"Green" capitalism, China, and our deluded Congress

I have to wonder about the seriousness of those in Congress who imagine themselves to have an actual response to the climate change problem, yet who actually support Senate Bill 1169, the "Strategic Competition Act."

Now the "Strategic Competition Act" has bipartisan support in Congress. Alleged liberal (and actual Democrat) Jeff Merkley, one of Oregon's Senate representatives, authored "numerous components" of this bill, yet, as the Reuters article argues:

The bill stresses the need to "prioritize the military investments necessary to achieve United States political objectives in the Indo-Pacific." It backs steep increases in security-related funding for the region and closer ties with Taiwan.

So it makes the liberals happy by selling "human rights," while flooding the military with money, something nobody in Congress can say "no" to.

Primary objections to this sort of bill among mere members of the public can be expected from principled pacifists. So, for instance, you have the Union of Concerned Scientists putting out a piece titled "Ten Problems with the Strategic Competition Act of 2021." But a more interesting objection comes from Michael Klare, who wrote a piece in TomDispatch which outlines what the real economic problem is. That is, it outlines what the real problem is if the Democrats have the least interest in actually making good on their promises to do anything at all about climate change (even within their narrow purview of saving capitalism first and the people and the planet second). Here is the paragraph that matters:

To put the matter simply, there is no way the United States or other countries can undertake a massive transition from fossil fuels to a renewables-based economy without engaging economically with China. Undoubtedly, efforts will be made to reduce the degree of that reliance, but there’s no realistic prospect of eliminating dependence on China for rare earths, lithium, and other key materials in the foreseeable future. If, in other words, the U.S. were to move from a modestly Cold-War-like stance toward Beijing to an even more hostile one, and if it were to engage in further Trumpian-style attempts to “decouple” its economy from that of the People’s Republic, as advocated by many “China hawks” in Congress, there’s no question about it: the Biden administration would have to abandon its plans for a green-energy future.

Simply put: if Congress thinks it's going to promote "green" capitalism as a climate change response while ratcheting up some kind of Cold War against China (and, yeah, I don't care how pretty their motives look), they are suffering from a collective delusion of the worst sort.

(Of course, if the solar panels and electric vehicles really can all be manufactured without using any rare earth metals, then there's no need to worry. Right, "green" capitalists? Guess we'll find out soon enough.)

Share
up
18 users have voted.

Comments

Cassiodorus's picture

up
9 users have voted.

"The war on Gaza, backed by the West, is a demonstration that the West is willing to cross all lines. That it will discard any nuance of humanity. That it is willing to commit genocide" -- Moon of Alabama

PriceRip's picture

@Cassiodorus , is just not good enough, what do you do.

 

          The sad truth is that our political machinery is only good at replicating itself repetitively, ad nauseam. Pretending that it can be reconstituted as an actual citizen-centric institution via bold systemic actions is a waste of time:

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed, citizens can change the world.
Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.

 

          We had an opportunity "to do the right stuff" twice, but we blew it, big time. I am absolutely certain that too few will get behind an AOC ticket, so there we go . . . slip-sliding-away . . . into the abyss . . .

 

RIP

up
11 users have voted.
Cassiodorus's picture

@PriceRip I can shake America's belief in its sacred two-party, capitalist, system.

up
17 users have voted.

"The war on Gaza, backed by the West, is a demonstration that the West is willing to cross all lines. That it will discard any nuance of humanity. That it is willing to commit genocide" -- Moon of Alabama

PriceRip's picture

@Cassiodorus , The whole two party system is such a constraint. At least we could have another avenue for developing a real government of the people if we had to "form" a government each national election. We had a large number of enthusiastic people at our functions during the previous cycle in 2016. So many were optimistic, so many were discouraged. But life goes on and (out of habit) I will continue to do my thing until the end . . .

RIP

up
12 users have voted.

@PriceRip

Locked in stocks in the town square.

Indeed they are.

up
6 users have voted.

I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.

Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal's picture

@Cassiodorus

"This machine can only swallow money."

I love Automatic for the People.

up
6 users have voted.

"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

Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal's picture

Personally, I don't see why it's OK to rely on Saudi Arabia but not OK to rely on China. Human rights abuses? Don't make me laugh.

But the larger issue is the one you describe: we do not yet have the technology necessary to move off fossil fuels without moving onto rare earths and lithium, which is far from "the answer." I believe that the actual "bridge" energy technology is probably what we now consider "green" technology. It was always ridiculous to consider methane the "bridge" technology just because it burns cleaner than petroleum.

It would have been great if we'd made our move to the current version of "green" technology--wind turbines, solar panels, etc.--back in the 1970s when we should have. Back then, China was not as politically or economically imposing, so the China-phobes wouldn't have to worry about that so much, and if we'd started with solar panels and wind turbines then, and continued both usage, maintenance, and research for the next forty years, who knows what we would have come up with by now. Instead, we researched how to most effectively lie to people, and constructed a multi-billion-dollar communications and surveillance infrastructure to prevent wrong thinking.

None of this should be taken to mean that we don't need a much deeper kind of transformation than just engineering new energy technologies, of course.

up
8 users have voted.

"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

@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal
Attempting to conquer China would probably destroy the world.
BTW, do we still have troops in Korea, defending them from the "yellow hordes"?
If we couldn't defend Korea, why do we think we can defend Taiwan?

Instead of insisting on continuing Chiang Kai-shek's dubious legacy two or three generations later, we should push for periodic monitored plebiscites. If the people of Taiwan want to join the Peoples' Republic, that is their right. If they don't then China should back off.

In any case, I don't think it's worth Nuclear War.

up
6 users have voted.

I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.

Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal's picture

@The Voice In the Wilderness

an attempt to take over KSA would inevitably draw in the other two superpowers, probably resulting in the same end-of-the-world scenario.

up
3 users have voted.

"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

@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal
We are fighting every else in the Mid-east, except for our real enemies, the originators of OPEC, KSA.

up
1 user has voted.

I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.

PriceRip's picture

@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal ,

      None of this should be taken to mean that we don't need a much deeper kind of transformation than just engineering new energy technologies, of course.

· · · is the key. Learning to rethink the problem is extremely difficult but ultimately the most rewarding of all the options, trust me on this one · · ·

RIP

up
4 users have voted.