Can Global Warming Become a Political Issue?

Nestor Miguel Gorojovsky gorojovsky at
Fri Jun 9 22:18:39 MDT 2000

As all of you have seen, I have refrained from entering the debate
that has been raging on the list over ecological issues. Not that I
did not want, only that I have more urgent tasks and nobody can put
the whole of an universe in a hairpin button.

I find Lou's and Mark's positions extremely apocaliptic, and I find
some reason in Carrol's objections. I do not share, however, the way
in which he poses them, nor the extent to which he carries the whole
thing: ecology, even long-term ecological issues, DO matter simply
because we humans are at or near a point of development of our
productive forces that turns us into a potential or actual forcing in
the complex and delicate tissue of energetic relationships in planet
Earth. It is not capitalism who will put some rationality in these
relationships, if only because nature, for capital, is an externality
by definition or at most a source of rent.

I want, however, to state that many things on the last posting by I
find quite compelling, particularly (it would be no surprise to
anybody here) the closing lines which, just because, I quote again.
Lacking the time for a major involvement on these issues (which will
probably appear again in the future, so what-me-worry?), I wanted to
stress, at least, my support to this simple assertion by José:

En relación a Re: Can Global Warming Become a Political Issue?,
el 9 Jun 00, a las 22:38, Jose G. Perez dijo:

>     By presenting an overarching, overriding ecological apocalypse of
>     global
> warming, Marxists disarm themselves before bourgeois forces who argue,
> essentially, "Wish we had the time and resources to save the hundreds
> of millions of children starving to death and dying from preventable
> diseases in the third world, but we've got to save the planet!"

Néstor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at

More information about the Marxism mailing list