Earth to Trump ... and all he stands for ...
In pulling out of the Paris climate deal, Trump showed America is a clear and present danger to civilization itself
Fine article from Jeff Goodell, I'll quote at length and comment.
And what Jeff tells Trump at the end here goes for me too, and applies also to that group of greedy, selfish, stupid, xenophobic, bigoted, deluded and dim-witted miscreants cheering him on. Here are the enemies of peace, freedom, justice and harmony on the planet. A fine crowd they are too.
‘The disappointment and outrage at Trump's decision came from all directions, from the prime minister of Fiji to Elon Musk…. The response was particularly scathing from Europe. Mary Robinson, the former president of Ireland who has become an outspoken advocate for climate change action, called the U.S. a "rogue state."
Rogues indeed. Free-riders happy to ride roughshod over others and keep hitting the till until the biosphere is kicked over the cliff, beyond any point of recovery. These people don’t give a damn – that is now official. It’s been semi-official for years, with the half-baked, half-hearted schemes for addressing climate change. But the planetary vandals are now in public and evidently proud of their handiwork. Goodell identifies precisely the nature of the conflict here. It isn’t just about climate agreements and plans to curtail carbon emissions to meet climate targets – it’s about different views of the world and of human nature.
‘The outrage over Trump's move runs deep because the Paris climate deal was never about just the climate. It was also about unity, equality, trust, sympathy – in short, all the qualities that make it possible for seven billion human beings to live together peacefully on the planet. These ideals are the not-so-hidden subtext of every word in the climate accord.’
Against that generous view of human nature and the idea that we may come together to live as one, cooperatively, in a global community, is the mean-spirited zero-sum view of politics as a competition for scarce resources, dissolving community into a mere congeries of individuals and groups seeking to steal a personal advantage at the expense of others, snatching to hoard and hoarding to snatch (to employ the words used by Christian Socialist R.H. Tawney nearly a century ago in The Acquisitive Society). That’s the view that has prevailed, yet again, in politics, and which will ensure mutual self-annihilation on the planet.
The Paris agreement took years of frightfully difficult negotiations and political manoeuvring. It was a real achievement, complex, full of nuance about voluntary emissions targets and how rich nations would help finance clean energy in poor nations. But nearly every nation on the planet came together and vowed to reduce greenhouse gases in the coming decades as to limit the warming of the climate to 2 degrees Celsius, the well-established threshold that might allow us to escape the worst impacts of climate change.
It’s imperfect, the letter is weak, it lacks implementation mechanisms, is non-binding, lacks legal force – and 2C is far from safe … I’ve made the criticisms elsewhere, and explained where the weaknesses come from – from this crowd of planetary renegades out for an endless free lunch, and determined to break up each, any, and every form of common agreement and climate action.
Trump rips it all up and casually declares he’s interested in a better deal, if he can get one. It’s an insult to the intelligence for anyone to expect us to believe that these characters, handing over the environment to corporate billionaires, withdraw from Paris because they think it is weak and ineffectual and won’t meet its targets. We know the weakness and ineffectiveness, and we know the forces standing in the way of something stronger. The reason the treaty is non-binding is because that was the only way Obama could sign it off without it having to go to the Senate, where the Republicans would have taken the opportunity to block it, as they would block each, every and any climate agreement. I was given this as a serious argument in favour of Trump’s withdrawal. At which point it becomes apparent that you are wasting time and energy down the rabbit hole, trying to make sense of a world turned inside out.
I’ll spell it out again, knowing that these people are not ignorant, just malicious and intent on stalling and dissembling and deceiving.
‘At the insistence of the Obama administration, the climate accord was crafted not as a binding treaty—which could have run afoul of domestic U.S. sovereignty concerns—but as a voluntary agreement.’ (Stewart Patrick).
Simple.
‘Trump strolled out into the Rose Garden and flipped his middle finger at the deal. Why? He claimed that the cuts in emissions wouldn't matter, that the deal was unfair to the U.S. because it would hurt the nation's economy while transferring wealth and power to other nations.’
I spent a fair amount of time rebutting these charges and more besides. It needed to be done. But Jeff Goodell sums it up in five words: ‘It was all transparently false.’
Unethical too in the misuse of research
And anyone who doesn’t see that is either a knave who is committed to the denialism and vandalism, or a fool. It is worth correcting the errors and falsehoods of the architects of this debacle, not because facts and values impress these characters, but because it serves to give the public at large a reality check that may bring the semi-detached world of politics back to its senses.
‘Far from hurting the economy, clean energy is the economic engine of the future. Even the mayor of Pittsburgh hit back at him on this, telling CNN, "What [Trump] did was not only bad for the economy of this country, but also weakened America in this world." As for the impact on the earth's temperatures, if all the nations of the world fulfilled their commitments, it wouldn't in itself reduce carbon pollution enough to eliminate the risk of climate catastrophe, but it would be a damn good start.’
And that’s a good point against those critics who seek to rationalise the U.S. withdrawal by claiming that Paris will fall short of its targets. WE KNOW!!! And we know why – on account of the obstruction and nullification of those who stand in the way of climate agreement and action and have done since Rio. We saw them at Kyoto, at Copenhagen, we saw them run a rival show at Paris, they are always with us, looking to break up unified efforts and dissolve collective commitments – liberty, they say, when they mean licence to pollute, emit, appropriate, exploit.
‘Trump's real motivations for pulling out of the deal are obvious: Mired in scandal and stalled with incompetency, this was an easy way to look tough to his fossil-fuel-loving base.’
That’s pretty basic stuff, an act of desperation on the part of a politician out of his depth. Profoundly unimpressive politically, showing a basic lack of leadership and intelligence. But it is more than this. Here we come back to the contrasting views of planet and people.
‘But the larger truth is that Trump ditched Paris because it is a profound threat to his greedy, isolationist America First vision of the world. In fact, the climate accord may be the clearest articulation we have yet of an anti-Trump ideology.’
I really wouldn’t frame the climate accord this way. It dignifies Trump and the forces behind him much too much. They are unworthy. The climate accord is for a positive vision of the world, it affirms that we live in a global community and that cooperation for the common good is something we are capable of undertaking out of fairness, equity and justice. It is the zero-sum ideology that is against precisely that vision of a world in union.
Goodell spells out the contrast between these rival worldviews:
‘The fundamental basis of the deal is global, not nationalistic; it is not about grabbing all you can, but about establishing basic rights of equity and fairness. It stipulates that rich polluters owe something to the poor who suffer most (and will do so increasingly) from the ravages of the West's 200-year-long fossil-fuel party. Most of all, it says that we live on one planet, and if we screw it up, we are all in trouble.’
In which case, it is a badge of honour to have been criticised as a ‘globalist.’ I am certainly not a nationalist, "Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind." (Albert Einstein). But I would call myself a patriot, and I firmly believe that effective climate action is rooted in oikophilia, love of place. I think by ‘globalist’, critics mean some statist, top-down governmental abstraction rooted in nothing and applying to nowhere, probably socialist to boot. That makes a nonsense of my view, which has been painstakingly set out over the years to emphasise socialisation, forms of the common life, subsidiarity and solidary and participatory practices and structures (I’ve been accused of being an anarchist and of being anti-state too … I would wish people would actually read what I write and not read my words through their own filters – i.e. any collective purpose must mean top-down statist government and therefore an infringement of liberty – ideology is a blight in politics, causing a waste of time, energy and ink in correcting errors).
As for what happens next, other nations have reaffirmed their commitments to the agreement, and U.S. cities, states, commerce and finance have declared that they will step up their efforts to cut carbon pollution. The attempts of nationalistic Trump supporters to frame criticism of the U.S. withdrawal as an anti-Americanism on the part of the rest of the world, born of sour grapes at not being able to live off American largesse in the future, was all of a piece with the ignorance, prejudice and malice of the Trump camp. I made a point of emphasising just how much of America remains onside with Paris, making it clear that criticism is not directed against the U.S., just against the American planetary wrecking crew.
‘It could well be that the backlash against Trump is so strong that it inspires more action, and the U.S. more or less hits the goals it committed to in Paris anyway.’
That’s the hope. But here’s why this deliberate act of political vandalism matters – the fact that the world's biggest carbon polluter has withdrawn from a deal to cut carbon pollution is likely to have a corrosive effect on the ambition of other nations.
In the words of Elliot Diringer, whose job is to track climate negotiations at the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions:
"The biggest obstacle to strong climate action has always been fear of competitive disadvantage. Countries will only put forward their best effort when they're confident others, especially their major competitors, are too. That's the gist of Paris – strengthening confidence that everyone's doing their part. When the world's largest economy walks away, other countries, especially those whose economies are closely tied to the U.S. or whose companies compete with U.S. firms, will have a harder time being ambitious. They may be less zealous in meeting their current targets and less ambitious in the next ones due in 2020. This won't reverse the strong momentum we built in Paris. Countries will keep acting because they know it's in their interest. But it will slow the momentum when what we need is to accelerate it."
And the planetary vandals and wreckers know this, of course, and continually seek to engineer division and defection in order to dissolve collective agreements, unravel the commitments and send us back to the beginning, yet again. They’ve been playing this game from the first, and will continue to play it to the last – either their last, or ours and the planet’s.
So in the end, this what is what it comes down to, the Last Great Cause in politics may well be humanity’s Last Stand on the planet. It may not be a Lost Cause yet, but if we fail to identify, marginalise and exclude the free-riders who are parasitic on planet and public realm, then it will be the end. The science on climate change is clear, we know what needs to be done, and we have the solutions. Against that, Trump ‘did the only thing he knows how to do: sow instability, chaos and fear.’ That’s the only thing the free-riders can do, in order to prevent the emergence of a genuine public life capable of putting an end to the global anarchy of the rich and powerful.
‘He demonstrated to the world that America has become not just a rogue state, but a clear and present danger to civilization itself.’
And there is, indeed, only one appropriate response to that, to Trump, to the powerful moneyed interests at work behind him, and to the idiots, libertarians, nationalists, xenophobes, ignoramuses, bigots, racists, militarists, hypocrites, hate-filled, fear-mongering, lying neurotics, paranoids, and poltroons who cheer him on – and Jeff Goodell gives it.
Trump is in charge at a critical moment for keeping climate change in check. We may never recover.
‘What Mr. Trump is trying to do to the planet’s climate will play out over geologic time as well. In fact, it’s time itself that he’s stealing from us.
What I mean is, we have only a short window to deal with the climate crisis or else we forever lose the chance to thwart truly catastrophic heating.’
‘The planet’s hope, coming out of those Paris talks, was that we’d see such growth in renewable energy that we’d begin to close the gap between what physics demands and what our political systems have so far allowed in terms of action.
But everything Mr. Trump is doing should slow that momentum. He’s trying to give gas-guzzlers new life and slashing the money to help poor nations move toward clean energy.’
Yes, rogues, planetary vandals and wreckers, and should be treated accordingly.
‘far from making America “great again,” the decision will endanger U.S. national security and prosperity by sabotaging U.S. global leadership and accelerating a planetary crisis from which not even an isolationist America can escape.’
‘By withdrawing the United States, Trump is taking a wrecking ball to the most important multilateral agreement of the twenty-first century.’
‘As impressive as the Paris Accord was, all signatories recognized that it was but a down payment. Even if fully implemented, the agreement would cut only 54 percent of the emissions needed to prevent average global temperatures rising by more than 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit—a threshold beyond which the planet would experience runaway warming. Leaders in Paris recognized that they would need to “ratchet up” their efforts to reduce emissions over the next two decades. Still, for the first time, global leaders had overcome the inertia that had long plagued climate change negotiations—and committed themselves to real action to save the planet.
By renouncing the agreement, President Trump risks throwing this momentum into reverse, at a perilous moment. The defection of the United States, the world’s second largest emitter after China, will embolden others to renounce their own pledges—or at a minimum delay their full implementation.’
‘As for the planet, the implications are dire. On its current trajectory, the world may well reach the critical threshold of 3.6 Fahrenheit by 2036. The catastrophic results will include more extreme and dangerous weather, more frequent and prolonged droughts and famines, rapid melting of glaciers and polar ice, dramatic sea level rise, accelerated ocean acidification, large-scale die-offs of coral reefs, devastating losses of habitats and species, and mass migrations involving tens and perhaps hundreds of millions of people.’
‘With this U.S. abdication of global leadership, the world must pin its hopes for slowing global warming on the combined efforts of other major emitters, U.S. states and cities, and private corporations. Tomorrow, China and the European Union will recommit themselves to the Paris Agreement, describing it as “imperative and more important than ever.” Governor Jerry Brown, meanwhile, promises that California will fill the vacuum left by the U.S. pullout, by working with other U.S. states and cities to impose new emissions caps and standards. Finally, the planet is counting on the self-interest of the U.S. business community, which is unlikely to make long-term investments in dirty technologies, given the near-certainty that a future administration will overturn Trump’s policies to pursue a low carbon future—and restore America’s stature in the world. That moment cannot come soon enough.’
In a dramatic announcement from the White House Rose Garden on Thursday, Donald J. Trump pronounced the planet Earth a “loser” and vowed to make a better deal with a new planet.
“Earth is a terrible, very bad planet,” he told the White House press corps. “It’s maybe the worst planet in the solar system, and it’s far from the biggest.”
When asked which planet he would make a new deal with, Trump offered few specifics, saying only, “The solar system has millions of terrific planets, and they’re all better than Earth, which is a sick, failing loser.”
Trump’s remarks drew a strong response from one of the United States’ NATO allies, Germany’s Angela Merkel. “I strongly support Donald Trump leaving the planet Earth,” she said.
Me too. And if he would take his supporters with him, it will be good news day on the planet. The earth will be a better place. Free-riders, parasites, exploiters, emitters, expropriators, one and all, go and seek a deal with the outer limits of nowhere.
A song of the earth for Trump and his 'gang of thugs, castoffs and oligarchs' (Timothy Egan).
Viola Wills - Gonna Get Along Without You Now