The FAO summit is going to end with the usual statements of the facade, without going to the root of the problem, without jeopardizing the interests that support the politics of GMO or bio-fuels and ease the position without increasing amounts of population World thrown into poverty and hunger. In fact, the surge agricultural prices, the use of biofuel crops are the result of a "pure capitalism" applied to agriculture and incompatible with the ecology. The following article, by Daniel Tanura, sheds light on this reality and indicates an area of \u200b\u200bwork, ecolosocialismo, very important for a new anti-capitalist left.
Daniel TanuroL'impennata of food prices is not accidental. Basically arises from a contradiction in the relationship between industry and capitalist agriculture, Marx had already pointed out in Capital: "It is the nature of things that the animal and vegetable substances, growth and production of which is subject to certain organic laws and related at certain times of natural, can not be increased rapidly to the same extent that, for example, the machines, which can play (if natural conditions do not change) be done quickly in a developed industrial country. It is therefore possible and even inevitable (...) that the production and the increase of the portion of constant capital which consists of fixed capital (machinery, etc..) Considerably exceeds the portion that consists of raw materials, so that the demand for these increases more causing rapidly rising prices. "The rush to agrofuels
exacerbates this contradiction at the highest level, opening up considerable space to the speculators, whose activity in turn aggravates the increase prices. In the analysis we can conclude that agrofuels are the weak link for excellence in the capitalist response to the energy and climate challenge. In fact, this answer, which is processed in darkness, under the pressure of industrial lobbies competing urges all sides in agriculture: this should not only nourish humanity, but also absorb carbon, cars do travel, make electricity and heat, protecting biodiversity and the landscape, providing building materials and biodegradable plastics ... It is clearly impossible: the biomass can not do anything and everything together, satisfying the needs in all areas of growth dictated by capital. You can postpone the deadline, move the issue forward with all sorts of media (which have feedback effects more or less perverse), but you can not skip this harsh reality: there are limits, you must choose.
Those who choose, as a function of that? Is the key question because, for the market, fill the tanks of the trucks and planes that carry the goods to the solvent demand is more important than feed people who have an empty wallet as the stomach. In terms of cost / benefit analysis is unassailable. From the social point of view is unacceptable. Therefore, in addition to highlighting the increasingly systemic capitalist crisis, agrofuels also cast light on an alternative to society, and civilization, which can be summed up very simply in terms of its immanent logic, system, and the challenge climate and energy, will try to resolve the squaring of the circle by means of an attack productivist brutal conditions of existence of hundreds of millions of people, perhaps even their very existence. Consequently, to say that this production is no longer the bearer of any human progress is an understatement: it is a potential for gaining unprecedented barbarity.
You can reverse the trend, avert climate catastrophe / capitalist who is preparing an alternative plot worthy of the name. But the essential starting point is to understand that the capitalist mode of production, distribution and consumption (and not "people's behavior!") Is exactly the problem. It is an unsustainable way, and the current economic situation is clearly shown: in a context marked by the reduction in hydrocarbon resources and the obligation imposed by the climate at very short notice to abandon fossil fuels, it is simply impossible to continue producing goods just in time to worldwide, offsetting the trend decline in the rate of profit with the super-superconsumption-products increasingly rapid obsolescence, and diminishing share of wages with an increase in consumption of luxury. This productivist and increasingly globalized scenario disegualitario can only lead to a combination of ecological and social crisis of great magnitude. To avoid them, it is necessary to take measures to break the logic of accumulation, riabilitino public initiative and redistribute the wealth in the North and the South
In this context, the tragedy serves to something: hooking up agricultural prices to those oil, the crazy liberal-productivist policy clearly demonstrate that the social ecology form one global struggle. It is no longer possible, in fact, oppose the reduction of income from work without declaring the race to agrofuels. Now, defend conditions for the existence of employees means of challenging both the climate policy, energy and agricultural globalized capitalism. One does not go without the other. It is a turning point. Far from being a hiccup, this change results from a combined development of capitalist industry and agriculture which Marx had grasped the dynamics when he wrote: "The big industry and big agriculture, industrial exploitation act in the same sense . Stand at the beginning because the first downfall of more work, so the natural force of man, the other more directly the natural force of the earth. But, developing, they end up shaking hands: the industrial system in the country ends up undermining even the workers, industry and trade, for their part provide agriculture with the means to exhaust the earth. "
Here where we stand. To repeat an expression of Michel Husson: we got much in the 'pure capitalism' world which Marx had drawn up the model. The answer can only be a "pure ecosocialism 'claims to unify social and environmental goals in a perspective of emancipation. But it is also necessary that the ecosocialism takes root in the concrete social struggles. In this sense, the current situation, with its combination of tension on the purchasing power, on energy, climate and food resources, it opens up possibilities, not sufficiently used to introduce ecological issues in the struggles of workers, trade unions, not as parallel issues, but directly as social issues. Plays a more important in this context, the radical left would strengthen as the bearer of an alternative global società .Daniel Tanura
0 comments:
Post a Comment