Home | About | Donate

Destroy the Earth Day: Under Trump and Pruitt, the Right's Assault on the Environment Goes Nuclear


#1

Destroy the Earth Day: Under Trump and Pruitt, the Right's Assault on the Environment Goes Nuclear

Paul Rosenberg

Republican attacks on the environment are nothing new. Ronald Reagan famously claimed, “Trees cause more pollution than automobiles do" while running for president in 1980. His first EPA chief, Anne Gorsuch, slashed the agency's budget by a quarter, and its workforce by 20.


#2

Voters now have had a chance to see what Trump will actually do in office. If living in a toxic stew doesn’t bother them they can vote for the Republicans again in November. And those convinced that there is no real difference between the two major parties can simply stay home and not deal with the hassle of voting.


#3

They can also vote for 3rd Party Candidates although they have no way of winning.


#4

I get tired of people insisting there is no difference. Yes there is. On some issues both sides do agree. But on civil rights and the environment, they are vastly different.


#5

And that is the elephant in the room, no 3rd party has a chance to win. The best they can do is swing an election or help to splinter a party. Our politics are too tied to money to let a 3rd party have a chance at winning.


#6

I dunno, Skip. The Democratic Socialists of America may be able to break that caveat. They are gaining support for the Healthcare for All movement. That is something we can all get behind, and we may be able to achieve it. If we do, that will be a powerful demonstration of People Power. If we then hold together, we might be able to cure the disease that is killing not only us, but the world. We might be able to use that same power to produce a Constitutional Government of the People, by the People and for the People. We had that once, for a couple of centuries. It wasn’t perfect, but it worked pretty well. If we could achieve that goal, with the wisdom of experience to guide us, we could produce an improved model, with checks and balances that would not allow fascism and greed to take over as it has in this century (And the latter part of the last century).
*Definitely worth a try, in my opinion. Being enslaved to the D/R dichotomy is a definite loser any way you cut it, for they are both purchased by the Oligarchy in charge and do what they are told. They’ve all got to go!
;-})


#7

I think you are absolutely right that there are differences between the Republican and Democrats. And not only on civil rights and the environment but also on social issues. And education (public versus private). And after the election of Trump you can add form of government (democracy versus fascism). The mainstream media’s claim that politics in Washington is polarized seems correct on domestic issues. The fact that most Democrats take campaign contributions from corporations does mean that the parties are not very different. We do need campaign finance reform but even in the sorry state of things in that regard voters have a real choice between the major parties.


#8

Let’s add institutional bulwarks as well. If Schumer ran the Senate, legislation like the recent bank bill would have never gotten to the floor, especially in the form it did.


#9

I doubt if we will ever see campaign finance reforms. Money has been part of US politics for most of the country’s history. And with the supreme court ruling that money is free speech, those decisions are rarely overturned. It would take a constitutional amendment to overturn that. And I don’t see congress or the states voting for that.


#10

Healthcare for all is different than a 3rd party winning. Most likely is that as it gains in popularity that more democrats will endorse it.
There is no such thing as people power. In order to have it, 1st people have to vote, we fail at that, 2nd it must be sustained generation after generation, we fail at that. Every victory has been undone. It took decades for the labor unions to win just some victories and the major one was the right to organize. And that right has really been taken away for the most part. Organized labor lost to the rich.
And even then the gains that labor was able to get were small ones.
And we have never had a government for, by, and with the people. The rich have controlled this country since the beginning. The founders didn’t want the people to have power, it’s why we have a republic instead of full democracy. And it is why money is considered free speech, which will always buy elections.
Not sure how you can get rid of either party when money runs the political campaigns. It’s why 3rd parties can’t win. The amount of money needed to run is too expensive unless they are ultra rich and can finance their own campaign and then you are still putting the rich into power. The rich have always held power, even after revolutions, the rich take back control. As long as there are tremendously rich people, they will control the world. Or at least their portion of the world.


#11

that’s exactly what pruitt & trump are doing, destroying this good earth


#12

Jeez, Skip,
*Sounds like all of us who hope and work for change should just pick a bridge abutment or doorway close to a soup kitchen, where we can park our shopping cart and hunker down until we starve or die of an illness or beating.
*If failure is a done deal, why bother?
*Sorry, I think it is still worth the effort. We made great strides under FDR, getting out of the depression, then fighting a war against fascism. We the People had work, made fairly decent wages and salaries, were conscious of working for the Common Good. Could get an education, and we were filled with hope. We were able to make changes, improve education and make it affordable.
*Most of that came to a screeching halt after 22 November, 1963, but many of us haven’t given up. What is needed is for the People to reawaken and realize their power, and work together to make change. Most thinking people are aware that changing a red sock puppet for a blue one or vice versa every four years is, in fact, useless.
*Perhaps supporting the DSA could make a chink in the armor of the uberwealthy. Worth a try.
;-})


#13

I lost my optimism after decades of fighting and seeing the loses year after year. There is yet to be any real groundswelling like the labor movement had towards the end when they saw gains.
It will take decades of organizing enough people to fight back and win small concessions.
Right now the left is disorganized and the right will fight back against any attempts by the left to fight for rights. And the right is still strong enough to slow any movement down. This country is as divided as the days leading up to the civil war and afterwards.
When the labor first started their push, they did not let Blacks or communists to join them. But as they suffered loss after loss, they gave in and accepted them into the movement. I can’t imagine the right workers ever uniting with blacks let alone what they perceive as commies. There is more hate at the left and the name liberal and socialist are now curse words.
Those days were the golden age of labor, better than at any other time and within the space of a few decades, it was lost.
Yes people power could, but will it is the question. We elected a black man and the hate has erupted. Without white males joining the movement, it will be seen as a socialist attempt to take over. The movement has to cross all lines to work and in these days, that isn’t going to happen.
What is the most likely is that parts of the country will revolt against each other and destroy the country. And each section will go their own way.
Empires always fall apart from within and what I see is the death throes of the country starting. I hope I am wrong, but as someone who studies history, that is a more likely outcome than the people banding together to fight the rich. And even if that happen, the rich would soon take control. They have the power of money on their side. There never has been any country that money doesn’t control it. The soviet union, cuba, china, all have/had the rich in power.
You would have to do what Marx suggested, take money out of the equation, no more rich. And that won’t sell anywhere. Marx was correct in pointing out the problems, but his solutions are shaky.
The DSA is never going to go anywhere. Socialism is a dirty word and scares americans. They will never support them. And the rich will never give up their money, they can afford to hire armies to fight back. So if the DSA looked like they could win, there would be violence from the rich.