Of course the GM bailout will fuel claims that we are moving to socialism, but in my opinion we are just funneling tax dollars into the capitalist system. Nothing is changing structurally, other than investment sources. The result, as we can see, is that good capitalists will follow their instincts, and find ways to make money off of these bailouts. The stock market has apparently seen the benefit of more government cheese on the way and rose accordingly today. However, from my observation, so called public/private partnerships disproportionately benefit those that have the capital, and the rest of the world is supposed to be thankful for what trickles down. Will this administration’s plan work any different? Has Obama stumbled on the magic formula that will allow a mismanaged company to miraculously turn itself around? He talks about stake holders, but who does he mean? I don’t know the details, but is he considering allowing worker control? Will the community where the factories are located (or relocate) have a say in how GM is run? If we are really talking about change, is this going to be something different than a government bailout? What will the structural changes be? NPR was sorely lacking in any real analysis, other than to repeat the administrations line.

Despite what I thought was a nice title, this is not much of a post, I’m tired and had a long ride (after a nice vacation). I had originally planned to get to the idea of worker and community ownership as an alternative business plan (though GM would have to be broken up into smaller components for this to realistically work). This would also require the reversal of so many government regulations and policies that currently favor the mega-corporations over smaller businesses.

So does anybody have any insight into what is so different about the GM bailout and how it is supposed to work? While I certainly am not a Republican, I think their question about what the exit strategy will be is important (and also needs to be addressed for our current foreign occupations (Iraq, Afghanistan) as well as government ownership of AIG and Banks (started by Bush admin).

So why do the majority of politicians (especially those with the most political power) refuse to seriously address this basic human right? Why do we have the most expensive health care system in the country yet continue to lag behind Canada, Australia and most other Western European nations when it comes down to basic indicators of health (you know things like infant mortality, life expectancy)? The answer lies in the fact that we have the most inefficient health care payment system on the planet. We could easily meet the health care needs of everyone in this country for less than the amount we currently spend on health care. The irony is that the largest barrier to single-payer health care is that it would be much more economically efficient. To address this would mean opposing very powerful economic and political interests as this efficiency could only be achieved by the removal of the bloated insurance industry and the multiple layers of public financing that currently dominates the health care payment system. The pharmaceutical industry would also lose much of its strangle hold on the citizens of this country. Of course this means loss of corporate profit and displacement of a large sector of the work force (indeed part of my job is helping individuals gain access to health care resources). However, maintaining corporate welfare and unnecessary employment can not even begin to justify maintaining the most inefficient and cruel (I plan to blog more on the personal impacts our current system has on human health) health care delivery system on the planet.

Our president and other leading politicians continued to be suckered into the idea that some magical combination of private and public health care provision is the answer (in other words, more of the same (did not we vote for change?)). This is despite the massive failures of just such plans in Oregon, Massachusetts, Tennessee and everywhere else this has been tried. The problem is private/public solutions continue to maintain the complicated and inefficient multiple health care payment systems, they rely on mandates for individuals to buy into the program and allow for a situation where private insurance companies can cherry pick healthier patients and leave the burden of the patients with the largest health care costs on the public. The proponents of such systems will provide fantasies about how government regulation will prevent such corporate abuse (we have certainly seen lately how great government is at that?). Insurance companies quickly find ways to target marketing towards healthier individuals and utilize bureaucratic red tape to deny access.

I think we should be very grateful for the actions of these dedicated citizens who were willing to be arrested for what they believed in. Because, as with all movements for civil rights in the US, our so-called political leaders will refuse to lead and will only follow once they see they have no other choice. That is why we must support further non-violent protests, educate our friends and neighbors and do everything else in our power to fight for this basic human right.

I certainly do not believe government can solve all our problems and I am very opposed to government violations of our rights and liberties. However, why even have government if it does not provide for basic human needs? This nation was founded on the idea of government for and by the people (at least for those who were considered people at the time). Previous civil rights movements have expanded this definition of people to a large (though not complete) extent. Now we must continue the fight for our basic human rights to include access to health care!

Refer to H.R. 676 for a current single-payer proposal in congress (actually has been there for several years and is starting to gain more sponsors).

For in depth information and resources about the need for single-payer system refer to Physicians for a National Health Program.

So what is the real story that you will not find in the mainstream media? Could it be an intelligent look at the actual factors that contribute to the evolution of this virus and the public policies that promote the spread of this disease? In a CNN/Time Magazine article “Swine Flu: Don’t Blame the Pig” they imply that this flu is an inevitable result of the adoption of farming practice by humans, but make no attempt to look at specific farming practices that may contribute to the mutation of this virus (the article seems more geared towards support of the pig industry). They conclude by making sure we know what our real concern should be by stating “But regardless of whence the virus came, the more salient question is, Where will it go?”

In an article titled “Mexico’s Swine Flu and the Globalization of Disease”, Laura Carlsen examines the fact that this disease originated in Perote, Veracruz, the home of a giant Smithfield Farms hog farm, that was enabled by the passage of NAFTA. (for a more detailed article about how industrial farming incubates disease see “Capiatlism & the Flu”). Carlsen further explains how the spread of this disease is enabled by the policies of the World Bank, which encourage governments to divert money from public services (such as health care) in order to create an attractive climate for international investment. She also discusses the impact of NAFTA on Mexico’s health care system. I encourage everyone to read these articles and always look critically at the stories we see in the corporate media as true objective reporting has completely disappeared from the mainstream media (consider yourself lucky if you find accurately reported facts and always consider the ones they omit).

Will this potential “pandemic” result in more awareness of the dangers of the neoliberal globalization agenda? Will the general public finally come to understand how corporations (and the governmental institutions that maintain them) are the antithesis of everything that it means to be human? Will more people come to see why so many dedicated citizens have been sacrificing their time, safety, freedom and lives to protest the globalization of corporate power and the subservient government systems that enable it? While those in power may not be able to see past their self interest inspired delusions, I have faith that the people of this world will. Examples of groups of individuals working together to support true democracy and human rights abound. Regardless of the hypocrisy of our current political and economic systems, we still try to teach our children to share!

Finally, if there are any conspiracy theorists out there seeing this as further evidence of some secret plot, please save that for the fantasy movies. While there are no doubt some underhanded dealings going on, it does not take a conspiracy theory to explain this situation if you simply examine the nature of our economic and political systems and the underlying principles of greed, selfishness and distrust that provides their foundation. Conspiracy theories are a hindrance to change and actually serve to support the interests of the supposed conspirators.

Before going to the talk I looked on the web for critiques of his work, as I have often noted that biologists that stray into politics can often present fascist, Malthusian based solutions to society’s problems. I found a really interesting commentary by Richard Smith at www.selvesandothers.org/article12682. Smith points out that Diamond does a good job of demonstrating how societies that fail to alter ‘core values’ are vulnerable to collapse. However, Smith asserts that when Diamond provides solutions for modern society, he actually fails to question our ‘core value’ of capitalism. Indeed during the question period Diamond referenced Churchill’s famous quote about democracy (“It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried”) and applied it to our economic system. Instead he proposed your typical ‘feel good’ solutions of lobbying, voting & screwing in some florescent bulbs. Of course these things may help, but it did seem to me that he could not recognize his own ‘core values’ (as Smith points out). The idea that we can ‘have our cake and eat it too’, is quite popular today among mainstream environmentalist and is also quite compatible with corporate agendas. Perhaps Diamond does know that we must look at this ‘core value’, but is not willing to say so out of fear of irrelevancy. Of course, he also sits on the board of the corporate friendly World Wildlife Fund.

I must admit that I was very impressed with his analysis and think that if he were willing to admit that economics and politics are not his expertise, his environmental analysis would fit well with the ideas of many anti-capitalist and direct democracy theorist (as Smith demonstrates in his commentary). I must also commend Diamond for not jumping on over-population as the major problem when asked. He stated that it was one aspect, but did say that consumption was much more important. Listening to him talk and the crowd reaction, I did get the feeling that if this is our leadership in creating sustainability then our society is destined to collapse. I believe diversity of socio-economic political systems is the key. We must develop and promote alternatives to our dominant system. Hopefully, these systems can grow as our current system continues to fade due to it’s inability to adapt. A really good new ecofeminist influenced book “Eco-Sufficiency and Global Justice: Women Write Political Ecology” (edited by Ariel Salleh) describes examples of many such alternative models and theories. While I did find Diamond’s talk to be interesting, I would be really excited if the sponsor of this talk, University of Florida Office of Sustainability, were to invite one of the authors from this book to speak.

Imagine what could be done if we gave those same tax breaks to local businesses that have a history of supporting Gainesville & a genuine commitment to this town. Obviously I am not the biggest promoter of capitalism, but in a market society, if it takes 98 million dollars to get a developer to build, that should be a sign that the market isn’t there for this sort of development. So what do we end out with?
Gainesville’s ‘Field of Dreams’!

Despite the news links provided on the left, I must admit I check CNN and other mainstream sources regularly. I find it interesting and often frustrating to see how the news that most people read is presented. However, I do think it is important to look at all points of view, and I often find interesting things on mainstream sites.

Did you all happen to see this video on CNN about urban farming in Cuba (CNN Video)? I was not aware of how extensive this practice was in Cuba. Apparently these farms now account for half the vegetables grown in Cuba.

I don’t want to get into the pros & cons of the Cuban system (though I do have opinions). What really impressed me about this story, was the ability of the people to adapt to the loss of resources after the dismantling of the USSR. This included a strong emphasis on local, sustainable organic farming due to the loss of chemical & gasoline imports.

Often, I feel that what keeps us (in the US) trapped in our system of consumerism is the fear that without this system we would all starve to death & going around killing each other with our massive gun supply. However, stories like these really provide hope for me. I don’t believe there is anything inherently superior about the Cuban people & I believe despite our differences in this country, there is a strong thread of mutual aid that cannot be extinguished by manufactured greed. Everywhere I look in this country I continue to see increased efforts to create sustainable agriculture.

I feel we need to stop living in fear of chaos and feeling trapped in a consumer mindset that relies solely on the corporate model to meet our daily living needs. The fact that a small economically isolated island can come together to overcome food shortages, should inspire us to abandon our perceived dependence on large scale corporate agriculture. So, I feel inspired to further increase my use of local foods and my support of farmer’s markets and sustainable organic farming.

Thanks Cuba, for demonstrating workable, local scale alternatives to corporate agriculture. And thanks to CNN for taking a break from fear mongering for a moment!