Heinberg, who has been sounding the alarm over the of global warming for a long time, responds to a recent article (authored by Eduardo Porter) that expresses the ruling capitalist class's view on this issue: "there is no alternative" or (TINA), which was recently printed in the NY Times, the semi-official source of our ruling class. Heinberg writes:
If our market economy cannot work on a finite planet, it is the economy that will give way, though the planet will also suffer in the process. Porter is effectively telling us that the global economy is an airplane incapable of controlled descent, a car without brakes. While degrowth advocates do make an ethical argument, the core of their concern is pragmatic: nothing can grow forever in a limited space with limited resources, and we are seeing urgent signals (climate change, biodiversity loss, soil degradation, ecosystem failure) warning that we have already grown too much. In his article, Porter does not show how infinite economic growth is possible; he merely insists we must have more growth because . . . well, we must. If pressed, he would no doubt cling to one or another of the technofixes we have already questioned. But that’s just not a rational response to the logical and practical necessity of coming to terms with limits. [my emphasis]What I think Heinberg fails to understand is that our ruling class depends on the system of capitalism for all its power and wealth. Thus they would essentially have to give up these goodies to save the planet. I don't think that there has ever been a ruling class which has ever voluntarily give up their control of any society, and there is no evidence that these capitalist classes will. Instead, much like addicted alcoholics, they indulge in all kinds of fantasies which Heinberg and many others have exposed as mere fantasies. But yet Heinberg and others, who are courageous enough to oppose our masters, try nevertheless to appeal rationally to our masters to give up their addiction. Is this realistic? I think not.
The only real solution is revolution. We simply must find a way to take power away from this tiny group of addicts in order to save ourselves. If we fail to do this, or simply stand passively by, we are only saving the addicts and destroying ourselves. Sometimes in my weaker moments I can't help but think that we all all suffering from dementia like Evelyn Parker in this Onion piece of humor.
