The author supplies some excellent ideas about transitioning from fossil fuels to non-polluting energy sources. However his understanding of how our society is governed seems incredibly naive to me.
First off, he suggests that the formal head of the US, Obama, can do this. A sensible view holds that Obama is merely an employee of the ruling class who was selected for this job of President, but which is actually only a public relations function of the Empire. If he didn't follow his employer's instructions, he would be removed one way or another. And there isn't the slightest bit of evidence that suggests Obama will do anything other than please his masters.
Secondly, to go "green" very suddenly requires extensive retooling and changes of infrastructure that is now totally designed for fossil fuel engines. Such efforts would require huge amounts of investment that would require government subsidies in various forms for a number of years. That would likely mean higher taxes that would suppress consumption of profit making junk that corporations sell to satisfy their reason-to-be--profits. So what the author is asking is that the corporate ruling class forgo profits for probably two decades in order to restore a stable climate and a sustainable world. Such an argument ignores the fact that corporations are motivated by short term profits. Most cannot see beyond the next quarter's financial statements. Their whole system of individual rewards and punishments is based on quarterly performance.
Thirdly, he concludes his article with this absurd statement:
At one level, the mad Tea Partyers are correct: government is leviathan-a monster. But it is our monster, and with proper leadership even this government in the current climate could jump-start a clean-energy revolution.The government is not "our monster", it belongs, quite literally, to the 1%. Also, that 1% will never give working people, a "proper leadership", that is, a leadership that serves our interests. Until we grow out of these childish notions, there will be no hope for change.
The best part of his essay is when he states,
Gates explained to the Washington Post that much of what is touted as free-market innovation was born of government subsidies: "The Internet and the microprocessor, which were very fundamental to Microsoft being able to take the magic of software and having the PC explode, were among many of the elements that came through government research and development."This was quite an admission, but an honest one. The ruling class relies a lot on government subsidies of various forms and has benefited greatly from taxpayer funded research. But then ruling classes always benefit from their dominant position and resist any changes that might reduce their benefits.
The only real solution is to replace the current system of capitalism with a fully functioning, participatory, inclusive democratic system.
