And this is the important thing. Of course, one could naively think that this would be the most important issue for organized labour or the labour movement. Yet labour movements look out for their national workforces, not the way ideologically they say they would in old slogans (All workers unites and stuff...). Foreign workforces are the competitors who steal jobs!And so labor, which had become very effective and powerful in the UK and the US was left with nothing. — frank
On the contrary, it's the crucial building block here just why things are the way they are. Neoliberals praise free markets and free trade in the West while countries like China eagerly exploit the openings, but in no way endorse neoliberalism. And even if you look at various other South Asian "tigers" that endorse free market capitalism like South Korea or Taiwan, you can find them also having long term planned industrialization programs that basically started to bear fruit in the 1980's and onward. Not so as the preachers of free markets often declare just to let the "invisible hand" to invest where markets want.The Chinese and Vietnamese rejected neoliberalism. So the example makes little sense. — Xtrix
And here you again with one narrative from the US, which put one memo from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce from 1971 as the pinnacle thing here, which is eagerly promoted by leftist thinkers who want to have culprits to accuse. (Just looking at the actual memo just shows how things were viewed in the 1970s)The push came out of the corporate sector, who rallied together in the 70s very openly. The Powell memo is partly the catalyst. — Xtrix
Democracy has this often resented feature that political movements do sometimes get their objectives and accepted by all sides. Hence if you refer to wealth transfers and social welfare nets being socialist, then both parties in the US (or parties in Canada) are all socialists. That hardly is the case. Yet when you look at how the UK, Finland or your country Canada actually spends the tax income (or the new debt), a lot of it goes into wealth transfers with systems similar to those implemented by Roosevelt and Truman in the US.He was equating a massive transfer of wealth and power with “every advance the people have made in the last 20 years”. As is common, he confuses the state’s aggrandizement with that of their subjects. Insofar as socialism routinely pretends that state ownership is social ownership, his critics are not far off the mark. — NOS4A2
Easy to dissolve everything in the acid bath of cynicism. There’s a few specialists of that around. — Wayfarer
1. The United States and China recall their Joint Statement Addressing the Climate Crisis of April 17th, 2021. They are committed to its effective implementation and appreciate the intensive work that has taken place to date and the value of continued discussion.
2. The United States and China, alarmed by reports including the Working Group I Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report released on August 9th, 2021, further recognize the seriousness and urgency of the climate crisis. They are committed to tackling it through their respective accelerated actions in the critical decade of the 2020s, as well as through cooperation in multilateral processes, including the UNFCCC process, to avoid catastrophic impacts.
3. The United States and China recall their firm commitment to work together and with other Parties to strengthen implementation of the Paris Agreement. The two sides also recall the Agreement’s aim in accordance with Article 2 to hold the global average temperature increase to well below 2 degrees C and to pursue efforts to limit it to 1.5 degrees C. In that regard, they are committed to pursuing such efforts, including by taking enhanced climate actions that raise ambition in the 2020s in the context of the Paris Agreement, with the aim of keeping the above temperature limit within reach and cooperating to identify and address related challenges and opportunities.
4. Moving forward, the United States and China welcome the significant efforts being made around the world to address the climate crisis. They nevertheless recognize that there remains a significant gap between such efforts, including their aggregate effect, and those that need to be taken to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement. The two sides stress the vital importance of closing that gap as soon as possible, particularly through stepped-up efforts. They declare their intention to work individually, jointly, and with other countries during this decisive decade, in accordance with different national circumstances, to strengthen and accelerate climate action and cooperation aimed at closing the gap, including accelerating the green and low-carbon transition and climate technology innovation.
5. The two sides are intent on seizing this critical moment to engage in expanded individual and combined efforts to accelerate the transition to a global net zero economy.
6. The two sides recall their intention to continue discussing, both on the road to COP 26 and beyond, concrete actions in the 2020s to reduce emissions aimed at keeping the Paris Agreement-aligned temperature limit within reach. With that clear purpose, and anticipating that particular forms of cooperation will have the effect of significantly accelerating emission reductions and limitations, including in the form of specific goals, targets, policies, and measures, the two sides intend to engage in the actions and cooperative activities set forth below.
7. The two sides intend to cooperate on:
regulatory frameworks and environmental standards related to reducing emissions of greenhouse gases in the 2020s; maximizing the societal benefits of the clean energy transition;
policies to encourage decarbonization and electrification of end-use sectors; key areas related to the circular economy, such as green design and renewable resource utilization; and
deployment and application of technology such as CCUS and direct air capture.
8. Recognizing specifically the significant role that emissions of methane play in increasing temperatures, both countries consider increased action to control and reduce such emissions to be a matter of necessity in the 2020s. To this end:
The two countries intend to cooperate to enhance the measurement of methane emissions; to exchange information on their respective policies and programs for strengthening management and control of methane; and to foster joint research into methane emission reduction challenges and solutions.
The United States has announced the U.S. Methane Emissions Reduction Action Plan.
Taking into account the above cooperation, as appropriate, the two sides intend to do the following before COP 27:
They intend to develop additional measures to enhance methane emission control, at both the national and sub-national levels.
In addition to its recently communicated NDC, China intends to develop a comprehensive and ambitious National Action Plan on methane, aiming to achieve a significant effect on methane emissions control and reductions in the 2020s.
The United States and China intend to convene a meeting in the first half of 2022 to focus on the specifics of enhancing measurement and mitigation of methane, including through standards to reduce methane from the fossil and waste sectors, as well as incentives and programs to reduce methane from the agricultural sector.
9. In order to reduce CO2 emissions:
The two countries intend to cooperate on:
Policies that support the effective integration of high shares of low-cost intermittent renewable energy;
Transmission policies that encourage efficient balancing of electricity supply and demand across broad geographies;
Distributed generation policies that encourage integration of solar, storage, and other clean power solutions closer to electricity users; and
Energy efficiency policies and standards to reduce electricity waste.
B. The United States has set a goal to reach 100% carbon pollution-free electricity by 2035.
C. China will phase down coal consumption during the 15th Five Year Plan and make best efforts to accelerate this work.
Recognizing that eliminating global illegal deforestation would contribute meaningfully to the effort to reach the Paris goals, the two countries welcome the Glasgow Leaders’ Declaration on Forests and Land Use. The two sides intend to engage collaboratively in support of eliminating global illegal deforestation through effectively enforcing their respective laws on banning illegal imports.
The two sides recall their respective commitments regarding the elimination of support for unabated international thermal coal power generation.
With respect to COP 26, both countries support an ambitious, balanced, and inclusive outcome on mitigation, adaptation, and support. It must send a clear signal that the Parties to the Paris Agreement:
Are committed to tackling the climate crisis by strengthening implementation of the Paris Agreement, reflecting common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, in the light of different national circumstances;
Recall the Paris Agreement’s aim to hold the global average temperature increase to well below 2 degrees C and pursue efforts to limit it to 1.5 degrees C and are committed to pursuing such efforts, including by taking ambitious action during this critical decade to keep the above temperature limit within reach, including as necessary communicating or updating 2030 NDCs and long-term strategies;
Recognize the significance of adaptation in addressing the climate crisis, including further discussion on the global goal on adaptation and promoting its effective implementation, as well as the scaling up of financial and capacity-building support for adaptation in developing countries; and Resolve to ensure that their collective and individual efforts are informed by, inter alia, the best available science.
Both countries recognize the importance of the commitment made by developed countries to the goal of mobilizing jointly $100b per year by 2020 and annually through 2025 to address the needs of developing countries, in the context of meaningful mitigation actions and transparency on implementation, and stress the importance of meeting that goal as soon as possible.
Both countries will work cooperatively to complete at COP 26 the implementing arrangements (“rulebook”) for Articles 6 and 13 of the Paris Agreement, as well as common time frames for NDCs.
Both countries intend to communicate 2035 NDCs in 2025.
The two sides intend to establish a “Working Group on Enhancing Climate Action in the 2020s,” which will meet regularly to address the climate crisis and advance the multilateral process, focusing on enhancing concrete actions in this decade. This may include, inter alia, continued policy and technical exchanges, identification of programs and projects in areas of mutual interest, meetings of governmental and non-governmental experts, facilitating participation by local governments, enterprises, think tanks, academics, and other experts, exchanging updates on their respective national efforts, considering the need for additional efforts, and reviewing the implementation of the Joint Statement and this Joint Declaration.
You don't need a global government, just few simple agreements between independent governments with ways to punish those that brake the agreement. Start from things like universal safety standards, work hours etc.Yes. I was wondering if there is some way past that, but I think it would require a global government to ironically limit the ill effects of globalization. — frank
And have to make the criticism that the political left has abandoned this classical support group and hence many in the working class have been lured by right-wing populism in many countries. — ssu
The Chinese and Vietnamese rejected neoliberalism. So the example makes little sense.
— Xtrix
On the contrary, it's the crucial building block here just why things are the way they are. — ssu
Neoliberals praise free markets and free trade in the West while countries like China eagerly exploit the openings, but in no way endorse neoliberalism. — ssu
And here you again with one narrative from the US, which put one memo from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce from 1971 as the pinnacle thing here, which is eagerly promoted by leftist thinkers who want to have culprits to accuse. (Just looking at the actual memo just shows how things were viewed in the 1970s) — ssu
The US centric view simply doesn't explain the globalization and the present "neoliberalism" of today. — ssu
Those idealists really thought at the start of the 20th Century that "all workers would unite", but then happened WW1 and the workers happily rallied to their flags killed each other. — ssu
Confusing the absence of 'international solidarity' for the power games of states is equally stupid but sure. — StreetlightX
The left didn't abandon the organizations, but organized trade unions have not succeed in the US. The working class or people who think of them as being part of the working class do exist. That they haven't found a voice in the left is the problem. Usually the left has very crappy ideas how to fix problems.But it seems to me that leftists didn't abandon labor, both labor and the left were just beaten into the ground by the 1980s and 90s.
Obliterated. — frank
And that was after WW1. Perhaps something like the Soviet revolution had an effect on socialist ideas, you know. Otherwise, please inform yourself of the actual history before accusing others of making things up:I wonder if you get off on just making things up for fun or if you genuinely are completely ignorant of the fact that the interwar period was a literal golden age of worker power the likes of which have never been seen since. — StreetlightX
During the early twentieth century, the Second International, composed primarily of European socialist and labor organizations that sometimes included U.S. representatives, often declared its opposition to bourgeois and imperialist wars and discussed tactics for opposing such wars. Yet proposals for a general strike in the event of the outbreak of war were voted down and constituent groups failed to agree upon any other concrete plans of action to stop war. Following the cascading series of events that led European powers to declare war against each other in August 1914, labor and socialist organizations in belligerent countries found themselves in a conundrum. They opposed the war in principle, but had no unified plan for ending it.
And that was after WW1 — ssu
Democracy has this often resented feature that political movements do sometimes get their objectives and accepted by all sides. Hence if you refer to wealth transfers and social welfare nets being socialist, then both parties in the US (or parties in Canada) are all socialists. That hardly is the case. Yet when you look at how the UK, Finland or your country Canada actually spends the tax income (or the new debt), a lot of it goes into wealth transfers with systems similar to those implemented by Roosevelt and Truman in the US.
LOL!And since your initial comment was to the effect that WWI somehow put a damper on worker solidarity — StreetlightX
THEN WW1 happened, which proved them wrong. — ssu
They are socialists to me. — NOS4A2
So-called “social” legislation and other mollycoddling adopted by governments these days are but the successive steps to a socialist regime, if they’re not there already. — NOS4A2
Let’s just swallow the pill already, name and all. — NOS4A2
It does matter who pulls the levers. What you're describing is the state being controlled by the capitalists, and so you generalize this to all states. A nation-state is a kind of social organization, and there are various forms. Just as there are various forms of business. It would be nice if we tried democratic participation in both. You rail against the former while defending the latter, and so you forfeit any right to be taken seriously.
Abolish the state? Fine. Let's first abolish capitalism.
Well, for example the US Republican party has a long tradition of that. Just to name few examples from some Republican Presidents:They are socialists to me. So-called “social” legislation and other mollycoddling adopted by governments these days are but the successive steps to a socialist regime, if they’re not there already. — NOS4A2
After millions of workers had killed each other and rallied to the flag of their country in 1914 and not have gone on strike everywhere...as the labour movement had thought prior.Except that WWI did not "prove them wrong" because worker solidarity literally flourished in the wake of WWI like no other time in the history of the planet. — StreetlightX
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.