truthout--2020-10-25--Fracking Isn’t Just Bad for the Climate. It’s Bad for Mental Health Too.

Hydraulic fracturing has boomed in the U.S. over the past decade , but unless you live near it , you may not realize just how close fracking wells can be to homes and schools .
In Colorado , the wellbore – the hole drilled to extract oil or gas – can be 500 feet from someone ’ s house under current state rules .
In some states , like Texas , drilling can be even closer .
For people living in these areas , that means noise , pollution and other stressors that can harm physical and mental health .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ vibrations that can make sleep difficult and disturb their pets .
Truck traffic around wellpads adds to the noise , dust and other airborne pollutants , creating another layer of industrial disruption .
One woman I spoke with had a 30-foot-high sound wall put up around her property , but the parade of semitrucks at all hours still rattled her home , and the sound wall couldn ’ t keep out the noise .
When she opened her bedroom curtains , all she saw was a brown wall where she used to have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who studies extractive industries and their environmental justice and health impacts , I have spent years in communities with unconventional oil and gas activity , visiting homes and well sites .
My research shows that living near fracking sites can lead to chronic stress and self-reported depression .
These effects often relate to systemic problems associated with the industry .
The boom in hydraulic fracturing started around 2010 and made the U.S. the No .
1 producer of hydrocarbons globally .
In Colorado , fracking has since helped quadruple oil production and increased @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has come with consequences .
By 2017 , researchers estimated 4.7 million people lived within 1 mile of an unconventional oil or gas well in the U.S. Health studies have found respiratory difficulties like coughing and wheezing in people living and working near fracking sites .
Other studies have found increases in endocrine-disrupting chemicals that can affect pregnant women and children , including raising the risks of birth defects and childhood cancers .
Emissions of methane , a potent greenhouse gas that contributes to climate change , have also spiked around oil and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been the effects on mental health .
In a new study on the mental health effects , I examined multiple communities across northern Colorado , surveyed hundreds of households and visited people ’ s homes , schools and wellpads .
Two drivers of stress and mental health harm stood out : • First , people report chronic stress and depression related to their uncertainty about environmental and public health risks – and inadequate access to useful information about it .
• Second , stress and depression relate to people ’ s experiences of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ control the activity , where it occurs , and how it is regulated .
Previous studies have suggested links to depression and lower quality of life , as well as social psychological impacts , such as increased tensions within communities , but these studies typically used surveys or government data .
This new research looked closer at people ’ s experiences .
Imagine you live in northern Colorado .
A company notifies you that it will start drilling in the open space in your subdivision that you can see from your backyard or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about the health or environmental risks , but that information is locked behind a publisher ’ s paywall or it is buried in hundreds of pages full of technical language .
One of the people I interviewed , a 45-year-old teacher who has lived in his community his entire life , talked about stress from the uncertainties of living near fracking : “ What ’ s stressful is the unknowns and how this industry is operating behind a curtain all the time .
… When you don ’ t know the chemicals they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t know where they ’ re getting the water .
You don ’ t know how much these tanks are leaking .
… To me , that is stressful , the not knowing.
” Other people reported feeling stress over uncertainties about long-term impacts .
A retired former city worker said : “ We ’ re lab rats right now .
They ’ re learning about it as they ’ re going .
… We don ’ t know what the impacts are going to be 20 years down the line.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about it .
In Colorado , people typically have only three minutes to talk during public meetings , while the companies have more time to present their cases .
A middle-aged woman living with a wellpad about 1,000 feet from her deck explained why public meetings felt so exclusive : “ This was a public hearing … and they turned it over to [ an oil company ] to give their slideshow .
… [ The oil company ] proceeded to do about a two-hour presentation , so there was no time for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people out of a hundred people who wanted to protest got a chance to talk .
It ’ s very hard to be heard.
” These patterns emerged across my data .
About 90 % of the people I interviewed reported increased , chronic stress related to nearby fracking operations , and 75 % reported feeling long-term depression – particularly because of the uncertainty about the impacts and feeling powerless to stop it .
What Can Be Done About It ?
Governments could help address some of these systemic problems fairly quickly .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , accurate information about the environmental and public health risks , as well as the economic risks and benefits .
Governments can also give people more meaningful opportunities to participate in zoning and other decisions about how , when and where hydraulic fracturing takes place .
Fixing the health and environment risks that underlie the stress is more challenging .
The Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission is expected in early November to finalize new drilling rules that include a 2,000-foot setback from homes , the widest statewide rule in the country , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
People I ’ ve interviewed have reported feeling a sense of empowerment by organizing with others to fight for more local control .
But solutions aren ’ t only the responsibility of governments or the public ; companies must be accountable , too .
Note : Stephanie Malin receives funding from the National Science Foundation , the Colorado Water Center , the National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences ( a branch of NIH ) , the Rural Sociological Society , and CSU School of Global Environmental Sustainability .

Hydraulic fracturing has boomed in the U.S. over the past decade, but unless you live near it, you may not realize just how close fracking wells can be to homes and schools. In Colorado, the wellbore – the hole drilled to extract oil or gas – can be 500 feet from someone’s house under current state rules. In some states, like Texas, drilling can be even closer.
For people living in these areas, that means noise, pollution and other stressors that can harm physical and mental health.
People with homes near fracking operations describe vibrations that can make sleep difficult and disturb their pets. Truck traffic around wellpads adds to the noise, dust and other airborne pollutants, creating another layer of industrial disruption.
One woman I spoke with had a 30-foot-high sound wall put up around her property, but the parade of semitrucks at all hours still rattled her home, and the sound wall couldn’t keep out the noise. When she opened her bedroom curtains, all she saw was a brown wall where she used to have mountain views.
As a social scientist who studies extractive industries and their environmental justice and health impacts, I have spent years in communities with unconventional oil and gas activity, visiting homes and well sites.
My research shows that living near fracking sites can lead to chronic stress and self-reported depression. These effects often relate to systemic problems associated with the industry.
Consequences of the Fracking Boom
The boom in hydraulic fracturing started around 2010 and made the U.S. the No. 1 producer of hydrocarbons globally. In Colorado, fracking has since helped quadruple oil production and increased natural gas production.
But that growth has come with consequences. By 2017, researchers estimated 4.7 million people lived within 1 mile of an unconventional oil or gas well in the U.S.
Health studies have found respiratory difficulties like coughing and wheezing in people living and working near fracking sites. Other studies have found increases in endocrine-disrupting chemicals that can affect pregnant women and children, including raising the risks of birth defects and childhood cancers.
Emissions of methane, a potent greenhouse gas that contributes to climate change, have also spiked around oil and gas activity.
Less well understood have been the effects on mental health.
In a new study on the mental health effects, I examined multiple communities across northern Colorado, surveyed hundreds of households and visited people’s homes, schools and wellpads.
Two drivers of stress and mental health harm stood out:
First, people report chronic stress and depression related to their uncertainty about environmental and public health risks – and inadequate access to useful information about it.
Second, stress and depression relate to people’s experiences of political powerlessness – particularly their inability to control the activity, where it occurs, and how it is regulated.
Previous studies have suggested links to depression and lower quality of life, as well as social psychological impacts, such as increased tensions within communities, but these studies typically used surveys or government data. This new research looked closer at people’s experiences.
Fearing the Unknown
Imagine you live in northern Colorado. A company notifies you that it will start drilling in the open space in your subdivision that you can see from your backyard or deck. You try to find information about the health or environmental risks, but that information is locked behind a publisher’s paywall or it is buried in hundreds of pages full of technical language.
One of the people I interviewed, a 45-year-old teacher who has lived in his community his entire life, talked about stress from the uncertainties of living near fracking: “What’s stressful is the unknowns and how this industry is operating behind a curtain all the time. … When you don’t know the chemicals they’re pumping down. You don’t know where they’re getting the water. You don’t know how much these tanks are leaking. … To me, that is stressful, the not knowing.”
Other people reported feeling stress over uncertainties about long-term impacts. A retired former city worker said: “We’re lab rats right now. They’re learning about it as they’re going. … We don’t know what the impacts are going to be 20 years down the line.”
Many people feel powerless to do anything about it. In Colorado, people typically have only three minutes to talk during public meetings, while the companies have more time to present their cases.
A middle-aged woman living with a wellpad about 1,000 feet from her deck explained why public meetings felt so exclusive: “This was a public hearing … and they turned it over to [an oil company] to give their slideshow. … [The oil company] proceeded to do about a two-hour presentation, so there was no time for public input. So four or five people out of a hundred people who wanted to protest got a chance to talk. It’s very hard to be heard.”
These patterns emerged across my data.
About 90% of the people I interviewed reported increased, chronic stress related to nearby fracking operations, and 75% reported feeling long-term depression – particularly because of the uncertainty about the impacts and feeling powerless to stop it.
What Can Be Done About It?
Governments could help address some of these systemic problems fairly quickly.
The first step is to provide easy-to-understand, accurate information about the environmental and public health risks, as well as the economic risks and benefits.
Governments can also give people more meaningful opportunities to participate in zoning and other decisions about how, when and where hydraulic fracturing takes place.
Fixing the health and environment risks that underlie the stress is more challenging. The Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission is expected in early November to finalize new drilling rules that include a 2,000-foot setback from homes, the widest statewide rule in the country, but wells could still be built closer.
People I’ve interviewed have reported feeling a sense of empowerment by organizing with others to fight for more local control. But solutions aren’t only the responsibility of governments or the public; companies must be accountable, too.
Note: Stephanie Malin receives funding from the National Science Foundation, the Colorado Water Center, the National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences (a branch of NIH), the Rural Sociological Society, and CSU School of Global Environmental Sustainability.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.


truthout--2020-10-25--Pence Was Exposed to COVID From Top Aide. He Plans to Keep Campaigning Anyway.

Despite being considered a close contact with a top aide who tested positive for Covid-19 and began quarantining on Saturday , Vice President Mike Pence is still planning to maintain his travel and campaign schedule with the November election just over a week away—a decision medical experts denounced as potentially dangerous for Pence , those accompanying him , and the public .
The White House announced Saturday that Pence Chief of Staff Marc Short and at least three additional members of the vice president ’ s staff have tested positive for Covid-19 , another outbreak within the Trump administration that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of his top aides , and his press secretary contracted the virus .
Two unnamed officials briefed on the matter told the New York Times that White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows attempted to keep news of the latest outbreak from going public .
Pence spokesperson Devin O ’ Malley said that both the vice president and his wife tested negative for Covid-19 on Saturday and “ remain in good health.
” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ( CDC ) guidelines recommend that those who come into close contact with someone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ home for 14 days… even if you test negative for Covid-19 or feel healthy.
” To justify keeping up the vice president ’ s travel plans—which are set to take him to North Carolina and Minnesota on Sunday following two stops in Florida on Saturday—Pence ’ s communications team pointed to the CDC ’ s guidelines for essential personnel .
“ Critical infrastructure workers may be permitted to continue work following potential exposure to Covid-19 , ” the guidelines state , “ provided they remain asymptomatic and additional precautions are implemented to protect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health experts rejected the notion that Pence ’ s campaigning amounts to essential activity .
Saskia Popescu , an infectious disease expert at George Mason University , called Pence ’ s decision to maintain his aggressive travel schedule “ grossly negligent.
” “ It ’ s just an insult to everybody who has been working in public health and public health response , ” Popescu told the Associated Press .
“ I also find it really harmful and disrespectful to the people going to the rally… He needs to be staying home 14 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Epidemiologist Eric Feigl-Ding , a senior fellow at the Federation of American Scientists , also voiced alarm at Pence ’ s decision to keep campaigning despite close exposure to a virus that has killed nearly 225,000 people in the U.S. and continues to spread nationwide .
“ Pence tested negative but that doesn ’ t immediately mean anything , ” Feigl-Ding noted .
“ Both [ Stephen ] Miller and [ Kayleigh ] McEnany tested negative for 4-5 consecutive days before testing Covid-19 positive on the final day .
Early infection [ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s still maybe infectious .
”

CDC guidelines call for a 14-day quarantine after exposure, but the vice president has chosen to endanger lives instead.
Despite being considered a close contact with a top aide who tested positive for Covid-19 and began quarantining on Saturday, Vice President Mike Pence is still planning to maintain his travel and campaign schedule with the November election just over a week away—a decision medical experts denounced as potentially dangerous for Pence, those accompanying him, and the public.
The White House announced Saturday that Pence Chief of Staff Marc Short and at least three additional members of the vice president’s staff have tested positive for Covid-19, another outbreak within the Trump administration that comes weeks after the president, one of his top aides, and his press secretary contracted the virus. Two unnamed officials briefed on the matter told the New York Times that White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows attempted to keep news of the latest outbreak from going public.
Pence spokesperson Devin O’Malley said that both the vice president and his wife tested negative for Covid-19 on Saturday and “remain in good health.”
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines recommend that those who come into close contact with someone infected by the coronavirus “should stay home for 14 days… even if you test negative for Covid-19 or feel healthy.”
To justify keeping up the vice president’s travel plans—which are set to take him to North Carolina and Minnesota on Sunday following two stops in Florida on Saturday—Pence’s communications team pointed to the CDC’s guidelines for essential personnel.
“Critical infrastructure workers may be permitted to continue work following potential exposure to Covid-19,” the guidelines state, “provided they remain asymptomatic and additional precautions are implemented to protect them and the community.”
But public health experts rejected the notion that Pence’s campaigning amounts to essential activity. Saskia Popescu, an infectious disease expert at George Mason University, called Pence’s decision to maintain his aggressive travel schedule “grossly negligent.”
“It’s just an insult to everybody who has been working in public health and public health response,” Popescu told the Associated Press. “I also find it really harmful and disrespectful to the people going to the rally… He needs to be staying home 14 days. Campaign events are not essential.”
Epidemiologist Eric Feigl-Ding, a senior fellow at the Federation of American Scientists, also voiced alarm at Pence’s decision to keep campaigning despite close exposure to a virus that has killed nearly 225,000 people in the U.S. and continues to spread nationwide.
“Pence tested negative but that doesn’t immediately mean anything,” Feigl-Ding noted. “Both [Stephen] Miller and [Kayleigh] McEnany tested negative for 4-5 consecutive days before testing Covid-19 positive on the final day. Early infection [is] not always detectable, but it’s still maybe infectious.”
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.


truthout--2020-10-25--An Effective Green New Deal Must Be Global. This Is What It Could Look Like.

The position of the Academies of Science from more than 80 countries and scores of scientific organizations is that global warming is human-caused through the release of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere from the burning of fossil fuels ( coal , natural gas , oil ) to generate power .
In fact , scientists have known for decades how carbon dioxide traps heat in the atmosphere and contributes to global warming , with nuclear weapons physicist Edward Teller actually warning the oil industry all the way back in 1959 how its own activities will end up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Naturally , the petroleum industry went on to bury under the rug Teller ’ s scientific explanation of the impact of carbon dioxide on climate change , along with many other scientific reports on the same topic that came to its attention in the years thereafter .
Of course , over the years , there has been an explosion of scientific studies about climate-change impacts on all aspects of civilized life .
Most of them are produced by leading university and research centers around the world , but also from NASA , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Federal Reserve , and the Bank of England .
The evidence for global warming is indeed compelling .
Nonetheless , we live in an age where the discovery of truth through reason and science has come under attack by far too many in the present-day world , including elected officials , especially in a country like the United States where religiosity is prevalent and only 40 % of its citizens place much confidence in the scientific community .
Unsurprisingly , therefore , climate change denialism is still quite prevalent in some parts of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ States among conservatives , which undoubtedly explains why at the Republican National Convention ( August 24-27 , 2020 ) the climate change threat was never even mentioned .
For Donald Trump ( and many of his followers ) , climate change is a “ hoax ” and , as the president said during his visit to California in mid-September , “ science doesn ’ t know ” what ’ s causing wildfires .
But he does : they are caused by “ exploding trees ” and poor forest management .
The climate crisis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is how to deal with this truly existential threat .
Stopping fossil fuel emissions and moving to clean , renewable sources of energy is the obvious and most widely accepted solution , and the game-changer is the idea of a Green New Deal .
“ Some form of a Green New Deal is essential to ‘ save the planet , ’ ” says Noam Chomsky in the newly published book Climate Crisis and the Global Green New Deal : The Political Economy of Saving the Planet ( Verso , 2020 ) .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ different schemes of the Green New Deal ?
Robert Pollin , co-author of the aforementioned book , outlines a detailed ( Global ) Green New Deal project which the world ’ s most revered public intellectual ( Noam Chomsky ) endorses wholeheartedly .
Pollin ’ s Global Green New Deal project to tackle the existential threat of climate crisis is all-encompassing as it addresses virtually every question associated with the transition to a “ green economy.
” Unlike other Green New Deal proposals , it is short on generalizations and extensive on specifics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and cost accounting assessments .
In fact , Pollin has designed several state-level Green New Deal proposals , including for Puerto Rico .
And his take on the transition to a “ green economy ” is quite different from some of the other Green New Deals that have been proposed by various other progressives , including Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , Bernie Sanders , and Naomi Klein .
Here , I wish to highlight some very specific items and ideas that are included in Robert Pollin ’ s detailed Global Green New Deal project , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Green New Deal proposals in circulation .
1 .
Applying the insurance option to climate change : To skeptics about the complete accuracy of the scientific predictions to climate-change impacts , Pollin suggests that “ we should think of a global Green New Deal as exactly the equivalent of an insurance policy to protect ourselves and the planet against the serious prospect — thought not the certainty — that we are facing an ecologic catastrophe.
” The only question is how much climate insurance we should purchase .
Indeed , most homeowners are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there is only 1 % or less risk of a loss caused by “ perils ” ( fire , lightning strikes , etc. )
.
Isn ’ t it therefore irrational to suggest that we should not take measures to safeguard the planet from the potential impacts of global warming ?
2 .
Irrational and unrealistic to expect capitalists on their own to get us out of the climate crisis : To those who wish to rely on capitalism and market-oriented solutions to climate change , Pollin argues convincingly that just because capitalism @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it is absurdly naïve to believe that capitalist entrepreneurship is the way out of a potential climate change catastrophe .
“ Forceful forms of government intervention , ” as in the case of the Great Depression , where the Roosevelt administration assumed direct role in the management of the economy , such as by embarking on massive public investment projects and ownership of critical industries , are absolutely essential for stopping fossil fuel emissions and making a transition to a clean and renewable sources of energy , argues Pollin .
In this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ warming , such as the carbon tax plan advocated by many mainstream economists who are still clinging tightly onto the straitjacket of neoliberal discourse , are highly inadequate , if enforced without other provisions and regulations , to make an impact on the containment of the climate crisis .
3 .
Public ownership of the energy industry is also not the way out .
90 percent of the world ’ s fossil fuel assets are already publicly owned , thus it ’ s obvious that public ownership of energy companies is not the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ publicly owned fossil fuel enterprises do not operate under exactly the same profit incentives as capitalist firms , their incentive structures are approximately equivalent — with careers , promotions , salaries , prestige all wrapped up in selling fossil fuels and generating maximum revenues .
Also , fossil fuel revenues are the big source of government revenues to fund everything .
The more general point on this matter , according to Pollin , is that we need to think about a variety of public and private ownership forms being given the opportunity to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ similar innovations .
4 .
Reducing global carbon dioxide emissions to net zero by 2050 is feasible .
Pollin ’ s Global Green New Deal project aims to meet the targets of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ( IPCC ) on global net carbon dioxide emissions , which amount to 45 percent reductions by 2030 and net zero emissions by 2050 .
For net zero emissions to be reached by 2050 , Pollin has estimated that it would require committing something in the range of 2.5 percent of global GDP per year @ @ @ @ @ @ @ improve energy efficiency standards across the board ( buildings , automobiles , transportation systems , industrial production processes ) and to massively expand the availability of clean energy sources .
With regards to clean energy transformation , Pollin estimates that it would require investments in the range of $ 2.6 trillion in the first year of the Global Green New Deal project .
Assuming that the project gets under way in 2024 , and lasting until 2050 , average spending would be around $ 4.5 trillion per year .
The total amount for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to approximately $ 120 trillion , and this figure include investment spending on both the public and private sectors .
If the above figures sound overwhelming , no need to worry .
Pollin says that the clean energy investment project which lies at the heart of the Green New Deal , will “ pay for itself in full over time ” by delivering “ lower energy costs for energy consumers in all regions of the world , ” and he has worked out the actual math behind this claim .
Even so , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policy objectives , such as stopping deforestation and embarking on afforestation .
The most recent data by IPCC reveals that deforestation alone is responsible for about 12 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions .
At the same time , Pollin points out , upon review of the existing literature , that we can not rely on geoengineering to get out of the climate crisis .
Carbon capture technologies have yet to prove that they are realizable at a commercial level , and , according to some expert assessments highly unlikely that they can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the century .
As for the nuclear power option , which appears to be attractive by the mere fact that it does not generate carbon dioxide emissions , Pollin stresses out that there are too many risks associated with reliance on nuclear energy on a global scale , which range from the problem of radioactive wastes to nuclear reactor meltdowns and of course political security issues .
5. Financing the Global Green New Deal and Standards of Fairness .
Financing the Global Green New Deal is not an especially challenging problem to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how it can be done through primarily four large-scale funding sources : ( 1 ) a carbon tax , with 75 percent of the revenues going back to the public but 25 percent channeled into clean energy investment projects ; ( 2 ) transfer funds out of military budgets ; ( 3 ) a Green Bond lending program introduced by the Federal Reserve and the European Central Bank ; ( 4 ) the elimination of all fossil fuel subsidies and the transfer of 25 percent of those funds into clean energy investments .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ New Deal , Pollin spells out the details for each one of these funding sources for his Global Green New Deal , while ensuring at the same time that they meet basic standards of fairness by subjecting them to scrutiny .
6 .
Shifting to clean energy resources would create new jobs and encourage growth .
Fear of job losses associated with the elimination of the fossil fuel industry keeps many people away from supporting the Green New Deal .
Yet , Pollin shows that such fears are completely unwarranted and the only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be created through the creation of a green economy , and correspondingly , how many will be lost .
Undoubtedly , there will be job losses and community impacts from the contraction of the fossil fuel industry , which is why just transition policies , spelled out by Pollin in a detailed fashion , are absolutely essential .
But job creation and the implementation of just transition policies lie at the heart of the Global Green New Deal project .
Based on research that Pollin has conducted with others on this question , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of development , he says that all countries will experience significant gains in job creation .
In India , for example , it ’ s estimated that “ increasing clean energy investments by 2 percent of GDP every year for twenty years will generate an average net increase of about 13 million jobs per year.
” 7 .
Actions to combat global warming by individual countries still matters .
While a Global Green Deal is absolutely essential and critical for avoiding a climate change catastrophe , Pollin points out that every place matters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of zero net global carbon emissions by 2050 .
For if we add up China , the United States , and the European Union ( EU ) , the combined carbon dioxide emissions amount to only 52 percent of the global total .
In other words , we are still only half way to global net zero emissions even if China , the United States , and the EU were to get to zero tomorrow .
Thus , as Pollin forcefully makes the point , there can be no exception to the application @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brings this point home by mentioning India , which , if it is excluded from a Green New Deal , and continues to rely on the burning of oil , coal , and natural gas for its economic growth , its carbon dioxide emissions would have increased by 5,5 billion tons under a baseline scenario of 3 percent annual growth through 2050 .
With this scenario at work , the global economy will be nowhere close to hitting the target of zero net emissions by 2050 .
8 .
Degrowth as a strategy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dead end .
Pollin takes issue with the proponents of degrowth by arguing that it does not provide “ a viable stabilization framework.
” As with practically everything else around his Global Green New Deal project , he makes the case against degrowth on the basis of economic data and analysis – and actually basic arithmetic .
He points out that global carbon emission need to drop from their current 33 billion tons , according to estimates in the IPCC report , to zero within thirty years .
Assuming that under a degrowth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ emissions global GDP shrinks by 10 percent over the next thirty years ( a contraction four times larger than what we experienced during the global financial crisis of 2007-09 ) , the effect on carbon dioxide emissions would be a reduction of 10 percent — in other words , from 33 to 30 billion tons .
In the meantime , the global economy would have faced massive job losses on account of the contraction and huge declines in the standard of living for average working people and the poor .
In sum , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a detailed Global Green New Deal project is the only viable way to combat climate emergency and to ensure a sustainable and more equitable economic future , argues Pollin ever so convincingly in his newly published co-authored book with Noam Chomsky .
As far as this commentator is concerned , who may be somewhat biased on account of having conducted the interviews with Pollin and Chomsky included in Climate Crisis and the Global Green New Deal : The Political Economy to Save the Planet , the only question around Pollin ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quickly can we get the international community to act on it before the die is cast .

The position of the Academies of Science from more than 80 countries and scores of scientific organizations is that global warming is human-caused through the release of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere from the burning of fossil fuels (coal, natural gas, oil) to generate power. In fact, scientists have known for decades how carbon dioxide traps heat in the atmosphere and contributes to global warming, with nuclear weapons physicist Edward Teller actually warning the oil industry all the way back in 1959 how its own activities will end up having a catastrophic impact on human civilization.
Naturally, the petroleum industry went on to bury under the rug Teller’s scientific explanation of the impact of carbon dioxide on climate change, along with many other scientific reports on the same topic that came to its attention in the years thereafter. Of course, over the years, there has been an explosion of scientific studies about climate-change impacts on all aspects of civilized life. Most of them are produced by leading university and research centers around the world, but also from NASA, the US Department of Defense, the Federal Reserve, and the Bank of England. The evidence for global warming is indeed compelling.
Nonetheless, we live in an age where the discovery of truth through reason and science has come under attack by far too many in the present-day world, including elected officials, especially in a country like the United States where religiosity is prevalent and only 40% of its citizens place much confidence in the scientific community.
Unsurprisingly, therefore, climate change denialism is still quite prevalent in some parts of the world, especially in the United States among conservatives, which undoubtedly explains why at the Republican National Convention (August 24-27, 2020) the climate change threat was never even mentioned. For Donald Trump (and many of his followers), climate change is a “hoax” and, as the president said during his visit to California in mid-September, “science doesn’t know” what’s causing wildfires. But he does: they are caused by “exploding trees” and poor forest management.
The climate crisis is real, and the only question is how to deal with this truly existential threat. Stopping fossil fuel emissions and moving to clean, renewable sources of energy is the obvious and most widely accepted solution, and the game-changer is the idea of a Green New Deal. “Some form of a Green New Deal is essential to ‘save the planet,’” says Noam Chomsky in the newly published book Climate Crisis and the Global Green New Deal: The Political Economy of Saving the Planet (Verso, 2020). But which form, as there are several different schemes of the Green New Deal?
Robert Pollin, co-author of the aforementioned book, outlines a detailed (Global) Green New Deal project which the world’s most revered public intellectual (Noam Chomsky) endorses wholeheartedly. Pollin’s Global Green New Deal project to tackle the existential threat of climate crisis is all-encompassing as it addresses virtually every question associated with the transition to a “green economy.” Unlike other Green New Deal proposals, it is short on generalizations and extensive on specifics, supported with ample of economic data and cost accounting assessments. In fact, Pollin has designed several state-level Green New Deal proposals, including for Puerto Rico. And his take on the transition to a “green economy” is quite different from some of the other Green New Deals that have been proposed by various other progressives, including Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Bernie Sanders, and Naomi Klein.
Here, I wish to highlight some very specific items and ideas that are included in Robert Pollin’s detailed Global Green New Deal project, which are rarely covered by the various Green New Deal proposals in circulation.
1. Applying the insurance option to climate change: To skeptics about the complete accuracy of the scientific predictions to climate-change impacts, Pollin suggests that “we should think of a global Green New Deal as exactly the equivalent of an insurance policy to protect ourselves and the planet against the serious prospect — thought not the certainty — that we are facing an ecologic catastrophe.” The only question is how much climate insurance we should purchase. Indeed, most homeowners are willing to buy homeowners insurance even if there is only 1% or less risk of a loss caused by “perils” (fire, lightning strikes, etc.). Isn’t it therefore irrational to suggest that we should not take measures to safeguard the planet from the potential impacts of global warming?
2. Irrational and unrealistic to expect capitalists on their own to get us out of the climate crisis: To those who wish to rely on capitalism and market-oriented solutions to climate change, Pollin argues convincingly that just because capitalism got us into the climate change mess, it is absurdly naïve to believe that capitalist entrepreneurship is the way out of a potential climate change catastrophe. “Forceful forms of government intervention,” as in the case of the Great Depression, where the Roosevelt administration assumed direct role in the management of the economy, such as by embarking on massive public investment projects and ownership of critical industries, are absolutely essential for stopping fossil fuel emissions and making a transition to a clean and renewable sources of energy, argues Pollin. In this context, market-driven plans for combating global warming, such as the carbon tax plan advocated by many mainstream economists who are still clinging tightly onto the straitjacket of neoliberal discourse, are highly inadequate, if enforced without other provisions and regulations, to make an impact on the containment of the climate crisis.
3. Public ownership of the energy industry is also not the way out. 90 percent of the world’s fossil fuel assets are already publicly owned, thus it’s obvious that public ownership of energy companies is not the solution. While it is true that publicly owned fossil fuel enterprises do not operate under exactly the same profit incentives as capitalist firms, their incentive structures are approximately equivalent — with careers, promotions, salaries, prestige all wrapped up in selling fossil fuels and generating maximum revenues. Also, fossil fuel revenues are the big source of government revenues to fund everything. The more general point on this matter, according to Pollin, is that we need to think about a variety of public and private ownership forms being given the opportunity to flourish — including small-scale cooperative ownership and similar innovations.
4. Reducing global carbon dioxide emissions to net zero by 2050 is feasible. Pollin’s Global Green New Deal project aims to meet the targets of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) on global net carbon dioxide emissions, which amount to 45 percent reductions by 2030 and net zero emissions by 2050. For net zero emissions to be reached by 2050, Pollin has estimated that it would require committing something in the range of 2.5 percent of global GDP per year to investment spending in areas designed to improve energy efficiency standards across the board (buildings, automobiles, transportation systems, industrial production processes) and to massively expand the availability of clean energy sources. With regards to clean energy transformation, Pollin estimates that it would require investments in the range of $2.6 trillion in the first year of the Global Green New Deal project. Assuming that the project gets under way in 2024, and lasting until 2050, average spending would be around $4.5 trillion per year. The total amount for the 27 year investment cycle would come to approximately $120 trillion, and this figure include investment spending on both the public and private sectors. If the above figures sound overwhelming, no need to worry. Pollin says that the clean energy investment project which lies at the heart of the Green New Deal, will “pay for itself in full over time” by delivering “lower energy costs for energy consumers in all regions of the world,” and he has worked out the actual math behind this claim. Even so, there undertakings need to be complemented other policy objectives, such as stopping deforestation and embarking on afforestation. The most recent data by IPCC reveals that deforestation alone is responsible for about 12 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions. At the same time, Pollin points out, upon review of the existing literature, that we cannot rely on geoengineering to get out of the climate crisis. Carbon capture technologies have yet to prove that they are realizable at a commercial level, and, according to some expert assessments highly unlikely that they can be adequately introduced before the second half of the century. As for the nuclear power option, which appears to be attractive by the mere fact that it does not generate carbon dioxide emissions, Pollin stresses out that there are too many risks associated with reliance on nuclear energy on a global scale, which range from the problem of radioactive wastes to nuclear reactor meltdowns and of course political security issues. 5. Financing the Global Green New Deal and Standards of Fairness. Financing the Global Green New Deal is not an especially challenging problem to solve, says Pollin, and shows how it can be done through primarily four large-scale funding sources: (1) a carbon tax, with 75 percent of the revenues going back to the public but 25 percent channeled into clean energy investment projects; (2) transfer funds out of military budgets; (3) a Green Bond lending program introduced by the Federal Reserve and the European Central Bank; (4) the elimination of all fossil fuel subsidies and the transfer of 25 percent of those funds into clean energy investments. In Climate Crisis and the Global Green New Deal, Pollin spells out the details for each one of these funding sources for his Global Green New Deal, while ensuring at the same time that they meet basic standards of fairness by subjecting them to scrutiny. 6. Shifting to clean energy resources would create new jobs and encourage growth. Fear of job losses associated with the elimination of the fossil fuel industry keeps many people away from supporting the Green New Deal. Yet, Pollin shows that such fears are completely unwarranted and the only question is how many new jobs will be created through the creation of a green economy, and correspondingly, how many will be lost. Undoubtedly, there will be job losses and community impacts from the contraction of the fossil fuel industry, which is why just transition policies, spelled out by Pollin in a detailed fashion, are absolutely essential. But job creation and the implementation of just transition policies lie at the heart of the Global Green New Deal project. Based on research that Pollin has conducted with others on this question, involving countries with significant differences in levels of development, he says that all countries will experience significant gains in job creation. In India, for example, it’s estimated that “increasing clean energy investments by 2 percent of GDP every year for twenty years will generate an average net increase of about 13 million jobs per year.” 7. Actions to combat global warming by individual countries still matters. While a Global Green Deal is absolutely essential and critical for avoiding a climate change catastrophe, Pollin points out that every place matters in the struggle to secure the target of zero net global carbon emissions by 2050. For if we add up China, the United States, and the European Union (EU), the combined carbon dioxide emissions amount to only 52 percent of the global total. In other words, we are still only half way to global net zero emissions even if China, the United States, and the EU were to get to zero tomorrow. Thus, as Pollin forcefully makes the point, there can be no exception to the application of the Green New Deal. He brings this point home by mentioning India, which, if it is excluded from a Green New Deal, and continues to rely on the burning of oil, coal, and natural gas for its economic growth, its carbon dioxide emissions would have increased by 5,5 billion tons under a baseline scenario of 3 percent annual growth through 2050. With this scenario at work, the global economy will be nowhere close to hitting the target of zero net emissions by 2050. 8. Degrowth as a strategy to combat climate change leads to a dead end. Pollin takes issue with the proponents of degrowth by arguing that it does not provide “a viable stabilization framework.” As with practically everything else around his Global Green New Deal project, he makes the case against degrowth on the basis of economic data and analysis – and actually basic arithmetic. He points out that global carbon emission need to drop from their current 33 billion tons, according to estimates in the IPCC report, to zero within thirty years. Assuming that under a degrowth strategy for the purpose of reducing carbon emissions global GDP shrinks by 10 percent over the next thirty years (a contraction four times larger than what we experienced during the global financial crisis of 2007-09), the effect on carbon dioxide emissions would be a reduction of 10 percent — in other words, from 33 to 30 billion tons. In the meantime, the global economy would have faced massive job losses on account of the contraction and huge declines in the standard of living for average working people and the poor. In sum, a growing global economy under the banner of a detailed Global Green New Deal project is the only viable way to combat climate emergency and to ensure a sustainable and more equitable economic future, argues Pollin ever so convincingly in his newly published co-authored book with Noam Chomsky. As far as this commentator is concerned, who may be somewhat biased on account of having conducted the interviews with Pollin and Chomsky included in Climate Crisis and the Global Green New Deal: The Political Economy to Save the Planet, the only question around Pollin’s Global Green New Deal project is how quickly can we get the international community to act on it before the die is cast.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.


truthout--2020-10-25--To Defeat Fascism, We Must Recognize It’s a Failed Response to Capitalist Crisis

Few would disagree in light of recent events that the Trump regime , its most diehard extreme-right , white supremacist supporters , and elements of the Republican Party are bidding for a fascist putsch .
Whether this putsch remains insurgent or is beaten back will depend on how events unfold in the November 3 election and its aftermath , and especially on the ability of left and progressive forces to mobilize to defend democracy and to push forward a social justice agenda as a counterweight to the fascist project .
This fight can benefit from analytical clarity as to what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , analysis that links the threat of fascism to capitalism and its crisis .
I have been writing about the rise of 21st-century fascist projects around the world since 2008 .
While such a project has been brewing in the United States since the early 21st century , it entered a qualitatively new stage with the rise of Trumpism in 2016 and appears to be fast-tracked now as the election draws near .
In the broader picture , fascism , whether in its 20th- or 21st-century variant , is a particular , far @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as that of the 1930s and the one that began with the financial meltdown of 2008 and has now been greatly intensified by the pandemic .
Trumpism in the United States ; Brexit in the United Kingdom ; the increasing influence of neo-fascist and authoritarian parties and movements throughout Europe ( including Poland , Germany , Hungary , Austria , Italy , the Netherlands , Denmark , France , Belgium and Greece ) , and around the world ( such as in Israel , Turkey , the Philippines , Brazil and India ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the crisis .
The telltale signs of the fascist threat in the United States are in plain sight .
Fascist movements expanded rapidly since the turn of the century in civil society and in the political system through the right wing of the Republican Party .
Trump proved to be a charismatic figure able to galvanize and embolden disparate neo-fascist forces , from white supremacists , white nationalists , militia , neo-Nazis and Klansmen , to the Oath Keepers , the Patriot Movement , Christian fundamentalists , and anti-immigrant vigilante groups .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ emerged , from the Proud Boys and QAnon to the Boogaloo movement ( whose explicit goal is to spark a civil war ) and the terrorist Michigan group known as Wolverine Watchmen .
They are heavily armed and mobilizing for confrontation in near-perfect consort with the extreme right wing of the Republican Party , which long since has captured that party and turned it into one of utter reaction .
Encouraged by Trump ’ s imperial bravado , his populist and nationalist rhetoric , and his openly racist discourse , predicated in part @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anti-Black sentiment , they began to cross-pollinate to a degree not seen in decades as they gained a toehold in the Trump White House and in state and local governments around the country .
Paramilitarism spread within many of these organizations and overlapped with state repressive agencies .
Racist , far right and fascist militia , identified by the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security as the most lethal domestic terrorist threat , operate inside law enforcement agencies .
As far back as 2006 , a government intelligence assessment had warned of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by organized groups and by self-initiated infiltration by law enforcement personnel sympathetic to white supremacist causes.
” The fascist insurgency reached a feverish pitch in the wake of the mass protests sparked by the police-perpetrated murder of George Floyd in May .
Among recent incidents too numerous to list , fascist militia members have routinely showed up heavily armed at anti-racist rallies to threaten protesters , and in several instances , have carried out assassinations .
Trump has refused to condemn the armed right-wing insurgency .
To the contrary , he defended a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” enthusiast who shot to death two unarmed protesters in Kenosha , Wisconsin , on August 25 .
On September 3 , federal marshals carried out an extra-judicial execution of Michael Reinoehl , who admitted to shooting a few days earlier a member of the white supremacist group Patriot Prayer during a confrontation between Trump supporters and counterprotesters in Portland , Oregon .
“ There has to be retribution , ” declared Trump in a chilling interview in which he seemed to take credit for what amounted to a death squad execution .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ domestic terrorist militia group , broken up on October 8 , to storm the Michigan state capitol to kidnap and possibly kill the Democratic governor of Michigan and other officials , a conspiracy that the White House refused to condemn .
While there are great differences between 20th- and 21st-century fascism and any parallels should not be exaggerated , we would do well to recall the 1923 “ beer hall putsch ” in Bavaria , Germany , which marked a turning point in the Nazis ’ rise to power .
In that incident @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of his followers hatched a plot to kidnap leaders of the Bavarian government .
Loyal government officials put down the putsch and jailed Hitler but the fascist insurgency expanded in its aftermath .
The fascist putsch now hinges on the November election .
The rule of law is breaking down .
Trump has claimed , without any credible evidence , that the vote will be fraudulent , has refused to commit to a peaceful transfer of power should he lose , and has all but called on his supporters to be prepared for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a racist and a fascist , Trump took advantage of the protests over the murder of George Floyd to bring the project to a new level , inciting from the White House itself the fascist mobilization in U.S. civil society , manipulating fear and a racist backlash with his “ law and order ” discourse , and threatening a qualitative escalation of the police state .
Widespread and systematic voter suppression , especially of those from marginalized communities , has already disenfranchised millions .
Donald Trump Jr. called in September for “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an army for Trump ’ s election security operation.
” The current crisis of global capitalism is both structural and political .
Politically , capitalist states face spiraling crises of legitimacy after decades of hardship and social decay wrought by neoliberalism , aggravated now by these states ’ inability to manage the health emergency and the economic collapse .
The level of global social polarization and inequality is unprecedented .
The richest 1 percent of humanity control more than half of the world ’ s wealth while the bottom 80 percent had to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this wealth .
Such extreme inequalities can only be sustained by extreme levels of state and private violence that lend themselves to fascist political projects .
Structurally , the global economy is mired in a crisis of overaccumulation , or chronic stagnation , made much worse by the pandemic .
As inequalities escalate , the system churns out more and more wealth that the mass of working people can not actually consume .
As a result , the global market can not absorb the output of the global economy .
The transnational capitalist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unload ” the trillions of dollars it has accumulated .
In recent years , it has turned to mind-boggling levels of financial speculation , to the raiding and sacking of public budgets , and to militarized accumulation or accumulation by repression .
This refers to how accumulation of capital comes increasingly to rely on transnational systems of social control , repression and warfare , as the global police state expands to defend the global war economy from rebellions from below .
Fascism seeks to rescue capitalism from this organic crisis ; that is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ establish new forms of state legitimacy and suppress threats from below unencumbered by democratic constraints .
The project involves a fusion of repressive and reactionary state power with a fascist mobilization in civil society .
Twenty-first-century fascism , like its 20th-century predecessor , is a violently toxic mix of reactionary nationalism and racism .
Its discursive and ideological repertoire involves extreme nationalism and the promise of national regeneration , xenophobia , doctrines of race/culture supremacy alongside a violent racist mobilization , martial masculinity , militarization of civic and political life , and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , social violence and domination .
As with its 20th-century predecessor , the 21st-century fascist project hinges on the psychosocial mechanism of dispersing mass fear and anxiety at a time of acute capitalist crisis toward scapegoated communities , whether Jews in Nazi Germany , immigrants in the United States , or Muslims and lower castes in India , and also on to an external enemy , such as communism during the Cold War , or China and Russia currently .
It seeks to organize a mass social base with the promise to restore @ @ @ @ @ @ @ capitalist crises .
Fascist organizers appeal to the same social base of those millions who have been devastated by neoliberal austerity , impoverishment , precarious employment and relegation to the ranks of surplus labor , all greatly aggravated by the pandemic .
As popular discontent has spread , far right and neo-fascist mobilization play a critical role in the effort by dominant groups to channel this discontent away from a critique of global capitalism and toward support for the transnational capitalist class agenda dressed in populist rhetoric .
The fascist appeal is directed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the global working class , such as white workers in the Global North and urban middle layers in the Global South , that are experiencing heightened insecurity and the specter of downward mobility and socioeconomic destabilization .
The flip side of targeting certain disaffected sectors is the violent control and suppression of other sectors — which , in the United States , come disproportionately from the ranks of surplus labor , communities that face racial and ethnic oppression , or religious and other forms of persecution .
The mechanisms of coercive exclusion include @ @ @ @ @ @ @ complexes ; anti-immigrant legislation and deportation regimes ; the manipulation of space in new ways so that both gated communities and ghettos are controlled by armies of private security guards and technologically advanced surveillance systems ; ubiquitous , often paramilitarized policing ; “ non-lethal ” crowd control methods ; and mobilization of the culture industries and state ideological apparatuses to dehumanize victims of global capitalism as dangerous , depraved and culturally degenerate .
Racism and Competing Interpretations of the Crisis We can not under-emphasize the role of racism for the fascist mobilization in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to deepen our analysis of it .
The U.S. political system and the dominant groups face a crisis of hegemony and legitimacy .
This has involved the breakdown of the white racist historic bloc that to one extent or another reigned supreme from the end of post-Civil War reconstruction to the late 20th century but has become destabilized through capitalist globalization .
The far right and neo-fascists are attempting to reconstruct such a bloc , in which “ national ” identity becomes “ white identity ” as a stand-in ( that is , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against perceived sources of anxiety and insecurity .
Yet many white members of the working class have been experiencing social and economic destabilization , downward mobility , heightened insecurity , an uncertain future and accelerated precariatization — that is , ever more precarious work and life conditions .
This sector has historically enjoyed the ethnic-racial privileges that come from white supremacy vis-à-vis other sectors of the working class , but it has been losing these privileges in the face of capitalist globalization .
The escalation of veiled and also openly racist discourse from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of this white working-class sector into a racist and a neo-fascist understanding of their condition .
Racism and the appeal to fascism offer workers from the dominant racial or ethnic group an imaginary solution to real contradictions ; recognition of the existence of suffering and oppression , even though its solution is a false one .
The parties and movements associated with such projects have put forth a racist discourse , less coded and less mediated than that of mainstream politicians , targeting the racially oppressed , ethnic or religious minorities , immigrants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Yet in this age of globalized capitalism , there is little possibility in the United States or elsewhere of providing such benefits , so that the “ wages of fascism ” now appear to be entirely psychological .
The ideology of 21st-century fascism rests on irrationality — a promise to deliver security and restore stability that is emotive , not rational .
It is a project that does not and need not distinguish between the truth and the lie .
The Trump regime ’ s public discourse of populism and nationalism , for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actual policies .
Trumponomics involves a sweeping deregulation of capital , slashing social spending , dismantling what remains of the welfare state , privatization , tax breaks to corporations and the rich , anti-worker laws , and an expansion of state subsidies to capital — in short , radical neoliberalism .
Trump ’ s populism has no policy substance .
It is almost entirely symbolic — hence the significance of his fanatical “ build the wall ” and similar rhetoric , symbolically essential to sustain a social base for which the state can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This also helps to explain the increasing desperation in Trump ’ s bravado as the election approaches .
But here is the clincher : Deteriorating socioeconomic conditions and rising insecurity do not automatically lead to racist or fascist backlash .
A racist/fascist interpretation of these conditions must be mediated by political agents and state agencies .
Trumpism represents just such a mediation .
To beat back the threat of fascism , popular resistance forces must put forward an alternative interpretation of the crisis , involving a social justice agenda founded on a working-class @ @ @ @ @ @ @ social base of fascism .
This would-be base is made up of a majority of workers who are experiencing the same deleterious effects of global capitalism in crisis as the entire working class .
We need a social justice and working-class agenda to respond to its increasingly immiserated condition , lest we leave it susceptible to a far right populist manipulation of this condition .
Joe Biden may well win the election .
Yet even if he does so and manages to take office , the crisis of global capitalism and the fascist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A united front against fascism must be based on a social justice agenda that targets capitalism and its crisis .

Few would disagree in light of recent events that the Trump regime, its most diehard extreme-right, white supremacist supporters, and elements of the Republican Party are bidding for a fascist putsch. Whether this putsch remains insurgent or is beaten back will depend on how events unfold in the November 3 election and its aftermath, and especially on the ability of left and progressive forces to mobilize to defend democracy and to push forward a social justice agenda as a counterweight to the fascist project.
This fight can benefit from analytical clarity as to what we are up against — in particular, analysis that links the threat of fascism to capitalism and its crisis. I have been writing about the rise of 21st-century fascist projects around the world since 2008. While such a project has been brewing in the United States since the early 21st century, it entered a qualitatively new stage with the rise of Trumpism in 2016 and appears to be fast-tracked now as the election draws near.
In the broader picture, fascism, whether in its 20th- or 21st-century variant, is a particular, far right response to capitalist crisis, such as that of the 1930s and the one that began with the financial meltdown of 2008 and has now been greatly intensified by the pandemic. Trumpism in the United States; Brexit in the United Kingdom; the increasing influence of neo-fascist and authoritarian parties and movements throughout Europe (including Poland, Germany, Hungary, Austria, Italy, the Netherlands, Denmark, France, Belgium and Greece), and around the world (such as in Israel, Turkey, the Philippines, Brazil and India), represent just such a far-right response to the crisis.
Trumpism and Fascism
The telltale signs of the fascist threat in the United States are in plain sight. Fascist movements expanded rapidly since the turn of the century in civil society and in the political system through the right wing of the Republican Party. Trump proved to be a charismatic figure able to galvanize and embolden disparate neo-fascist forces, from white supremacists, white nationalists, militia, neo-Nazis and Klansmen, to the Oath Keepers, the Patriot Movement, Christian fundamentalists, and anti-immigrant vigilante groups. Since 2016, numerous other groups have emerged, from the Proud Boys and QAnon to the Boogaloo movement (whose explicit goal is to spark a civil war) and the terrorist Michigan group known as Wolverine Watchmen. They are heavily armed and mobilizing for confrontation in near-perfect consort with the extreme right wing of the Republican Party, which long since has captured that party and turned it into one of utter reaction.
Encouraged by Trump’s imperial bravado, his populist and nationalist rhetoric, and his openly racist discourse, predicated in part on whipping up anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim and anti-Black sentiment, they began to cross-pollinate to a degree not seen in decades as they gained a toehold in the Trump White House and in state and local governments around the country. Paramilitarism spread within many of these organizations and overlapped with state repressive agencies. Racist, far right and fascist militia, identified by the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security as the most lethal domestic terrorist threat, operate inside law enforcement agencies. As far back as 2006, a government intelligence assessment had warned of “white supremacist infiltration of law enforcement by organized groups and by self-initiated infiltration by law enforcement personnel sympathetic to white supremacist causes.”
Fascism seeks to violently restore capital accumulation, establish new forms of state legitimacy and suppress threats from below unencumbered by democratic constraints.
The fascist insurgency reached a feverish pitch in the wake of the mass protests sparked by the police-perpetrated murder of George Floyd in May. Among recent incidents too numerous to list, fascist militia members have routinely showed up heavily armed at anti-racist rallies to threaten protesters, and in several instances, have carried out assassinations. Trump has refused to condemn the armed right-wing insurgency. To the contrary, he defended a self-described vigilante and “Blue Lives Matter” enthusiast who shot to death two unarmed protesters in Kenosha, Wisconsin, on August 25. On September 3, federal marshals carried out an extra-judicial execution of Michael Reinoehl, who admitted to shooting a few days earlier a member of the white supremacist group Patriot Prayer during a confrontation between Trump supporters and counterprotesters in Portland, Oregon. “There has to be retribution,” declared Trump in a chilling interview in which he seemed to take credit for what amounted to a death squad execution.
Particularly ominous was the plot by a domestic terrorist militia group, broken up on October 8, to storm the Michigan state capitol to kidnap and possibly kill the Democratic governor of Michigan and other officials, a conspiracy that the White House refused to condemn. While there are great differences between 20th- and 21st-century fascism and any parallels should not be exaggerated, we would do well to recall the 1923 “beer hall putsch” in Bavaria, Germany, which marked a turning point in the Nazis’ rise to power. In that incident, Hitler and a heavily armed group of his followers hatched a plot to kidnap leaders of the Bavarian government. Loyal government officials put down the putsch and jailed Hitler but the fascist insurgency expanded in its aftermath.
The fascist putsch now hinges on the November election. The rule of law is breaking down. Trump has claimed, without any credible evidence, that the vote will be fraudulent, has refused to commit to a peaceful transfer of power should he lose, and has all but called on his supporters to be prepared for an insurrection. Himself a transnational capitalist, a racist and a fascist, Trump took advantage of the protests over the murder of George Floyd to bring the project to a new level, inciting from the White House itself the fascist mobilization in U.S. civil society, manipulating fear and a racist backlash with his “law and order” discourse, and threatening a qualitative escalation of the police state. Widespread and systematic voter suppression, especially of those from marginalized communities, has already disenfranchised millions. Donald Trump Jr. called in September for “every able-bodied man and woman to join an army for Trump’s election security operation.”
Morphology of the Fascist Project
The escalation of veiled and also openly racist discourse from above is aimed at ushering the members of this white working-class sector into a racist and a neo-fascist understanding of their condition.
The current crisis of global capitalism is both structural and political. Politically, capitalist states face spiraling crises of legitimacy after decades of hardship and social decay wrought by neoliberalism, aggravated now by these states’ inability to manage the health emergency and the economic collapse. The level of global social polarization and inequality is unprecedented. The richest 1 percent of humanity control more than half of the world’s wealth while the bottom 80 percent had to make do with just 5 percent of this wealth. Such extreme inequalities can only be sustained by extreme levels of state and private violence that lend themselves to fascist political projects.
Structurally, the global economy is mired in a crisis of overaccumulation, or chronic stagnation, made much worse by the pandemic. As inequalities escalate, the system churns out more and more wealth that the mass of working people cannot actually consume. As a result, the global market cannot absorb the output of the global economy. The transnational capitalist class cannot find outlets to “unload” the trillions of dollars it has accumulated. In recent years, it has turned to mind-boggling levels of financial speculation, to the raiding and sacking of public budgets, and to militarized accumulation or accumulation by repression. This refers to how accumulation of capital comes increasingly to rely on transnational systems of social control, repression and warfare, as the global police state expands to defend the global war economy from rebellions from below.
Fascism seeks to rescue capitalism from this organic crisis; that is, to violently restore capital accumulation, establish new forms of state legitimacy and suppress threats from below unencumbered by democratic constraints. The project involves a fusion of repressive and reactionary state power with a fascist mobilization in civil society. Twenty-first-century fascism, like its 20th-century predecessor, is a violently toxic mix of reactionary nationalism and racism. Its discursive and ideological repertoire involves extreme nationalism and the promise of national regeneration, xenophobia, doctrines of race/culture supremacy alongside a violent racist mobilization, martial masculinity, militarization of civic and political life, and the normalization — even glorification — of war, social violence and domination.
As with its 20th-century predecessor, the 21st-century fascist project hinges on the psychosocial mechanism of dispersing mass fear and anxiety at a time of acute capitalist crisis toward scapegoated communities, whether Jews in Nazi Germany, immigrants in the United States, or Muslims and lower castes in India, and also on to an external enemy, such as communism during the Cold War, or China and Russia currently. It seeks to organize a mass social base with the promise to restore stability and security to those destabilized by capitalist crises. Fascist organizers appeal to the same social base of those millions who have been devastated by neoliberal austerity, impoverishment, precarious employment and relegation to the ranks of surplus labor, all greatly aggravated by the pandemic. As popular discontent has spread, far right and neo-fascist mobilization play a critical role in the effort by dominant groups to channel this discontent away from a critique of global capitalism and toward support for the transnational capitalist class agenda dressed in populist rhetoric.
The ideology of 21st-century fascism rests on irrationality — a promise to deliver security and restore stability that is emotive, not rational. It is a project that does not distinguish between the truth and the lie.
The fascist appeal is directed in particular to historically privileged sectors of the global working class, such as white workers in the Global North and urban middle layers in the Global South, that are experiencing heightened insecurity and the specter of downward mobility and socioeconomic destabilization. The flip side of targeting certain disaffected sectors is the violent control and suppression of other sectors — which, in the United States, come disproportionately from the ranks of surplus labor, communities that face racial and ethnic oppression, or religious and other forms of persecution.
The mechanisms of coercive exclusion include mass incarceration and the spread of prison-industrial complexes; anti-immigrant legislation and deportation regimes; the manipulation of space in new ways so that both gated communities and ghettos are controlled by armies of private security guards and technologically advanced surveillance systems; ubiquitous, often paramilitarized policing; “non-lethal” crowd control methods; and mobilization of the culture industries and state ideological apparatuses to dehumanize victims of global capitalism as dangerous, depraved and culturally degenerate.
Racism and Competing Interpretations of the Crisis
We cannot under-emphasize the role of racism for the fascist mobilization in the United States. But we need to deepen our analysis of it. The U.S. political system and the dominant groups face a crisis of hegemony and legitimacy. This has involved the breakdown of the white racist historic bloc that to one extent or another reigned supreme from the end of post-Civil War reconstruction to the late 20th century but has become destabilized through capitalist globalization. The far right and neo-fascists are attempting to reconstruct such a bloc, in which “national” identity becomes “white identity” as a stand-in (that is, a code) for a racist mobilization against perceived sources of anxiety and insecurity.
Yet many white members of the working class have been experiencing social and economic destabilization, downward mobility, heightened insecurity, an uncertain future and accelerated precariatization — that is, ever more precarious work and life conditions. This sector has historically enjoyed the ethnic-racial privileges that come from white supremacy vis-à-vis other sectors of the working class, but it has been losing these privileges in the face of capitalist globalization. The escalation of veiled and also openly racist discourse from above is aimed at ushering the members of this white working-class sector into a racist and a neo-fascist understanding of their condition.
To beat back the threat of fascism, popular resistance forces must put forward an alternative interpretation of the crisis, involving a social justice agenda founded on a working-class politics.
Racism and the appeal to fascism offer workers from the dominant racial or ethnic group an imaginary solution to real contradictions; recognition of the existence of suffering and oppression, even though its solution is a false one. The parties and movements associated with such projects have put forth a racist discourse, less coded and less mediated than that of mainstream politicians, targeting the racially oppressed, ethnic or religious minorities, immigrants and refugees in particular as scapegoats. Yet in this age of globalized capitalism, there is little possibility in the United States or elsewhere of providing such benefits, so that the “wages of fascism” now appear to be entirely psychological. The ideology of 21st-century fascism rests on irrationality — a promise to deliver security and restore stability that is emotive, not rational. It is a project that does not and need not distinguish between the truth and the lie.
The Trump regime’s public discourse of populism and nationalism, for example, bears no relation to its actual policies. Trumponomics involves a sweeping deregulation of capital, slashing social spending, dismantling what remains of the welfare state, privatization, tax breaks to corporations and the rich, anti-worker laws, and an expansion of state subsidies to capital — in short, radical neoliberalism. Trump’s populism has no policy substance. It is almost entirely symbolic — hence the significance of his fanatical “build the wall” and similar rhetoric, symbolically essential to sustain a social base for which the state can provide little or no material bribe. This also helps to explain the increasing desperation in Trump’s bravado as the election approaches.
But here is the clincher: Deteriorating socioeconomic conditions and rising insecurity do not automatically lead to racist or fascist backlash. A racist/fascist interpretation of these conditions must be mediated by political agents and state agencies. Trumpism represents just such a mediation.
To beat back the threat of fascism, popular resistance forces must put forward an alternative interpretation of the crisis, involving a social justice agenda founded on a working-class politics that can win over the would-be social base of fascism. This would-be base is made up of a majority of workers who are experiencing the same deleterious effects of global capitalism in crisis as the entire working class. We need a social justice and working-class agenda to respond to its increasingly immiserated condition, lest we leave it susceptible to a far right populist manipulation of this condition. Joe Biden may well win the election. Yet even if he does so and manages to take office, the crisis of global capitalism and the fascist project it is stoking will continue. A united front against fascism must be based on a social justice agenda that targets capitalism and its crisis.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-10-25--You Cannot Decarcerate by Using the Tools of Incarceration, Says Mumia Abu-Jamal

The somber baritone of Mumia Abu-Jamal is unmistakable .
Before we can exchange greetings , one of several automated announcements interrupts the call , reminding us that our conversation will be subject to recording and monitoring .
Abu-Jamal is phoning from State Correctional Institution Mahanoy , a medium-security prison in Pennsylvania .
Convicted in 1982 for the alleged killing of white Philadelphia Police Officer Daniel Faulkner in a racially charged trial that , according to Amnesty International , failed to meet international standards , Abu-Jamal ’ s death sentence was commuted to life imprisonment in 2011 .
In April 2019 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appeal his life sentence was opened by reform-leaning Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner , who withdrew his initial opposition for a new appeal to go forward in the courts .
Yet , 64-year-old Abu-Jamal remains skeptical when it comes to criminal legal reform in the United States .
Despite calls to defund the police and a string of electoral victories for more progressive prosecutors like Krasner , the current administration is actively rolling back reforms .
Most notably , Donald Trump has lifted the 17-year moratorium on federal executions and reinstated Department of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Abu-Jamal , with whom I spoke about abolition , the history of slavery and racialized state violence in the United States , this fraught political moment requires an entirely different mindset that allows us to think about decarceration in new ways .
Maresi Starzmann : Donald Trump claims to have instituted prison reforms , because he introduced the First Step Act , a bipartisan federal sentencing and reform bill , and granted clemency to several select , high-profile or celebrity prisoners .
What do you make of this ?
Mumia Abu-Jamal : Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ understand the meaning , much less the function of the word “ empathy.
” One can not seek to help the people who are caged in this carceral state without empathy .
Trump really has no substantive prison reform programs at all .
But he takes a thimble and makes a bucket out of it .
I ’ ve heard him in debates talking about prison reform , but that ’ s not really what he supports .
It is a political tool meant to pry people away from other candidates in support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ true that some people have gotten out on the First Step program , Trump has also supported the reinstitution of some of the most repressive institutions in the carceral state — private prisons .
This takes us far back to post-Civil War traditions in American life when the state sublet its function to private corporate entities and Black people were forced into slavery by another name .
Can you explain this term , “ slavery by another name ” ?
I refer to the post-Civil War era of the 1870s and the period @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of what can only be called a fascist state — openly at first in the Southern half of the United States , then suddenly and quietly in the rest of the country .
Against Black life , Black freedom , Black liberty and ostensibly Reconstruction .
The people , who were formerly enslaved , were now submitted to Black Codes — laws that only applied to Black people .
It was a form of legalized bondage of African Americans under the power of the state .
This continued throughout the beginning of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by pogroms and race riots in major American cities against Blacks .
At the time , white workers were mobilized , both north and south , because Black people were considered threats to their jobs .
It was absurd and it was patently unconstitutional .
Can we still see remnants of this today ?
Many Americans think that the 13th , 14th and 15th Amendments were introduced to grant freedom and equal rights to Black people .
In fact , however , they did nothing of that kind .
We are living in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by forces and agents of the state , like the police , with very little control or comeback .
This is the kind of unspoken , unwritten impunity that targets Black people in the North , in the South , in the East , in the West , in their homes , in their cars , on the streets , at the job , anywhere… .
Black people speak openly about driving while Black , walking while Black and breathing while Black .
Could you talk more about the historical roots of this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American policing , and what this means for the present political moment ?
American policing really differs from the police systems that emerged in European states .
There is no co-referent to these systems , they are distinct .
Most people lazily believe that American policing emerged as an offspring of Scotland Yard in London .
Nothing could be further from the truth .
The American police system emerged from the slave system and from a perpetual war against the freedom , movement and liberation of Black people from the land of their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , humiliate and often destroy Black people as a message to other Black people , who dared to run away from slavery .
Forces known as the Ku Klux Klan , the Knights of the White Camelia , and similar organizations performed a super-policing of Black people through terrorism .
This was fascism in every sense .
Fascism is not [ only ] an Italian or even a German thing ; in many ways , it ’ s an American thing .
And we saw what that means when we looked at that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for his life and calling for his mother .
The cop kneeling on his neck could not be more nonchalant , more comfortable , more arrogant , because he is doing his job .
And yet , we also see reform movements in the criminal legal system , like the election of progressive prosecutors , many of whom are Black women who ran on platforms to reduce racial disparities in prosecution .
Isn ’ t that a positive development ?
Reform movements are playing around the edges of the problem .
It is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mend this broken system , because , in the end , they are still prosecutors .
Their job is to put people in prison .
And why are we not talking about changing judges or legislators , who are also engines in this system ?
Or the media ?
The media play a remarkable role in driving mass incarceration in America .
When people work their way out of the system after 20 , 25 , 30 or 35 years , it is the media making money by selling stories about the prisoners @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the scope of the problem — the fact that millions of people are incarcerated and that the prison system has become a generational employer for the white rural working class — then you see the kind of economic and political impediment to the abolition of this system .
We will never heal the social wound of mass incarceration by changing the prosecutors .
Reforms allow us to ignore the structural element that has created mass incarceration .
You can not decarcerate by using the tools of incarceration , because they have a specific @ @ @ @ @ @ @ different mindset .
I prefer the term adopted by Dr. Angela Y. Davis : abolition .
We must move for what we want , not for what we think the system can produce , because the system is the problem , not the solution to the problem .
Given your own experiences with the system , do you at all believe that deep , systemic change is possible ?
I obviously think all things are possible .
The question is , is it probable ?
That ’ s an open political question , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the land that claims to be the land of the free .
This is also the land of the incarcerated .
There is a reason we speak of “ prison nation , ” because the numbers in the millions are an American phenomenon .
And mass incarceration is a direct response to freedom movements in the United States .
Change is contested .
But where there is struggle , there is progress .
That ’ s the lesson of Frederick Douglass , and we do well to listen to the original abolitionists to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for this moment .
It is relentless , continuous struggle wherever it ’ s possible — and sometimes even in places where one may think it to be impossible .
Note : This interview has been lightly edited for clarity .
A German translation of this interview was published on October 2 by the German daily , Neues Deutschland .
The views expressed are the author ’ s own and not necessarily those of the Vera Institute of Justice .

“We must move for what we want, not for what we think the system can produce, because the system is the problem.”
Part of the Series The Road to Abolition
The somber baritone of Mumia Abu-Jamal is unmistakable. Before we can exchange greetings, one of several automated announcements interrupts the call, reminding us that our conversation will be subject to recording and monitoring. Abu-Jamal is phoning from State Correctional Institution Mahanoy, a medium-security prison in Pennsylvania. Convicted in 1982 for the alleged killing of white Philadelphia Police Officer Daniel Faulkner in a racially charged trial that, according to Amnesty International, failed to meet international standards, Abu-Jamal’s death sentence was commuted to life imprisonment in 2011. In April 2019, a new path for Abu-Jamal to appeal his life sentence was opened by reform-leaning Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner, who withdrew his initial opposition for a new appeal to go forward in the courts. Yet, 64-year-old Abu-Jamal remains skeptical when it comes to criminal legal reform in the United States. Despite calls to defund the police and a string of electoral victories for more progressive prosecutors like Krasner, the current administration is actively rolling back reforms. Most notably, Donald Trump has lifted the 17-year moratorium on federal executions and reinstated Department of Justice contracts with private prisons. For Abu-Jamal, with whom I spoke about abolition, the history of slavery and racialized state violence in the United States, this fraught political moment requires an entirely different mindset that allows us to think about decarceration in new ways.
Maresi Starzmann: Donald Trump claims to have instituted prison reforms, because he introduced the First Step Act, a bipartisan federal sentencing and reform bill, and granted clemency to several select, high-profile or celebrity prisoners. What do you make of this?
Mumia Abu-Jamal: Trump is a wolf. He does not understand the meaning, much less the function of the word “empathy.” One cannot seek to help the people who are caged in this carceral state without empathy. Trump really has no substantive prison reform programs at all. But he takes a thimble and makes a bucket out of it. I’ve heard him in debates talking about prison reform, but that’s not really what he supports. It is a political tool meant to pry people away from other candidates in support of his reelection. While it is true that some people have gotten out on the First Step program, Trump has also supported the reinstitution of some of the most repressive institutions in the carceral state — private prisons. This takes us far back to post-Civil War traditions in American life when the state sublet its function to private corporate entities and Black people were forced into slavery by another name.
Can you explain this term, “slavery by another name”?
I refer to the post-Civil War era of the 1870s and the period after Reconstruction that resulted in the eruption of what can only be called a fascist state — openly at first in the Southern half of the United States, then suddenly and quietly in the rest of the country. Against Black life, Black freedom, Black liberty and ostensibly Reconstruction. The people, who were formerly enslaved, were now submitted to Black Codes — laws that only applied to Black people. It was a form of legalized bondage of African Americans under the power of the state. This continued throughout the beginning of the 20th century, which was itself marked by pogroms and race riots in major American cities against Blacks. At the time, white workers were mobilized, both north and south, because Black people were considered threats to their jobs. It was absurd and it was patently unconstitutional.
Can we still see remnants of this today?
We will never heal the social wound of mass incarceration by changing the prosecutors.
Many Americans think that the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments were introduced to grant freedom and equal rights to Black people. In fact, however, they did nothing of that kind. We are living in a period where Black people are attacked by forces and agents of the state, like the police, with very little control or comeback. This is the kind of unspoken, unwritten impunity that targets Black people in the North, in the South, in the East, in the West, in their homes, in their cars, on the streets, at the job, anywhere…. Black people speak openly about driving while Black, walking while Black and breathing while Black.
Could you talk more about the historical roots of this system, in particular with regards to American policing, and what this means for the present political moment?
American policing really differs from the police systems that emerged in European states. There is no co-referent to these systems, they are distinct. Most people lazily believe that American policing emerged as an offspring of Scotland Yard in London. Nothing could be further from the truth. The American police system emerged from the slave system and from a perpetual war against the freedom, movement and liberation of Black people from the land of their oppressors. It was designed to terrorize, humiliate and often destroy Black people as a message to other Black people, who dared to run away from slavery. Forces known as the Ku Klux Klan, the Knights of the White Camelia, and similar organizations performed a super-policing of Black people through terrorism. This was fascism in every sense. Fascism is not [only] an Italian or even a German thing; in many ways, it’s an American thing. And we saw what that means when we looked at that video of George Floyd dying, begging for his life and calling for his mother. The cop kneeling on his neck could not be more nonchalant, more comfortable, more arrogant, because he is doing his job.
And yet, we also see reform movements in the criminal legal system, like the election of progressive prosecutors, many of whom are Black women who ran on platforms to reduce racial disparities in prosecution. Isn’t that a positive development?
We must move for what we want, not for what we think the system can produce, because the system is the problem, not the solution to the problem.
Reform movements are playing around the edges of the problem. It is interesting that people think progressive prosecutors could mend this broken system, because, in the end, they are still prosecutors. Their job is to put people in prison. And why are we not talking about changing judges or legislators, who are also engines in this system? Or the media? The media play a remarkable role in driving mass incarceration in America. When people work their way out of the system after 20, 25, 30 or 35 years, it is the media making money by selling stories about the prisoners’ redemption. When you look at the scope of the problem — the fact that millions of people are incarcerated and that the prison system has become a generational employer for the white rural working class — then you see the kind of economic and political impediment to the abolition of this system. We will never heal the social wound of mass incarceration by changing the prosecutors.
Can you elaborate?
Reforms allow us to ignore the structural element that has created mass incarceration. You cannot decarcerate by using the tools of incarceration, because they have a specific function. Decarceration calls for a completely different mindset. I prefer the term adopted by Dr. Angela Y. Davis: abolition. We must move for what we want, not for what we think the system can produce, because the system is the problem, not the solution to the problem.
Given your own experiences with the system, do you at all believe that deep, systemic change is possible?
I obviously think all things are possible. The question is, is it probable? That’s an open political question, because freedom has always been contested in the land that claims to be the land of the free. This is also the land of the incarcerated. There is a reason we speak of “prison nation,” because the numbers in the millions are an American phenomenon. And mass incarceration is a direct response to freedom movements in the United States. Change is contested. But where there is struggle, there is progress. That’s the lesson of Frederick Douglass, and we do well to listen to the original abolitionists to get a sense of what is necessary for this moment. It is relentless, continuous struggle wherever it’s possible — and sometimes even in places where one may think it to be impossible.
Note: This interview has been lightly edited for clarity. A German translation of this interview was published on October 2 by the German daily, Neues Deutschland. The views expressed are the author’s own and not necessarily those of the Vera Institute of Justice.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.