Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Trick or Treat for Climate Change
Halloween is around the corner, and children will soon be dressing up and chanting “trick or treat,” their demand for candy backed up by the threat of a prank. Climate-change activists, from pranksters to presidents, are doing the same. This past Monday, the activist-artist group The Yes Men staged another of its hoaxes, with one member posing as an official from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, leading what appeared to be a legitimate press conference and stating the chamber’s complete reversal on its historically adamant opposition to climate-change legislation.
Meanwhile, in the Indian Ocean, the president of the Maldives held the world’s first underwater cabinet meeting, demonstrating that rising sea levels could very soon overwhelm his archipelago nation. With the Copenhagen climate conference less than 50 days away, people are stepping up the pressure.
The Yes Men stage elaborate hoaxes on global-trade organizations, multinational corporations and politicians. They satirically skewer corporate, free-trade, pro-business positions by acting as genuine, sincere spokespeople for these institutions, often offering apologies for past corporate crimes or promoting absurd products with remarkably straight faces at industry conferences.
In December 2004, on the 20th anniversary of the Bhopal, India, disaster in which a Union Carbide plant gas leak killed thousands of people, Andrew Bichlbaum of The Yes Men appeared on BBC News posing as a representative of Dow Chemical (which bought Union Carbide), claiming Dow would finally take full responsibility for the accident.
In 2007, Yes Men Bichlbaum and Mike Bonanno addressed Canada’s largest oil conference, posing as executives of ExxonMobil and the National Petroleum Council. They announced a plan to convert the corpses of the expected millions of victims of climate change into a fuel they called “Vivoleum.” They were ejected, after which Bonanno told the press: “While ExxonMobil continues to post record profits, they use their money to persuade governments to do nothing about climate change. This is a crime against humanity.”
At this week’s faux press conference in Washington, D.C., Bichlbaum read from a statement: “We at the Chamber have tried to keep climate science from interfering with business. But without a stable climate, there will be no business.”
Fox Business News and other global news outlets carried the story of the chamber’s surprise support for climate-change legislation. During the press conference, an actual U.S. Chamber of Commerce employee entered, loudly declaring the event a fraud, but exposing himself to probing questions about the chamber’s position on climate change.
Several major corporations have quit the chamber because of its opposition to genuine climate-change legislation, including Apple, Exelon, PG&E and Levi Strauss & Co.
The U.S. chamber’s resistance to science-based climate policy is nothing new. Career public relations executive James Hoggan is the author of “Climate Cover-Up: The Crusade to Deny Global Warming.” Hoggan told me, “The PR stunt wasn’t pulled off by The Yes Men; the PR stunt is basically being pulled off by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and it’s been going on for decades.”
Hoggan’s book describes what he calls “a two-decade-long campaign by the energy industry in Canada and the United States, basically designed to confuse the public about climate change, and to give people the sense that there is a debate about the science of climate change.”
Oct. 24 is the global day of action organized by the group 350.org, which includes environmentalist Bill McKibben. Named after what scientists have identified as a sustainable target for carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere, 350 parts per million (we are currently at 387 ppm), 350.org lists close to 4,000 events around the world on Oct. 24.
The goal is to pressure government representatives before their departure for the major United Nations climate summit that will be held in Copenhagen in December.
President Mohamed Nasheed of the Republic of Maldives is already taking action. Last week, he held an underwater cabinet meeting, donning scuba gear and literally meeting in 20 feet of water in the world’s lowest-lying country. They signed an “SOS from the frontline” declaration, reading, in part, “If we can’t save the Maldives today, you can’t save the rest of the world tomorrow.” He will carry the declaration to Copenhagen.
U.S. government leadership will be critical to clinching a substantive deal in Copenhagen, but the Senate has not finalized any climate legislation, which essentially ties the hands of U.S. negotiators. Oil, gas and coal interests are spending $300,000 a day lobbying the government. The moment of climate-change truth is upon us, and the professional deniers are up to their old tricks.
Denis Moynihan contributed research to this column.
- Posted in
101 Comments so far
Show AllAs Chris Hedges states, the oil and coal industryies will not take their extinction laying down. They are fighting and will fight to stay alive as long as possible. We have to bring them to a halt. How/ massive demonstrations and boycott!!!!!!Change our life styles!!!!!
The problem with the boycott and lifestyle approach is that corporations (I include government and the military) will continue to consume fossil fuel. The US military is claimed to be the largest single consumer of fossil fuel in the world. Which, since it's the largest corporation in the world, is not surprising.
I suspect the only way to fully end the fossil-fuel hegemony will be to band together for political action. Make them outlaw.
Sorry, Master October, but I must interject again: where is this international communism? In Russia or China? You might find it in Cuba, I suppose, but only because Dictator Castro is a remarkable human being. What you say about global socialist economic revolution is true. And capitalism must be forcibly overthrown by a genuinely democratic workers' movement. But led by an elected leadership of communist, Leninist parties? Hasn't that been tried before, by the Soviet Union? There was only one Leninist party though, and it quickly became a rigid bureaucratic dictatorship. That experiment failed, though not because of the mighty Reagan, as neo-cons would con us into believing. It failed because it betrayed true socialism, that is, it betrayed Marxism. I'm a little bemused, I didn't realize any of you communists still existed.
Holding up a failed form of socialism as the answer is not very smart, Master Oct. But I'd rather fight for international communism than capitalism, if that's the only choice. I'm just not sure where to find international communism.
Communism may work best at a local level, such as worker owned cooperative businesses, than on a national level where the concentration of power and money can easily corrupt.
Better prepare yourself Amy for an array of backlash from the Obama bots who are back on CD with a vengeance to undermine the REAL left; their strategy is to perpetuate the fantasy of clean coal, advance nuclear power irrelevant of the fact that there is currently no solution to spent nuclear fuel storage (note John Kerry's new Bill); or that the storage of current spent fuel supplies often is stored in facilities in poor neighborhoods; or mountain top removal, species extinction (like the Grey wolf who was recently taken off endangered species list by Obama to satisfy corporate ranching); or oil exploration in pristine wilderness areas not only goes forward, but is enshrined in their legislative dogma forever.
We might ask ourselves why the advance of solutions is inimical to the environment and - concommitantly, why are these solutions hostile to the Obama Administration? Like you have noted in so many fine articles, it is because Obama is married to corporate hegemony destroying our planet.
For taking a principled stand, you will be called all kind of names (like Hedges and Jensen recently), accused of erecting walls, undermining Obama’s corporate driven agenda, but that agenda will be framed in such a way as to make Obama appear as our saviour who is working against those corporate forces, not for it; and – perhaps most importantly – daring to suggest these links are meaningful or truthful, you will be called a heretic by the status quo types who forever have a vested interest in destroying Mother Earth.
(Of course, their only concern for the planet is lip service, nothing more, they disguise their real agenda behind rhetoric while avoiding action at all costs!)
Thanks for your courage to report the REAL issues of importance to the authentic progressive community.
Trick or Treat, indeed!
Sioux Rose
ELOHIM: Masterful job at connecting the dots. Well-said! Bravo.
LOL ! COUGH COUGH ! LOL ! A conspiranoid and a bedwetting astrozombie coming together ! OOOOOOOOOOO !! LOL ! COUGH COUGH ! LOL !
If you need another conspiranoid, elohim is tops. LOL !
Prepare yourself Amy, the professional deniers are indeed up to their old tricks.
Denying that there is any argument or debate needed.
Denying that there is any question that Global Warming is masn made.
Denying that there are more scientists that do not go along with the "science" that "proves" their theories.
Denying its a theory and not the proven truth they pretend.
Denying the fact that no matter what we do unilaterally, it would have no effect.
I suppose the melting of the Arctic Ocean is just theory eh Henry? I suppose the common sense of not crapping in your own nest in order to keep it habitable is some sort of scientific concept that requires study. Keep crapping Henry. Your corporate fascist turd bombs are quite amusing.
Your
Henry, what's your profession/trade? I know it can't be science, because no one trained in science need do more than look at the longitudinal data on surface temperature, ocean acidification, and oxygenation. It's unambiguous, and so are the implications.
It's worth noting that the real measure of someone's belief --whether he'll make a 'bar bet' for a substantial sum of money-- leaves the deniers with their trousers down around their ankles. At least two people, one a climate scientist and the other the journo George Monbiot, have tried to get up substantial ( ca. US$10K ) 'bar bets' with deniers. But the deniers all run away. Regardless of what they prostitute themselves to *claim*, the deniers know the truth and quite sensibly refuse to throw their money away by betting on their own lies.
>>Hoggan’s book describes what he calls “a two-decade-long campaign by the energy industry in Canada and the United States, basically designed to confuse the public about climate change, and to give people the sense that there is a debate about the science of climate change.”
This is key to understanding the current situation. The oil and coal companies don't have to debate the reality of global climate change, they just have to pretend there is a debate.
>>Oil, gas and coal interests are spending $300,000 a day lobbying the government.
And they are spending huge sums of money with advertising campaigns that tout "clean coal" and other such nonsense. We need to nationalize the energy industries in this country and start putting that $300,000 a day and all the profits they are making into building a truly green power grid. We are being slowly bled to death in this battle and enough is enough.
Climate change? What happened to global warming? I guess the fact the the Earth has been cooling for the last 8 years requires a quick propaganda modification. What is it about this climate change, that is not global warming, that will produce catastrophes that are identical to those previously attributed to warming?
Goodman bemoans her opponents', "giv(ing) people the sense that there is a debate about the science of climate change.”
If there is actually no debate, Amy, why do you have to write columns attacking the other side? Are you really suggesting that "the debate about the science of climate change" is closed? Does man now know everything there is to know about our climate and what affects its changes? Or is it just that, once the "progressive" side has settled on a course of action, the debate is closed?
What about the 31,000 scientists who have signed the Oregon Petition ridiculing the notion that carbon dioxide is causing catastrophic climate change? Do you just wipe them from existence with a silly column?
This hoax is growing old. People are awakening to the fact that it is just the latest attempt of the Progressive project to transfer wealth and power from the creators to the leeches and parasites of the Left. And, in Goodman's case, to make little people with meaningless lives feel that they are important by saving the very planet from the ravages of evil mankind.
This Chicken Little crap would be funny if it weren't so damned vicious and dangerous.
Yeah, parasites like Dick Cheney and little Georgie Jr. tells me a lot, along with their marching band. Hi ho, hi ho, off to work we go...
Cheney! Bush! You forgot "Haliburton!" Ha ha! Talk about someone whose "entire vocabulary comes either at the promptings of his handlers or is punctuated by a tendency of self-pity and injured ego dramatics." Ha ha!
What about the column and the notion that the debate is closed, genius? When presented with a point-counterpoint, you resort to mindless chants from 4-year-old bumper stickers.
Dick Cheney is Haliburton; explain why Haliburton got the richest no bid contracts in Iraq genius? What don't you understand about any of this?
Closed debate? Get a grip little one, no one is keeping you from parroting your own galactic stupidity on this forum.
Ahh, I knew you would get Haliburton in there. Why are you diverting a column and a posting about "climate change" to worn out slogans from the previous administration? "Iraq!" "No bid contracts!" Why can no one here address my points, but only make fun of my name and rant about Bush? I thought this was an intellectual site.
Man, you are going around in circles. It was you who raised the issue of Haliburton. I responded directly to your rebuttal.
If you cannot deal with it now, what can I tell you?
I don't participate on this forum to hold anyone's hand for them. With regards your assertion about Mak[ing] fun of [your] name" I would suggest you direct the comment to the person who did so: I made no such assertion.
With regards to using your real name, I respect you for it. I use to use my real name on this forum and got banned for doing so.
Wah wah wah. He calls people on the left leeches and parasites and then whines when someone calls him a wanker. This is laughable. Somebody get out the world's smallest violin!
Sioux Rose
LEFTY: It is the troll's favored tactic. See the discussion board from the Naomi Klein article posted last Friday. The same imbecile (under a different screen name, but it sure sounds JUST like that one to me!) posted 55 comments! Then accused others, including myself, of dominating the board. I had about 14.
I am not Shawn Berry and I don't post under other names. SB said repeatedly that he is a blue collared progressive. I am a conservative. I know that "progressive" is just the latest newspeak for commie. He dislikes Rush Limbaugh. I am a big fan of Rush. He is a Naderite. I despise Ralph Nader. It was not me on the Naomi Klein column, Sioux Rose.
Ho! Thanks for letting us know who you love and who you despise, Doug. Common Dreams commenters need an example of who their enemies are, and how they think. Most of them never listen to the ravings of Rush.
I get paid to *shudder*
Though only for two months and change longer.
You're welcome George. You can also visit the American Thinker blog for more insight on your opponents.
Doug Wakeman October 21st, 2009 7:35 pm -- Aha! That's the one that banned me for trying to introduce some civility into it. But not before I learned exactly what "your opponents" think. I had fun there, but we really need to get to work on the science of this thing.
Sioux Rose does this to people she hates. Lying and name calling is her hobby. She couldn't prove that any of us were the same.
I may not be a rightwing jerk like you but at least you made yourself clear. I believe in pushing the Democratic Party to the left while you want the Republicans to come back. I am a fan of Nader's ideas but I didn't vote for him so that the Republican Party could screw this country up for another 4 years. Nader already gave the election to Bush in 2000 by running as a Green Party guy instead of running as a Democrat and knocking Gore out in the primaries. What has 8 years of Bush/Cheney done that you can be proud of?
If you need the Republicans to return to power, Rose will help you out. HA !
No offense Shawn but this sure looks a lot like you posting to your own sock puppet. While it might be fun, you really should do it elsewhere. You would fit in nicely at World Nut Daily or USA Today.
It's easy for you to imagine that I'm someone else's sock puppet than it is to prove it. My post proves that I'm not. Until it can be proven that I'm someone else's sock puppet, yours and Sioux Rose's claim remains a lie. Neither you nor Sioux Rose get it. I could easily call you and Sioux Rose sock puppets by your own definitions but since I can't prove it either, I won't. Relying on heresy is not proof. If you want to believe heresy without proof or evidence to back it up, what's to stop you from acting childish?
I didn't claim this guy was your sock puppet. I said it appears that way. If Wankerman isn't your puppet, I apologize. If he is, I am not condemning you or angry at you. I am just trying to point out that there are better venues for sock puppetry. Slate and MSN political groups have a lot of them. And for goodness sakes, stop defending yourself to Rose and other people. Be yourself, you're fine when you're not engaging yourself in these petty squabbles.
I don't know how you can judge my post as sounding like I was his sock puppet. All I did was just thank him for speaking out and I pointed out that yeah I disagree with his ideology and corrected him on the Nader part. I don't need you lecturing me about defending myself. I have every right to defend myself, guns or speechwise. I didn't want to jump in to this shit but SR gave me no choice. Go find one post where I actually went personally against her. I always point out what I don't like about someone's post. If you want to condone her violent threats against me even though I never meant ill of her personally, do it. But don't lecture me about it. She can sweet and all this and that with her astro mumbo jumbo that most people don't get any education in. Fine but when she goes hypocritical and threatens violence, I have every right to defend myself. I have no intention of threatening any violence against SR, never did, never will. But I will call her out on her posts even if her associates want to gang up on me and try to give me a living hell on it. She complains about dissent being silenced but when she is facing dissent, she won't debate it with civility. If I have to be banned for this, I'll accept their death sentence even if I don't agree with it. I don't see what is so difficult to understand. Rose is not the boss of this forum unless she can prove it. I'll leave it at that. I need some time to prepare discussing my experience as a repair man and a construction worker and why it makes me feel like repairing the system from within even if some people want to call it "maintaining the status quo". I don't expect anything in return but I think it's time someone here stood for crediting blue collared workers for going green in different ways.
Sioux Rose
Given that the WEB = virtual reality, I can't spray pesticide to get rid of you, as I would any other buzzing gnat.
On a different matter, you say "the Republican return to power," if you actually read, or were capable of learning from this forum it might occur to you that NO significant changes of policy have been executed, that even when Clinton was head of state, the deregulation of the FCC, the "end of welfare as we know it" (except to the MIC and big corporations, particularly those too big to fail), NAFTA, and the evisceration (look it up in the dictionary) of the Glass-Steagall Act all took place. This is why Michael Moore referred to Clinton as "The best REPUBLICAN president we ever had." So, election and the two-party system represent a very expensive costume ball, a "masque," and BOTH parties with RARE exceptions serve the SAME masters. If you had the intelligence to pay attention, the evidence remains in plain sight. Nice try, troll, calling what I see what it IS, is neither lying, nor name calling. Usually I compliment people in the forum for their intelligence. In your case, that of course is impossible to do.
Your name calling and your lust for violence takes away whatever credibility you had. Any objective and independent reader can see that.
I already understand that Clinton didn't do much. The problem started out with the Republicans in Congress forcing him to go center. The Democrats may have made dumb decisions in the past but they're the only thing left for getting this country to go left. Third parties can't win, lack the resources, funding, and appeal, and they're ready to accept the spoiler role. Only a fool would try an untested third party that has no chance of winning rather than attempt to move the Democratic Party to the left. You're a rich celebrity as you posted in another post so you wouldn't understand. Why don't you give all of your money to your favorite third party and see how far you can go or would you rather sit here and act childish all day every day?
Sioux Rose
DOUG: I think you people come with scripts. You define yourself by age, your so-called political allegiance, which family member beat up, divorced, or harmed another; what city you live in, and then go on to dominate the threads. I haven't figured out how many of you exist, but in spite of your good cop/bad cop best efforts, you all sound alike. Robots. And another DEAD giveaway is you always cross-reference one another in your comments, sometimes throwing me or another commenter in to give your sense of belonging to the forum some credibility, I guess. I know Homeland Security has a budget tantamount to an embarassment of riches, so I would assume you geniuses are on their payroll.
Oh, and if Shawn is progressive, then I AM the Pope!
Sioux Rose says:
"And another DEAD giveaway is you always cross-reference one another in your comments, sometimes throwing me or another commenter in to give your sense of belonging to the forum some credibility,"
And this is the same Sioux Rose that does the same on her posts. Archives don't lie. Be honest and stop being hypocritical. You don't own this forum.
"I know Homeland Security has a budget tantamount to an embarassment of riches, so I would assume you geniuses are on their payroll."
You sound just like the "birther" or "9/11 truther" idiots who have no basis for their lying.
"Oh, and if Shawn is progressive, then I AM the Pope!"
If Sioux Rose is really progressive, then I AM the son of Jesus Christ ! Two can play at that game.
Fair enough. I think I'm done here.....for now.
http://dougwakeman.com/
Wow, a 9-12er and a truther all in one. I'm impressed.
Doug Wakeman October 21st, 2009 11:34 am -- Some of your comments suggest that from the outset, you considered this a free-fire zone, not "an intellectual site."
Nonetheless, I would appreciate a response to my post from a few minutes ago.
No hoax here Wankerman. There is damage all over the planet from global warming. Not predicted, TODAY. Once again, you don't have to debate the facts, you just have to pretend there is a debate. Just because the fossil fuel industry can only garner/buy support of 31,000 scientists, I should be impressed.
Go back to the World Nut Daily hole you came from. Your schtick doesn't play here.
I have the courage to use my real name and your intelligent response is to twist it. What's your name pal?
And don't tell me where to read and post you arrogant little prick.
I can tell you anything I want you twisted right wing cockroach. Go kick your dog or drive around in your pick-up truck. Like I said, beat it clown.
That tone, that syntax, hey, I think I know you! Aren't you the fat little NAMBLA fella' who hangs around down at the 7-Eleven trying to buy Slurpies for little boys?
Speaking of NAMBLA, don't you have an appointment in the airport restroom with your boss?
Sioux Rose
I think we've got another Shawn Berry trip here, the same one or two using a variety of screen names to produce their verbal phlegm on this board. Kleenex, anyone?
To be honest with you Rose, this is about the most troll-free site I've ever frequented. I know I shouldn't feed them but I can't help myself sometimes. Hope you are well today!
Sioux Rose
Hi LEFTY, yeah, these trolls are such bottom-feeders that it makes one realize how low some department will go to seek out "hired help." Wasn't the military taking crack heads, too?
I sense a level of mental instability that transcends crack. It also appears my comment about trolls was premature.
Why, thanks for calling Rose out on her mental instability. Oh and I didn't know she was a troll but that's your call. She's welcome to grow up anytime she's done with her psycho rantings.
She's feeling fine already. All she needs is another EGG PIE slapped in her face.