Green New Deal Meeting with Jean Lambert and Sean Thompson

Public Meeting

Called by Haringey Green Party

Thursday March 19th, 7pm

Kurdish Cultural Centre, Portland Gardens, N.8 (rear of Harringay Green Lanes overground station, approached via Green Lanes and Stanhope Gardens)
* The Green New Deal, a plan to help us find a way out of the triple crisis of financial crunch, rising oil prices and climate change.

* Limit working hours to share work and make time for living

* Oppose workfare and benefit cuts

With
JEAN LAMBERT,
London's Green Member of the European Parliament

and

SEAN THOMPSON,
Critical writer on political economy and Green Party activist

* The Green New Deal would:

create thousands of green-collar jobs
provide free insulation to every home
build safer ways of investing
raise finance for green energy
renew small and local businesses
increase food production in cities
invest in public transport
Greens who have been elected to local councils, the London Assembly and the European Parliament are already pushing through these ideas.

* Green work should be secure work. Jean Lambert has consistently pushed for employment rights for temporary agency staff.
* Green work must be well paid. Greens in the Greater London Assembly have pushed for a minimum ‘living wage’ of £7.45 per hour, in place of the pathetic national minimum wage of £5.73.

* Shorter working time can reduce layoffs; Jean has consistently challenged the UK Government's opt-out of the Working Time Directive and worked against it in the European Parlaiment. She recently backed the TUC’s Work Your Proper Hours Day on 27 February, the annual event which aims to ensure employees remember - and claim - their rights in the workplace. Over five million people in the UK regularly work unpaid overtime, handing their employers £26.9 billion in free work.

* Greens oppose the government’s Welfare Reform Bill, and supported the lobby of Parliament against it on March 3. Greens say no to benefit cuts, to forcing the disabled and parents of young children back to work, to workfare for the long-term unemployed, to privatisation of job centres and of back-to-work schemes .
_______________________________________________

Manchester university occupation solidarity demo tomorrow

MANCHESTER UPDATE:

Huge solidarity to Manchester uni, who after nearly a month of creative and energetic occupation which saw them take several different rooms on their campus and despicable threats and intimidatory strategies from their VC are still going stronger than ever! The Vice Chancellor Alan Gilbert has threatened expulsion for students who are involved. They have called for a national demonstration of support at 2pm this Wednesday 4th March (see http://manunioccupa tion.wordpress. com/). This is a critical time for the occupation: please support them by sending an email to VC Allan Gilbert demanding that he negotiate with occupiers: president@mancheste r.ac.uk.

Karl Marx the ecologist

Green Left Weekly published one of my blog posts from my European Election campaign, I am very pleased, its an excellent ecosocialist publication put together weekly by Australian comrades...hoping to write something for them on Jerry Hicks!

This is from last weeks GLW on Marx and ecology, a nice summary from Simon...although if you want chapter and verse read John Bellamy Foster's book Marx's Ecology

Karl Marx the ecologist
Simon Butler
21 February 2009


As the world economy spirals down into its deepest crisis since the great depression, the writings of Karl Marx have made a return to the top seller lists in bookstores. In his native Germany, the sales of Marx’s works have trebled.


His theories have been treated with contempt by conservative economists and historians. Yet, in the context of the latest economic downturn, even a few mainstream economists have been compelled to ask whether Marx was right after all.

Marx argued that capitalism is inherently unstable, fraught with contradictions and prone to deep crises.

Exploitation, war, hunger and poverty were not problems that could be solved by the market system, he said. Rather, they were inescapable outcomes of the system itself. This is because capitalism is dominated by the wealthiest corporations and devoted to profit above all else.

Only a move to a democratic socialist society, where ordinary people are empowered to make the key decisions about the economy and society themselves, can open the path to genuine freedom and liberation.

Famous for their critique of capitalism and for advocating social revolution, Marx and his co-thinker Frederick Engels are far less known for their concern for the destruction of the environment and the need for sustainability.

Taken together, their views on the relationship between human society and the environment rank them among the most advanced environmentalists of their day.

According to Marx, capitalism is an economic system profoundly at odds with a sustainable planet. The exploitation of nature is as fundamental to the profit system, he argued, as the exploitation of working people.

One of the key goals of socialism is to liberate the natural world from the anti-environmental impacts of corporate greed. “From the standpoint of a higher economic formation, the private property of particular individuals in the earth will appear just as absurd as the private property of one man in other men”, Marx wrote.

He was scathing of the capitalist economic notion that the air, rivers, seas and soil can be treated as a “free gift of nature” to business.

“Even an entire society, a nation, or all simultaneously existing societies taken together, are not owners of the earth. They are simply its possessors, its beneficiaries, and have to bequeath it in an improved state to succeeding generations.”

The market system is incapable of preserving the environment for future generations because it cannot take into account the long-term requirements of people and planet. The competition between individual enterprises and industries to make a profitable return on their investment tends to exclude rational and sustainable planning.

Engels explained this destructive dynamic: “As individual capitalists are engaged in production and exchange for the sake of the immediate profit, only the nearest, most immediate results must first be taken into account.

"As long as the individual manufacturer or merchant sells a manufactured or purchased commodity with the usual coveted profit, he is satisfied and does not concern himself with what afterwards becomes of the commodity and its purchasers.

"The same thing applies to the natural effects of the same actions.”

In Marx and Engels’s time, this feature of capitalism was especially apparent in farming and agriculture.

“The way that the cultivation of particular crops depends on fluctuations in market prices and the constant changes in cultivation with these price fluctuations — the entire spirit of capitalist production, which is oriented towards the most immediate monetary profits — stands in contradiction to agriculture, which has to concern itself with the whole gamut of permanent conditions of life required by the chain of human generations”, Marx wrote.

Capitalist farming is unsustainable because it inevitably starves the soil of nutrients. It is nothing less than “an art, not only of robbing the labourer, but of robbing the soil”.

Furthermore, Marx held that “all progress in increasing the fertility of the soil for a given time is a progress towards ruining the more long-lasting sources of that fertility. The more a country starts its development on the foundations of modern industry, like the United States, for example, the more rapid is this process of destruction.

"Capitalist production, therefore, develops technology … only by sapping the original sources of all wealth — the soil and the worker.”

Marx and Engels understood the Earth’s ecosystem as dynamic and complex — an intricate, delicately balanced process of interacting components where any changes that occur feed back with new, and often unpredictable, effects.

We disrupt the natural ecosystem at our peril, Engels warned. “Let us not, however, flatter ourselves overmuch on account of our human victories over nature. For each victory nature takes its revenge on us.

"Each victory, it is true, in the first place brings about the results we expected, but in the second and third places it has quite different, unforeseen effects which only too often cancel out the first.”

Many times Marx described the normal interaction between human society and the natural world as a kind of “metabolism”. Capitalist production creates a “metabolic rift” — a sharp break in the relationship — between humanity and the Earth.

The environmental results of this deepening rift have proved devastating.

“The development of civilisation and industry in general has always shown itself so active in the destruction of forests that everything that has been done for their conservation and production is completely insignificant in comparison”, Marx pointed out.

Engels added: “At every step we are reminded that we by no means rule over nature like a conqueror over a foreign people, like someone standing outside of nature.” On the other hand, “we have the advantage of all other creatures of being able to learn its laws and apply them correctly.” That is, we can organise society in step with nature’s limits.

Marx and Engels held that socialism aimed to end class exploitation and also re-establish the “metabolism” between people and the Earth.

This is impossible unless the profit motive is removed from determining production in human society and a system of participatory democracy and rational planning is built in its stead.

Engels argued that only the working people organised as “associated producers” can “govern the human metabolism with nature in a rational way”. This “requires something more than mere knowledge. It requires a complete revolution in our hitherto existing mode of production, and simultaneously a revolution in our whole contemporary social order.”

Today, with climate change threatening life itself, the ecological contradictions of capitalism have reached truly dire proportions. The environmental crisis will undoubtedly play a far larger role in the demise of the system than Marx and Engels realised 150 years ago.

Along with their contribution to ecology, another neglected fact about Marx and Engels is that they were not merely political theorists or philosophers — they were also dedicated activists who participated in the revolutionary movements of their day.

They insisted that theory must be made “real” — it must be enriched and developed through revolutionary practice — to have any real significance.

Marx reached this conclusion in 1845 when he was still very young. “The philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways”, he wrote. “The point, however, is to change it.”

From: Comment & Analysis, Green Left Weekly issue #784 25 February 2009.

Caroline Lucas MEP demands recognition for Palestinian unity government and an end to the blockade, as illegal Israeli settlement building continues

Following a four-day visit to Gaza and the West Bank with a European
Parliament delegation, Green Party MEP for the South East Caroline Lucas has
warned that the Middle East peace process will fail unless political leaders
recognise a Palestinian unity government – and insist on an immediate end to
the blockade of Gaza.

Speaking about her trip to the region, Dr Lucas, who is also Green Party
Leader, said:

“The UK’s Secretary of State for International Development has today said
it's crucial that Palestinians come together for reconciliation –and I would
certainly agree with him. Yet the EU's refusal to recognise the previous
unity government because it contained elements from Hamas – though
democratically elected – was instrumental in dividing Palestinians and
exacerbating tensions.

“If the Palestinians can put together a government of genuine unity, based
on tolerance, pluralism, and a commitment to previous peace process
agreements that include the recognition of Israel, then it is the
responsibility of the international community to accept it – regardless of
whether or not it contains members of Hamas.

“And indeed, a process of dialogue and reconciliation between the different
Palestinian factions is already emerging. The political leaders gathering in
Sharm-el-Sheikh this week for a conference on aid and the reconstruction of
Gaza must recognise the need to support this political process and work
towards bringing the West Bank and Gaza under unity control. More aid may
provide short-term relief for the humanitarian crisis, but it is merely a
sticking plaster on what is essentially a political struggle.

“There are already tonnes of aid piled up at the border into Gaza, but the
continuing Israeli siege is preventing it from reaching the people who need
it most. When I met with UN officials in Gaza this week, I was told that
around 750 trucks a day are needed to maintain essential supplies.
Currently, Gazans are lucky to see around 30.

“So, the international community must demand an urgent lifting of the siege
on Gaza, and ensure the free movement of people, as well as goods, for the
whole of the West Bank and Gaza Strip – in other words, the first steps
towards ending the occupation, so that the Palestinian people can be allowed
to start rebuilding their economies and communities.

Dr Lucas concluded: “Unfortunately, the main threat now to a two-state
solution is the Israeli authorities’ continuing aggressive expansion of the
settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and the further extension
of the apartheid wall. Israel must be brought to account for this continued
flouting of its commitments under both the Oslo Accords and recent peace
agreements.”

More from the Modern Movement

Had this from Sarah Boyes of the Modern Movement...please feel to comment, and I have just published my draft thoughts on fishing at my Euro blog!

Hallo again,

As for Modern Movement, you can see our statement - calling for cheaper, better, faster transport on our website - www.modernmovement.org.uk.

On the idea of climate change, though, there seems a lot more going on than at first blush. The climate has always been changing, but 'climate change' as a phenomenon is quite a recent. I think there's a variety of reasons for that, and not all of them have to do with what scientists have been predicting recently; but are bound up with deeper trends in society.

The idea of 'not being dictated to by science' is a rallying cry against people who would invoke scientific authority and expertise to veto public and political debate. The idea of building a future based on a fearful reaction to what's often presented as inevitable global catastrophe or a terrible present is something I have a problem with. If other people and publications have a problem with that then good - because I think it's a problem.

I'm quite happy to rely on scientific expertise and for scientists to write reports telling the rest of us what's going on. But firstly, it's not as if 'science' develops along lines abstracted from what's going on in the rest of society, or that funding of scientific research isn't tied to often political and institutional agendas. That's not a conspiracy theory about science, but pointing out it's ultimately based in society. Neither is it 'denying climate change'. But secondly, there's a world of difference between knowing what's going on, and then deciding how to deal with it, coming up with solutions that are both progressive and suit what people want and can take us forward.

It's not that I think 'Greens' are an homogeneous group bent on stopping everybody from flying. But the idea that we can't both deal with what's going with the climate and also keep on traveling and moving around even more than we do is ridiculous. If that is enough to make me a 'free market libertarian' then I suppose I'll have to swallow the moniker and get on with it. Though neither am I the one calling myself a 'socialist' - or anything else for that matter. It's much more important - I think - to look at what people want to do and stand up for something positive, good, fun, exciting and progressive. I'm not apologising for being idealistic, though. Or wanting to fly abroad as much as I want to for little cost.

Caroline Lucas is blogging from Palestine

Caroline Lucas is in Palestine...this is reason enough for supporting her re-election campaign...She and Jean stand in solidarity with the people of Palestine.


February 27th, 2009
An afternoon in Hebron

A revolving turnstile-like metal gate, topped by spikes, with barely enough room for one person at a time to pass through, is now the only permitted access point to Ibrahim mosque for any Palestinians living in Hebron. As our group of MEPs file through, we are greeted by several heavily armed soldiers and police. Italian MEP, Luisa Morgantini was here last month and at the time walked along a road beyond the gate into a former residential area. Today the soldiers tell us that we cannot go down this road - in other words, as far as they are concerned, it is now under Israeli control. After much discussion we are finally permitted to pass, accompanied by a police jeep. We find what can only be described as a ghost town. Children emerge from what appear to be deserted buildings. Huge slabs of concrete dangle precariously overhead and members of the Hebron Rehabilitation Committee tell us that, despite having the funds, they are not allowed to renovate these homes for Palestinians to live in. There are around 400 Jewish settlers living in Hebron and we learn how the town has been split in two by the Israeli authorities - with access for Palestinians strictly controlled. We hear how Palestinian children on the way to school are attacked by settlers. How barriers have been erected throughout the centre - be they oil drums welded together or breeze blocks formed into walls - in order to prevent free movement by the Palestinians. One result is that the commercial heart of Hebron is being strangled, denying residents one of the few remaining opportunities to pursue economic independence.

Under the terms of the Oslo Agreement, no new settlements are permitted and yet, as we travel back from Hebron to Jerusalem, we see plenty of evidence that Israel is, once again, showing no respect for the promises it has made as part of the peace process. There has been much talk here of whether the election of President Obama might influence events here in the Middle East. Opinion seems divided over the extent to which he will be able to deliver any real change. As I reflect on what I have learned today, one fact sticks in my head - that the only time during recent history that Israel put its settlement programme on hold coincided with a US senate vote refusing Israel its usual package of financial support

RMT TO CONTEST EURO ELECTIONS

If this is true I have only myself to blame back in the early 1990s I asked Alex Gordon to put up Murray Bookchin, the brilliant but rather grumpy green anarchist thinker...this was when Alex lived in Bristol and we put together a speaking tour for Bookchin.

Bookchin was one of the most important political thinkers of the last century but he could be a bit prickly...did this action put Alex off of Anarchism...well who knows.

Interested to read that he is venturing into electoral politics, if this report is true.

Please RMT don't stand...we need to re-elect Jean Lambert in London and Caroline Lucas in the South East.

I am being far from serious by the way mentioning Bookchin, Alex Gordon is a very impressive long term RMT militant and an all round good thing...although I think a RMT euro slate would be a mistake.

This is what Andy Newman posted on Socialist Unity



RMT TO CONTEST EURO ELECTIONS

A little bird tells me that the RMT is putting together an anti-EU slate for this year’s Euro elections, and that Bob Crow is intending to head of the list in London, with the twist that these anti-EU candidates would not take their seats (and salaries!) if elected.

This scheme is the brainchild of former anarcho-syndicalist, Alex Gordon.

I have serious doubts about this myself, especially as in some seats this could take votes away from candidates better placed to beat the BNP. What do you think?