Abolish coal in 3 years? Aus Green party super plan to beat all plans.

7 posts / 0 new
Last post
jason's picture
jason
Offline
Joined: 22-07-06
Feb 12 2007 06:07
Abolish coal in 3 years? Aus Green party super plan to beat all plans.
Quote:
interseting on the poll bludger's message board the ALP supporters are so happy that Bob Brown "fucked up" by promoting the idea of winding up coal production in 3 years and moving it to wind and solar. If global warming is as bad as what the experts say isnt it time for drastic action? On the message board the ALP voters are proud they are taking the middle road and see the Greens as radical leftists. Internally the Greens are debating if they are an activist or Political party. I have to admit i love activism and have spent a good few hours in jail for it.

Firstly I don't know about a Labor Party "middle road". I would probably fall off of my seat if I found their plan to differ significantly from the Liberal Party.

But this is the problem with the Greens. I would probably agree with most of their points but the fact is they announce some policy out of the blue without any discussion with the 30,000 odd people whose jobs are gonna be affected, and then that dopey idiot Bob Brown will be wondering why there is such a backlash. They did this last election to the Tassie forest workers and now they're gonna do it this election to the coal workers. I think the Liberals must be the Green's greatest fans nowadays - they just can't help driving whole industries into the arms of the Right. And it all comes from seeing themselves as a leadership of ideas that they can think up and then hopefully impose from parliment.

I bet my testicles most extra-parlimentary environmental activism would serve the same function. And its not like the perpetrators are so stupid they don't realise they're alienating most of the population. Based on the psycho-emotional masochists I've been exposed to, I suspect they like it so they can portray themselves as some sort of selfless martyrs banging their head against the brick wall of proletarian ignorance and ruling class greed.

I wonder what sort of things could happen if a network was built up within the energy sector similar to what ASN do in transport?

anna x
Offline
Joined: 22-09-06
Feb 12 2007 07:21

The greens have got their eye on richard branson's prize for the first to come up with the answer to stop global warming I reckon. And as for activist or political party, I just love them because it makes me smile whenever I read redneck rants in the paper about bob brown and his "ilk". Fuck I'd love to be part of an "ilk" grin
gregg.

Terry
Offline
Joined: 1-02-06
Feb 12 2007 21:16

Jason what do you make of the 'extra-parlimentary environmental activism' detailed here: http://www.indymedia.ie/mayo
and here: https://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/actions/2006/mayo/

jason's picture
jason
Offline
Joined: 22-07-06
Feb 13 2007 01:21

Not a fan at all.

What do you think of this?:
http://libcom.org/history/1971-1974-green-bans-by-builders-in-australia

Terry
Offline
Joined: 1-02-06
Feb 13 2007 13:46

Why not a fan?
Yeah I'm aware of the 'green bans' in Australia in the early 70s.
What puzzles me is why what seems to be a fairly singular and localised phenomenon is held up as THE strategy for environmental conflicts (see for instance 'anarchism and environmental survival' I think it is called, by Graham Purchase). As an aside the class content of the Kelly's Bush campaign seems a bit questionable to me, looks like a bit of greenery in a wealthy area, though I could be wrong.
Sure it has deeply radical implications if a group of workers decide that their labour should be spent only on projects which are socially useful and ecologically benign and is wonderful.
But what does this mean?, does it mean that opposition to any particular project should be confined to convincing whomsoever might be employed on the project not to do it.

Over the last decades, in the south especially (at least in China, Nigeria, South Africa, India, and Brazil), but also in Ireland, the United States, and continental Europe, there have been repeated and regular instances of communities coming out in opposition, including mass direct action, against environmentally destructive projects in their locality. This probably happens elsewhere also.

Recognition of this should be at the heart of an anarchist-communist approach to 'the environment'.

jason's picture
jason
Offline
Joined: 22-07-06
Feb 14 2007 06:26
Quote:
Why not a fan?

Because I don't see it as achieving anything radical. At best it is a stop gap solution to problems, at worst it is reactionary. What do you see it as achieving? How do you prioritise which campaign you get involved in?

Quote:
Over the last decades, in the south especially (at least in China, Nigeria, South Africa, India, and Brazil), but also in Ireland, the United States, and continental Europe, there have been repeated and regular instances of communities coming out in opposition, including mass direct action, against environmentally destructive projects in their locality. This probably happens elsewhere also.

Recognition of this should be at the heart of an anarchist-communist approach to 'the environment'.

Yes, but you're fetishising "community" opposition. If you're worried about the class content of Kelly's Bush you should worry about whole communities coming out over something.

Terry
Offline
Joined: 1-02-06
Feb 14 2007 13:45

"Because I don't see it as achieving anything radical."

Why not? What is your specific criticism of the campaign detailed in the links above?

'fetishising "community" opposition'

Can you explain to me why, you would presumbly from what you are saying here, support the black lung movement in Appalahcia in the late 60s and early 70s, ie mining communities taking action on health and safety grounds in the workplace, but not support the later movements of ex-mining communities against strip mining and later mountain top removal since the 70s on health and safety grounds.

And no I'm aware that it is not a matter of "whole communities" for instance in the first example the development is supported by the local Chamber of Commerce, and similar groups, the main local buisness interests, the two main right wing parties, and formerly the Church.

In the American cases it is well documented that the location of toxic facilities is based on race and class.

This article has lots of links attached on the subject:
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/73527