Marxists may have M been too slow to rise to the challenge of develop•ing an analysis or the growing environmental disaster created by imperialism: but Marxism offers the only serious answer to the most fundamental quesuon of all what is to be done to resolve the crisis?
All manner of well-intentioned liberals and environmentalists have developed very detailed critiques of the ways in which capitalism - led by the multi-national monopolies -and the old Stalinist regimes have poisoned, wasted and destroyed the carth's precious resources.
Bur when it comes down to offering a fundamental alternative, they all stop short.
Many turn to emphasise the "moral" duty individuais. whether to boycott the most offenin political activity to press for acton by royeramenis or by inict national bodies. sophisticated ways in which the very companies and profiteers who damage can be perSUACCE TATONNE to moderate Perhaps the most comprehensive recent example of this approach is the compendious study Global Outlook (GEO 2000) just published by the United Nations Environment Programme The document contains a wealth of valuable information charting the chaos that has been created in the global environment. and is much too lengthy to deal with fully BCTC But while many of the facts it parades are sufficient to create anger and frustration, the conclusions and recommendations GEO 2000 embody precisely the weaknesses outlined above.
The report shows a world in chaos and riven by grotesque incqualitici arising from capitalist expolitation.
W that despite a five-fold expansion of the world since 1950, more than a quarter of the world's population remains in severe poverty, and 1.3 billion people live on less than a dollar a day.
We are told that while a comfortable "global middle class" is emerging, the inequalities of the system mean that poverty is expected to increase in Africa during the next century. 14 African countries already subject to "water stress" -and another 11 are expected to face ine same probiems Dy eues On the eve of the new millennium "at least" one in three Asians has no access to sale drinking water, # ce cycs oi soveramoats and tie UN. Instead their concern is fres trade: "One of the greatest chalSomali mother with her dead baby: impersalism promotes cash crops for export, toorsening famine lenges is to promote liberal trade the protection of the environment and natural resources"
In West Asia the oll producing countries exnloited bs US-owned oil monopolies are also left to deal with the deadly waste products aad "generate from 2-8 times more hazardous waste per capita than docs the United States".
The "free-trade" dogma enforced by the World Trade Organisation also helps to undercut any attempt to preserve the environment:
*WTO recently ruled that the US could not discriminate against imports of shrimp caught without the use of turtle excluder devices which allow sea turtles to escape from shrimp nets". The same WTO has ruled against EU countries promoting banana imports from former colonies in the Caribbean.
GEO appears oblivious to the behind this inequality.
that this pattern of and environmental degrada• tion runs alongside a massive expansion of the global role of The report points out that by 1996 speculative trading in foreign exchange amounted to a massive $350 trillion, the world's Gross Domestic Product ($30 trillion).
The total revenue of the world's top 500 companies was $I1 trillion, dwarfing the total of $250 billion invested by private companies in a sclect number of developing countries, and the miserable $50 billion of western governments' combined Overscas Development Assistance As the flows of private cash have increased, the resources for "aid" programmes has been cut back, complains UNEP, "leading, effect to a decreased capacity Ol public sector and multilateral agencies to dever public gooas such as environmental health." and finance houses can be expected to mop up cheap raw materias and exploit cheap labour while pocketing the profits, UNEP argues that "Transnational corporations, private banks and pension funds cannot be expected to cover major public health and environmental infrastructure costs."
No: they are after all only there tor tc pronts. bur taci acmands for low (or no) taxation on their tries - and for hefty interest payloans extended governments and to local enterprises - makes it even more difficult to raise the resources required:
"Public tries are hampered by their tremenand GOUS aCOl environmental agencies and activitics are olten among the tirst to be cut back in order to manage deficits and interest payments."
Worse, the sheer weight of debt and scale of repayments is itself driving towards environmental destruction, compelling developing countries "to sell off their natural resources, particulariy price they could obtain, often in environmentally destructive ways."
Imperialism is forcing governments to vandalise their own coun• tries and starve their own people:
"Export cash crops have been favoured over food production for local consumption. Environmental standards have been kept low or non-existent to help attract foreign investment".
But despite all of this evidence of where the blame lies for the fouling of the carth, the UNEP report returns time and again to the notion that the very multinationals and the despicable stooge regimes which do their bidding at national Icici can ouer ine solution ratact than constituting the problem.
U balance in an organisaimperialist powers and WIUC