We feature each week Nicholas Reid's reviews and comments on new and recent books
“THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING – Capitalism vs.
the Climate” by Naomi Klein (Penguin/ Allen Lane, $NZ37)
Naomi Klein
tells us that evidence for the human impact upon climate change is
overwhelming, that climate change is catastrophic and will have drastic effects
on the nature of human life on this planet, and that only concerted,
world-wide, cross-national, collectivist and governmental action will halt or
reverse current climate trends and put the planet back on the path of
habitability.
But, says Naomi
Klein, the current economic system is totally opposed to concerted, world-wide,
cross-national, collectivist and governmental action. The unregulated
capitalism of free trade agreements, “globalisation”, privatisation,
deregulation and corporatism is diametrically opposed to both the public interest
of collectivist action and the larger powers that governments would need to
carry through necessary eco-friendly changes. Ever since the collapse of Communism,
neoliberal ideologues have triumphed with the notion that the “only
alternative” to their preferred free market globalisation is extreme left-wing
tyranny. Therefore any attempts to genuinely regulate the harmful use of fossil
fuels are decried as a limitation on democratic freedoms and an insidious plot
by the Hard Left. Green is the new Red and those who call for governmental
intervention to restore the environment are just a new breed of Stalinists
trying to inflate the state’s powers.
The subtitle to This Changes Everything is Capitalism vs. the Climate, which should
be self-explanatory.
Klein divides
her long volume (466 pages of text before 100 pages of endnotes and index) into
three long sections.
Part One, “Bad
Timing”, sets out to show how the triumph of neoliberalism came at just the
wrong time, for it was exactly the moment when the threat of anthropogenic
climate change and global warming, driven by the use of fossil fuels, was
becoming most evident. Prior to the collapse of Soviet Communism, Western
liberal and capitalist democracies were quite prepared to take the type of
governmental action that solved social problems. With the neoliberal brand of
capitalism triumphing, however, any interventions in “the market” were shunned
and therefore any attempts to regulate extractive industries in the cause of
environmental stability became impossible. After pointing out that as recently
as the 1970s, Richard Nixon was willing to introduce wage and price controls,
she continues:
“But by
the 1980s, the battle of ideas waged out of the same Washington think tanks
that now deny climate change had successfully managed to equate the very idea
of industrial planning with Stalin’s five-year plans. Real capitalists don’t
plan, these ideological warriors insisted – they unleash the power of the
profit motive and let the market, in its infinite wisdom, create the best
possible society for all.” (p.125)
In this first
section, Naomi Klein also chronicles the negative effects of free trade deals,
whereby multinational corporations are able to prevent local communities from
regulating their own industries or acting in the interests of their own
environment. She discusses the sham of “carbon credits”, by which global carbon
emissions are not one wit lessened, but entrepreneurs are able to make big
money by shuffling “credits” for them around the world. And she notes how many
think tanks, which claim to have scientific evidence to deny climate change,
are in fact bankrolled by the oil or natural gas industries.
Part Two, “Magical
Thinking”, deals with what Klein sees as the illusory “cures” for the
world’s environmental crisis – the ones that lead nowhere. First, there is the
problem of what she calls “Big Green” – those environmental agencies and
pressure groups who thought that they could woo big business off global
pollution by doing deals with, and making concessions to, extractive industries
in the name of “partnership” and peaceful progress. In every instance, argues
Klein, this simply has not worked. Corporations enjoy using
conservation-friendly images for public relations, but never concede their
prime purpose of making a profit. When profit-making clashes with environmental
projects, it is the environmental projects that are ditched. Klein gives a long
litany of “Big Green” groups that have unwittingly ended up as drumbeaters for
further drilling, fracking and emissions rather than less. Second, there is the
delusion that some friendly billionaire, who makes the right ecological noises,
will bankroll a real environmental movement. Somebody like Bill Gates or
Richard Branson. But again, this always leads to no more than photo
opportunities and broken promises. Klein speaks of supposedly “green”
billionaires like Branson, Gates and T. Boone Pickens who “put a firewall between mouth and money” (p.236). Third, there is
the delusion of “eco-engineering” – the notion that climate change can be
halted or reversed by new technologies – something to suck the carbon out of
the atmosphere, for example, or to turn down the heat of the sun. But this
delusion serves only to give extractive industries a pretext to continue with
business as usual, and as yet no planet-saving technology either exists or is
on track to be invented.
Says Klein “If geoengineering has anything going for it,
it is that it slots perfectly into our most hackneyed cultural narrative, the
one in which so many of us have been indoctrinated by organised religion and
the rest of us have absorbed from pretty much every Hollywood action movie ever
made. It’s the one that tells us that, at the very last minute, some of us (the
ones that matter) are going to be saved. And since our secular religion is
technology, it won’t be God that saves us but Bill Gates and his gang of
super-geniuses at Intellectual Ventures. We hear versions of this narrative
every time a commercial comes on about how coal is on the verge of becoming
‘clean’, about how the carbon produced by the tar sands will soon be sucked out
of the air and buried deep underground, and now, about how the mighty sun will
be turned down as if it were nothing more than a chandelier on a dimmer. And if
one of the current batch of schemes doesn’t work, the same story tells us that
something else will surely arrive in the nick of time. We are, after all, the
super-species, the chosen ones, the God Species. We will triumph in the end because
triumphing is what we do.” (p.289)
Finally, in Part
Three, “Starting Anyway”, Naomi Klein champions what she calls
“Blockadia” – local initiatives to directly confront, blockade and halt
drilling, fracking, pipelines and all the other paraphernalia and activities of
extractive industries. She also champions concerted pressure on governments to
dis-invest in extractive industries. Much of this third section is taken up
with her praise for indigenous peoples who have a more symbiotic relationship
with nature than industrialised economies have. It also becomes very personal
when, in the second-to-last chapter, she talks about her infertility and
struggles to conceive a child without miscarriage, and how eventually she came
to see the promotion of life itself as being threatened by climate change. That
this third section is called “Starting Anyway” signals that she knows the
solutions she proposes are incomplete ones. There will, she believes, be no
reprieve for our climate until concerted government action is taken, and until
the so-called developed world gets over its culture of crass consumerism,
learns to live without unnecessary luxuries and coexists in harmony with the
Earth.
Wittily, she has
already signalled this theme much earlier in the book where, ironically, she
attributes to the climate-change-denial lobby at least some intelligence. She
writes:
“The free market capitalism of the last three
decades has put the emphasis particularly on consumption and trade. But as we
remake our economies to stay within our global carbon budget, we need to see
less consumption (except among the poor), less trade (as we relocalise our
economies), and less private investment in producing for excessive consumption.
These reductions would be offset by increased government spending, and
increased public and private investment in in the infrastructure and
alternatives needed to reduce our emissions to zero. Implicit in all this is a
great deal more redistribution, so that more of us can live comfortably within
the planet’s capacity.
Which is precisely why, when climate change deniers
claim that global warming is a plot to redistribute wealth, it’s not (only)
because they are paranoid. It’s also because they are paying attention.” (pp.92-93)
As you will have
noted, I have so far not written a review of this book. I have merely served
you a summary of it.
Most obviously This Changes Everything is a polemic.
That I find myself agreeing with Naomi Klein more often than not does not blind
me to the book’s weaknesses. First, and most obvious, it is far, far too
long. Klein indulges in a great deal of
repetition and does tend to hammer home the same point by giving multiple
examples in detail, where many of them could have been flagged more concisely.
While I enjoyed her outbursts of wit, and her impassioned and committed tone, I
did find it a real trudge to read it through to the end, especially as she had
stated her overall thesis so clearly at the beginning. I also suspect that,
given the book’s excessive length, it will be read mainly by those who are
already committed to the cause she espouses, although doubtless this will not
stop it from being a major bestseller as her earlier No Logo and The Shock
Doctrine were.
So concerned is
she to expose the sins of neoliberal capitalism (in which respect I have no
quarrels with her), I think she does underplay the ecological sins of the old
Hard Left, which was so intent on industrial development that it gave not a
toss for the environment. True, at pp.176-182 she does have a section called
“The Extractivist Left” in which she decries the ecological disasters created
by Mao and Stalin and others, but this brief section, in my opinion, lets those
regimes off too lightly.
Having said
this, though, and despite the trudge that reading this book eventually became,
it is a lively read and gave me many pieces of objective information that were
news to me. It matters not at all that, as a Canadian, she devotes a
disproportionate of her examples to Canadian cases of indigenous and local
people opposing large violations of their environment (like exploitation of the
Alberta tar pits). They will do as well as those of other nations.
I was interested
in her early example of how capitalism readily adjusts to playing conservation
games solely as a means of investment”
“Communal forests around the world are being
turned into privatised tree farms and preserves so their owners can collect
something called ‘carbon credits’, a lucrative scam… There is a booming trade
in ‘weather futures’, allowing companies and banks to gamble on changes in the
weather as if deadly disasters were a game on a Vegas crap table (between 2005
and 2006 the weather derivatives market jumped nearly fivefold, from $9.7
billion to $42.5 billion). Global reinsurance companies are making billions in
profits, in part by selling new kinds of protection schemes to developing
countries that have done almost nothing to create the climate crisis, but whose
infrastructure is intensely vulnerable to its impacts.” (pp.8-9)
I note her
skewering of the notion that carbon emissions are lessening:
“After a rare decline in 2009 due to the
financial crisis, global emissions surged by a whopping 5.9 per cent in 2010 –
the largest absolute increase since the Industrial Revolution.” (p.18)
I see her
insistence that ecology and business are not a good mix, even if business seems
to be actively concerned with producing alternative forms of energy:
“It’s easy to mistake a thriving private
market in green energy for a credible climate action plan, but, though related,
they are not the same thing. It’s entirely possible to have a booming market in
renewables [=renewable sources of energy], while a whole new generation of solar and wind entrepreneurs are
growing very wealthy – and for our countries to still fall far short of
lowering emissions in line with science in the brief time we have left. To be
sure of hitting those tough targets, we need systems that are more reliable
than boom-and-bust private markets.” [She then goes on to note that
historically governments, rather than the private sectors, has done most to
invest in renewable energy sources] (pp.100-101)
She is right to
deploy irony when dealing with those who insist on little government control
and regulation until such time as they themselves require state assistance:
“ During good times, it’s easy to deride ‘big
government’ and talk about the inevitability of cutbacks. But during disasters,
most everyone loses their free market religion and wants to know that the government
has their backs. And if there is one thing we can be sure of, it’s that extreme
weather events like Superstorm Sandy, Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines, and
the British floods – disasters that, combined, pummelled coastlines beyond
recognition, ravaged millions of homes, and killed many thousands – are going
to keep coming.” (p.107)
The extent to
which corporations can attempt to bully nations because of free trade
agreements is alarming:
“As the anti-fossil fuel forces gain
strength, extractive companies are beginning to fight back using a familiar
tool: the investor protection provisions of free trade agreements.” [The
example she gives is the major US company Lone Pine Resources threatening to
sue Canada for $230 billion after the province of Quebec successfully banned
fracking.] (p.358)
Finally, I
endorse heartily her condemnation of the media culture of distraction and
trivia, which has accustomed people to thinking only in the short term:
“Climate change is… about the inescapable
impacts of the actions of past generations not just on the present, but on
generations in the future. These time frames are a language that has become
foreign to a great many of us. Indeed Western culture has worked very hard to
erase indigenous cosmologies that call on the past and the future to
interrogate present-day actions, with long-dead ancestors always present,
alongside the generations yet to come. In short, more bad timing. Just when we
needed to slow down and notice the subtle changes in the natural world that are
telling us that something is seriously amiss, we have sped up; just when we
needed longer time horizons to see how the actions of our past [have an] impact [on] the prospects for our future, we entered into the never-ending feed of
the perpetual now, slicing and dicing our attention spans as never before.”
(p.159)
This is a lumpy,
uneven, over-long and sometimes shrill book. But, if you can stay the course,
it does the business it sets out to do.
New Zealand Footnote: For
New Zealanders, it is very chastening to read (pp.161-169) Naomi Klain’s
account of the recent history of Nauru as a microcosm for the dangers of
extractivism.
Footnote on a footnote: I
am sorry that Naomi Klein buries in a footnote (p.114) this piece if
information: “The persistent positing of
population control as a solution to climate change is a distraction and moral
dead end. As [quoted] research makes
clear, the most significant cause of rising emissions is not the reproductive
behaviour of the poor but the consumer behaviours of the rich.” I wish she
had given this argument more prominence.
No comments:
Post a Comment