The Sanders Green New Deal
It's over at https://berniesanders.com/issues/the-green-new-deal/ . I'm good at reading. So let's do a reading!
Okay first the good stuff. Bernie has a solid goal:
As rising temperatures and extreme weather create health emergencies, drive land loss and displacement, destroy jobs, and threaten livelihoods, we must guarantee health care, housing, and a good-paying job to every American, especially to those who have been historically excluded from economic prosperity.
Now three questions:
Reaching 100 percent renewable energy for electricity and transportation by no later than 2030 and complete decarbonization by 2050 at latest – consistent with the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change goals – by expanding the existing federal Power Marketing Administrations to build new solar, wind, and geothermal energy sources.
So the government is going to build America's solar infrastructure? Hopefully there will be quality control and the ramping-up will be smooth.
Supporting small family farms by investing in ecologically regenerative and sustainable agriculture. This plan will transform our agricultural system to fight climate change, provide sustainable, local foods, and break the corporate stranglehold on farmers and ranchers.
This is also great! Is there going to be a program teaching conventional farmers how to go organic?
Also:
The cost of inaction is unacceptable. Economists estimate that if we do not take action, we will lose $34.5 trillion in economic activity by the end of the century. And the benefits are enormous: by taking bold and decisive action, we will save $2.9 trillion over 10 years, $21 trillion over 30 years, and $70.4 trillion over 80 years.
What does this mean statistically from projected year to projected year? I don't understand anything in the above paragraph.
The rest of it all looks very attractive, but I have a sneaking feeling that the Sanders Green New Deal wants to save the world while keeping capitalism around. Just saying.
Comments
I presume “100% of electricity and transportation”
does not include home heating, commercial transportation, ocean freight, aircraft or, the military, one of the largest and dirtiest fossil fuel polluters. Too bad, a battery powered military would probably lead to much cleaner air and a decidedly more peaceful planet. The people will scrimp and sacrifice, but for the the bloated military and the really important people nothing will change.
“ …and when we destroy nature, we diminish our capacity to sense the divine,and understand who God is, and what our own potential is and duties are as human beings.- RFK jr. 8/26/2024
It's tough to have a revolution
The ruling classes need an extra party to make the rest of us feel as if we participate in democracy. That's what the Democrats are for. They make the US more durable than the Soviet Union was.
capitalism and the green new deal
That's because Bernie's not completely stupid, unlike a significant proportion of his country's population.
Bernie knows we don't have the time to extract the heads of the majority of Americans from locales where other anatomica should be before tackling the climate change problem. Remember, a majority of the individual votes cast for President in 2016 went for Hillary Clinton; only the Electoral College process enabled us to dodge that bullet!
We need to move beyond capitalism towards socioeconomic democracy, yes. But in order for us to accomplish this, we need to move beyond carbon-burning first.
We won't have time otherwise.
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
The no-time excuse
The ruling classes need an extra party to make the rest of us feel as if we participate in democracy. That's what the Democrats are for. They make the US more durable than the Soviet Union was.
sucks
More like "let's buy the time to solve the problem that is end-stage capitalism".
All respects of this timing suck, no exceptions. That's why Al Gore called it "An Inconvenient Truth".
Now, if you have some sort of idea how to accomplish the simultaneous fixing of climate change and end-stage capitalism in the world we actually live and move and have our being in, I'm all ears.
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
not just organic, but regenerative agriculture
https://www.csuchico.edu/regenerativeagriculture/demos/gabe-brown.shtml
8.5 min talking about his farm and neighbors.
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PAVH01bnD0U]
At least Bernie has a plan and is trying to address the issue...recognizing the role of our agricultural system. Sadly he fails to tackle our militarism.
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
Bernie Co-Opts AOC
AOC got a lot of good pub (and rightly so) for launching her version of the GND. Yet while the legislation, written by old Obama hands, was long on ambitious goals, it was woefully short on specifics (sound familiar?).
Sanders' plan takes the Incrementalist skeleton of AOC's GND and piles on real Progressive muscle, detailing specific policies that in the aggregate can achieve true structural transformation.
In launching his own GND, Bernie is not just capitalizing on the popularity of AOC's initiative, he is co-opting that initiative from the corporatists who wrote it, thus ensuring that HIS robust approach becomes the gold standard, and not the typical neo-lib, "we'll figure out how to water it down and cash in later" approach we have all come to know and despise.
Well done Bernie.
The current working assumption appears to be that our Shroedinger's Cat system is still alive. But what if we all suspect it's not, and the real problem is we just can't bring ourselves to open the box?
So there will be a government organization
Here is the main concern: all of the reformist cheerleaders are out with their idea, which they all feel like Chris Columbus about having discovered -- a carbon tax! They'll offer an economic disincentive to buy gasoline, and magically all of the carbon corporations will surrender, and in their defeat they will all work together to graciously build the new infrastructure. Or at least that's what they imagine.
The Bernie proposal is a welcome alternative to what the pseudo-left imagines is its Great White Hope. But how specific is it?
The ruling classes need an extra party to make the rest of us feel as if we participate in democracy. That's what the Democrats are for. They make the US more durable than the Soviet Union was.
How specific is it?
Here's a taste.
And that's just the Ag part.
The current working assumption appears to be that our Shroedinger's Cat system is still alive. But what if we all suspect it's not, and the real problem is we just can't bring ourselves to open the box?
Loved Bernie's so causual, quick and matter-of-fact response to
a cable talking-head last week. Paraphrased, Bernie said " I think I'll ask those world leaders to understand that instead of investing in bombs to kill each other, we'd be better off pooling our resources to fight climate change."
i'm crap at reading,
and have crap eyes as well, so i was unable to spot a link to bernie's green new deal at your link. quite a tome, i'd only had time to read a bit more thn half of it, but boy, howdy, did i have any number of Qs and considerations about it.
it's chore sunday here, and i doubt i'll back nor would this be the proper venue given your three meager excerpts, cass.
Sorry wendydavis
The ruling classes need an extra party to make the rest of us feel as if we participate in democracy. That's what the Democrats are for. They make the US more durable than the Soviet Union was.
Shut down the pumps
for a week, co-inciding with the XR. What, no gas? They did it to us in '76. Remember rationing? Hit the beast in the pocket. Wouldn't take much more than a few thousand smart folks to sabotage the entire supply chain. Trucks, trains, ships and refineries. Your local tanks would dry-up over-night. Remove the grease that turns the cogs. Stifle the oil engine for a few days nationally, and you will see change. Cut hoses, idle drivers, cross tracks and the whole ugly machine stops grinding. Hopefully long enough to get the message out on the streets. There is an alternative.
At least people will see the fascist push-back. Realize who's side the 'peace keepers' are on?
question everything
Probably it does want to keep capitalism around.
Not, I think, because Sanders has any particular fondness for capitalism but because Sanders is not going to fight the establishment at that level.
That, indeed, is one of the two main problems with Sanders. But it's also the problem with almost everybody else. There are only two candidates I know of who ran this time who are willing, at least in a limited fashion, to engage the system at the level it needs to be engaged in order to make actual change happen. (There may be some I don't know about--I didn't even know that Bill de Blasio was running for a while there, and the only reason I knew about Tim Ryan was that Bernie made him look dumb on national TV--twice). Tulsi Gabbard is, in a limited fashion, actually calling out both the military industrial complex and the police state. Mike Gravel did the same thing, only better, which is why they wouldn't allow him on the debate stage.
If Sanders won't confront the election fraud that already denied him any real chance of a victory in 2016, deflecting the question by saying that he and the DNC are talking this time and it looks like everything will be fine (vague nonsense which could only come out of the mouth of someone as smart as Sanders if he was performing some first-class evasion), then he's unlikely to try to end capitalism.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
On the bright side, Sanders did not give Trump
a standing ovation when Trump vowed that America would never be a capitalist nation, but slumped in his chair, looking displeased (and perhaps allowing us an even better view of a standing, applauding Warren behind him). He also did not vote for the most bloated military budget in US history and he does have a plan for health care. Of course, the third thing may be moot if global warming gets us first.
But these three things are among those that distinguish him from Senator Warren (and I frankly don't trust her on anything).
Is that the right link?
His proposal is on my reading list, but that looks like a petroleum industry government forecast.
For those who want to nerd out on the technologies and how to balance them, this report may be of interest.
We can’t save the world by playing by the rules, because the rules have to be changed.
- Greta Thunberg