           ******* Earth Summit ************
                 from Workers Solidarity No 36
                                       (1992)

THE EARTH SUMMIT took place  in Rio last 
June.  In spite of the enormous cost 
($123 million) and publicity (8,749 
media people.) the final results were 
two weak treaties and the agreement of 
some "principles" on the environment.  
Even this was too much for America who 
refused to sign the Bio-Diversity 
Treaty, fearing for their bio-technology 
industry.  In Rio itself an estimated 
700 "street children" have been murdered 
since January (according to the Centre 
for the Mobilisation of Marginalised 
Populations) in an attempt to beautify 
the city. 
	
Once again the capitalists proved unwilling to tackle 
the problems of under-development and environmental 
degradation.  Given their past record this doesn't come 
as much of a surprise.  However there are serious 
problems and it would be wrong for socialists and 
anarchists to down-play them.  For example, according to 
the World Bank's World Development Report for 1992 well 
over one billion people in the so-called developing 
nations suffer from water-borne diseases and more then 
3.5 million children a year die from diarrhoea alone.  
Despite the collapse of Stalinism arms spending has 
increased from $680 billion in 1972 to an estimated $800 
billion this year,  the rainforests are been cut down at 
a rate of 170,000 square kilometres per year with an 
estimated loss of 50-100 forest species every day.

THE EVE OF DESTRUCTION? 

Things are clearly pretty bad.  Many would point to 
pollution, soil degradation, de-forestation and species 
loss and say we are experiencing a devastating crisis.  
Some even say that the end is nigh.  Are things really 
this bad?

Firstly, if you look back it is possible to see where 
such doomsday pictures were painted in the past but we 
survived.  In the 1930s ten record warm years in a row 
combined with increasing carbon-dioxide concentrations 
led to fears of major global climate changes.  Sound 
familiar?  The 1940s-1970s then proved on average to be 
much cooler then expected.   This is not to knock the 
research of scientists like those on the Inter-
Governmental Panel on Climate Control who believe we are 
experiencing a greenhouse effect.  However it must be 
borne in mind that climate and ecological systems are 
extremely complex and to be wary of simple doomsday 
scenarios.

In 1972 a book was published by scientists in the 'Club 
of Rome' called "Limits to Growth".  In this they argued 
that key resources such as lead, copper and aluminium 
were about to run out.  Of course they didn't.  In the 
recently published sequel "Beyond the Limits" the 
scientists admit they were totally wrong.  They admit 
they should never have used the "if present trends 
continue" type argument.  The only thing that is certain 
about trends is that they rarely do!  We weren't on the 
eve of destruction then.  We aren't now,  though we do 
face serious problems.

OVER-PRODUCTION?

However the question is still raised by a lot people 
concerned with the environment: are we over-developed 
and over-producing?  For example, at the "alternative" 
Earth Summit in Rio a demand was issued for "a cut in 
the North's consumption of resources and an immediate 
transformation of technology to create ecological 
sustainability in the North".  Is the problem one of  
over-production and consumption in the industrialised 
countries?

We would argue that there is a problem of over-
production in capitalism. But it is not real over-
production.   Simply that it is an enormously wasteful 
system of production geared purely towards competition 
and profit.  Huge amounts of goods are made to break as 
soon as possible, rubbish is sold by advertising, new 
inventions which threaten monopoly positions are bought 
out as fast as possible to stop their production (the 
oil companies are notorious for this).  A lot of 
production is geared purely to maintaining a competitive 
advantage.  

Often more is produced then there is a market demand 
for.  Then the price collapses and recession follows.  
This might not mean that too much had been produced for 
peoples' needs.  Oh, no!  All it means is that more has 
been produced then can be bought. 

So in America, one of the richest countries in the 
world, 36 million people (15% of the population) were 
living in poverty in 1991 according to Business Week. 
Worldwide in 1991 there were 200 million tons of grain 
hoarded to preserve prices.  The charity Trocaire 
estimated that 3 million tons could have eliminated 
starvation in Africa for that year.  

ARRESTED DEVELOPMENT

Imperialism is one of the ways the capitalists try to 
eliminate some of the contradictions involved in 
apparent over-production followed by recession.  It is a 
system were certain countries are kept at a very low 
level of development by other well-developed capitalist 
nations.  During booms they can buy up labour and raw 
materials cheaply.   They can also off-load huge amounts 
of generally inferior products onto these countries to 
delay price collapse and recession.

Imperialism is not a thing of the past. The Gulf War 
proved that the imperialists will go to any lengths, 
including massive use of force, to maintain their  
power.  At the Summit the so-called developing nations 
of the South asked for $40 billion to implement the Bio-
Diversity Treaty.  They received just $1 billion.  Even 
$40 billion is but a small fraction of their 
indebtedness to Western banks and governments.

These countries pay twice as much in debt re-payment as 
they ever get from development 'aid'.  Most so-called 
'aid' usually has a cost: total compliance to the wishes 
of the donor government.  In fact most governmental 
development aid is used as a tool to keep the 
imperialised countries in line.   93% of the USA's aid 
budget goes to Israel where it certainly isn't used for 
humanitarian purposes!

CHEMICAL PROSPECTING IN COSTA RICA

When the West's rulers moan about the loss of bio-
diversity they are generally worried about potential 
drugs and other new products they wish to extract, 
refine and make a profit from.   Costa Rica has already 
signed "chemical-prospecting" agreements with Western 
pharmaceutical companies.  Malaysia tries to sell 
hardwood products and, indeed, some renewable forest 
products on the world market.  The West charges massive 
tariffs on finished products but virtually nothing on 
raw materials which they can process themselves.  Other 
countries like Brazil are so massively burdened with 
debt they are almost entirely committed to deforestation 
and disastrous industrial and ranching projects to try 
and earn foreign currency. 

Another example of how imperialism  works is in the 
locating of polluting industry.  12% of the total cost 
of building a chemical plant in the USA is made up of 
pollution controls, 6% in Ireland and presumably even 
less in the third world.  So industry that wouldn't be 
tolerated in the West moves into third world countries.  
For this reason, when fighting to prevent location in 
countries like Ireland it is important to try to move 
beyond the "not in our back-yard" syndrome.  You have to 
try to make links internationally.

The basic point is that capitalism is not committed to 
development.  In fact it is based on arresting the 
development of most of the world which in turn 
contributes to environmental degradation. 

POSSIBLE WORLDS

Progress and development are not the problem.  Even 
severely distorted and uneven (e.g. confined to the 
West) as they are at present they still seem to point to 
a better future.  The possibility of freeing humanity 
from poverty and drudgery exists.  In the seventeenth 
century average life expectancy in the West was 40 
years, now it's 75.  Access to education, leisure time 
and a generally better standard of living has been made 
possible.

Most people in the West like the improvement and 
wouldn't wish their grandparents' or great grandparents' 
lifestyle on anyone.  Our aim must be to extend the 
possibilities, to widen peoples' experiences and 
expectations.  Under capitalism we see the potential for 
a better way of life but the system can't deliver.  It 
offers the promise of improvement with one hand but 
snatches it away with the other.


THE ANARCHIST ALTERNATIVE: DROP THE PILOT

The problems aren't due to unbridled development.  In 
fact in most of the world development is urgently 
needed.   We can't afford to go back but it is 
impossible to move forward under capitalism.  Therefore 
we argue for the overthrow of capitalism.  We make the 
case for anarchism and workers' management of industry.  
We need growth which is finely tuned, highly developed 
and responds to peoples' needs. 

For now, we focus on immediate action by workers to 
address the issue where it arises.  Environmental 
degradation is a class issue.  The working class always 
gets the worst effects, the bosses can retreat to the 
air-conditioned penthouse or the golf-links.  We support 
action to reduce pollution from industrial plants or 
even for their re-location while attempting to avoid 
just making "not in our back-yard" arguments.

In Britain it took industrial action by the National 
Union of Seamen to stop nuclear dumping at sea, they 
just refused to do it even when threatened with legal 
action.   Similarly dockers in Liverpool stopped the 
importation of toxic chemicals from  Canada.

Workers can, in day-to-day struggle, make real gains in 
forcing industry to clean up.  They have also proved 
capable of managing highly centralised and complex 
industries in a democratic way.  The experience of 
Russia (1917-1921), Spain (1936-37), Hungary (1956) and 
Portugal (1974) support this case.

Workers can make industry something which can ensure a 
better world and begin the massive task of development 
that is needed worldwide.  This is the only way that 
resources can be used sustainably and the problems of 
poverty and under-development tackled.   Industry has to 
be made work for people not profits.

Conor McLoughlin



