THE CLIMATE CRISIS AND THE GLOBAL GREEN NEW DEAL

A specific plan to address humanity’s “greatest existential crisis ever.”

With the global mean temperature steadily rising and opposition based on ideology over evidence, a steady stream of writing and conferences proposes to fix matters. Although some national leaders support action, they are not responding to pressure from any major movement because none exists—so, with rare exceptions, the end result has been mere rhetoric. Although it has yet to gather mass support, one political movement proposes to eliminate fossil fuels along with the supportive driving forces of climate change, including deforestation, industrial agriculture, and food and land waste. Known as the Global Green New Deal, its goal is to eliminate greenhouse emissions by 2050 and invest massively to raise energy efficiency and expand clean energy sources. As the name “new deal” implies, it aims to accomplish this without joblessness and economic insecurity and to raise living standards for working people and the poor throughout the world. The concise narrative is laid out as an interview in which Chomsky and Pollin alternatively respond to questions. Pollin, a professor of economics at the University of Massachusetts and co-founder of its Political Economic Research Institute, concentrates on the evidence for climate change and details of the legislation and finances required for the GGND, which seem surprisingly attainable despite the political difficulties he admits are considerable. Chomsky, longtime activist and emeritus professor of linguistics at MIT, concentrates a fierce attack on the culprit: a heartless, obsessively profit-oriented capitalist system that has prevailed for more than four decades. The GGND, which requires all governments to cooperate to eliminate the powerful fossil fuel industry while simultaneously eradicating poverty, has attracted sneers aplenty. Nonetheless, its architects are convincing about the necessity of such a program. What is lacking is a thoughtful discussion by influential—rather than merely intelligent—people on preventing catastrophe.

A serious plan that needs refinement more than invective.