RE: [OPE] Alexander Cockburn on carbon catastrophism

Date: Mon Feb 11 2008 - 19:46:15 EST

Hi Jurriaan:
There are historical examples aplenty of both real and contrived 
catastrophes. Hiroshima was a catastrophe; the so-
called "population bomb"  (which, imo, was based on ideology
rather than science) was not.  I think it would be a very big
mistake to lump, say, Malthusian theory with the *science*
concerning global warming.  In other words, one needs to separate
out real from imagined catastrophes - not denounce
belief in "catastrophism" per se.
> As Marx recognized early on in his life, if you are capable
> of framing a problem, a solution is usually available if you
> are attentive to the way the problems are actually framed 
> (they could be framed in a distorted, convoluted, or upside-
> down manner).
There are certainly problems with the way the issue is often 
framed: e.g. Gore's framing of the issue as a human problem
leads to his framing of a solution which stipulates that since 
everyone is to blame, everyone must pitch in to solve global
warming. In other words, it is framed in a liberal manner
which is devoid of class analysis. Still,  I am not in the slightest 
bit comforted by Marx's belief that if humans can imagine the
problem then they can/will find a solution. This strikes of 19th
Century over-confidence in technology.
In solidarity, Jerry

ope mailing list

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Feb 29 2008 - 00:00:03 EST