RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Politics
FOCUS: How to Save the Great Barrier Reef Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=35861"><span class="small">Bill McKibben, The New Yorker</span></a>   
Thursday, 31 May 2018 10:54

McKibben writes: "The Great Barrier Reef is the largest living structure on Earth, but it is roughly half as living as it was three years ago. Massive bleaching events in 2016 and 2017 - caused by the incursions of hot water that are becoming far more common on our rapidly warming planet - devastated the northern and central sections."

The Great Barrier Reef is the largest living structure on Earth, but it is roughly half as living as it was three years ago. (photo: Eric Martin/Redux)
The Great Barrier Reef is the largest living structure on Earth, but it is roughly half as living as it was three years ago. (photo: Eric Martin/Redux)


How to Save the Great Barrier Reef

By Bill McKibben, The New Yorker

31 May 18

 

rom Port Douglas, in Queensland, Australia, it’s about two hours by motorboat to the outer edge of the Great Barrier Reef. On a trip last month, the sea was choppy and no one talked much, just dozed in the early morning sun. We were headed to the Opal Reef, where, three years earlier, a crew had filmed some of the remarkable scenes of coral spawning for the BBC Series “Blue Planet II.” Guided by the phases of the moon, and with David Attenborough providing discreet and tasteful narration, the garden of corals simultaneously released clouds of eggs and sperm, in the world’s most profligate display of fecundity.

We moored, tugged on snorkels and masks, and stepped off the stern, clad in full-body “stinger suits” to protect against the jellyfish. I swam the fifty yards to the reef with James Kerry, a reef researcher at Queensland’s James Cook University, and, when we got to the edge, peered down. It was like snorkeling over a parking garage. The forms of coral remained—there were exuberant fans and antlers and trays—but instead of vivid neon colors there were just shades of murk. The living coral were so few in number that Kerry could tell me about them individually as we treaded water at the surface. “That blue one is Pocillopora damicornis. It’s pretty hardy,” he said. “And did you see that one thing down on the bottom that looked like a pillow? That’s a large single-polyp coral, a fungid.” Some fish wandered through—mostly parrotfish, which feed off the algae that covers the dead coral.

The Great Barrier Reef is the largest living structure on Earth, but it is roughly half as living as it was three years ago. Massive bleaching events in 2016 and 2017—caused by the incursions of hot water that are becoming far more common on our rapidly warming planet—devastated the northern and central sections. It’s hard to explain how grim it looked beneath the surface, in the same way that it’s hard to explain precisely how you know instinctively that a dead body is dead. But everyone on board was trying, working out a kind of grief.

Dean Miller, a reef scientist who is the director of media and science for the Great Barrier Reef Legacy, an organization that works to get more scientists out on the water, has filmed transects across this section of the reef over the years, mapping the same route across the coral. “This place—it looked like someone had created the reef, had planted all their favorite corals in perfect shapes and sizes. It was a bustling city, like in ‘Finding Nemo.’ But now it just seems quiet, like the lights have been turned off.” The shapes of the dead coral will persist until the first big storm crumbles them, but no one has seen any spawning in the area in the past two years.

Paul O’Dowd was the mate on the boat. He’s not a scientist, but he has been bringing visitors to the reef since December, 1990. He told me, “There are individual coral colonies I’d had contact with for years, and then in a matter of days they fluoresce and bleach. There are very few of the old familiars left.” Each day during the siege of hot water was a little worse, he said. “We kept hoping the wind would come up and blow it away, but it didn’t. You’d dive and it was like visiting a friend in the hospital, knowing he was terminal. It’s like touring a hospice ward.”

While we were diving, about fifty miles away, in the reef city of Cairns, several Australian cabinet members were announcing a “reef-rescue plan.” It did not address climate change at all—instead, in what was widely perceived as an election-year gesture, it provided hundreds of millions of dollars mostly to combat the crown-of-thorns starfish, which eat coral polyps, and agricultural runoff from the shore. Those are real problems for the reef, but no scientist thinks that they’re the reason for its dramatic demise; it was akin to interrupting a mugging to give the victim a quick cholesterol check. In fact, it was worse than that, since Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull’s government was also trying to open what would be Australia’s largest coal mine. The charity that the government put in charge of reef rescue was reportedly run by a former Esso Australia executive, and his “chairman’s panel” includes representatives from mining giants like Rio Tinto and Peabody Energy.

On the way home, I stopped in Vancouver, Canada, to help activists fighting a giant new pipeline from the Alberta tar sands. Although Prime Minister Justin Trudeau spoke eloquently at the 2015 Paris climate conference about the need to limit the planet’s temperature increase to 1.5 degrees Celsius, he has pushed for more infrastructure to expand output from Alberta’s oil region. Last year, he told an energy-industry audience in Texas that Canada would develop the hundred and seventy-three billion barrels of oil in the Alberta tar sands, adding, “Our job is to insure that this is done responsibly, safely, and sustainably.” But burn oil and you produce carbon dioxide. That’s chemistry. And if you burn a hundred and seventy-three billion barrels, the CO2 you produce will use up between a quarter and a third of the carbon budget between us and that 1.5-degree rise. That seemed more likely than ever on Tuesday morning, when Trudeau announced that the Canadian government would buy the contested pipeline outright, so that it could finish its construction, over the objections of environmentalists and indigenous people.

The day after I left Vancouver, I was down the coast in Oakland, California, where people were preparing to protest Governor Jerry Brown’s planned September climate summit. Few world leaders have done as much as Brown has to push down demand for fossil fuel; his most recent announcement was that every new house built in California will soon need to be come with solar panels. But while Brown, Turnbull, and Trudeau are all willing to talk about reducing emissions by cutting demand for energy, none of them are reducing the supply of fossil fuel. According to a coalition of environmental groups that includes 350.org, of which I am a co-founder, Brown’s Administration has issued twenty thousand drilling permits to oil companies, just as Canada has kept pushing to expand development in the tar sands, and Australia to open the vast, untapped coal reserves of the Galilee Basin. If you want to address climate change in whatever time remains to do so, you need—as one study put it recently—to “cut with both arms of the scissors.”

You’d think that urgency would be the order of the day. In the past few years, Australia has had heat waves so dramatic that government meteorologists had to add new shades of red to the official weather map. Canada has watched nearly half the sea ice in the Arctic melt, and California has suffered catastrophic out-of-season wildfires and mudslides. But, in truth, virtually no world leader has moved aggressively to cut supply. (One exception: Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, of New Zealand, announced recently that her government will stop issuing new permits for offshore oil and gas exploration as part of its efforts to combat climate change.)

If you possibly can, you should see the Great Barrier Reef. It’s glorious, the most psychedelic corner of God’s brain. It’s not by any means all dead. In fact, after our dive on the desolate section I’ve described, we motored a few minutes to another section of the Opal Reef, this one by a channel of water that apparently had flowed fast enough to cool the corals somewhat during the worst of the bleaching. When we dived, there was beauty all around us. Chevron butterflyfish. Orange-tailed damselfish. Plate corals in three-color morphs. A giant clam with neon filaments in its mouth, which closed comically when Kerry gave it a tug. You’re looking in on another world, so alien that its inhabitants barely recognize you as an intruder—schools of fish dart just a few inches to avoid you, and then carry on. But, even as you marvel, it’s hard to ignore the truth that this is a lovely realm we’re about to blow up—by 2050, on current trends, coral-reef researchers believe this ecosystem will be gone, not just in Australia but around the world.

“Even that section we just were on, it’s not a healthy reef,” Kerry said quietly as we headed back to shore across the chop. “If you did a transect, even that section was fifty per cent dead. You want to say it’s the hope for the reef going forward, but if we keep getting these bleaching events it doesn’t really matter, because they’ll all be killed.”


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
FOCUS: Rosanne and Trump: One Down, One to Go Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=35918"><span class="small">Michael Moore, Michael Moore's Facebook Page</span></a>   
Thursday, 31 May 2018 10:34

Moore writes: "So Roseanne Barr woke up [Tuesday] morning and posted hateful, slanderous tweets about me, Valerie Jarrett, George Soros and Chelsea Clinton - and within hours, ABC fired her."

Michael Moore. (photo: The New York Times)
Michael Moore. (photo: The New York Times)


Rosanne and Trump: One Down, One to Go

By Michael Moore, Michael Moore's Facebook Page

31 May 18

 

o Roseanne Barr woke up [Tuesday] morning & posted hateful, slanderous tweets about me, Valerie Jarrett, George Soros & Chelsea Clinton — and within hours, ABC fired her. The same ABC who hired her after years of her posting other tweets saying Hillary was running a child sex abuse ring out of a pizza restaurant in DC, that the Clintons had murdered people, and anyone who criticized Benjamin Netanyahu was a Nazi. The same Roseanne who referred to black people (even back then) as apes, and Arabs as, well, every racist thing you can imagine. That Roseanne. Like Trump, she went on a Wild White Racist tear during the Obama years.

Did you ever wonder why, in 2011, NBC didn’t fire Donald Trump when he launched his racist birther movement, declaring the President a Kenyan and a Muslim?

Roseanne, the viscous slur at me you retweeted [Tuesday] — if I had the time I’d sue you and drain you of every dime you have. But I’ve got a better idea. As they say in the movies: one down, one to go.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Trump's Manchurian Trade Policy Print
Thursday, 31 May 2018 08:33

Krugman writes: "It all feels horribly relevant these days. But don't worry: This isn't going to be another piece on Donald Trump's collusion with Russia, which is being ably covered by other people."

President Trump. (photo: Doug Mills/The New York Times)
President Trump. (photo: Doug Mills/The New York Times)


Trump's Manchurian Trade Policy

By Paul Krugman, The New York Times

31 May 18

 

emember “The Manchurian Candidate”? The 1959 novel, made into a classic 1962 film (never mind the remake), involved a plot to install a Communist agent as president of the United States. One major irony was that the politician in question was modeled on Senator Joe McCarthy — that is, he posed as a superpatriot even while planning to betray America.

It all feels horribly relevant these days. But don’t worry: This isn’t going to be another piece on Donald Trump’s collusion with Russia, which is being ably covered by other people. What I want to talk about instead are Trump’s actions on international trade — which are starting to have a remarkably similar feel.

On one side, the “Make America Great Again” president is pursuing protectionist policies, supposedly in the name of national security, that will alienate many of our democratic allies. On the other side, he seems weirdly determined to prevent action against genuine national security threats posed by foreign dictatorships — in this case China. What’s going on?


READ MORE

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
White House in Panic Mode After TV Star With Racist Twitter Feed Loses Job Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=9160"><span class="small">Andy Borowitz, The New Yorker</span></a>   
Wednesday, 30 May 2018 14:04

Borowitz writes: "The White House was reportedly in panic mode Tuesday afternoon, shortly after news broke that a television star with a racist Twitter feed had been fired."

President Trump. (photo: Olivier Douliery/Getty)
President Trump. (photo: Olivier Douliery/Getty)


White House in Panic Mode After TV Star With Racist Twitter Feed Loses Job

By Andy Borowitz, The New Yorker

30 May 18

 

he White House was reportedly in panic mode Tuesday afternoon, shortly after news broke that a television star with a racist Twitter feed had been fired.

According to a White House source, Donald J. Trump immediately huddled with close advisers to discuss the firing, which, staffers agreed, “set an ominous new precedent.”

“We’ve been living under assumption that a TV personality could tweet out as many racist things as he or she wanted with no consequences,” the source said. “Now, all of a sudden, our worst nightmare has come true.”

White House staffers are reportedly combing through Trump’s thirty-seven thousand tweets, searching for ones that could be deemed fireable offenses, and have so far flagged more than thirty-six thousand of them.

Many on Trump’s team are urging calm, however, claiming that the dismissal of one racist TV star could be an “isolated example.”

“The only people who can fire Donald Trump right now are congressional Republicans, and they don’t have the high moral standards that TV executives have,” the source said.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
With His Choice of Prime Minister, Italy's President Has Gifted the Far Right Print
Wednesday, 30 May 2018 13:53

Varoufakis writes: "Sergio Mattarella's defence of the status quo has ensured the success of racist and populist policies."

Northern League party leader Matteo Salvini 'is secretly salivating at the thought of another election.' (photo: Tony Gentile/Reuters)
Northern League party leader Matteo Salvini 'is secretly salivating at the thought of another election.' (photo: Tony Gentile/Reuters)


With His Choice of Prime Minister, Italy's President Has Gifted the Far Right

By Yanis Varoufakis, Guardian UK

30 May 18


Sergio Mattarella’s defence of the status quo has ensured the success of racist and populist policies

taly should be doing well. Unlike Britain, it exports considerably more to the rest of the world than it imports, while its government spends less (excluding interest payments) than the taxes it receives. And yet Italy is stagnating, its population in a state of revolt following two lost decades.

While it is true that Italy is in serious need of reforms, those who blame the stagnation on domestic inefficiencies and corruption must explain why Italy grew so fast throughout the postwar period until it entered the eurozone. Was its government and polity more efficient and virtuous in the 1970s and 1980s? Hardly.

The singular reason for Italy’s woes is its membership of a terribly designed monetary union, the eurozone, in which the Italian economy cannot breathe and which consecutive German governments refuse to reform.

In 2015 the Greek people elected a progressive, Europeanist government with a mandate to demand a new deal within the eurozone. In the space of six months, under the guidance of the German government, the European Union and its central bank crushed us. A few months later, I was asked by the Italian daily newspaper Corriere della Sera if I thought European democracy was at risk. I answered: “Greece surrendered but it was Europe’s democracy that was mortally wounded. Unless Europeans realise that their economy is run by unelected and unaccountable pseudo-technocrats, committing one gross error after another, our democracy will remain a figment of our collective imagination.”

Since then, the pro-establishment government of Italy’s Democratic party implemented, one after the other, the policies that the unelected bureaucrats of the EU demanded. The result was more stagnation. And so, in March, a national election delivered an absolute parliamentary majority to two anti-establishment parties which, despite their differences, shared doubts about Italy’s eurozone membership and a hostility to migrants. It was the bitter harvest of absent prospects and withering hope.

After a few weeks of the kind of post-election horse-trading common in countries like Italy and Germany, the Five Star Movement and League leaders Luigi Di Maio and Matteo Salvini struck a deal to form a government. Alas, President Sergio Mattarella used the powers bestowed upon him by the Italian constitution to prevent the formation of that government and, instead, handed the mandate to a technocrat, a former IMF employee who stands no chance of a vote of confidence in parliament.

Had Mattarella refused Salvini the post of interior minister, outraged by his promise to expel 500,000 migrants from Italy, I would be compelled to support him. But, no, the president had no such qualms. Not even for a moment did he consider vetoing the idea of a European country deploying its security forces to round up hundreds of thousands of people, cage them, and force them into trains, buses and ferries before sending them goodness knows where.

No, Mattarella chose to clash with an absolute majority of lawmakers for another reason: his disapproval of the finance minister designate. Why? Because the said gentleman, while fully qualified for the job, and despite his declaration that he would abide by the EU’s rules, had in the past expressed doubts about the eurozone’s architecture and has favoured a plan of EU exit just in case it was needed. It was as if Mattarella declared that reasonableness from a prospective finance minister constitutes grounds for his or her exclusion from the post.

What is so striking is that there is no thinking economist anywhere in the world who does not share concern about the eurozone’s faulty architecture. No prudent finance minister would neglect to develop a plan for euro exit. Indeed, I have it on good authority that the German finance ministry, the European Central Bank and every major bank and corporation have plans in place for the possible exit from the eurozone of Italy, even of Germany. Is Mattarella telling us that the Italian finance minister is banned from thinking of such a plan?

Beyond his moral failure to oppose the League’s industrial-scale misanthropy, the president has made a major tactical blunder: he fell right into Salvini’s trap. The formation of another “technical” government, under a former IMF apparatchik, is a fantastic gift to Salvini’s party.

Salvini is secretly salivating at the thought of another election – one that he will fight not as the misanthropic, divisive populist that he is, but as the defender of democracy against the Deep Establishment. He has already scaled the moral high ground with the stirring words: “Italy is not a colony, we are not slaves of the Germans, the French, the spread or finance.”

If Mattarella takes solace from the fact that previous Italian presidents managed to put in place technical governments that did the establishment’s job (so “successfully” that the country’s political centre imploded), he is very badly mistaken. This time around he, unlike his predecessors, has no parliamentary majority to pass a budget or indeed to lend his chosen government a vote of confidence. Thus, the president is forced to call fresh elections that, courtesy of his moral drift and tactical blunder, will return an even stronger majority for Italy’s xenophobic political forces, possibly in alliance with the enfeebled Forza Italia of Silvio Berlusconi.

And then what, President Mattarella?


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
<< Start < Prev 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 Next > End >>

Page 1237 of 3432

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN