We need a "Green New Deal," at a minimum



  • From @paul-martinez (original post):

    We need a Green New Deal, at a minimum. The US should lead the charge in greening the world’s economies with a Green New Deal, put forth by the Green Party and endorsed now by the United Nations. (http://gpus.org/organizing-tools/the-green-new-deal/) The goal is to spend the next 13 years transitioning our economy to 100% clean energy, phasing out all fossil fuel use by 2030. The bill is written, the plan set, we just need politicians willing to enact it. It would create at least 20 million jobs in the US alone, offsetting the unemployment from the scale-down of industries like fossil fuel, oil, and carbon in addition to the military industrial complex. Other countries with their own Green Parties should be able to enact this somewhat seamlessly, and the US should work directly with our neighbors, Canada and Mexico, and assist other countries where possible.

    The severity of the climate crisis has passed the point where we can afford politicians who believe we’re making good progress (and “safe fracking”) more than those who believe it’s a Chinese hoax or “God” will prevent the decay of the planet; neither can we afford those who oppose government regulations in the name of small government and “freedom.” We must call this what it is: a Climate Emergency, and clean House (and Senate) of any ‘incremental change’- and status quo-endorsing politicians. It has been proposed by many different people since at least 2008. Every year that we ignore this crisis is a year not only wasted but a year of driving up fossil fuel use and contributing to the already-growing threats the changing climate poses (Fossil fuel use has increased under President Obama more than under President Bush, FYI).

    If we continue preoccupying ourselves and fear-mongering about the “lesser evil,” we prolong the inevitable. Instead, we must think outside the bounds of elections–by, for example, voting Green this election in America, even if the current nominee doesn’t win, the Green Party would be much more competitive in 2020 and 2024, even if that means dealing with four years of the “greater” evil. If, instead, everyone flocks to the “lesser” evil, then the non-corporate political parties which support these movements never grow and we have the same status quo “we are making good progress; fracking is OK” people in power, forever fearing the greater evil, and rationalizing the very things we are afraid of when they’re given to us by the ‘lesser’ evil.



  • Tim Willard responded:

    We definitely need a Green New Deal. The time for pragmatism is gone.



  • @Mobilize-Climate I like the term “Green New Deal” (or some variation on it, just to tweak it so that it rolls off the tongue a bit more gracefully). This acknowledges the fact that addressing climate change will require more than just shutting down extraction activities, but will mean a change to our society (i.e. in terms of greater equity, a revitalization of true democracy in our countries, etc.).


  • administrators

    I often use the words Green New Deal when explaining our goals and the pledge to folks in person!



  • I am thankful to find your forum, and your followers to reply to … Because;
    As my hero Buckminster Fuller put it …

    “You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
    … To change something, … build a new model,
    … that makes the existing model obsolete.”
    Buckminster Fuller

    So I took it to heart and by 1981 had invented what I now call the “Solution 2 Pollution” system for responsible petroleum fuel combustion … Then presented it to Prime Minister P.E. Trudeau [Justin Trudeau’s father] … in 1983 to help me complete it for EXPO ‘86’ in Vancouver BC in 1986, which he wouldn’t and more recently offered it to young Justin Trudeau to unveil at COP 21 in Paris last December … Which HE ALSO didn’t.

    Where the ‘S2P’ system reduces fuel consumption by 25% while REMOVING 100% of the ‘Water-soluble’ ‘Acid Rain’ producing GHG’s out of any “*Converted” … engines exhaust, within the exhaust system before the gasses even clear the tail pipe.
    [*And ALL EXISTING petroleum fueled ENGINES in daily use CAN BE CONVERTED]

    Re; http://wecando101.tripod.com/

    BTW …
    I also have a PROVEN design that is 80% more energy efficient than the conventional DC electric motor in common use today … Re; the Tesla electric car could have it’s “RANGE” increased from it’s 225 mile limit to a 1,1250 mile range between charges by “CONVERTING” the drive motors to my Come-No-Go DC motor design …
    If that is of interest …



  • The new model referred to in the quote by B. Fuller may be the one developed in the long post “Comments on Victory Plan from long-time environmental activist” Carol Dansereau. We can dream all we want about things the government should do – but nothing comprehensive will happen unless the capitalist system that runs the world is changed. For more perspective that you already have, give it a read.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to FORUM was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.