http://climateandcapitalism.blogspot.com/2007/03/is-contraction-and-convergence-answer.html
Blair Anderson
CQuestNZ
ph (643) 389 4065 cell 027 265 7219
- Comment
- Reblog
-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
MildGreens's Backup Blog 
April 1, 2007 at 10:46 am |
The challenge of human causation of climate change has raised the stakes in questions of human destiny.The issue of where we came from is now rather pointededly over-taken by the issue of where we are going to. The prognosis is not reassuring.Answering questions of any kind requires judgement, and the climate-question is no exception.Doing the right things for the wrong reasons is as futile now as doing the wrong thing for the right reasons.Dealing with this invites an extent of understanding of ‘self’ [collective and individual] that puts on trial ‘judgement’ about identity and motivation for all of us – i.e. who is asking: what question: for what reason; for whose benefit; with what expectation; and so on and so.To ask the right question for the right reason and then [more difficult] give the right answer for the right reason is a challenge to which the author of the article [Mr Roy Wilkes of the Socialist Resistance] has not yet in my judgement sufficiently risen.Analysis from the left tends to be critical of reactionary behaviour – i.e. behaviour focused more on effect than on cause. Fair enough.Yet frequently [as in this article] the policy analysis and the policy demands are just that – reactionary. When more attention is paid to the rates of change and the rising risks of *everything* being destryoed by climate change, it is obvious that capitalism no less than the Socialist Resistance, will be destroyed by unless fundamental change in human structures is organised by humans.The problem is *growth* not *capitalism* per se. C&C is in his phrase ‘based on trade’. This is nonsense and is not said or even suggested in the GCI references for C&C he cites: -www.gci.org.uk/briefings/ICE.pdf.C&C is a suggested framework-based constitutional structure rotted in the science of climate change in which and subject to which a market could operate if necessary. The latter depends on the former and is meaningless without it.Some evidence for whichs is at: -www.tangentfilms.com/Risk Analysis web.movwww.tangentfils.com/AIC.mp4 The above should work – please test – in a Quicktime Player.The file below works in an MS Web Browser [Logos touch-sensitive to advance through scenes]http://www.gci.org.uk/images/CandC_model_context_animation.swfMr Wilkes cadres will need to be more disciplined in their reasoning, if avoiding dangerous rates of climate change is the ‘success’ he seeks. This will come more from identity with rationale than with the decoy of reactionary rhetoric and resistance.Aubrey MeyerGCI