• commentary
  • SATURDAY DECEMBER 8 2007 4:00 PM

Power to the People? Money Talks.

Submitted by Rahodeb

Edited by Rahodeb



Al Gore believes in what he calls the growing "people-power" movement. He says he's optimistic that it will "push the world's leaders to take action to stop global warming."

"I have one reason for being optimistic, and that is that I see throughout my own country, the United States of America, and throughout the world the rising of the world's first people-power movement on a global basis," he said.

Gore pointed to an international grassroots nuclear-freeze movement which helped push U.S. President Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev to sign arms controls deals in the late 1980s, and said the climate campaign was even broader.

He was recently awarded a Nobel Peace Prize, so it's hard to argue with his hunch. Except that Yasser Arafat has also been awarded a Nobel Peace Prize, so, um, yeah--that kind of diminishes its legitimacy. Just a tad. I'm not saying I wouldn't accept one (my mom would be so proud), but you know. Anyway, Gore is all "power to the people," but before you go slathering on that patchouli and flashing me the peace sign, let's get real.

P-to-tha-P mentality is great for Glastonbury or Coachella or other wannabe Woodstocks, but in reality, buying that soy candle or bringing your own reusable bags to the grocery store (while both laudable deeds) ain't gonna make a lick of difference. These days, even a sizable march on Washington probably wouldn't make much of a difference. If today's hippies want to control tomorrow's environment, they'd better start saving the greenbacks they currently spend on bellbottoms and invest it in green business. Let’s exchange the hippy-dippy “power to the people” ridiculousness for something more realistic. I suggest ACDC’s “Money Talks.” Al Gore’s grassroots movement should be called the “Money Talks, Bullshit Walks” campaign.

Gore, whose Oscar-winning documentary "An Inconvenient Truth" called for immediate action on the environment, urged for curbs on carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas blamed by scientists for global warming.

"The engines of our great global civilization are now pouring 70 million tons of global warming pollution into (the atmosphere) every single day. It is having the consequences long predicted by the scientific community," he said.

"It is now abundantly clear that we cannot continue this process," he said.

True, we can't continue this process. Nor can we continue the process of dealing with such challenges by utilizing the emotional, radical techniques and approaches demonstrated in the 1960s. There's a reason why the current Business Week cover story is about how Monsanto is "quietly winning the battle over genetically modified crops, despite the noise about organic food." Monsanto has power because Monsanto has money. This is not about right or wrong, moral or immoral, ethical or unethical, good or bad. This is about rich or poor.

If the John Lennon tunes inspire you to invest in green companies, then crank up the volume. But, as Treehugger pointed out over two years ago, "too few people realize that even if they lead a virtuous life and try to have a healthy personal relationship with nature, their money could be working against them if it is invested in polluting and destructive enterprises." As the relatively new, but extremely encouraging company and think tank Kyoto Planet puts it, "There is no shortage of funds and public interest to address our environmental challenges, just a lack of understanding of where the investment is best placed."

Put your money into green businesses, and the world will really start to change.

  • PERMALINK
  • PRINT
  • Digg This
  • Email To A Friend
 
Comments
Skywisdom

Skywisdom

Portland, OR
December 2005

DEC 09, 2007 01:06 PM

So where is some information on companies which I can invest in?

discosebastian

discosebastian

United Kingdom
August 2007

DEC 09, 2007 04:14 PM

No, because climate change is overwhelmingly an issue for those without the power to influence companies through spending habits.

The first and most obvious problem with consumer democracy is that some people have more votes than others. Those with the most votes - that is to say, with the most money - are the least likely to wish to change an economic system which has served them well. We should surely reject a formula for changing the world which relies on the goodwill of those with the most dollars to spend. It should be obvious that the decisions made in this weighted voting system, by the people with the most money will not, in aggregate, be decision made in the interests of those with the least.

It's to be solved though popular collective action, like absolutely every other political problem.

Duh.

Formus

Formus

Milwaukee, WI
May 2007

DEC 09, 2007 04:27 PM

Government regulation.

wereduck

wereduck

I'm lost
July 2007

DEC 09, 2007 05:32 PM

Formus said:
Government regulation.



B-b-bu-bu-bu-but, Ron Paul says regulation is bad.

wereduck

wereduck

I'm lost
July 2007

DEC 09, 2007 05:41 PM

Whoops

freshprncebelair

freshprncebelair

Ellicott City, MD
June 2004

DEC 09, 2007 06:34 PM

Formus said:
Government regulation.



China says: "Fuck that"

But it's not like companies would move production to places with much more relaxed laws.

And before you say: We will just stop imports from them (or impose environmental tariffs), remember that we have to break a lot of treaties to ban imports or impose special tariffs for environmental reasons (or revise our World Trade agreements)

wereduck

wereduck

I'm lost
July 2007

DEC 09, 2007 06:47 PM

freshprncebelair said:

Formus said:
Government regulation.



China says: "Fuck that"

But it's not like companies would move production to places with much more relaxed laws.

And before you say: We will just stop imports from them (or impose environmental tariffs), remember that we have to break a lot of treaties to ban imports or impose special tariffs for environmental reasons (or revise our World Trade agreements)



That's why next year:


Lockeblade

Lockeblade

Australia
May 2007

DEC 09, 2007 07:05 PM

Angus! Angus! Angus! *insert metal horn salute here*

What was this article about again?

Formus

Formus

Milwaukee, WI
May 2007

DEC 09, 2007 07:08 PM

freshprncebelair said:

Formus said:
Government regulation.



China says: "Fuck that"

But it's not like companies would move production to places with much more relaxed laws.

And before you say: We will just stop imports from them (or impose environmental tariffs), remember that we have to break a lot of treaties to ban imports or impose special tariffs for environmental reasons (or revise our World Trade agreements)


We can't do much other than to set an example for the rest of the world anyway, and we're failing miserably at it at the moment. So we might as well try. Most of the world doesn't trust this administration on environmental issues because of the Kyoto fiasco, but if the new administration takes steps to stiffen regulations at the same time it makes peace and talks with the countries we stiffed on the Protocol, we can put a rather significant amount of political pressure on them (coughChinacough) to comply - especially if we get our allies (England, Canada, Japan) to go along with us.

And we can always give tax leniencies to companies or corporations that keep their production in this country. Make it worth their while to stay.

elysianfielder

elysianfielder

Los Angeles, CA
March 2003

DEC 10, 2007 08:25 AM

Maybe you should have spent a couple of minutes researching what Al Gore actually does with his time when not accepting awards. His main job is chairman of Generation Investment Management, which does exactly what you suggest: heavily investing in renewable energy and other sustainable businesses. Gore has also joined the board of Kleiner-Perkins, Silicon Valley's most important venture capital firm, with the goal of making them the preeminent financial backer of emerging green companies. And he serves on the board of directors of a rather large company known as Google, where he has been steering them toward throwing billions of dollars into green businesses, including Nanosolar.

Google, by the way, is a very handy tool for finding this type of stuff out.

How about a little editorial oversight, SG?

Cigarette

Cigarette

Cleveland, OH
April 2004

DEC 10, 2007 09:34 AM

elysianfielder said:
How about a little editorial oversight, SG?



You've been here four and a half years. Is this yr first visit to the newswire?

lavenir

lavenir

Turlock, CA
June 2007

DEC 10, 2007 01:56 PM

You're right, rahodeb. I'm sending some money to AC/DC right now.

featured interviews