a well-known academic detained since a previous sweep this month against the KCK, a shadowy organization that Turkish authorities say includes Kurdish terrorists.

To the authoritarian mind thousands of detentions justify any one of them. Never once will the authoritarian entertain the idea that none of the detentions are justified.

This way to the gulag, if you please.

Some Possibility

Paying too much attention to contemporary events and trends can easily leave me cynical and pessimistic. The pessimist and cynic are less likely to be disappointed but those perspectives make life pretty grim. So I look for possibilities. One possibility is that voices are speaking out against the corporate-military hegemony of America's economy and how that hegemony is maintained at the expense of most Americans. Yesterday, I cited Noam Chomsky and others. Today I find another perceptive analysis of America's spiral into oligarchy.

William Astore's essay (like Chomsky's, at TomDispatch) on the America as an "Old Regime". Astore's vocabulary is stunningly direct:

Consider again the example of pre-revolutionary Versailles. A top-heavy, remarkably dissolute, and openly parasitic bureaucracy plundered the commonweal of France in its pursuit of power and privilege. Can we not say the same of Washington today? In its kleptocratic tendency to enrich itself and its accountability-free deployment of military power globally, the American ruling class bears a certain resemblance to French kings and their courts which, in the end, drove their country to economic ruin and violent revolution.

Fed up with its prodigal and prideful rulers, France saw the tumbrels roll and the guillotine blades drop. How many more undeclared “enlightened” wars, how many more trillions of dollars in war-driven debt, how many more dead and wounded will it take for the American people to reclaim their power over war? Or are we content to remain deferential to our ruling class and court -- and to their less-than-liberty-loving overseas creditors -- until such a time as their prideful wars and prodigal trillion-dollar-plus “defense” budgets bring our great democratic experiment crashing down?

How long, indeed. I keep asking how long Americans, whose reputation and image has traditionally been practicality, will continue to accept immiseration for the benefit of the wealthy?

Maybe I will get an answer soon. At least one politician is willing to bet his re-election that Americans are unwilling to simply absolve the wealthy of any social responsibility. Senator Bernie Sanders, a Vermont socialist, has introduced a bill creating a surtax on gross incomes exceeding one million dollars

The millionaires tax was pushed by Sen. Bernie Sanders, (I-Vt.), a socialist and a member of the budget committee. He initially called for a 5.4 percent surtax on adjusted gross incomes over $1 million, which Sanders said would raise as much as $50 billion a year.
[...]
Sanders, in an interview, waved off criticisms of the surtax, saying its inclusion would help Democrats’ campaigns — including his own.

“I’m running for reelection, and I think this is what the American people want,” he said. ”Asking the wealthiest people in this country to contribute to deficit reduction is not only good policy, it’s good politics.”

One thing the Republicans have done well is offer their vision for America. It's chillingly brutal, based on truly fuzzy math and assumptions that are not credible but at least Republicans put their vision out for people to see. Democrats need an equally bold vision but are too timid to take a chance.

All of which makes me glad that an independent socialist is willing to speak out. That's an antidote for cynicism and pessimism.

Noam Chomsky Tells It Like It Is

...at TomDispatch:

As long as the general population is passive, apathetic, diverted to consumerism or hatred of the vulnerable, then the powerful can do as they please, and those who survive will be left to contemplate the outcome.

Of course, this is much the same message offered by Chris Hedges and Ted Rall but it bears repeating over and over.