We are at the point when olio and gas companies need to pay for the damage they are inflicting. All legal means should be used including monetary fines and compensation as well as criminal charges for climate change denial and acting falsely. It is so sad that these companies, who could have leaders in divestment and transformation to new forms of profitable energy have chosen to deliberately destroy our and their home in the name of capitalism and profit. Evil!
Relying on similar findings from CERN testing, the French government acted "Three months after adopting a renewable energies law, French lawmakers voted on a new law to accelerate procedures for constructing new nuclear reactors. This second legislation presented by the government was adopted in a final vote at the Assemblée Nationale on Tuesday, May 16. It was passed with votes from the ruling coalition, Les Républicains (conservative), the Rassemblement National (far right) and the Communists." Apparently the Heritage Society doesn't lobby in France.
We have no such plans. Part of the problem is legalized bribery: "More than 1,500 lobbyists in the US are working on behalf of fossil-fuel companies while at the same time representing hundreds of liberal-run cities, universities, technology companies and environmental groups that say they are tackling the climate crisis, the Guardian can reveal. Lobbyists for oil, gas and coal interests are also employed by a vast sweep of institutions, ranging from the city governments of Los Angeles, Chicago and Philadelphia; tech giants such as Apple and Google; more than 150 universities; some of the country’s leading environmental groups – and even ski resorts seeing their snow melted by global heating." https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jul/05/double-agent-fossil-fuel-lobbyists
One of the few things that Mitch McConnell, Rand Paul and I agree is hemp. During WW II after the Philippines fell, we lost the capacity to make rope. Enter hemp. John Y Young Brown Sr. obtained a hemp monopoly, mostly based in central Kentucky. The war on drugs became a war on hemp. Come the tobacco litigation, hemp became an alternative for tobacco farmers, but it was illegal. Finally, only a couple of years ago, it was legalized.
Consider over 50,000 known uses of the hemp plant from paper to medication. Researchers have discovered that hemp batteries can potentially last eight times longer than lithium-based batteries and outperform graphene at a fraction of the cost. That means we can cut out world wide pollution from mining lithium, and reliance on China for supplies. As an advocate for Appalachia, IMHO this could change everything!!!! Who needs coal?
Sometimes I think hemp is just magic!! How can one plant do SO MUCH?
But it does. Even batteries!! What insanity to have made it illegal for so long, but it challenged the timber industry and so much more, so it was demonized and sidelined. It could have made SUCH a difference in food, energy, fabrics, construction … EGAD.
But all water under the bridge — Yes, now we need to accelerate the technologies of hemp, and figure out how to break the stranglehold of the fossil fuel oligarchs.
The major catastrophe in Appalachia was the chestnut blight. Changed the other flora and fauna, and eliminated much of the economy, leaving an opening for king coal. A couple of weeks ago I had sort of a conversation about “Demon Copperhead,” Barbara Kingsolver. It's about drug addiction and the susceptibility in Appalachia.
I tried to tell her about moonshine and ginseng, and later hemp and marijuana, which were illegal, but were among the cash crops available to them pre-drugs to make a living, so they would not have to go somewhere else to seek their fortune.
I used to give give blight resistant chestnut plants as gifts. Now maybe hemp.
Besides the economic potential, this could change the culture. No criminal liability for producing hemp. No more guilt?
Based on Daniel's comment, maybe we first need to adopt a requirement for fact based legislation. We are currently witnessing states adopting laws with no evidence of harm (bans on books, words, drag queens, etc) while we fail to act on evidence of harm (gun violence, plastics, CO2). It's bizarre. Another idea for fighting Big Oil propaganda is to remind people of all the other times corporations lied to make a profit despite the consequences to human health and environment. Corporations maximize profits by externalizing losses to the public. I can name off hand radium, PCBs, asbestos, PFAS chemicals, and of course, tobacco. In fact, when Big Oil set out to make people doubt climate science, they hired the same PR firms used by tobacco. Corporations have a long history of lying to protect profits, no matter who and what they hurt. I think people Right, Left, and Center believe in corporate greed. There are more than 2,200 cases on file currently challenging Big Oil company lies, replete with evidence the companies had knowledge of the harm they were inflicting all the way back to the 1970's. Of course, the Plaintiffs tend to be groups of kids or environmentalists against an army of Big Oil lawyers--still, fingers crossed. When I meet climate deniers I try to be sympathetic because Big Oil spent years and billions to make people doubt climate science. However, I have NO sympathy for any "bought" elected official who knows better or should know better. Again, this is yet another reason we need to separate public service from money. Public servants should protect public health, safety, and welfare. They cannot do that fairly and impartially when dependent on fossil fuel, NRA, or any other money. Also, because climate science has become yet another polarized, binary issue in our country, we need a robust public education campaign so people quit avoiding the subject. Thank you for considering my comment. PS I also think that Big Oil should disgorge some of its massive profits to fund the shift from fossil fuels instead of us SUBSIDIZING damage to our own future.
Being walled off from the big money is tough, though. When someone waves a wad of cash in front of people, supposedly legally, it hard to get people to resist finding a way to take that money. See how the Saudis have absorbed sports systems, even while so many are dismayed at being in league with the Saudis. Dismayed, yes … but …but… ALL THAT MONEY! ….How do we keep good people working for change and NOT accepting the dollars being waved in their faces?
That carries a lot of weight with a lot of us, but when everyone around you is taking the dough and you are struggling with the house payment, morality can start to look like whatever floats your boat.
We see it SO clearly with this whole “Sports-washing” situation. We could take some lessons from it and seriously figure out how to counter the power of money.
When it comes to actually fighting the good fight to ward off the worst of climate change, at least the lines are more clear.
But this is not an easy struggle — getting people to AGREE on what is “right” [and you need to get them to that agreement] and then getting them willing and able to resist being wooed away from that by money, there’s the rub.
Yes, use the observed facts to state the issues in a way that can be operationally addressed and results measured. Fine bad deeds to make restitution for disasters like you mentioned above. Since even lies are free speech, just calling it as it is, identify pernicious lies and patterns of behavior that are contrary to the common good and detrimental to health, safety, and social well being.
Morality cannot be legislated because some people just aren’t wired for it. Your way of thinking makes working on problems tangible rather than the anything goes so called values based religious belief based side shows.
Here in Missouri talk of EV charging stations is met with derision and laughter by our transportation republican representatives. There’s obviously a competition going on to see who can be the most right wing stupid.
Daniel, I so wish there were a way to get the word out to those entities you mentioned letting them know whom they are dealing with and how destructive that is. It would probably be better to somehow get the message to the people who live, work, or study in those entities. I suspect some of our media also benefit from fossil fuel money and power. With the limiting of local media and honestly balanced media, getting that message out will be difficult too. We need some well-respected folks to be out there at least as much as Baby Donnie is covered, to talk about what we are experiencing, maybe show the horror of someone dead of heat. Showing the photo of the refugee child dead on a beach changed a lot of people's perceptions of refugees, OK, not enough, but at least people started thinking about it. They say a picture is worth . . . . Well, maybe pictures could open more doors to people who have ignored global warming in the past. We need a real shake-up because doing what we have been doing has not gotten us anywhere close to where we need to be.
Where I grew up the Republican "Hambiltonians" i.e. bluebloods, were all "conservationists." The richest people on the planet at the time. The Mellons. Eventually they acquired Gulf Oil and Alcoa and their attitude changed.
However, some of their institutions remain. https://waterlandlife.org/ I'm sure that groups like the Sierra Club are all over this issue. They have all the data.
Daniel, thanks again for more information on an important topic. How can anyone break into the shareholder bubble and let people know what they are actually supporting and that instant gratification is not really healthy for anyone? Then, do they even care?
I agree that there should be a concerted effort to stem the tide of disinformation that is paid for by the fossil fuel lobbies. Pushing for electric vehicles, which are vastly more efficient and cleaner, would help. The change is already well under way, and will continues growing as people realize the they are also much cheaper in the long run.
I disagree that nuclear fusion is a useful solution at this stage, as it will not be available (if it is ever available) until well past the time line we need to follow to get ourselves out of this current mess. The simple adoption of clean energy sources now online is the answer.
Even fusion produces fast neutrons, which eventually make the containment vessel weaker and radioactive = nuclear waste. No one tells you about this dark side.
Heat is produced. Never had the kind proposed in France. Their old reactors produced plutonium that were encased in glass and buried. Supposedly safe but leaked. Their new model produces water.
Another option is thorium. We've known it was feasible since the Manhattan project.
I agree there is too much lobbying allowed, but I,have great concerns about nuclear options. Look at the destruction when something goes wrong, and there is still a storage problem. I wish more research was being done into using hemp as a fuel source, requiring all farming and ranching done using regenerative techniques, buildings that use safe nontoxic substances that can provide their own energy form solar and the movement within the building, There are many smart ways to protect this Earth, but the majority are going to have to demand these changes
BUT... fusion produces fast neutrons, which eventually make the containment vessel weaker and radioactive = nuclear waste. No one tells you about this dark side.
I'm no expert, but I think the new reactors are much better than the old ones and less likely to fail. I agree we need to figure out the storage problem.Everybody is Not in My Backyard about it.
I think earth crust thermal would a great source. I wanted to get it with a heat pump but it is extremely expensive. The new heat pumps have much higher serr values anyway.
Daniel. Thanks for sharing the links, very informative. I especially found this quote from the Guardian article very enlightening; “This database really makes it apparent that when you hire these insider lobbyists, you are basically working with double agents. They are guns for hire. The information you share with them is probably going to the opposition.” Still shaking my head over this. How to stop this insanity?
Money IS Power!!! And those with a lot of money know how to wield its power! We have to call them out and try to boycott them like Bud Light! However they know doing so would be deeply disruptive to us. They also know that we could not boycott/protest/strike against other companies if they continue to dismantle and ultimately end our Social Safety Net. They disguise their efforts as reforms against willing and able bodied people and ppl of color who abuse the system (every system has exceptions), when the truth is, they are targeting all of us. They are trying to prevent collective/majority efforts (boycotts/protests/strikes/referendums- just like the Ohio Republics trying to change the rules for referendums on yesterday) by ending the social safety net- if you don't work, you don't eat.
Day before yesterday, Lawrence Livermore Labs replicated its triumph of a few months ago by creating a nuclear fusion reaction that had a net positive return--more energy came out than was put in to achieve the reaction. A friend from the Department of Energy wrote to me that we may be able to expect commercial nuclear fusion in five to 10 years. A network of small fusion reactors -- enough to power a large neighborhood and capable of sharing power over their network over a limited area -- could power homes, businesses and electric vehicles. These would also eliminate the long strands of electrical power lines striping the countryside and sparking devastating wildfires. We are learning that although wind energy is productive, maintainance is expensive. Solar works now to reduce or replace electric-grid home energy. WE HAVE SOLUTIONS NOW, OR ONES THAT ARE COMING VERY SOON. THE PROBLEM IS POLITICAL. THESE CREEPS ARE BUYING CONGRESS YEAR AFTER YEAR AFTER YEAR, AND STUFFING THEIR WALLETS WHILE WE TEETER ON THE BRINK. Climate scientists now estimate that the AMOC--the ocean circulation that keeps the Northern Hemisphere both warm and cool--will collapse in as little as TWO YEARS. If that happens, Europe will go into deep freeze, the Southern Hemisphere will roast, and America will hit a Dust Bowl-level drought that will cause widespread famine and, simultaneously, watch her cities drown in rising seas. An AMOC shutdown won't "cure itself" for at least 1,000 years. And because of the delayed effects of rising ocean temperatures, we will not see the full effect of what we have ALREADY done for another 300 years. ... The bottom line is this: IF WE DO NOT RETURN DEMOCRATIC HOUSES OF CONGRESS--BOTH OF THEM--AND THE PRESIDENCY FOR AT LEAST THREE SUCCESSIVE PRESIDENTIAL TERMS, WE CANNOT GET OIL COMPANIES STOPPED. ... And the final problem is: Although China is now the world's largest contributor to the greenhouse gases, America has traditionally been the major culprit in this crisis, and the whole world knows it. It is entirely possible that as millions or billions die in this crisis, the rage against 1st world pollution will burst into flame. And the enraged will have all the evidence against us they need: from the onset of the Industrial Age (c. 1760) until 1996, the United States put roughly 768bn tonnes of carbon and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. By 1996, we know--everybody knew. SINCE 1996, we have put more than 850bn tonnes MORE greenhouse gas into the atmosphere. We knew, and this is what we did. "We"? Yes. Because we let this run; we used more and more oil and gas; and we let the politics of this situation get out of hand. And if we can do that, we can reverse it. SCIENCE IS DOING ITS PART. WE HAVE TO DO OURS, AND OUR PART IS POLITICAL.
At some point, we will get to the MAJOR energy transformations because we HAVE NO CHOICE. Governments will be FORCED to deal with this problem or there will be chaos.
Yeah, it's going to take 5-10 years -- and fusion will NEVER happen if the oil companies get their way. That's why this is a POLITICAL FIGHT. Also, most scientists believe that AT THE OUTSIDE, the ocean currents will collapse by 2095. It's most likely it will happen by 2050. But the newest figures show a much worse situation than we previously thought. The harbinger-of-doom prediction that they'll go down by 2025 is the worst-case scenario, but scientists now feel they have to tell us it's possible. And I absolutely agree with you that adoption currently-available technologies is crucial. It may also be crucial to start limiting air travel and start setting limits on individual-vehicle travel while expanding electric bus movement within cities.
My Tesla roof's tempered glass tiles exploded when my backyard was set on fire by illegal fireworks this past July 4th so heat will even get through a Tesla Solar Glass Roof. This could be why the inactive tiles have been replaced with steel tiles rather than tempered glass.
KEEP IN MIND that fusion produces fast neutrons, which eventually make the containment vessel weaker and radioactive = nuclear waste. No one tells you about this dark side.
Yup, the IAEA notes this: "The activation of the reactor’s structural material by intense neutron fluxes is another issue. This strongly depends on what solution for blanket and other structures has been adopted, and its reduction is an important challenge for future fusion experiments." ... So they are aware of this now -- as well as a low-level risk from excess tritium, most of which is consumed infusion anyhow, and which has an extremely small half-life of 12.33 years--unlike the millions of years of contamination expected with fission. Tritium, which is the only isotope of hydrogen, has low energy and readily transforms to helium and/or combines with its hydrogen parent to create water. It's too low-energy to penetrate the skin, but can be breathed and consumed in the water it so readily forms. This was the problem immediately after the raft of atmospheric nuclear detonations in the mid-20th century. However, the radiation problems people experienced weren't caused by the beta-radiation of tritium but by the alpha radiation of plutonium, the alpha particles of which lodge in the spleen, liver, and bones. Tritium water will have a low-energy beta radiation signature and, as it is water in the body, is flushed out regularly and won't stay there long. Most sources I'm seeing say that is no indication it would raise cancer risk, but ALL radiation, including that suntan and that dental x-ray, raise cancer risk, however negligibly. Also, the EPA is already aware of the "blanket" issue with deuterium fusion chambers, and they will be addressing this (as will the IAEA) before any commercial use is allowed. But your point is definitely well-taken. ... Meanwhile, all this crashes right into the INTRACTABLE REALITY THAT WE CAN GO NO FURTHER WITH FOSSIL FUELS. INNOVATION IS ****FORCED**** IN THIS SITUATION BY THE FACT THAT IF WE DON'T DO IT, WE'RE DEAD. BY THE BILLIONS. Even if we're off petroleum in 10 years, we and our progeny will be dealing with this problem for the next 300 years minimum--while the warming effects of what we have already done spread out over the seas. Carbon dioxide is now already down to 1,500 below sea surface and disrupting the basic metabolic functions of some ocean life. ... I deeply, deeply wish I could promise you a perfect solution with NO ill effects, but fusion is a million times safer than fission--and thousands and thousands of times safer than coal, gas and oil. And these last ones must be replaced with all deliberate speed, or we need to stop moving around so much, stop heating and cooling our houses, and eat more non-cooked foods. As this gets worse, our ways will be forced to change. But fusion, though it won't be there tomorrow, is our best hope for a truly healthy and comfortable way of life. There are problems--minor in comparison to every other form energy other than solar and wind--NEITHER of which can produce enough to power the world. We will solve every one of those problems.
I heard that Scotland has so much geothermal energy near the surface--but without tectonic threat--that it can supply all of the country's needs with geothermal alone. I just hope they do this safely. Mexico drilled deep into the earth near Mexicali in the Salton Sea complex, and there is fear that they have destabilized several faults. So I hope PG&E will show an uncharacteristic level of circumspection about this.
Many arrows in the quiver is the answer to include the very important women’s education. More research dollars into contingency plans of geoengineering. Moral hazard be damned.
CHECK out David Hogg's, March for our Lives leader, and parkland shooting survivors new pac - https://leaderswedeserve.com/
The youth of our country are fed up. They are going to use money and elected power to do whatever it takes to protect thier future. Protect our schools and students, protect the earth, protect our right to vote, to make our own choices for our bodies, protect workers, and protect people to be who they are, and love who they want to love.
Unless the fires, droughts and extreme temperatures are in the backyards of theses evil people, nothing will happen. Their children along with everyone else children will inherit a earth that’s no longer inhabitable.
Make the Heritage Foundation and the radical, anti environment wing of the Right Wing GOP own it. Post their names, their Positions, the sources of their wealth.
Publish Plain English and Graphic Comic versions of their grotesque manifesto and lay clear the disaster that they are proposing to force the rest of us, the great majority of us who are concerned with the future and fate of our children,our grandchildren, our fellow travelers the Animals, the Trees, our Streams, Rivers and Oceans - in short Life on Earth.
They propose to make Planet Earth walk their plank. We simply can’t let them.
Good for the young members of the GOP who oppose them! Good for the young Dems and Independents who feel the same way.
It needs to be that we, the Elders, join them in their Mission. And begin to dismantle this radical wing of what used to call itself the Grand Old Party. It has become instead Grotesque Old Party.
Let's see if we can fund that mission! Robert Reich is a very good cartoonist, and he and Heather lofthouse have Inequality Media, which has talent and can post 30 second blurbs on the media used most by young people. 🤔 maybe we can make a plan to commit to support the work involved with getting this message out! Name names! Facts that matter! What do You think, fellow travelers, posters? Robert Reich? Maybe it can be broken down into some segments featured in the weekly cartoon contest? (Or another feature, since Climate Disaster is no laughing matter!).Having posted that, I like the drawing of the person affected by the brownish smoke haze : They don't look very happy and healthy! Robert Reich's characters are so well done! He manages to convey what I feel when breathing smoke particulates in the air!
Hi Laurie, thanks for your enthusiasm. I would love to see this take off. I have been working in IT for 45 years now and have accumulated a pretty broad network. Each of them with their own Rolodexes.
But I am still at the very beginning of learning how to become, and then to manage the levers of being a Substack Author. I’ll need to blunder around a bit before I’m ready to launch sb initiative.
I would be open to join any discussion of how the initiative itself can get off the ground
I enjoy posting comments, but have no knowledge of IT production. I am the consummate consumer and 'enjoyer' ( Is that a word?) Of this particular forum. But what a realm of possibilities could be opened ! Not limited necessarily to one substack! The Messages that need to get out would be sufficient to reach more voters.
This could be something that those interested can contribute to in the future., working with Inequality Media was my suggestion, but that would be Robert Reich's and Heather Lofthouse's 'wheelhouse'. I was thinking of asking what kind of financial contributions would be necessary 😀.
Do the same with major donors to Republican candidates who continue to block climate legislation, where they can. Like Edward Jones that keeps donating to AnnWagner in missouri second district.
Did you see where New Jersey coast residents are protesting an off shore wind farm? Will they want us to pay to rebuild their homes when Climate Change results in ocean rise and the drowning of their coast? Dumb, but so American.
Hah! You aint kidding. Unless they want to put their houses on top of oil rigs they are definitely getting washed away by sea level rise and/or extreme hurricanes.
Molly, of course those New Jerseyites will want us and their insurance companies to pay for their destroyed homes. They came for the view and that is what they want. Who cares where the electricity for their homes and everything else comes from; "that's not my problem," they say. And, they're rich enough to get whatever they want and the state legislators know it, so are almost guaranteed to back down in the face of such selfish ignorance. Amazing!
Once again you have an "all of the above" multiple choice question. Katherine Hayhoe, a highly respected climate scientist, states quite clearly that we need to talk more about it. Our political personalities, with a few exceptions, fail to bring climate change to the top of the list. It is sad, because if you look at the list of other problems we have related to health, environmental degradation, pollution, etc., they are all reduced or solved by the elimination of fossil fuels. Fossil fuels are the central problem. Climate change is just a symptom, as are forest fires, floods, and a host of health issues. We need to stop the fossil fuel madness as quickly as possible and that will require something else that eludes almost all politicians from nearly every country - cooperation on a global scale, accompanied by action at all local levels.
This is also a national security problem.. In reality our economy is undermined by OPEC/Saudis/ Russian ability to control our markets, Moreover many of our domestic oil companies are controlled by the Saudis. They own much of our refinery capacity outright.
Daniel, do you think it would make a difference if the facts you present here about the Saudis and their control of much of our refinery capacity were made loudly public? Would any of the fossil fuel lovers be moved to think differently if they knew it is not Americans who are mostly benefiting from all that pollution and destruction that we experience around the country? Would they want something different, like renewables researched, developed, and made in America? I know Baby Donnie would be blathering that it is all a lie because he is a one-trick pony, but maybe others might be forced by constituents to acknowledge this and change their positions. OK, probably not, but it's a thought. I didn't realize just how much of what is going on here is controlled elsewhere. I suspect that's true in other fields as well. Maybe those facts need to be out there too and the politicians who actually care should keep bringing it up and saying that we need to stop supporting dictators; after all, we're a democracy.
Daniel, it seems to me the law is quite clear, every foreign business entity with foreign ownership/connections needs to report. That sounds pretty straightforward. I am guessing there are enough desperate lawyers around that someone will find loopholes to drive trucks through to allow the kind of behavior we are now experiencing.
We can’t just jump in and say “vote for a party with …” A, B, or C.
We would need to build such a party first, or we’d be voting for a third party with no chance of winning, and we’d hand the country to Republicans who are trying to undo our very democracy.
We need to be on the case, but we have to be strategic about it. The Republicans have been working on and developing the circumstances for taking over the wheels of government {even though they are seriously in the minority in the country} for several decades. They’ve built their machine, and its working for them inside state governments and in Washington.
We don’t have decades more to turn their machinations around, and we do need to be strategic, if we still hope for a chance to do it.
We already have plenty of non-Republicans to win over in this country — let’s figure out how to do that. Use what we already have and make it work for US instead of letting them fragment us.
[I’d love to have a vibrant field of more parties, but that’s not what we have right now, and we need to fight off the Oligarchs NOW.]
Yes. I’m a Vermonter. Bernie has been a gift, here AND nationally. I wish he had been able to prevail nationally more than he has {and he HAS done a great deal … }
Climate change should be treated as a catastrophe. The first place to start is with its name. Global climate destruction, or worldwide environmental upheaval, or simply CLIMATE CATASTROPHE. The second thing must be to turn climate into a one vote issue, which swamps other issues such as abortion or gun control. Climate affects every other issue, and challenges our ability to live in an ordered manner. It threatens global peace and security. Climate must become the greatest political issue of our time. If that can happen, young voters will become engaged, and America will be saved. QED.
Back on October 23rd 2020, then-CNN Host Chris Cuomo interviewed NYT Editorialist Thomas Friedman, wherein Friedman walked the audience through numerous examples of an oil industry already in transition and also underscored reasons why Democrats should want to own this movement. Friedman concluded:
“The argument is over. The industry is in transition and the companies that aren’t are the ones that are going to go the way of the Stone Age. And Democrats should want to own this. We as a country should want to own this. I don’t want to go from importing oil from the Middle East to importing clean energy efficiency tools from China and missing the whole thing because we are not in transition; because we have a president who is so wedded to the Stone Age, he wants to go down with oil. And I don’t care to go with him.”
Though not entirely related to the Tom Friedman discussion, as a final point, I would urge, because words matter, that when speaking of “regulations,” as warranted, we call them “protections.” Similarly, we might all benefit were we to consider “de-regulating,” generally speaking, as synonymous with “ending protections.”
Good thinking. I believe this critical topic is an enormous opportunity for ALL parties to own it. Across the aisle cooperation and all that community talk. No need to further divide Right and Left issues. This is not a sport. It’s a matter of life on this planet. Democratics can LEAD but should position themselves to do so side-by-side with all persuasions. Like Covid--which somehow became a polarizing issue--it’s an everyone problem. Time for some serious adulting. Not a time for deepening divisions which we’ve seen is a catastrophic approach.
Theresa, Thanks so much for writing. I couldn’t agree more and would add that Friedman, who was interviewed on the heels of the last Biden-Trump Presidential debate, had stated, “Democrats should want to own this. We as a country should want to own this.”
You may be right, but a new party isn't ready for the next round of elections. Until the Democrats get rid of Joe Manchin's effective veto power they cannot do much. Wouldn't it be nice if corporations were not people and campaign contributions from corporations were not allowed?
I so agree with you. I wish we could get motivated in time to do some good. I worry that our greed is going to do us in. Even educated people I know keep planning cruises and long flights and driving constantly. Just look at the number of folks regularly stranded in airports during extreme weather events! No part of the USA is free of climate threats, and yet we can't (or won't) connect the dots.
It never seems “ready” to form another political party. We should have formed more parties eons ago. We need to do so, both on the left and right, so that there are real choices, not just evil and the lesser of two evils.
Unlike countries that can form a collaborative government out of multiple parties we have a system of winner takes all, and it doesn’t even require a majority of votes!
True. We should have, and some tried, but Diane is correct, it would take a revamping of the political system for proportional representation to make it work, and we don't have anything close. Perhaps ranked choice voting, as in Alaska, would help. Basically you limit the impact of parties that way, and then second choices start to count.
Not exactly please with the ranked choice mayor we have in New York. I was hoping we'd finally have a woman, but the two contenders basically cancelled each other.
it’s not whether it a ready time to do it — it’s whether there is a party ready to compete. And there is not.
Right now, our government gives a majority party the reins of government, not a plurality party. You need more than half the votes, not the MOST votes.
In parliamentary countries, smaller parties form alliances to get where they need to be. In our country, we don’t do that {in Vermont, the Dems and Progs do it, though, quite a bit}.
Is there a way to build more parties, and have them form alliances with a main party or with each other, to be VIABLE challengers on the national stage? I’d love it if we were not stuck voting the lesser of evils {though I don’t think Biden is EVIL, either}, but what STRATEGY can we devise to prevail against fascists and authoritarians?
Does the Democratic Party have a big enough tent for all of us? If it doesn’t, how do we expand the tent?
We can’t do it — we cannot repel the advances of anti-democratic Republicans — if the Left is fragmented.
Wayne, yes, and was that not a Republican thing with our Johnny Roberts and his anti-constitutionalists? It made no sense at the time and still doesn't, but the Court has gone even further off the deep end in the years since that ridiculous pandering Citizens United ruling. We need a better Supreme Court or we need to do what Alabama is already doing and so many states have already done over time since Brown v. Board, ignore anything the Court says and just go on about business as usual especially if it hurts people of color. We wouldn't do the hateful discriminating, but just as many states as possible start acting as though corporations are entities, not persons and tax their profits very heavily, then imprison their CEOs when they have broken the law and put citizens at risk, since our SC has claimed corporations are persons. Then, heavily tax any donations to candidates say over $250 no matter which PAC the support comes through since money is not speech, just money that is being used to bribe candidates and others. Oh yes, and lobbyists are not a business expense, they are part of the profits and therefore taxed. That might leave fewer lobbyists to harass senators and representatives. It's a thought.
Scares the hell out of me these days to hear people say the courts don’t have their own way to enforce their rulings, and so to hell with them. I don’t want above-the-law courts to hand down arbitrary or clearly-partisan rulings and have the rest of us bow down as though we have no recourse — But to destroy the very idea of courts as arbiters … WHOA, therein lies chaos. Pure and destructive chaos that will fragment whatever fragile bonds hold 50 states together as a country that counts itself united by a rule-of-law philosophy, not blood.
Pat, I do agree with you, but unfortunately, our highest courts are making up things as they go along, ignoring our constitution and the will of the people entirely. They claim to want Congress to make law about whatever it is the court is considering, then negates the laws ?Congress has already made, even when it has been with vast majorities, like the Voting Rights Act. They break precedent just because, and their explanations for what they are doing are often pathetic (Alito's anti Roe v. Wade for example). States like AL just ignored the SC ruling, one of the few good/appropriate rulings this term, that told AL they had to make 2 majority Black districts, then they went and screwed up the one district they already had. The Confederacy and some of the north too ignored Brown v. Board and chose not to integrate schools and schools are now nearly as segregated as they were back in the pre Brown days. I know because I taught 26 years in a district where the students were mostly African-American and the aid from the state reflected that. They pushed charter schools on us, schools that have poorer outcomes than the regular public schools, yet they get new buildings (the newest of the regular public schools is 1974 while the charters got all new buildings in the past decade or so). There is a judge now in a truly spectacular case against Trump regarding stolen classified documents, a whole lot of them, who should never have even been in the mix of judges to be considered for the case. She is ignorant of the law, a Trumpette, and has no clue what she is doing, yet whatever she rules must be accepted. That is the kind of thing that makes people feel like giving up in disgust and frustration. We need to get some messaging out there about voting for candidates who actually care about them and the law and it isn't Republicans or conservatives of any party.
No argument. That’s why it scares the hell out of me.
It has been a long time coming, and how DO we turn it around without tearing it down? Tearing it down {as I hear more and more thees days, too} is the road to failed state and chaos and then … the rise of the military? What?
Do we see our direction? And can we steer away from the cliff?
Pat, it scares me too, but I have hope that we can turn it around. We all need to demand interviewers who are "chatting" with lawyers involved in cases as Trump's lawyer was interviewed, ask the hard questions and call out the lies and call them lies, even if that scares the interviewee and he runs away. Every media entity has treated Trump and Kump with Kid gloves (as they used to say) and here we are. The SC members have been able to visit and speak at super conservative groups and suddenly afterward, they happen to rule in favor of the conservative "cause" or corporate donor. The people need to know about this but not filtered through Trump's barely functioning brain. Our best bet is to get young people on board and talk with them about how to manage social media, how to cancel out the evil on social media. Those young people know a lot and we are often ignoring their expertise. They also know how to get out there and connect with their friends. Republicans generally dismiss them as ignorant, a waste of time, etc. They are not and we need them to help us save our democracy. If some of them went to Trump rallies and laughed when Trump said some of the stupid things he said, then together left still laughing, it could get others to follow suit. Maybe if a couple of them would yell out when Trump or one of the other candidates says something that sounds treasonous, as they do, they could say, "OMG! THAT SOUNDS A LOT LIKE TREASON, YOU MIGHT NOT WANT TO SAY THAT!" They could then leave before there is trouble. A few times doing that would get some media attention. Young people can do things like that (as the Act-Up people did in the 1980s and 90s to get attention on HIV/AIDS). It could work with some planning, funding, and support.
Bushwa. Any argument about equivalence between the parties is simply another way of supporting Big Oil and the fossil fuel industry. The Republican Party used to be environmentally sane, after all, Richard Nixon created the EPA because of an oil spill. But the GOP long ago abandoned any pretense of environmental conscience. Mike Pence wants to abolish the EPA. Name me one Democrat who believes in that. You can’t. Not even Joe Manchin goes to that extreme.
That’s what they say, but actions speak much louder than words. Joe Manchin may say that he is for the environment, but how much can you trust those words when he is in bed with fossil fuel companies? I can go that far with him, since he has taken more money from oil and gas lobbyists than any Republican. Opensecrets.org is your friend here.
Some arguments about the equivalence between parties is quite appropriate. We need to get ALL corporate money out of government, and make all election contributions visible to the people. This includes PACs.
Ive made similar arguments about Mr Manchin and or Sinema. There are a few other Dem senators waiting in the wings who have voted with corporate interests as apposed to Dem interests. I'm not for a new party. I completely agree on getting corporate money way the hell out of governement. People deserve a vote. Corporations and the money they throw into politics do not.
Rocco, the fact that you can name the one Democrat that is so deeply in bed with fossil fuelers says a lot. You would have to fill an entire page or two to name all the Republicans who depend significantly on their campaign money from fossil fuelers. False equivalencies will not help us. Everyone knows Manchin is a fossil fueler himself which is why he was elected from WV, a desperately poor state that has been used and abused by fossil fuel corporations and left with nothing, but praying Republicans will somehow rescue them when they couldn't even identify WV on a map of the US. Yes, getting corporate money from our political system is critical, but Republicans just can't manage that and whine to their constituents that if corporate money is stopped, they would be cheated by Democrats who have all kinds of rich people like Soros to pay for their elections. That kind of lying works for Republicans and their constituents who want so badly to believe their Republicans care a whit for them, when they don't.
Eric, thanks for nixing that "they all do it, so we need a third party" thing. They don't all do it, not even close. We have a few Dems on the edge, like Manchin, but there is a whole Republican Party that is so far past the edge that there is no comparison. We do need to find out which Dems are collecting from the fossil fuelers then make it public, asking people if they want to be represented by people who owe their allegiance to the oil and gas industry, and their often foreign owners, instead of to them, the constituents. I am guessing put that way, any Democrats who are fossil fueled might change their funding source at least to some extent and want to prove it. As long as Democratic leaders are hung up with defending incumbents no matter what their positions are, though we are going to have trouble shaking things up. How do we shake Rep. Pelosi and her crew and get them to break out of that really harmful practice? We do have a lot of work ahead.
SO FAR, this is true. The parties are NOT cookie cutter images of each other.
The Dems drive me nuts these days, but there is still a remnant of FOR THE PEOPLE in that party, and we need to re-energize it!!! If ee DO have smaller third-parties, they need to leverage their influence to form alliances for power, work with Dems, and move the Dems away from big money, insofar as it’s possible.
Rocco, Wayne and Jennifer are starting to point to the serious discussion. Democracy as a form of governance that represents the interests of the population it is supposed to serve is a failing form of governance. Now that the Supreme Court has been fatally compromised it is only a matter of time until corporate capitalism, like a metastasized cancer, disables and eventually allows our government to continue its transformation into an authoritarian system masquerading as "democracy."
While the cancer spreads, now is the time to begin plans for a form of economics and governance that is the only logical step forward. We are caught in a discussion of Republicans verses Democrats and wasting our collective wisdom on a myopic topic. It is like attempting to treat cancer by discussing what part of the body we should focus radiation to first when we know the patient (democracy) is rapidly approaching stage four cancer and the final treatment will be planning the funeral.
We must look beyond the next election to design an expansive system that will work for the planet. The Progressive Utilization Theory is the type of thinking we need to be discussing. (ChatGPT will give you a good summary of this far reaching and progressive philosophy.)
We’re out of time. We are going to have to fight this climate war with the two major parties we have, and with the system of capitalism that we have although it certainly can be modified. We ain’t changing to Socialism at this point. This is it.
All of the above. Part of the Democrats “problem” in messaging is not going full out on all the reasons the GOP is dangerous. Climate change is both complex and dangerous. We need to pull out all the stops and give a multi-layered message about how to reduce damage.
Donald A. Spaugy ; Not unless the corporation has a good, clean track record of responsibility to the Common Good. and that would include environmental considerations.
Bill Reitz ; There may be people making whole food supplements or prebiotic or growing mycoplasma (mushrooms?) On a larger scale without harming the mushrooms or the environment.? Or recycling plastic for windbreakers or other useful things. That would be interesting to see. How many corporations are useful ? Without doing harm? And successful enough to support politicians/lawmakers who have similar ethics?
For regular citizens the best tool we have is democratic government producing responsible, forward looking regulation that balances the needs of the contemporary economy with the long term needs of human kind, while strictly avoiding unnecessary enrichment of the extractive industries. Yeah, it's that easy (not easy!).
I just don’t understand our species. As humans we come into this world with all the variations of normal. We have different shades of hair, eye and skin colors. We have different personality types with varying degrees of intellectual and emotional IQ’s. We have various forms of genitalia and gender identities. These are all variations of being human, all deserving of being valued with basic common courtesy, human dignity, respect, and love. But hatred is taught to gain control and power. Now, after the scientific evidence is clear, we have a group of fascists denying climate change to further their power and profits. Climate change not only hurts the planet and causes destruction, it is a terrible health hazard to humans. A recent article is linking increased air pollution to antibiotic resistant infections that are already killing thousands. I hope the Democrats make a clear message that they support what sustains and nurtures Life, and supports equality and equity for all.
Let me help you understand our species. We are highly social and we adapt to our social system, no matter how illogical or destructive. The problem is not really us, it’s our system! Please study up and consider signing on to help out at movetoamend.org System change is imperative!
Trump is old enough to qualify as a fossil fuel. However, seeing the way he tried to run this country I would never allow a man that "crude" to fuel my engine.
Three of the five are good suggestions, the Democrats need to talk about this, we need to blare the amount of money flowing into republican coffers from fossil fuels industry and we need to motivate the younger generation to fight for their lives against the destruction of too much life on Planet Earth. The planet won't die, it will continue orbiting around the sun for another 5 to 10 billion years. Even some Homo sapiens will survive; that is if they want to. Most of the mammals and many birds, reptiles, and aquatic species will also die. The utter selfishness of those aging oligarchs is astonishing. It is their own grandchildren who will suffer and perhaps die. They don't care. As long as they get theirs, they care about no one. This is how we need to present this. We need their offspring know for certainly that Grandpa doesn't care if they can't enjoy his billions. I can understand this attitude in people over 60, they will be dead, most likely of natural causes before most of the land masses become unlivable. But those aged 15 to 50 must be scared as hell. I know my grandchildren are.
Although I chose to say make this significant part of Dem's message, globally speaking, we humans are nowhere near where scientists say we need to be headed if we’re to stave off our possible extinction through pollution and planet warming. We should not be coddling big oil, and Democrats are more progressive in supporting change to combat what’s happening to the environment. Hopefully, as we head towards next year and the election, President Biden and the Democrats can put forward facts and figures on what’s been accomplished since 2020, what Democrats have in the green pipeline already, and why voters should continue to support the Democrats and not the Republicans in 2024. Realistically, the global situation does not look good, however, as the entire planet’s human population continues to consume darn near everything in its path for its growth and sustainability. Unless we all start going to painful alternatives to save the world, there may not be a future, especially if we keep heavily tied to fossil fuel use.
It’s a daunting thought, I won’t be here, but my children, grandchildren and if we manage to survive that long, great grandchildren will be. But what kind of earth will they inherit. Humans ( in last century) have managed to scourge Mother Earth and Father Sky. They will not forget😔
unfortunately, few are persuaded by facts and figures. Scientific and statistical truths have been a nonstarter for The Deniers. It’s a matter of dismantling wrongheaded beliefs. That’s possible but much more difficult -- and a different skillset-- than the presentation of facts and figures.
Agreed: message must be a significant part of dem platform HOWEVER that will, sadly, only further the divide of sensibilities. Blue v Red. The more force blue puts behind the message, the redder red gets. Nonsense. Truly nonsense. The dems and ALL parties must persevere in raising the flag and immediately taking action! Republicans will only listen, though, when the message and alarm bells come from their young party leaders. Transformation quickly is paramount. We all must be a united front on this issue with smart plans of action to which we all must comply. Steep monetary consequences will encourage compliance: credits to those that comply and fines for those who do not.
I agree with mobilizing young gop. Change happens from the inside out. Those who are younger tend to support choice — in many realms — along with acknowledging the crisis life on earth is blatantly experiencing. I also support a third party approach (one with an ethical, bribe-free, platform) as mentioned in another comment. That’s the longer game.
And they want us to pay to recycle. We can't recycle our way out of this. Only like 9% of plastic is recycled. The rest is here to stay. In the Pacific Garbage Patch and landfills. Recycling is a big lie perpetuated by BIG OIL. Companies that are producing it need to be held accountable for the life cycle....like Coke, Nestle etc. They like to talk like they are doing good things for the environment (Green Wash). In fact they are some of the biggest producers of plastic waste. China isn't taking our plastic anymore so now plastics are shipped to other parts of the world, often exploiting and polluting developing countries, where they burn it! - which is adding to the climate & pollution problem - and the health of the communities.
Plastic is harming the climate and wildlife. We are drowning in plastic. There are studies about microplastics everywhere from the beach, to snow in the highest peaks to the human body, in our blood and guts. It is estimated there will be more plastic than fish in the worlds ocean by 2050!
I volunteer full time in sea turtle conservation. It has been hot as heck and the sand is too hot. Sea turtles sex is determined by the incubation temps of the nest. Hot temps produce females. Latest research suggest that ~99% of the hatchlings produced on Florida beaches are female. This isn't great news for the future for turtles or people. It's sending a loud and clear message! Along our beaches, climate change is in our face every single day. There is no way it can be denied. It is hard not to feel a sense of doom. Corporations need to be held accountable. They need regulation and enforcement not free reign.
We are at the point when olio and gas companies need to pay for the damage they are inflicting. All legal means should be used including monetary fines and compensation as well as criminal charges for climate change denial and acting falsely. It is so sad that these companies, who could have leaders in divestment and transformation to new forms of profitable energy have chosen to deliberately destroy our and their home in the name of capitalism and profit. Evil!
"Transformation."
Existing industries have viewed alternatives as competition. There are a lot of new possibilities that can displace all pollution. For example, note a recent nuclear fusion reaction, this time with an even higher energy yield. The merging of atoms could someday be a source of abundant clean energy without using uranium, creating radioactive byproducts or risking meltdowns. https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-solutions/2023/08/06/nuclear-fusion-net-energy-gain-higher-yield/?utm_campaign=wp_the7&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_the7&fbclid=IwAR349_k0hwlOR3gGlRgfQO49U8obUuVbngBfUej9Tfj8uc1rYBqIKsJ1cs8
Relying on similar findings from CERN testing, the French government acted "Three months after adopting a renewable energies law, French lawmakers voted on a new law to accelerate procedures for constructing new nuclear reactors. This second legislation presented by the government was adopted in a final vote at the Assemblée Nationale on Tuesday, May 16. It was passed with votes from the ruling coalition, Les Républicains (conservative), the Rassemblement National (far right) and the Communists." Apparently the Heritage Society doesn't lobby in France.
We have no such plans. Part of the problem is legalized bribery: "More than 1,500 lobbyists in the US are working on behalf of fossil-fuel companies while at the same time representing hundreds of liberal-run cities, universities, technology companies and environmental groups that say they are tackling the climate crisis, the Guardian can reveal. Lobbyists for oil, gas and coal interests are also employed by a vast sweep of institutions, ranging from the city governments of Los Angeles, Chicago and Philadelphia; tech giants such as Apple and Google; more than 150 universities; some of the country’s leading environmental groups – and even ski resorts seeing their snow melted by global heating." https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jul/05/double-agent-fossil-fuel-lobbyists
"Money doesn't talk, it swears". Bob Dylan 1964(?). It should be part of the 'Oath of office' that stewardship of the planet's health be priority.
One of the few things that Mitch McConnell, Rand Paul and I agree is hemp. During WW II after the Philippines fell, we lost the capacity to make rope. Enter hemp. John Y Young Brown Sr. obtained a hemp monopoly, mostly based in central Kentucky. The war on drugs became a war on hemp. Come the tobacco litigation, hemp became an alternative for tobacco farmers, but it was illegal. Finally, only a couple of years ago, it was legalized.
Consider over 50,000 known uses of the hemp plant from paper to medication. Researchers have discovered that hemp batteries can potentially last eight times longer than lithium-based batteries and outperform graphene at a fraction of the cost. That means we can cut out world wide pollution from mining lithium, and reliance on China for supplies. As an advocate for Appalachia, IMHO this could change everything!!!! Who needs coal?
https://formulaswiss.com/blogs/industry-news/the-future-of-batteries-hemp?fbclid=IwAR1ygdPkaXX4n225PLl8j3Gtkg8Ge2D2tiJkV6MsLhgtHLienk8KwpVOPN0
To Mitch (and Elaine): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ua51JVOqrPM
Sometimes I think hemp is just magic!! How can one plant do SO MUCH?
But it does. Even batteries!! What insanity to have made it illegal for so long, but it challenged the timber industry and so much more, so it was demonized and sidelined. It could have made SUCH a difference in food, energy, fabrics, construction … EGAD.
But all water under the bridge — Yes, now we need to accelerate the technologies of hemp, and figure out how to break the stranglehold of the fossil fuel oligarchs.
The major catastrophe in Appalachia was the chestnut blight. Changed the other flora and fauna, and eliminated much of the economy, leaving an opening for king coal. A couple of weeks ago I had sort of a conversation about “Demon Copperhead,” Barbara Kingsolver. It's about drug addiction and the susceptibility in Appalachia.
I tried to tell her about moonshine and ginseng, and later hemp and marijuana, which were illegal, but were among the cash crops available to them pre-drugs to make a living, so they would not have to go somewhere else to seek their fortune.
I used to give give blight resistant chestnut plants as gifts. Now maybe hemp.
Besides the economic potential, this could change the culture. No criminal liability for producing hemp. No more guilt?
Let Steve Earl tell it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhMO9azmKNU
Next, need a religious epiphany: the social gospel.
There’s so much so many of us never realized … So much still possible!
How to make it known … Just keep trying …
There’s a lot of talk about “inflection points” these days.
Wow, we are at a political one, for sure …
Daniel Solomon : " you shall not despoil the Earth with oil"!? For one thing, anyway. "Or sell your soul for coal!"
Should be, but isn’t and won’t be, until we end corporate rule. Sign on at movetoamend.org
The problem is that politicians, once elected, consider their "oath of office" to be a suggestion..
Or something to redefine as Orwell predicted would be the decline of language.
Good idea.
Based on Daniel's comment, maybe we first need to adopt a requirement for fact based legislation. We are currently witnessing states adopting laws with no evidence of harm (bans on books, words, drag queens, etc) while we fail to act on evidence of harm (gun violence, plastics, CO2). It's bizarre. Another idea for fighting Big Oil propaganda is to remind people of all the other times corporations lied to make a profit despite the consequences to human health and environment. Corporations maximize profits by externalizing losses to the public. I can name off hand radium, PCBs, asbestos, PFAS chemicals, and of course, tobacco. In fact, when Big Oil set out to make people doubt climate science, they hired the same PR firms used by tobacco. Corporations have a long history of lying to protect profits, no matter who and what they hurt. I think people Right, Left, and Center believe in corporate greed. There are more than 2,200 cases on file currently challenging Big Oil company lies, replete with evidence the companies had knowledge of the harm they were inflicting all the way back to the 1970's. Of course, the Plaintiffs tend to be groups of kids or environmentalists against an army of Big Oil lawyers--still, fingers crossed. When I meet climate deniers I try to be sympathetic because Big Oil spent years and billions to make people doubt climate science. However, I have NO sympathy for any "bought" elected official who knows better or should know better. Again, this is yet another reason we need to separate public service from money. Public servants should protect public health, safety, and welfare. They cannot do that fairly and impartially when dependent on fossil fuel, NRA, or any other money. Also, because climate science has become yet another polarized, binary issue in our country, we need a robust public education campaign so people quit avoiding the subject. Thank you for considering my comment. PS I also think that Big Oil should disgorge some of its massive profits to fund the shift from fossil fuels instead of us SUBSIDIZING damage to our own future.
Firstly there is NO "left' in the USA.
Both party's are centrist..repubs moving right of centre.
Vote for a Politician who only accepts money from the people like Bernie Sanders.
Being walled off from the big money is tough, though. When someone waves a wad of cash in front of people, supposedly legally, it hard to get people to resist finding a way to take that money. See how the Saudis have absorbed sports systems, even while so many are dismayed at being in league with the Saudis. Dismayed, yes … but …but… ALL THAT MONEY! ….How do we keep good people working for change and NOT accepting the dollars being waved in their faces?
Morality, that's how! Is owning a yacht or a mansion worth losing your self respect and the admiration of your children?
That carries a lot of weight with a lot of us, but when everyone around you is taking the dough and you are struggling with the house payment, morality can start to look like whatever floats your boat.
We see it SO clearly with this whole “Sports-washing” situation. We could take some lessons from it and seriously figure out how to counter the power of money.
When it comes to actually fighting the good fight to ward off the worst of climate change, at least the lines are more clear.
But this is not an easy struggle — getting people to AGREE on what is “right” [and you need to get them to that agreement] and then getting them willing and able to resist being wooed away from that by money, there’s the rub.
Egad.
Moneyed culture!
End Citizens United!
ABSOLUTELY — money facilitates speech, but it is not speech.
Corporations are run by people, but they are not people.
Put rational ideas back into the system.
Unfortunately, Fact Based is in the mind of the speaker.
Too true. Fortunately, Mother Nature is weighing in at a good volume.
Yes, use the observed facts to state the issues in a way that can be operationally addressed and results measured. Fine bad deeds to make restitution for disasters like you mentioned above. Since even lies are free speech, just calling it as it is, identify pernicious lies and patterns of behavior that are contrary to the common good and detrimental to health, safety, and social well being.
Morality cannot be legislated because some people just aren’t wired for it. Your way of thinking makes working on problems tangible rather than the anything goes so called values based religious belief based side shows.
Love everything about this! Thank you Celia!
Here in Missouri talk of EV charging stations is met with derision and laughter by our transportation republican representatives. There’s obviously a competition going on to see who can be the most right wing stupid.
Daniel, I so wish there were a way to get the word out to those entities you mentioned letting them know whom they are dealing with and how destructive that is. It would probably be better to somehow get the message to the people who live, work, or study in those entities. I suspect some of our media also benefit from fossil fuel money and power. With the limiting of local media and honestly balanced media, getting that message out will be difficult too. We need some well-respected folks to be out there at least as much as Baby Donnie is covered, to talk about what we are experiencing, maybe show the horror of someone dead of heat. Showing the photo of the refugee child dead on a beach changed a lot of people's perceptions of refugees, OK, not enough, but at least people started thinking about it. They say a picture is worth . . . . Well, maybe pictures could open more doors to people who have ignored global warming in the past. We need a real shake-up because doing what we have been doing has not gotten us anywhere close to where we need to be.
If they are lawyers, they have potential conflicts of interests.
The resolution for most should be shareholder derivative suits. These industries are selling their futures for instant gratification. The Rockefellers tried it, but the Saudis remain in control. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/mar/27/rockefeller-family-tried-and-failed-exxonmobil-accept-climate-change
Where I grew up the Republican "Hambiltonians" i.e. bluebloods, were all "conservationists." The richest people on the planet at the time. The Mellons. Eventually they acquired Gulf Oil and Alcoa and their attitude changed.
However, some of their institutions remain. https://waterlandlife.org/ I'm sure that groups like the Sierra Club are all over this issue. They have all the data.
Daniel, thanks again for more information on an important topic. How can anyone break into the shareholder bubble and let people know what they are actually supporting and that instant gratification is not really healthy for anyone? Then, do they even care?
I agree that there should be a concerted effort to stem the tide of disinformation that is paid for by the fossil fuel lobbies. Pushing for electric vehicles, which are vastly more efficient and cleaner, would help. The change is already well under way, and will continues growing as people realize the they are also much cheaper in the long run.
I disagree that nuclear fusion is a useful solution at this stage, as it will not be available (if it is ever available) until well past the time line we need to follow to get ourselves out of this current mess. The simple adoption of clean energy sources now online is the answer.
Even fusion produces fast neutrons, which eventually make the containment vessel weaker and radioactive = nuclear waste. No one tells you about this dark side.
Heat is produced. Never had the kind proposed in France. Their old reactors produced plutonium that were encased in glass and buried. Supposedly safe but leaked. Their new model produces water.
Another option is thorium. We've known it was feasible since the Manhattan project.
Those are FISSION reactors. We are talking about Fusion reactors, 1000x harder to do.
Tell it to the French. Working on fusion.
I agree there is too much lobbying allowed, but I,have great concerns about nuclear options. Look at the destruction when something goes wrong, and there is still a storage problem. I wish more research was being done into using hemp as a fuel source, requiring all farming and ranching done using regenerative techniques, buildings that use safe nontoxic substances that can provide their own energy form solar and the movement within the building, There are many smart ways to protect this Earth, but the majority are going to have to demand these changes
Not the same. Look ma, no plutonium.!
Yes to so many alternatives … but also check out the differences between nuclear fission and nuclear fusion. Very different processes …
BUT... fusion produces fast neutrons, which eventually make the containment vessel weaker and radioactive = nuclear waste. No one tells you about this dark side.
I'm no expert, but I think the new reactors are much better than the old ones and less likely to fail. I agree we need to figure out the storage problem.Everybody is Not in My Backyard about it.
We don't have this technology in the US. We have a couple of reactors coming on line, but they are fission technology.
We also have heat from the earth's crust, thermal energy, as an alternative. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_energy Germany is proposing use of "heat pumps." https://www.ft.com/content/acd6e873-751a-46bc-b789-52fc49165833
It is my understanding that the new fission reactors have new technology so they cannot run away and they can shut themselves down.
I think earth crust thermal would a great source. I wanted to get it with a heat pump but it is extremely expensive. The new heat pumps have much higher serr values anyway.
Daniel. Thanks for sharing the links, very informative. I especially found this quote from the Guardian article very enlightening; “This database really makes it apparent that when you hire these insider lobbyists, you are basically working with double agents. They are guns for hire. The information you share with them is probably going to the opposition.” Still shaking my head over this. How to stop this insanity?
Money IS Power!!! And those with a lot of money know how to wield its power! We have to call them out and try to boycott them like Bud Light! However they know doing so would be deeply disruptive to us. They also know that we could not boycott/protest/strike against other companies if they continue to dismantle and ultimately end our Social Safety Net. They disguise their efforts as reforms against willing and able bodied people and ppl of color who abuse the system (every system has exceptions), when the truth is, they are targeting all of us. They are trying to prevent collective/majority efforts (boycotts/protests/strikes/referendums- just like the Ohio Republics trying to change the rules for referendums on yesterday) by ending the social safety net- if you don't work, you don't eat.
Day before yesterday, Lawrence Livermore Labs replicated its triumph of a few months ago by creating a nuclear fusion reaction that had a net positive return--more energy came out than was put in to achieve the reaction. A friend from the Department of Energy wrote to me that we may be able to expect commercial nuclear fusion in five to 10 years. A network of small fusion reactors -- enough to power a large neighborhood and capable of sharing power over their network over a limited area -- could power homes, businesses and electric vehicles. These would also eliminate the long strands of electrical power lines striping the countryside and sparking devastating wildfires. We are learning that although wind energy is productive, maintainance is expensive. Solar works now to reduce or replace electric-grid home energy. WE HAVE SOLUTIONS NOW, OR ONES THAT ARE COMING VERY SOON. THE PROBLEM IS POLITICAL. THESE CREEPS ARE BUYING CONGRESS YEAR AFTER YEAR AFTER YEAR, AND STUFFING THEIR WALLETS WHILE WE TEETER ON THE BRINK. Climate scientists now estimate that the AMOC--the ocean circulation that keeps the Northern Hemisphere both warm and cool--will collapse in as little as TWO YEARS. If that happens, Europe will go into deep freeze, the Southern Hemisphere will roast, and America will hit a Dust Bowl-level drought that will cause widespread famine and, simultaneously, watch her cities drown in rising seas. An AMOC shutdown won't "cure itself" for at least 1,000 years. And because of the delayed effects of rising ocean temperatures, we will not see the full effect of what we have ALREADY done for another 300 years. ... The bottom line is this: IF WE DO NOT RETURN DEMOCRATIC HOUSES OF CONGRESS--BOTH OF THEM--AND THE PRESIDENCY FOR AT LEAST THREE SUCCESSIVE PRESIDENTIAL TERMS, WE CANNOT GET OIL COMPANIES STOPPED. ... And the final problem is: Although China is now the world's largest contributor to the greenhouse gases, America has traditionally been the major culprit in this crisis, and the whole world knows it. It is entirely possible that as millions or billions die in this crisis, the rage against 1st world pollution will burst into flame. And the enraged will have all the evidence against us they need: from the onset of the Industrial Age (c. 1760) until 1996, the United States put roughly 768bn tonnes of carbon and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. By 1996, we know--everybody knew. SINCE 1996, we have put more than 850bn tonnes MORE greenhouse gas into the atmosphere. We knew, and this is what we did. "We"? Yes. Because we let this run; we used more and more oil and gas; and we let the politics of this situation get out of hand. And if we can do that, we can reverse it. SCIENCE IS DOING ITS PART. WE HAVE TO DO OURS, AND OUR PART IS POLITICAL.
It's a nice dream, but adoption of currently available technologies is the real answer. No fusion reactors will be online within two years.
At some point, we will get to the MAJOR energy transformations because we HAVE NO CHOICE. Governments will be FORCED to deal with this problem or there will be chaos.
In a way, that’s optimistic. More pessimistically chaos will emerge, making attempts to manage the situation impossible.
Yeah, it's going to take 5-10 years -- and fusion will NEVER happen if the oil companies get their way. That's why this is a POLITICAL FIGHT. Also, most scientists believe that AT THE OUTSIDE, the ocean currents will collapse by 2095. It's most likely it will happen by 2050. But the newest figures show a much worse situation than we previously thought. The harbinger-of-doom prediction that they'll go down by 2025 is the worst-case scenario, but scientists now feel they have to tell us it's possible. And I absolutely agree with you that adoption currently-available technologies is crucial. It may also be crucial to start limiting air travel and start setting limits on individual-vehicle travel while expanding electric bus movement within cities.
The biggest 'fusion operation' that I know of is underground in Switerland.
Are you talking about the Large Hadron Collider at CERN?
Dana. France.
My Tesla roof's tempered glass tiles exploded when my backyard was set on fire by illegal fireworks this past July 4th so heat will even get through a Tesla Solar Glass Roof. This could be why the inactive tiles have been replaced with steel tiles rather than tempered glass.
WOW!!!!!!!! I AM REMOVING TESLA REFERENCE FROM MY ORIGINAL POST. THANK YOU...... WOW!
KEEP IN MIND that fusion produces fast neutrons, which eventually make the containment vessel weaker and radioactive = nuclear waste. No one tells you about this dark side.
Yup, the IAEA notes this: "The activation of the reactor’s structural material by intense neutron fluxes is another issue. This strongly depends on what solution for blanket and other structures has been adopted, and its reduction is an important challenge for future fusion experiments." ... So they are aware of this now -- as well as a low-level risk from excess tritium, most of which is consumed infusion anyhow, and which has an extremely small half-life of 12.33 years--unlike the millions of years of contamination expected with fission. Tritium, which is the only isotope of hydrogen, has low energy and readily transforms to helium and/or combines with its hydrogen parent to create water. It's too low-energy to penetrate the skin, but can be breathed and consumed in the water it so readily forms. This was the problem immediately after the raft of atmospheric nuclear detonations in the mid-20th century. However, the radiation problems people experienced weren't caused by the beta-radiation of tritium but by the alpha radiation of plutonium, the alpha particles of which lodge in the spleen, liver, and bones. Tritium water will have a low-energy beta radiation signature and, as it is water in the body, is flushed out regularly and won't stay there long. Most sources I'm seeing say that is no indication it would raise cancer risk, but ALL radiation, including that suntan and that dental x-ray, raise cancer risk, however negligibly. Also, the EPA is already aware of the "blanket" issue with deuterium fusion chambers, and they will be addressing this (as will the IAEA) before any commercial use is allowed. But your point is definitely well-taken. ... Meanwhile, all this crashes right into the INTRACTABLE REALITY THAT WE CAN GO NO FURTHER WITH FOSSIL FUELS. INNOVATION IS ****FORCED**** IN THIS SITUATION BY THE FACT THAT IF WE DON'T DO IT, WE'RE DEAD. BY THE BILLIONS. Even if we're off petroleum in 10 years, we and our progeny will be dealing with this problem for the next 300 years minimum--while the warming effects of what we have already done spread out over the seas. Carbon dioxide is now already down to 1,500 below sea surface and disrupting the basic metabolic functions of some ocean life. ... I deeply, deeply wish I could promise you a perfect solution with NO ill effects, but fusion is a million times safer than fission--and thousands and thousands of times safer than coal, gas and oil. And these last ones must be replaced with all deliberate speed, or we need to stop moving around so much, stop heating and cooling our houses, and eat more non-cooked foods. As this gets worse, our ways will be forced to change. But fusion, though it won't be there tomorrow, is our best hope for a truly healthy and comfortable way of life. There are problems--minor in comparison to every other form energy other than solar and wind--NEITHER of which can produce enough to power the world. We will solve every one of those problems.
I agree. But location, location, as volcanic activity is organic fusion. Geothermal energy is derived from heat within the Earth's crust. Approximately 30 plants in the US. PGE is No 1. https://www.statista.com/statistics/749659/us-geothermal-power-plants-by-state/#:~:text=California%20is%20home%20to%20the,with%2024%20geothermal%20power%20plants.
Several companies are drilling to the crust. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_crust
I heard that Scotland has so much geothermal energy near the surface--but without tectonic threat--that it can supply all of the country's needs with geothermal alone. I just hope they do this safely. Mexico drilled deep into the earth near Mexicali in the Salton Sea complex, and there is fear that they have destabilized several faults. So I hope PG&E will show an uncharacteristic level of circumspection about this.
PG&E has been at it since 1921. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Geysers
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/geothermal/where-geothermal-energy-is-found.php
Throughout the US are "springs," many heated by fissures.
Plenty along the east coast and offshore. https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/0529j/report.pdf
Many arrows in the quiver is the answer to include the very important women’s education. More research dollars into contingency plans of geoengineering. Moral hazard be damned.
CHECK out David Hogg's, March for our Lives leader, and parkland shooting survivors new pac - https://leaderswedeserve.com/
The youth of our country are fed up. They are going to use money and elected power to do whatever it takes to protect thier future. Protect our schools and students, protect the earth, protect our right to vote, to make our own choices for our bodies, protect workers, and protect people to be who they are, and love who they want to love.
read this: https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2021/09/23/Still-Not-Getting-Energy-Prices-Right-A-Global-and-Country-Update-of-Fossil-Fuel-Subsidies-466004
Yes, they need to, but they won’t, and we can’t make them. Help change our system so that we can. Sign on at movetoamend.org
Yes, the oil companies have had plenty of time to convert themselves into “energy” companies, but they didn’t.
Unless the fires, droughts and extreme temperatures are in the backyards of theses evil people, nothing will happen. Their children along with everyone else children will inherit a earth that’s no longer inhabitable.
Make the Heritage Foundation and the radical, anti environment wing of the Right Wing GOP own it. Post their names, their Positions, the sources of their wealth.
Publish Plain English and Graphic Comic versions of their grotesque manifesto and lay clear the disaster that they are proposing to force the rest of us, the great majority of us who are concerned with the future and fate of our children,our grandchildren, our fellow travelers the Animals, the Trees, our Streams, Rivers and Oceans - in short Life on Earth.
They propose to make Planet Earth walk their plank. We simply can’t let them.
Good for the young members of the GOP who oppose them! Good for the young Dems and Independents who feel the same way.
It needs to be that we, the Elders, join them in their Mission. And begin to dismantle this radical wing of what used to call itself the Grand Old Party. It has become instead Grotesque Old Party.
Make the own it! Make it public.
Robert Leming ; The best post ever!
Let's see if we can fund that mission! Robert Reich is a very good cartoonist, and he and Heather lofthouse have Inequality Media, which has talent and can post 30 second blurbs on the media used most by young people. 🤔 maybe we can make a plan to commit to support the work involved with getting this message out! Name names! Facts that matter! What do You think, fellow travelers, posters? Robert Reich? Maybe it can be broken down into some segments featured in the weekly cartoon contest? (Or another feature, since Climate Disaster is no laughing matter!).Having posted that, I like the drawing of the person affected by the brownish smoke haze : They don't look very happy and healthy! Robert Reich's characters are so well done! He manages to convey what I feel when breathing smoke particulates in the air!
Hi Laurie, thanks for your enthusiasm. I would love to see this take off. I have been working in IT for 45 years now and have accumulated a pretty broad network. Each of them with their own Rolodexes.
But I am still at the very beginning of learning how to become, and then to manage the levers of being a Substack Author. I’ll need to blunder around a bit before I’m ready to launch sb initiative.
I would be open to join any discussion of how the initiative itself can get off the ground
Best!
Bob
I enjoy posting comments, but have no knowledge of IT production. I am the consummate consumer and 'enjoyer' ( Is that a word?) Of this particular forum. But what a realm of possibilities could be opened ! Not limited necessarily to one substack! The Messages that need to get out would be sufficient to reach more voters.
This could be something that those interested can contribute to in the future., working with Inequality Media was my suggestion, but that would be Robert Reich's and Heather Lofthouse's 'wheelhouse'. I was thinking of asking what kind of financial contributions would be necessary 😀.
Robert, I was thinking of the GOP as more like the Grotesque Obstructionist Party, but "Old" still works, maybe now more than ever.
The Grand Old Obstructionist Party would make it "GOOP," which I think is taken.
Ha! You two
Do the same with major donors to Republican candidates who continue to block climate legislation, where they can. Like Edward Jones that keeps donating to AnnWagner in missouri second district.
Did you see where New Jersey coast residents are protesting an off shore wind farm? Will they want us to pay to rebuild their homes when Climate Change results in ocean rise and the drowning of their coast? Dumb, but so American.
Molly Ciliberti ; yes, so short sighted. ; They worry about the view.
Yes and I wish these people would start thinking..........we are talking about the WORLD.
I wouldn't give a shit if it only affected the USA but it doesn't.
Well, I WOULD give a shit … but it is worse than JUST us …
The article on Ocean City, my summer resort, added the dark money group was financed by an unknown group. Read the book Merchants of Doubt.
Oreskes, new book along with Conway is the big myth detailing how corporate America has taught American citizens to Loathe their government.
Or watch the film.
or do both, and tell others.
Hah! You aint kidding. Unless they want to put their houses on top of oil rigs they are definitely getting washed away by sea level rise and/or extreme hurricanes.
Molly, of course those New Jerseyites will want us and their insurance companies to pay for their destroyed homes. They came for the view and that is what they want. Who cares where the electricity for their homes and everything else comes from; "that's not my problem," they say. And, they're rich enough to get whatever they want and the state legislators know it, so are almost guaranteed to back down in the face of such selfish ignorance. Amazing!
Once again you have an "all of the above" multiple choice question. Katherine Hayhoe, a highly respected climate scientist, states quite clearly that we need to talk more about it. Our political personalities, with a few exceptions, fail to bring climate change to the top of the list. It is sad, because if you look at the list of other problems we have related to health, environmental degradation, pollution, etc., they are all reduced or solved by the elimination of fossil fuels. Fossil fuels are the central problem. Climate change is just a symptom, as are forest fires, floods, and a host of health issues. We need to stop the fossil fuel madness as quickly as possible and that will require something else that eludes almost all politicians from nearly every country - cooperation on a global scale, accompanied by action at all local levels.
This is also a national security problem.. In reality our economy is undermined by OPEC/Saudis/ Russian ability to control our markets, Moreover many of our domestic oil companies are controlled by the Saudis. They own much of our refinery capacity outright.
Daniel, do you think it would make a difference if the facts you present here about the Saudis and their control of much of our refinery capacity were made loudly public? Would any of the fossil fuel lovers be moved to think differently if they knew it is not Americans who are mostly benefiting from all that pollution and destruction that we experience around the country? Would they want something different, like renewables researched, developed, and made in America? I know Baby Donnie would be blathering that it is all a lie because he is a one-trick pony, but maybe others might be forced by constituents to acknowledge this and change their positions. OK, probably not, but it's a thought. I didn't realize just how much of what is going on here is controlled elsewhere. I suspect that's true in other fields as well. Maybe those facts need to be out there too and the politicians who actually care should keep bringing it up and saying that we need to stop supporting dictators; after all, we're a democracy.
Should be common knowledge.
IMHO Trump (and a lot more) should be investigated as unregistered foreign agents.
https://www.fara.us/?gclid=CjwKCAjw8symBhAqEiwAaTA__AfS3JwqhWTNuqftvgcBK_6rCXhG9XepvD4lWUcpCiHvP3-vMUS7EhoCBj8QAvD_BwE
Daniel, it seems to me the law is quite clear, every foreign business entity with foreign ownership/connections needs to report. That sounds pretty straightforward. I am guessing there are enough desperate lawyers around that someone will find loopholes to drive trucks through to allow the kind of behavior we are now experiencing.
Paul Manafort was the poster boy....lots of convictions under the statute.
Daniel, of course he was! Ugh! What an appalling human being Manafort is! He and Trump deserve each other.
Our good friends, the Saudis.
Big oil money and money in YOUR Politics............vote for a party with no big money!
We can’t just jump in and say “vote for a party with …” A, B, or C.
We would need to build such a party first, or we’d be voting for a third party with no chance of winning, and we’d hand the country to Republicans who are trying to undo our very democracy.
We need to be on the case, but we have to be strategic about it. The Republicans have been working on and developing the circumstances for taking over the wheels of government {even though they are seriously in the minority in the country} for several decades. They’ve built their machine, and its working for them inside state governments and in Washington.
We don’t have decades more to turn their machinations around, and we do need to be strategic, if we still hope for a chance to do it.
We already have plenty of non-Republicans to win over in this country — let’s figure out how to do that. Use what we already have and make it work for US instead of letting them fragment us.
[I’d love to have a vibrant field of more parties, but that’s not what we have right now, and we need to fight off the Oligarchs NOW.]
You had Bernie!
Yes. I’m a Vermonter. Bernie has been a gift, here AND nationally. I wish he had been able to prevail nationally more than he has {and he HAS done a great deal … }
Yes. It could have been a 3rd party but Dems. are too cowardly it seems?
The answer must be "all of the above" which Reich doesn't provide as a choice. Maybe he should number the choices.
Give the UN the teeth to enforce the agreements made there. How, I don't know.
Climate change should be treated as a catastrophe. The first place to start is with its name. Global climate destruction, or worldwide environmental upheaval, or simply CLIMATE CATASTROPHE. The second thing must be to turn climate into a one vote issue, which swamps other issues such as abortion or gun control. Climate affects every other issue, and challenges our ability to live in an ordered manner. It threatens global peace and security. Climate must become the greatest political issue of our time. If that can happen, young voters will become engaged, and America will be saved. QED.
NOT just USA...................!!!!!!
Should be, but isn’t, and won’t be until we end corporate rule and corruption. Sign on and help out at movetoamend.org
Back on October 23rd 2020, then-CNN Host Chris Cuomo interviewed NYT Editorialist Thomas Friedman, wherein Friedman walked the audience through numerous examples of an oil industry already in transition and also underscored reasons why Democrats should want to own this movement. Friedman concluded:
“The argument is over. The industry is in transition and the companies that aren’t are the ones that are going to go the way of the Stone Age. And Democrats should want to own this. We as a country should want to own this. I don’t want to go from importing oil from the Middle East to importing clean energy efficiency tools from China and missing the whole thing because we are not in transition; because we have a president who is so wedded to the Stone Age, he wants to go down with oil. And I don’t care to go with him.”
Though not entirely related to the Tom Friedman discussion, as a final point, I would urge, because words matter, that when speaking of “regulations,” as warranted, we call them “protections.” Similarly, we might all benefit were we to consider “de-regulating,” generally speaking, as synonymous with “ending protections.”
Good thinking. I believe this critical topic is an enormous opportunity for ALL parties to own it. Across the aisle cooperation and all that community talk. No need to further divide Right and Left issues. This is not a sport. It’s a matter of life on this planet. Democratics can LEAD but should position themselves to do so side-by-side with all persuasions. Like Covid--which somehow became a polarizing issue--it’s an everyone problem. Time for some serious adulting. Not a time for deepening divisions which we’ve seen is a catastrophic approach.
Theresa, Thanks so much for writing. I couldn’t agree more and would add that Friedman, who was interviewed on the heels of the last Biden-Trump Presidential debate, had stated, “Democrats should want to own this. We as a country should want to own this.”
Love this reminder and thus reframing. Thanks so much Barbara Jo!
I’m sorry, but don’t Democrats also take “donations” (formerly known as bribes) from the oil companies?
Therefore my solution is to form a political party that does not take ANY corporate money.
You may be right, but a new party isn't ready for the next round of elections. Until the Democrats get rid of Joe Manchin's effective veto power they cannot do much. Wouldn't it be nice if corporations were not people and campaign contributions from corporations were not allowed?
I so agree with you. I wish we could get motivated in time to do some good. I worry that our greed is going to do us in. Even educated people I know keep planning cruises and long flights and driving constantly. Just look at the number of folks regularly stranded in airports during extreme weather events! No part of the USA is free of climate threats, and yet we can't (or won't) connect the dots.
Do you want me to stop dancing?
Never.
Then I’ll keep dancing like everyone else I see on TV
It never seems “ready” to form another political party. We should have formed more parties eons ago. We need to do so, both on the left and right, so that there are real choices, not just evil and the lesser of two evils.
Unlike countries that can form a collaborative government out of multiple parties we have a system of winner takes all, and it doesn’t even require a majority of votes!
Diane : Yes, ; It's not so Democratic, either, is it?
True. We should have, and some tried, but Diane is correct, it would take a revamping of the political system for proportional representation to make it work, and we don't have anything close. Perhaps ranked choice voting, as in Alaska, would help. Basically you limit the impact of parties that way, and then second choices start to count.
Not exactly please with the ranked choice mayor we have in New York. I was hoping we'd finally have a woman, but the two contenders basically cancelled each other.
it’s not whether it a ready time to do it — it’s whether there is a party ready to compete. And there is not.
Right now, our government gives a majority party the reins of government, not a plurality party. You need more than half the votes, not the MOST votes.
In parliamentary countries, smaller parties form alliances to get where they need to be. In our country, we don’t do that {in Vermont, the Dems and Progs do it, though, quite a bit}.
Is there a way to build more parties, and have them form alliances with a main party or with each other, to be VIABLE challengers on the national stage? I’d love it if we were not stuck voting the lesser of evils {though I don’t think Biden is EVIL, either}, but what STRATEGY can we devise to prevail against fascists and authoritarians?
Does the Democratic Party have a big enough tent for all of us? If it doesn’t, how do we expand the tent?
We can’t do it — we cannot repel the advances of anti-democratic Republicans — if the Left is fragmented.
Wayne, yes, and was that not a Republican thing with our Johnny Roberts and his anti-constitutionalists? It made no sense at the time and still doesn't, but the Court has gone even further off the deep end in the years since that ridiculous pandering Citizens United ruling. We need a better Supreme Court or we need to do what Alabama is already doing and so many states have already done over time since Brown v. Board, ignore anything the Court says and just go on about business as usual especially if it hurts people of color. We wouldn't do the hateful discriminating, but just as many states as possible start acting as though corporations are entities, not persons and tax their profits very heavily, then imprison their CEOs when they have broken the law and put citizens at risk, since our SC has claimed corporations are persons. Then, heavily tax any donations to candidates say over $250 no matter which PAC the support comes through since money is not speech, just money that is being used to bribe candidates and others. Oh yes, and lobbyists are not a business expense, they are part of the profits and therefore taxed. That might leave fewer lobbyists to harass senators and representatives. It's a thought.
Scares the hell out of me these days to hear people say the courts don’t have their own way to enforce their rulings, and so to hell with them. I don’t want above-the-law courts to hand down arbitrary or clearly-partisan rulings and have the rest of us bow down as though we have no recourse — But to destroy the very idea of courts as arbiters … WHOA, therein lies chaos. Pure and destructive chaos that will fragment whatever fragile bonds hold 50 states together as a country that counts itself united by a rule-of-law philosophy, not blood.
Pat, I do agree with you, but unfortunately, our highest courts are making up things as they go along, ignoring our constitution and the will of the people entirely. They claim to want Congress to make law about whatever it is the court is considering, then negates the laws ?Congress has already made, even when it has been with vast majorities, like the Voting Rights Act. They break precedent just because, and their explanations for what they are doing are often pathetic (Alito's anti Roe v. Wade for example). States like AL just ignored the SC ruling, one of the few good/appropriate rulings this term, that told AL they had to make 2 majority Black districts, then they went and screwed up the one district they already had. The Confederacy and some of the north too ignored Brown v. Board and chose not to integrate schools and schools are now nearly as segregated as they were back in the pre Brown days. I know because I taught 26 years in a district where the students were mostly African-American and the aid from the state reflected that. They pushed charter schools on us, schools that have poorer outcomes than the regular public schools, yet they get new buildings (the newest of the regular public schools is 1974 while the charters got all new buildings in the past decade or so). There is a judge now in a truly spectacular case against Trump regarding stolen classified documents, a whole lot of them, who should never have even been in the mix of judges to be considered for the case. She is ignorant of the law, a Trumpette, and has no clue what she is doing, yet whatever she rules must be accepted. That is the kind of thing that makes people feel like giving up in disgust and frustration. We need to get some messaging out there about voting for candidates who actually care about them and the law and it isn't Republicans or conservatives of any party.
No argument. That’s why it scares the hell out of me.
It has been a long time coming, and how DO we turn it around without tearing it down? Tearing it down {as I hear more and more thees days, too} is the road to failed state and chaos and then … the rise of the military? What?
Do we see our direction? And can we steer away from the cliff?
Pat, it scares me too, but I have hope that we can turn it around. We all need to demand interviewers who are "chatting" with lawyers involved in cases as Trump's lawyer was interviewed, ask the hard questions and call out the lies and call them lies, even if that scares the interviewee and he runs away. Every media entity has treated Trump and Kump with Kid gloves (as they used to say) and here we are. The SC members have been able to visit and speak at super conservative groups and suddenly afterward, they happen to rule in favor of the conservative "cause" or corporate donor. The people need to know about this but not filtered through Trump's barely functioning brain. Our best bet is to get young people on board and talk with them about how to manage social media, how to cancel out the evil on social media. Those young people know a lot and we are often ignoring their expertise. They also know how to get out there and connect with their friends. Republicans generally dismiss them as ignorant, a waste of time, etc. They are not and we need them to help us save our democracy. If some of them went to Trump rallies and laughed when Trump said some of the stupid things he said, then together left still laughing, it could get others to follow suit. Maybe if a couple of them would yell out when Trump or one of the other candidates says something that sounds treasonous, as they do, they could say, "OMG! THAT SOUNDS A LOT LIKE TREASON, YOU MIGHT NOT WANT TO SAY THAT!" They could then leave before there is trouble. A few times doing that would get some media attention. Young people can do things like that (as the Act-Up people did in the 1980s and 90s to get attention on HIV/AIDS). It could work with some planning, funding, and support.
It’s no surprise that getting control of courts has been a major aspect of the Republican move to take over our government lock-stock-and-barrel.
Exactly what the Nazi's did in Germany.
Bushwa. Any argument about equivalence between the parties is simply another way of supporting Big Oil and the fossil fuel industry. The Republican Party used to be environmentally sane, after all, Richard Nixon created the EPA because of an oil spill. But the GOP long ago abandoned any pretense of environmental conscience. Mike Pence wants to abolish the EPA. Name me one Democrat who believes in that. You can’t. Not even Joe Manchin goes to that extreme.
That’s what they say, but actions speak much louder than words. Joe Manchin may say that he is for the environment, but how much can you trust those words when he is in bed with fossil fuel companies? I can go that far with him, since he has taken more money from oil and gas lobbyists than any Republican. Opensecrets.org is your friend here.
Some arguments about the equivalence between parties is quite appropriate. We need to get ALL corporate money out of government, and make all election contributions visible to the people. This includes PACs.
Ive made similar arguments about Mr Manchin and or Sinema. There are a few other Dem senators waiting in the wings who have voted with corporate interests as apposed to Dem interests. I'm not for a new party. I completely agree on getting corporate money way the hell out of governement. People deserve a vote. Corporations and the money they throw into politics do not.
Rocco, the fact that you can name the one Democrat that is so deeply in bed with fossil fuelers says a lot. You would have to fill an entire page or two to name all the Republicans who depend significantly on their campaign money from fossil fuelers. False equivalencies will not help us. Everyone knows Manchin is a fossil fueler himself which is why he was elected from WV, a desperately poor state that has been used and abused by fossil fuel corporations and left with nothing, but praying Republicans will somehow rescue them when they couldn't even identify WV on a map of the US. Yes, getting corporate money from our political system is critical, but Republicans just can't manage that and whine to their constituents that if corporate money is stopped, they would be cheated by Democrats who have all kinds of rich people like Soros to pay for their elections. That kind of lying works for Republicans and their constituents who want so badly to believe their Republicans care a whit for them, when they don't.
Yeah, and in the meantime, vote Democrat
Eric, thanks for nixing that "they all do it, so we need a third party" thing. They don't all do it, not even close. We have a few Dems on the edge, like Manchin, but there is a whole Republican Party that is so far past the edge that there is no comparison. We do need to find out which Dems are collecting from the fossil fuelers then make it public, asking people if they want to be represented by people who owe their allegiance to the oil and gas industry, and their often foreign owners, instead of to them, the constituents. I am guessing put that way, any Democrats who are fossil fueled might change their funding source at least to some extent and want to prove it. As long as Democratic leaders are hung up with defending incumbents no matter what their positions are, though we are going to have trouble shaking things up. How do we shake Rep. Pelosi and her crew and get them to break out of that really harmful practice? We do have a lot of work ahead.
SO FAR, this is true. The parties are NOT cookie cutter images of each other.
The Dems drive me nuts these days, but there is still a remnant of FOR THE PEOPLE in that party, and we need to re-energize it!!! If ee DO have smaller third-parties, they need to leverage their influence to form alliances for power, work with Dems, and move the Dems away from big money, insofar as it’s possible.
Strategize, people. Please, please strategize!
EXACTLY....Cornell West please.
Alternatives, and a strategy to win …GOOD.
Spoilers for the sake of stomping our feet … BAD.
Be strategic.
Bring him into the Dem. party then?
At the very least, find a way to be ALLIES.
If we do not find alignment, we will go down to defeat.
NO!
Rocco, Wayne and Jennifer are starting to point to the serious discussion. Democracy as a form of governance that represents the interests of the population it is supposed to serve is a failing form of governance. Now that the Supreme Court has been fatally compromised it is only a matter of time until corporate capitalism, like a metastasized cancer, disables and eventually allows our government to continue its transformation into an authoritarian system masquerading as "democracy."
While the cancer spreads, now is the time to begin plans for a form of economics and governance that is the only logical step forward. We are caught in a discussion of Republicans verses Democrats and wasting our collective wisdom on a myopic topic. It is like attempting to treat cancer by discussing what part of the body we should focus radiation to first when we know the patient (democracy) is rapidly approaching stage four cancer and the final treatment will be planning the funeral.
We must look beyond the next election to design an expansive system that will work for the planet. The Progressive Utilization Theory is the type of thinking we need to be discussing. (ChatGPT will give you a good summary of this far reaching and progressive philosophy.)
Go ahead and check it out. https://proutalliance.org
Thanks for the link................looks interesting.
We’re out of time. We are going to have to fight this climate war with the two major parties we have, and with the system of capitalism that we have although it certainly can be modified. We ain’t changing to Socialism at this point. This is it.
My congressman does not.
All of the above. Part of the Democrats “problem” in messaging is not going full out on all the reasons the GOP is dangerous. Climate change is both complex and dangerous. We need to pull out all the stops and give a multi-layered message about how to reduce damage.
Don't allow corporate donations to politicians.
Donald A. Spaugy ; Not unless the corporation has a good, clean track record of responsibility to the Common Good. and that would include environmental considerations.
Probably talking to the choir here. A good clean corporation exists?
Bill Reitz ; There may be people making whole food supplements or prebiotic or growing mycoplasma (mushrooms?) On a larger scale without harming the mushrooms or the environment.? Or recycling plastic for windbreakers or other useful things. That would be interesting to see. How many corporations are useful ? Without doing harm? And successful enough to support politicians/lawmakers who have similar ethics?
That would be illegal. Corruption and bribery are their constitutional rights. But there is one solution, HJR54. Help out at movetoamend.org
For regular citizens the best tool we have is democratic government producing responsible, forward looking regulation that balances the needs of the contemporary economy with the long term needs of human kind, while strictly avoiding unnecessary enrichment of the extractive industries. Yeah, it's that easy (not easy!).
I just don’t understand our species. As humans we come into this world with all the variations of normal. We have different shades of hair, eye and skin colors. We have different personality types with varying degrees of intellectual and emotional IQ’s. We have various forms of genitalia and gender identities. These are all variations of being human, all deserving of being valued with basic common courtesy, human dignity, respect, and love. But hatred is taught to gain control and power. Now, after the scientific evidence is clear, we have a group of fascists denying climate change to further their power and profits. Climate change not only hurts the planet and causes destruction, it is a terrible health hazard to humans. A recent article is linking increased air pollution to antibiotic resistant infections that are already killing thousands. I hope the Democrats make a clear message that they support what sustains and nurtures Life, and supports equality and equity for all.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2023/08/09/air-pollution-antibiotic-resistance-link/
https://popular.info/p/judge-orders-southwest-airlines-to?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Let me help you understand our species. We are highly social and we adapt to our social system, no matter how illogical or destructive. The problem is not really us, it’s our system! Please study up and consider signing on to help out at movetoamend.org System change is imperative!
Trump is old enough to qualify as a fossil fuel. However, seeing the way he tried to run this country I would never allow a man that "crude" to fuel my engine.
Three of the five are good suggestions, the Democrats need to talk about this, we need to blare the amount of money flowing into republican coffers from fossil fuels industry and we need to motivate the younger generation to fight for their lives against the destruction of too much life on Planet Earth. The planet won't die, it will continue orbiting around the sun for another 5 to 10 billion years. Even some Homo sapiens will survive; that is if they want to. Most of the mammals and many birds, reptiles, and aquatic species will also die. The utter selfishness of those aging oligarchs is astonishing. It is their own grandchildren who will suffer and perhaps die. They don't care. As long as they get theirs, they care about no one. This is how we need to present this. We need their offspring know for certainly that Grandpa doesn't care if they can't enjoy his billions. I can understand this attitude in people over 60, they will be dead, most likely of natural causes before most of the land masses become unlivable. But those aged 15 to 50 must be scared as hell. I know my grandchildren are.
I am a grandparent and I do care.
Talk is cheap. Follow the money. End the corruption with movetoamend.org Please check it out.
Although I chose to say make this significant part of Dem's message, globally speaking, we humans are nowhere near where scientists say we need to be headed if we’re to stave off our possible extinction through pollution and planet warming. We should not be coddling big oil, and Democrats are more progressive in supporting change to combat what’s happening to the environment. Hopefully, as we head towards next year and the election, President Biden and the Democrats can put forward facts and figures on what’s been accomplished since 2020, what Democrats have in the green pipeline already, and why voters should continue to support the Democrats and not the Republicans in 2024. Realistically, the global situation does not look good, however, as the entire planet’s human population continues to consume darn near everything in its path for its growth and sustainability. Unless we all start going to painful alternatives to save the world, there may not be a future, especially if we keep heavily tied to fossil fuel use.
It’s a daunting thought, I won’t be here, but my children, grandchildren and if we manage to survive that long, great grandchildren will be. But what kind of earth will they inherit. Humans ( in last century) have managed to scourge Mother Earth and Father Sky. They will not forget😔
Great comment and true about Mother Earth and Father Sky!
“Democrats can put forward facts and figures...”
unfortunately, few are persuaded by facts and figures. Scientific and statistical truths have been a nonstarter for The Deniers. It’s a matter of dismantling wrongheaded beliefs. That’s possible but much more difficult -- and a different skillset-- than the presentation of facts and figures.
Agreed: message must be a significant part of dem platform HOWEVER that will, sadly, only further the divide of sensibilities. Blue v Red. The more force blue puts behind the message, the redder red gets. Nonsense. Truly nonsense. The dems and ALL parties must persevere in raising the flag and immediately taking action! Republicans will only listen, though, when the message and alarm bells come from their young party leaders. Transformation quickly is paramount. We all must be a united front on this issue with smart plans of action to which we all must comply. Steep monetary consequences will encourage compliance: credits to those that comply and fines for those who do not.
I agree with mobilizing young gop. Change happens from the inside out. Those who are younger tend to support choice — in many realms — along with acknowledging the crisis life on earth is blatantly experiencing. I also support a third party approach (one with an ethical, bribe-free, platform) as mentioned in another comment. That’s the longer game.
RANT
Don't forget Big Oil's plan B is PLASTIC!
And they want us to pay to recycle. We can't recycle our way out of this. Only like 9% of plastic is recycled. The rest is here to stay. In the Pacific Garbage Patch and landfills. Recycling is a big lie perpetuated by BIG OIL. Companies that are producing it need to be held accountable for the life cycle....like Coke, Nestle etc. They like to talk like they are doing good things for the environment (Green Wash). In fact they are some of the biggest producers of plastic waste. China isn't taking our plastic anymore so now plastics are shipped to other parts of the world, often exploiting and polluting developing countries, where they burn it! - which is adding to the climate & pollution problem - and the health of the communities.
Plastic is harming the climate and wildlife. We are drowning in plastic. There are studies about microplastics everywhere from the beach, to snow in the highest peaks to the human body, in our blood and guts. It is estimated there will be more plastic than fish in the worlds ocean by 2050!
I volunteer full time in sea turtle conservation. It has been hot as heck and the sand is too hot. Sea turtles sex is determined by the incubation temps of the nest. Hot temps produce females. Latest research suggest that ~99% of the hatchlings produced on Florida beaches are female. This isn't great news for the future for turtles or people. It's sending a loud and clear message! Along our beaches, climate change is in our face every single day. There is no way it can be denied. It is hard not to feel a sense of doom. Corporations need to be held accountable. They need regulation and enforcement not free reign.
/RANT