Kristin’s Picks:
Enlarging our sense of “the economy”
While hopeless at mathematics, I am fascinated by economics and especially economic history. I am constantly trying to bend my head around what basic economic concepts translate into in everyday life. This article tries to reframe the old dichotomy between “the voracious market” and the “regulatory state” by dropping the concept of the commons in the mix. “The commons is the third force…”
Complexity: It’s not that simple
Dave Pollard is one of those visionaries who sees life from his own very unique viewpoint. Sometimes he sees into my head, and sometimes he is speaking a different language. I long ago became disillusioned with theory for theory’s sake. But Dave marries complexity theory with practical examples, many taken from his experience in the Transition movement.
Reading Sharon’s books has inspired me to not just start going to farmer’s markets but also to help start up a community supported agriculture project in order to increase the resiliency of the local food economy here in Bristol. The points that Sharon makes in this article could transfer to almost any community relocalization project. Required reading.
Simone’s pick
I would almost pick this one for the Rilke quote alone. But as it turns out Shaun Chamberlain’s analysis of the tension around cultural values and PR messaging, especially in relation to environmental messaging (inspired by the new Common Cause report), is a fascinating read in itself – not least because he doesn’t stop at an either/or conclusion, but encourages you to delve further for the answer.
For more on Edward Bernays see the excellent BBC Century of the Self series.
Bart’s Picks:
I let Kristin and Simone go first, because I have a LOT of favorites this month.
Dr. James Schlesinger: The peak oil debate is over
I admit it. Even with all the reading and research I’ve done, I still have my doubts about peak oil. At a deep emotional level, I feel that if it really were that important, surely President Obama and the other authority figures would be addressing the nation, setting up task forces, starting the great transition. Even the Republicans would see that it’s in our national interest to prepare. Since we’re seeing none of that, maybe it’s us in the peak oil crowd who are wrong.
And then Dr. Schlesinger speaks out. He’s probably the most well connected and experienced political figure to espouse the idea of peak oil. Rick Munroe listed a small part of his resume in his introduction, “Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission (1971-73), Secretary of Defense (1973-75), Director of the CIA and was the first Secretary of Energy (1977-79).” His talk struck me not for the points that he made — they are familiar to all of us who are following the issue. It’s the fact that he was saying them. I imagine that he’s articulating what a growing number of politicians would like to be saying, if they dared.
Why aren’t they speaking out? The wise Dr. Schlesinger reminds us of the perennial truth about politics:
The political order responds to what the public believes today, not to what it may come to believe tomorrow. It is also resistant to any action that inflicts pain or sacrifice on those who vote. The payoff in politics comes from reassurance, perhaps precluded by a rhetorical challenge.
The Ecology of Consumption (excerpts)
Marxist thinkers are like the little girl in the poem by Longfellow. When they are good, they are very very good, but when they are bad they are horrid. John Bellamy Foster and his colleagues at Monthly Review are some of the good ones.
Over the years, they have written about peak oil, climate change, unsustainable agriculture and other issues we follow at EB. Unlike many other commentators, they have an intellectual framework from which to analyze events.
In this chapter from a recent book, they critique common environmentalist arguments. Some points I took away:
- Changing patterns of individual consumption is important but insufficient. By focusing exclusively on individuals, we neglect the other consumers — business, industry and government.
- If individuals reduce their consumption, their savings will be invested and cause further use of resources.
- The capitalist system depends on profits, and this drives consumption of all sorts. Movements which neglect this reality are doomed to frustration.
The 2010 ASPO conference: national security aspects
Volunteer writer Rick Munroe has been doing yeoman’s service reporting on what leading figures in the military are thinking about energy. In this article, he summarizes the points made by various speakers associated with national security.
As peak oil researchers are well aware, the military is the one branch of government which has started looking at energy realistically. I appreciate their reports and talks for their clarity and willingness to think through implications.
Related from Matthew Wilder: Military reports leading the charge in peak oil debate.
Global Village Construction Set – explained in a 2-minute video
After covering intractable political conflicts, what a relief to see a group of young people pursuing a vision of “an advanced industrial economy-in-a-box that can be replicated inexpensively anywhere in the world. The GVCS is like a Lego set of modular building blocks which that work together for creating sustainable, regenerative, resilient communities.”
Will it work? Is it practical? I don’t know, but we need dreams like this.
Much of the peak oil blogosphere is preoccupied with collapse and food shortages. I think that concern is misplaced. What we will see is social turmoil of the sort presaged by the strikes and demonstrations in France during October. As peak oil and other factors cause long-term wconomic woes, governments and corporations will cut wages and benefits. In France, the explicit reason for the strikes was President Sarkozy’s proposal to raise the retirement age. In other industrialized countries, workforces are facing similar cuts, but France has a strong tradition of labor militancy. From 1.5 to 3 million Frenchmen and women were estimated to have been in the streets.
Sadly, most of the U.S. media coverage was superficial and silly. The peak oil blogosphere also didn’t think it was particularly relevant. In this post, I tried to highlight articles that gave a different perspective than one usually gets. An earlier post on events in France is France today, us tomorrow – Oct 23. In the same spirit is this account of a grassroots response to the 2001 financial collapse of Argentina.
From Suzuki to revolution: my road to the barricades
Over coffee with me, a hermit-engineer-genius gave a rave review to the author of this article, Frank Rotering. Intrigued, I examined Frank’s site. Unfortunately, it was heavy-duty economics. Important maybe, but hard to get excited about. Instead I found myself caught up in his personal history.
Not many people these days have the passion for intellectual endeavor that Frank does, the conviction that ideas matter. Frank put aside a comfortable computer career to study economics. He read Ruskin and Marx, thought deeply about economics and the environment. It sounded like a solitary path, but he persevered, finally publishing his own book (available free online).
At first, Frank did not want to talk about himself, preferring to emphasize his ideas. I finally persuaded him with the argument that this was the way to reach a wider public. About the validity of his ideas, it is hard for me to say. But as a story of intellectual endeavor, I found it fascinating.
The article ends with a list of core principles for his system, “Economics of Needs and Limits,” so readers can get a flavor of his thinking.
An interview with Alexis Rowell, author of ‘Communities, Councils and a Low Carbon Future’
I love the Transition approach, but I’ve always felt it was rather vague when it came to working with local governments. Planting nut trees and visioning a sustainable future is great stuff, but for real change one has to work though government at some point.
Alexis Rowell clears up some of the mystery in his just published book from Transition. In addition to this interview, we posted the foreward to the book by Rob Hopkins.
A critique of Chapter XVII of the new book by Hirsch, Bezdek, and Wendling
Sigh. I wish we didn’t have to talk about this. Some of the analysts who are so good on peak oil are … uh … embarrassing when it comes to climate change. Like a favorite uncle who keeps telling stupid off-color jokes.
But author Michael Bendzela is right. We can’t ignore the issue. If one denies or minimizes climate change, the energy strategies one proposes will be very different than if you accept the scientific consensus. Coal is a centerpiece of such policies, and as David Roberts at Grist repeats, “Coal is the enemy of the human race.”
With a deft scalpel, Bendzela takes apart the climate change arguments of Hirsch et al in their new book. The contest is not even close. Fortunately, this is only one chapter of what promises to be an excellent book. Tom Whipple in his review of the book, was jarred by the book’s “climate agnosticism”, but otherwise gave it a thumbs up.
The concept of “Living Well” – a Bolivian viewpoint
I guess this is my month for picking left-leaning articles. Whatever your politics, I think the “Vivir Bien” (Living Well) movement is worth watching. The article surfaced at the time of the climate conference in Cochabamba, Bolivia. It is supposedly written by the Bolivian delegation to the United Nations, but the actual authors are hard to discover.
In any case, Vivir Bien is profoundly influenced by indigenous peoples and an awareness of nature. It’s a breath of fresh air in contrast to traditional leftism. Whether socialist or communist, traditional leftism had the same imperious attitude to nature that capitalism has had.
Unfortunately, Vivir Bien and the Cochabamba conference were scarcely covered in the U.S. media and it doesn’t seem to have made a ripple among environmental or peak oil groups. Related article: Pachakuti: Indigenous perspectives, degrowth and ecosocialism
