@Matthuber78 states that any environmental politics must secure people’s basic needs, strengthen the working class and tackle inequalities. Great, couldn't agree more!
But then why does Matt completely overlook the LONG list of Degrowth policies that do precisely that?
/2
A few examples of such Degrowth policies:
-Decommodify basic needs
-Universal Basic Services
-Universal Basic Income
-Cancel illegitimate debts
-job guarantee
-living wage
-reduce working time
-re-allocate productivity gains into work time reduction and job creation
/3
More such Degrowth policies:
-redistribute undesirable jobs
-recognise unpaid, informal activities
-right to part time work
-democractic owernship of business
-Make democracy more participatory
-Regulate lobbying
-strenghten the commons
-support co-operatives
/4
Even more such Degrowth policies:
-remove economic rents (unearned income from capital and land)
-(Housing) rent controls
-Interdiction to own more than two dwellings
-More social housing
-Global wealth tax
-Capital gain tax
-inheritance tax
-Tax on property
/5
Aaand even more:
-global tax on financial transactions
-tax on transnational profits
-global minimum corporate tax
-maximum income
-Progressive income tax
-Tax on luxury products
-Progressive tax on consumption, resource use, pollution, waste
There’s a lot of Degrowth literature out there explaining why and how these policies are progressive, secure basic needs and strengthen the working class.
Given @Matthuber78’s lack of engagement with the actual ideas & arguments of Degrowth⬆️it is hard to see his statements as critiques and not just as plain defamation. Not least as half of his rant against Degrowth is a personal attack on scholar-activist Francois Schneider.
/9
While I'd love to see some genuine critical engagement, I'm left wondering: what’s your agenda here, @Matthuber78?
@jacobinmag we would love to move beyond defamatory left infighting and see a proper, balanced discussion between a Degrowth proponent and a Degrowth critic.
/10
For people who would like to actually engage with Degrowth rather than blindly echo defamatory slogans (which you should think are for people on the right?), please check out this Degrowth Debate on
Monday, 16th Nov 19:00 CET:
/11
Yes, Degrowth prompts us to question the status quo - because it is necessary.
I hope anyone that actually spends half an hour engaging with Degrowth will find it is all about tackling environmental and social (and political, economic, racial, sexist ++) issues - together.
/END
Surely such personal smear campaigns should have no space on a progressive platform like @jacobinmag ?
/9b
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
@pauleastwd@JKSteinberger@jasonhickel@WIRED It's in the IPCC SR1.5C report, Fig. 2.5. Of the scenarios meeting 1.5C with no or little overshoot, only one doesn't heavily rely on negative emissions technologies: That one is the "Low Energy Demand" (LED) scenario, which indeed involves large reductions in energy demand.
@pauleastwd@JKSteinberger@jasonhickel@WIRED New research from @exergy_paul & co however suggests that the LED energy demand reduction rates are unlikely to be reconcilable with the simultaneously assumed high rates of GDP growth: this would require a step change in energy/GDP decoupling well beyond historical precedents.