FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Can Democracy Save Us?

As a columnist for the Anglo-Indian magazine Socialist Factor, I find it inspiring and gratifying to see fellow socialists in India fighting to elect Socialist candidates, and working to make their country better through a democratic system.

I was also inspired and motivated by the success of Iceland’s Pirate Party in bringing fundamental change to their country, and throwing banksters and conservatives out of office following the financial crisis.

From time to time such democratically achieved successes give one hope that real change is in fact possible through the ballot box. But in most countries on this planet, and in most international organizations as well, I see no real hope that the frightening challenges facing our world can conceivably be addressed effectively, much less overcome, through democratic means. I find myself increasingly at a loss for words when I read appeals from friends on the Left around the world which are framed as calls for more democracy, or building movements to achieve democratic majorities which can bring about major structural change.

Anyone who has read carefully about the current environmental dangers threatening life on Earth, anyone who understands the basics of the science involved and the widespread agreement among scientists about what is now possible and growing more likely every day, will know what I mean when I say: There is not a snowball’s chance in hell, as we say in Tennessee, that any international consensus about how to prevent disaster will emerge soon enough to save our asses if these scientific projections are accurate. The only thing that could even conceivably replace our filthy, poisonous industrial economy fast enough to make a difference in the horrors which are developing would be complete, perfectly coordinated international cooperation to make that fundamental transformation: eliminating the use of most fossil fuels, banning the production of most plastics, placing strict mandatory controls on the use of water and the production of meat, and much, much more.

Does anyone really believe we are even crawling in the direction of real international cooperation with the democratic, pseudo-democratic, fake-democratic and fraudulent sham-democratic jockeying for power kicking up so much dust in the media and the world’s political capitals? Can anyone deny to me with a straight face that, every day, we race farther in exactly the opposite direction, with new disputes and proxy wars and subversion between world powers being the order of the day?

The United Nations, for all the well-meaning, idealistic and motivated people who work there and do its work around the world, has become a pathetic joke in terms of ever being capable of challenging the massive entrenched power of those who fund it and dominate the Security Council. Far too often, the UN is a political tool of the United States of America, which manipulates and instrumentalizes it in ways that even many NATO partners find frustrating and distasteful, although when it gets down to the wire and it’s time to vote, they usually suppress their grumbling and vote the way their allied colossus wants them to vote.

The very idea that the UN is capable of preventing environmental disaster is laughable. I do not mean to denigrate the hard work of those who organized and supported the Paris Climate Summit and the Paris Accords, and I am gratified that there are so many people who are passionate about saving the planet. But we have no more time to indulge in wishful thinking about the Paris process simply because the alternatives are too scary and intimidating. The levels of emissions reduction in the Paris Accords are not remotely capable of slowing global warming and they fail to even directly address the acidification and plastic poisoning of the oceans and the food chain. Without an emergency, mandatory plan to meet these objectives rapidly, it will be too late to save the food chain and the environment, if it is not already too late. Can anyone reading this seriously imagine such cooperation between – just to name one example – America, the EU, China and Russia? Setting aside for a moment the fact that the 1% and their deadly industrial minions will never make such sacrifices voluntarily (in America they refuse to even admit that we are standing precariously on the edge of the abyss … New pipelines! New nuclear plants, even after Fukushima persuaded some European countries to abandon nuclear energy! Here in Germany, a new highway tax to pay for more work on the country’s overloaded highway system: slow progress on electric cars against resistance from Germany’s huge and powerful auto manufacturers): even in countries such as China and India, the desire for industrial equality and consumer goods which are killing Mother Earth is strong. Would these countries behave in any more of an enlightened manner, were we to have an emergency meeting of the United Nations to negotiate an immediate plan to save the environment? How do we imagine such consensus could come about?

I am convinced that it will never come about through the auspices of the fraudulent democracy which is the order of the day in so many countries. Even if there were to be a real hope of building a movement which could persuade a world majority of the necessity for such change, most life on Earth would be long gone before it could come to fruition.

Here in Germany there is a term for the (inadequate) proposals of the Green Party to change popular thinking about environmental issues: the Greens’ suggestion in the last national election that it would be a good thing for everyone to refrain from eating meat for one day every week was scorned as attempted “Öko-Diktatur” (Eco-Dictatorship). The Greens were lampooned mercilessly in the press for wanting to control the behavior of Germany’s allegedly politically conscious citizens, and sustained losses in the election as a result. That is the mentality faced by anyone who seriously believes democracy or dialogue can save the environment.

And the environment is only one issue, even if it is the most pressing.

On issues of nuclear weapons, the worldwide police-surveillance stated created by the United States and others, the use of the mainstream media to control public opinion, and the rapidly growing digital addiction which is cutting off our brains from our physical surroundings — and making us ever more susceptible to spying, thought control and thralldom to huge corporations with a technical grip on the world’s computer-run infrastructure – it is almost impossible to imagine any democratically-based consensus developing which could slow or prevent the approaching crises.

Of course, I am aware that this sounds like a plea for authoritarianism, and I suppose that it is, although I am fully aware that it will not win me many political allies. But I believe that a deluded optimism is far more dangerous than a clear view of a frightening future. In spite of my anarchist heart, I want life on this planet – not only human life, but especially plant and animal life, which it appears ever more likely we would destroy along with ourselves – to survive. And that means, as I see it, in fact, some kind of Eco-Dictatorship. My vision of a revolution that could save the planet would produce something like worldwide socialism with adequate Basic Guaranteed Incomes and a mandatory emergency plan to save the environment. We will not even begin to go in that direction any time soon, much less make substantial progress, via the ballot box.

Consensus is dead.

More articles by:
September 18, 2018
Conn Hallinan
Britain: the Anti-Semitism Debate
Tamara Pearson
Why Mexico’s Next President is No Friend of Migrants
Richard Moser
Both the Commune and Revolution
Nick Pemberton
Serena 15, Tennis Love
Binoy Kampmark
Inconvenient Realities: Climate Change and the South Pacific
Martin Billheimer
La Grand’Route: Waiting for the Bus
John Kendall Hawkins
Seymour Hersh: a Life of Adversarial Democracy at Work
Faisal Khan
Is Israel a Democracy?
John Feffer
The GOP Wants Trumpism…Without Trump
Kim Ives
The Roots of Haiti’s Movement for PetroCaribe Transparency
Dave Lindorff
We Already Have a Fake Billionaire President; Why Would We want a Real One Running in 2020?
Gerry Brown
Is China Springing Debt Traps or Throwing a Lifeline to Countries in Distress?
Pete Tucker
The Washington Post Really Wants to Stop Ben Jealous
Dean Baker
Getting It Wrong Again: Consumer Spending and the Great Recession
September 17, 2018
Melvin Goodman
What is to be Done?
Rob Urie
American Fascism
Patrick Cockburn
The Adults in the White House Trying to Save the US From Trump Are Just as Dangerous as He Is
Jeffrey St. Clair - Alexander Cockburn
The Long Fall of Bob Woodward: From Nixon’s Nemesis to Cheney’s Savoir
Mairead Maguire
Demonization of Russia in a New Cold War Era
Dean Baker
The Bank Bailout of 2008 was Unnecessary
Wim Laven
Hurricane Trump, Season 2
Yves Engler
Smearing Dimitri Lascaris
Ron Jacobs
From ROTC to Revolution and Beyond
Clark T. Scott
The Cannibals of Horsepower
Binoy Kampmark
A Traditional Right: Jimmie Åkesson and the Sweden Democrats
Laura Flanders
History Markers
Weekend Edition
September 14, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Carl Boggs
Obama’s Imperial Presidency
Joshua Frank
From CO2 to Methane, Trump’s Hurricane of Destruction
Jeffrey St. Clair
Maria’s Missing Dead
Andrew Levine
A Bulwark Against the Idiocy of Conservatives Like Brett Kavanaugh
T.J. Coles
Neil deGrasse Tyson: A Celebrity Salesman for the Military-Industrial-Complex
Jeff Ballinger
Nike and Colin Kaepernick: Fronting the Bigots’ Team
David Rosen
Why Stop at Roe? How “Settled Law” Can be Overturned
Gary Olson
Pope Francis and the Battle Over Cultural Terrain
Nick Pemberton
Donald The Victim: A Product of Post-9/11 America
Ramzy Baroud
The Veiled Danger of the ‘Dead’ Oslo Accords
Kevin Martin
U.S. Support for the Bombing of Yemen to Continue
Robert Fisk
A Murder in Aleppo
Robert Hunziker
The Elite World Order in Jitters
Ben Dangl
After 9/11: The Staggering Economic and Human Cost of the War on Terror
Charles Pierson
Invade The Hague! Bolton vs. the ICC
Robert Fantina
Trump and Palestine
Daniel Warner
Hubris on and Off the Court
John Kendall Hawkins
Boning Up on Eternal Recurrence, Kubrick-style: “2001,” Revisited
Haydar Khan
Set Theory of the Left
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail