Home | About | Donate

On Environmental Protection, Biden’s Election Will Mean a 180-Degree Turn from Trump Policies

Originally published at http://www.commondreams.org/views/2020/11/13/environmental-protection-bidens-election-will-mean-180-degree-turn-trump-policies

The “loser’s” days are numbered, and thank all of the lords and ladies who helped make that a reality.

The evil 4-year old is about to disembark his “Reality TV presidency.” And his little dog Putin too.

Forever.

It will mean no such thing. Biden does what his corporate handlers tell him to and he won’t do anything substantive about the environment. CD is increasingly turning into Raw Sewage with nonsense articles like this.

12 Likes

I completely agree. The EPA was co-opted and disabled decades ago. They will be dragged kicking and screaming into the Anthropocene along with the rest of us.

4 Likes

The author of this article is typical of the “liberal” (i.e., status quo-oriented) drones that CD increasingly posts. The author was an environmental administrator during the Obama Administration. For those with amnesia, that’s when BP’s Deepwater Horizon well blew out and poisoned the Gulf of Mexico. Obama, like W, approved offshore drilling. I’m in academia, and the author, a professor in the “Resilience” institute at IUPUI, represents the kind of careerist that is rotting academia from within.

I’m just waiting for John Kasich’s opinion piece in CD.

8 Likes

Thanks for speaking the truth. I, too, noticed that CD, a progressive website, has politically moved quite a bit to Center. Usually, when mainstream politics move to the right, progressive/left politics move farther to the left spectrum. Not this one. The moment CD started selling its readers Joe Biden as Amerika’s savior from Fascism, I decided it was time to include real progressive websites in my reading arsenal.

2 Likes

Stop comparing Biden to Trump to make yourself feel good. Compare his policy plans to what other countries are doing. Look at the one’s who are doing the best, and push Biden to to even better. The situation is much worse than folks want to admit to themselves. We are morally required to to as much as we can for the futures of our children.

180 degrees in the other direction? This hyperbole taken to the extreme. Biden will make minor changes nothing more. 180 degrees would mean shutting down the Oil and Gas industry, pushing 100 percent to green renewable energy and dismantling the growth mantra and Capitalism itself.

He has already stated he would do NONE of these things.

Another election come and gone and another cadre of peoples whose task it is to paint lipstick on a pig step forth.

5 Likes

Biden needs to use exec orders to immediately reverse all of Fuhrer’s biosphere-hating exec orders and appointments.
He has to fire all of Fuhrer’s people from Interior, EPA, Parks, BLM, Forestry, ESA. and other programs.
He should shut down all new fossil fuel pipeline authorizations.
He can create jobs by replacing the poisonous water systems in Flint and elsewhere.
He can restore the acreage stolen by Fuhrer from national monuments and parks in Utah and elsewhere.
Finally, to protect the environment, he should prosecute and imprison Fuhrer and all his allies in the earth-kill industries.
Charge them with ecocide and destruction of the public commons.
As my buddies in Earth First say, “no compromise in defense of Mother Earth.”

1 Like

We are morally required to do what we can to assure the future for non-human species and the biosphere itself, irregardless of what humans want.

2 Likes

Absolutely agree. On issues like fracking, Biden has been very clear. Thanks

Agree. I mean, what the hell?

Sadly, McCabe appears to be hallucinating.

Just like Obama did, right? Just don’t mind all those pipeline and fracking approvals, the absolute lack of effective policies and actions on reducing the impacts of fossil fuels on atmosphere, oceans, and soils, the increases in the Pentagon budget – the same Pentagon that is the world’s most significant source of pollution, and the bailouts of banks and other sources of funds for many of the world’s most environmentally destructive projects-for-profit. Hey, Common Dreams, what compels you to print this sort of tripe and nonsense? You’re sinking fast in my personal polls!

Kuze,

I never said this or anything even remotely like it. I’d appreciate it if you provide a link to this alleged statement, and if you cant, don’t misquote me.

Maybe you misunderstood something I said, Give me a link to wherever you think I said this and I will gladly explain to you what I was actually trying to say. But I think that here you are probably way off.

It doesn’t ring true to me as anything I might have said, not even remotely.

How am I “infamous”? For what? For telling the truth?

(I don’t think Biden can reverse a lot of what Trump (or any other Administration) has done unfortunately, because thanks to FTAS like the “Opt in” or “bottom up” or “positive list” parts of) WTO as well as our i own “negative list” FTAs (which function in every respect like a freeze on new regulation) past and present and pending all have noose like provisions which our media have been going all out to masquerade, Thanks to things like these “Trojan Horse clauses” (de)regulation is a one way street -Globally, not just here in the US, Its because of OUR precious trade agreements). Which create new corporate entitlements each time a law is changed (and without a great many obstacles, (we have to compensate “injured parties” merely for implementing any laws which reverse the theft, except in a grave emergency, and then it can only be in the most minimal possible way) So no more compromise, Dems always have to lose)

Changes ? They only can go one way)

Locking in corporate interests above countries and voters. So we no longer have democracy as far as economic issues. Voters and legislators are stuck with an ever shrinking number of areas to legislate. Making what we have something other than democracy, if people think of democracy as meaning voters decide anything of economic interest.

Perhaps not all but a very great many of the progressive things people want from Democratic administrations, are all re-regulation, and when they impact areas that have been the subjects of FTAs, (under the WTO agreements) or things that have not been carved out in advance (under US style"next generation" or “negative list” agreements) That is forbidden.;

Thanks to misinformation, which we desperately want to believe despite its being ridiculous, under the circumstances, (because the truth and its implications are quite scary, a world owned by corporations where people 'worth 'is only defined by how much they earn and spend, amounts likely to be falling dramatically soon, because the dogma we’re using to justify this theft of our policy space (and planet) is known to be faulty.

We’re swallowing this theatrical performance hook, line and sinker.

1 Like

i apologize… i didn’t want to insult you and shouldn’t have mentioned your name either, i simply thought the situation is ironic namely the discrepancy between what the elites of the elites advertise and the realities the doomsday prepper have to life with — but i sorta failed to bring my message accross — so plz let me spot the very obvious: instead of presenting liberals like Bill Gates (who picked up „their“ ideas from the Economist magazine) instead of using ideas nobody believes in (while the preppers are going off grind en mass) instead of that it might 've been a lot better to present credible ideas that really can create a better future… but the liberal elites found their champion i.e Bill Gate and want to celebrate him to hell with everybody else but enough about Bill Gates.

i remember BigB claiming something like this: in the future „we“ need to life in underground bunkers because of climate change and below is what you wrote Zed-kun, and the quoted text definitely stands in the context of climate change…

…the differences between your statement and Bigbee’s are academic but i admit it: you didn’t use the word bunker so you could 've meant something that is not a bunker while feeling like a bunker to its inhabitants — or somthing scifi — be this as it may, i was calling the idea idiotic (sorry for being so impolite) because both ideas (even if they would be different) are nonsensical in the context of climate change.

i 've read a lot of science fiction… in the celebrated scifi epic from Cixin Liu — that ended with the mesmerizing Three body problem — in the book humanity went underground to escape the total annihilation by a incoming alien invader that wanted to kill everybody, fast… however there is absolutely no need to go underground because of climate change it’s just not true… anyway my point is this: the doomsday preppers might have needed to hear ideas, solutions etc that sounded better to them than going underground, because they can do that (and going off grid) by themselves and the same is basically true for everybody that has lost trust in the system.

where some see failure other see opportunity, it’s an idea of my enemies but it can be transposed into anti capitalist slanders… with a great crisis comes even greater potential for change, therefore i argue the more crisis the better… Antonio Negri once said: we are creating crisis, are you creating crisis zed? are the jourmos (and artists) around Naomi Klein creating crisis for Bill Gates? last time i checked he loughed, he loughed me in my fxxxing face (from the top of the Rollingstone magazine)… to me it seemed the progressives are losing on all fronts, i want to win zed (and look cool at winning while i put my boots in the face of the billionaire, so to speak) if the progressives can’t win then something else has to win, it’s as simple as that and also the reason why i 'm here. why are you here zed? do you want to win?

yesterday there was a thread it sorta stated Uber and Lyft won again… is progressive america really winning (a battle worth fighting for) zed?

Here is what I wrote, coming from where I stand which is pragmatism.

And your meaning was intended to trivialize or marginalize what I said which makes it clear that the vast majority of mankind would not be able to survive at temperatures higher than what human life can withstand. We would have lots more resources than we would on other planets, it all being here already, but the human race would shrink, unless we left the Earth or the climate got cooler. Its the same with the iceberg Earth scenario.

If you watch the Kubrick/Spielberg collaboration film “AI” you’ll see where I also suspect it may end up. I say it because we are not a part of that world in the way we are today, as …

(Spoiler warning)

we are extinct… In the distant future depicted in that film, we have died out and our machines have evolved into sentient life.; The new masters of the planet, and they have evolved emotions too, which we see happening, beautifully, in the bulk of the film.

The scene where we are extinct is fittingly, at the very end.


Here is what I wrote. (Talking about an Earth where the tropics are no longer safe for human life and the oceans life is dying depriving us of oxygen -
Thats called a “Strangelovian” ocean.

"Sure there will be humans, they will likely have built huge underground cities, with enough supplies to last a very long time, lots of countries have the resources. the temperatures underground are stable and cool, they will only rise a few degrees at the most even if the world were to become much hotter. Humans would move underground and farm by means of light pipes to channel some of the blazing sunlight underground. Then when people go to the surface they will have to wear cooling suits. Some plants in the equatorial zones would likely grow to huge sizes because of all the carbon dioxide even if the heat was too hot for humans, its possible we or some small animals might even be able be able to survive if we became nocturnal.

The oceans might become anerobic (Strangelovian ocean) so oxygen might be scarce but who knows, plants on land might produce enough for survival or perhaps the atmospshere might end up being enriched by more oxygen causing a swing towards a "snowball Earth " scenario?
Global cooling, as in very very cold.

the Earth has been almost covered by huge glaciers in the past.

Nomatter what happens, some humans would likely survive, even if most of us died, as long as we had a source of energy (the sun would do) we could manufacture enough oxygen for ourselves by means of electrolysis. With what we know now we could most certainly survive. Remember it would not be as if we were on the Moon or Mars, there still would be the essentials of life, just a lot less of them (or maybe more as I said) just in different places and harder to get, perhaps.

It would be horrible, but we would survive. Even in a nuclear war scenario, its likely some people would survive, somewhere, maybe for a long time. They might eventually die out but maybe not. Just like as envisisioned in the great Kubrick film Dr. Strangelove, which is based on real things and people, the government has all sorts of plans for continuity of government even if most of humanity is dead."

Don’t expect much in the way of change from Biden in the economic areas because trade deals lock in all deregulation.

(Yes, bernie was lying, all those things were taken off the table by the creation of the WTO which misgoverns the world for corporations, not people.)

So national politicians can only make things worse, not better, its like a noose around policy space thats set up that requires corporations taking over.

That’s my point, with the changes both parties have made to the government we no longer have democracy. And of course trhey are lying about it, all of them.

Why are you all trying so hard to pretend that has not happened?

Are you even the slightest bit ashamed that you have been so untruthful?

i never said i expect anything from Biden.

TMI, mate…