Another Christmas

Another Christmas

Another Christmas has come and gone. One wonders how many more we will have before the earth can no longer support a humane world. Deadly wildfires, droughts, floods, melting ice caps, monsoons, hurricanes, tornadoes, once in a lifetime blizzard, the disturbance of the equilibrium conditions needed to support life, etc. — these just make up the brief list of what is and will be the consequences of environmental chaos. We are living on the edge of a precipice and have not yet shown the capacity to manage the situation we have created. Reforms need to be radical to address this problem or, better yet, problem cluster. The situation is such that the beings living on the planet are in trouble; we will remain in trouble up to the point in time when humanity will learn to live within its means or will collectively destroy the world because it cannot or simply failed to live that way.

The word “humanity” is an abstract noun, an idea that refers to the sum of all persons on the planet. Humanity can neither experience the world nor act in concert. Fractions of the globe can trade goods, communicate, make war, defend against aggressors of various kinds, these do bring the disparate forms of life on the planet into something like a social relation. However, quantity passes over into quality in this instance. Humanity is not a real group; it is an abstract category, an entity of reason, which refers only to the sum of all human beings. States are real. They exist to manage problems. They are collective actors, and are durable in most cases. It is unfortunate that the states found in the world today are not doing much to resolve the problems created by industrialized production, automobile use, industrial farming, forest destruction, etc. The key state is the United States. We have the United Nations, but the UN lacks credible enforcement power. It is not a state. It does not tax or issue a currency. It has a legislative body in the General Assembly. It has the Security Council which can make decisions for the whole body.  However, the composition of the Security Council reflected the relative power of the various members of the Council at the time of its inception. The UN acts mostly through its member states. This is significant since the UN is often considered a rubber stamp the United State uses to ‘legitimate’ its reckless war-making.

As for the climate, we are currently at 1.9°F degrees above the estimated average temperature which existed before the industrial revolution. Two degrees may not seem like much; but that measurement reflects the enormous amount of energy transferred onto the planet. And we are nearing the point of no return.

So, it is surprising (or not) that the two greatest polluters (the United States and Red China) do not talk with each other about climate chaos, to which they each contribute so much. In fact, the United States has famously made a pivot to Asia. But it pivoted to check the emergence of a regional economic bloc led by China, to bend China towards affirming the role of the United States in the region specifically and the world as a whole. China, however, has refused so far to bow to the authority claimed by the only existing superpower (Wolin, 2008, 131). It is unlikely to do so in the future. Instead, we can add the conflict between the United States and China to the war in the Ukraine, which Russia reportedly believes to be a proxy war with the United States and NATO. This is significant since the Ukrainian war reflects the possible use of nuclear weapons and other parts of the arsenal by the United States/NATO and Russia The conflict between the United States and Russia as well as the Ukrainian invasion are arrogantly mad acts committed by an actual hegemon, the United States, and a lesser state, Russia. The media in the United States seems to be treating Volodymyr Zelenskyy as a great statesman and defender of liberty, mimicking the acclaim bestowed on Boris Yeltsin. Zelensky is but a tool of NATO. That said, it can also be stated that the United States, NATO and the Ukraine pushed Putin into a corner from which he emerged swinging wildly. NATO was never meant to include any of the former Soviet Republics. The United States and NATO promised Russia that it would not expand. But it broke those promises. NATO lacked a mission once the Soviet system collapsed. It provoked the Russian response, and we are thus left with supporting the out-manned and out-gunned Ukrainian army, amid calls for a Marshall Plan for the country.

This situation provides the left in the United States with dilemmas. First, it can continue to ignore the surreptitious Cold War that the United States and NATO are fighting with Russia or China. Second, it can attempt to organize itself to link climate chaos, militarism and imperialism together as scourges to be managed (climate chaos) and resolved (the latest Cold War, militaristic saber rattling and imperial aggression). In this way the left, by revealing what had been occluded by ideology can return to its historical mission: Being the functionary of liberated world.

Pussy Riot offended Putin

And for this reason alone the trio must pay:

A Moscow judge handed down stiff prison sentences of two years on Friday afternoon for three young women who staged a protest against Vladimir V. Putin in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior last February and whose jailing and trial on hooliganism charges have generated worldwide criticism of constraints on political speech in Russia.

While a guilty verdict against the three women, members of a band called Pussy Riot, was widely expected, suspense had built over how severe a punishment they would receive. Prosecutors had demanded three-year prison terms, but President Vladimir V. Putin had weighed in on the side of leniency.

But the judge, Marina Syrova, showed little sympathy for the trio, and it was not immediately clear whether the sentences would prompt a reaction on Moscow’s streets.

To be sure, the severe penalty meted out for the ‘crime’ (see Section 213) provides a compelling reason which justifies the putatively criminal act ex post facto!

Mother Russia’s Caesaropapists defend the world by incarcerating these Riot Girlzzzz

Quote of the day

Paul Craig Roberts addresses the looming American attack on Iran:

In my judgment, the US government’s war preparations are driven by three factors.

One is the neoconservative ideology, adopted by the US government, that calls for the US to use its superior military and economic position to achieve world hegemony. This goal appeals to American hubris and to the power and profit that it serves.

A second factor is Israel’s desire to eliminate all support for the Palestinians and for Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. Israel’s goal is to seize all of Palestine and the water resources of southern Lebanon. Eliminating Iran removes all obstacles to Israel’s expansion.

A third factor is to deter or slow China’s rise as a military and economic power by controlling China’s access to energy. It was China’s oil investments in eastern Libya that led to the sudden move against Libya by the US and its NATO puppets, and it is China’s oil investments elsewhere in Africa that resulted in the Bush regime’s creation of the United States Africa Command, designed to counter China’s economic influence with US military influence. China has significant energy investments in Iran, and a substantial percentage of China’s oil imports are from Iran. Depriving China of independent access to oil is Washington’s way of restraining and boxing in China.

What we are witnessing is a replay of Washington’s policy toward Japan in the 1930s that provoked the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Japan’s bank balances in the West were seized, and Japan’s access to oil and raw materials was restricted. The purpose was to prevent or to slow Japan’s rise. The result was war.

A war with China — that’s truly change we can believe in….

Roberts continues by asking:

We, as Americans, need to ask ourselves what all this is about? Why is our government so provocative toward Islam, Russia, China, Iran? What purpose, whose purpose is being served? Certainly not ours.