Resistance and Alternatives
France, the first country in the world to make food waste illegal
On the basis of this law, the community has been made aware of a problem that most countries in the world are facing, namely the enormous amount of food that is thrown away because it is not sold in supermarkets, which presents a double problem : It is one of the main sources of pollutionof the planet and question the ethics of an opulent society that produces more food than it needs while condemning those who cannot pay for it to starvation.
Cow shit. Organic agriculture as a philosophy and as an everyday reality.
Jairo Restrepo is an institution in the field of global agroecology; his name and that of his project, which he baptized “Cow Shit ” are confused and give the impression of being the same. He was born in Colombia but his life path is linked to other countries and particularly to Brazil, from where 40 years ago he began to irrigate the entire world with a proposal that is at the same time a philosophy of life, a social project and a daily practice: Organic agriculture. better known as agroecology .
Saving the world – global warming and social justice
Author Octavia Butler predicted much of what is happening today 30 years ago. She draws a gloomy but not hopeless perspective.
The end of the world is coming. Most likely. Because we as humanity are far from taking the necessary steps to avert the climate catastrophe and the associated social consequences. However, the downfall will not look like we imagine it in books and films: the ground shakes, the sky darkens, lamentations and cries of pain ring out everywhere, the earth opens up and swallows up large and small, old and young, rich and poor without any difference.
No, it does not come suddenly, but in waves and at different times. It affects regions and people unequally. The science fiction author Octavia E. Butler described this very realistically in her “Parabola Series” in the 1990s. If you want to know what our dystopian future might look like, you should read these books. In it she describes a “ climate change ” that will lead to deadly heat waves, water shortages, burning forests and violent storms in California in the 2020s, among other places.
Sounds familiar, doesn’t it? The main character Lauren lives in a small community that protects itself from aggressive gangs with high walls and guns. Those who have money protect themselves with barbed wire and electric fences, pay the police, who are only interested in the rich, or hire armed security services. Money also makes it possible to move to Canada or Russia, where the climate crisis has not hit so hard. The economy, state and social structures still function there.
Water is not constantly getting more expensive there. Without money, an escape is hardly feasible. The borders are closed, the way is life-threatening. The dangers intensify as the US launches a war against Canada and breakaway Alaska. If you don’t have money, you’re vulnerable. That’s already the case today. But when the world collapses around you, that vulnerability becomes acute danger. Poor women in particular fear the permanent threat of sexualised violence .
Wave into disaster
A few ruthless and insane people are enough to set in motion a dynamic of distrust and fear and with it a spiral of violence. Butler’s descriptions are realistic. After all, the end of the world due to the climate catastrophe has already begun, even if it hasn’t hit us that hard here yet. In some parts of the world, temperatures rose to as much as 60 degrees this summer. Such heat waves will come more and more often.
Not slowly and steadily, but in bursts of waves: there will be summers that will be less hot, with fewer and less severe wildfires. People who don’t want to know then say: “Well, it’s a cool day, it’s not all that dramatic!” Next summer, however, new heat records will be broken again, new fires and floods will destroy entire regions. It hits the old harder than the young, the sick worse than the healthy, the poor worse than the rich.
The associated economic crises favor political crises, violence and fanaticism. Butler describes a shift to the right. The US elects a president who calls for “America First” and a radical conversion to Christian values. He agitates against those who think differently and minorities. Some of his followers are violent. This President denies it or claims to have nothing to do with it. Many hope that a strong hand will restore order in the country.
With this authoritarian leadership come people who abuse the power that comes with it. Self-proclaimed, heavily armed “crusaders” raid, rob and even enslave vulnerable groups such as refugees and the poor. They do this with the help of a “smart” collar that causes terrible pain at the touch of a button and denies the enslaved any opportunity to resist.
Although slavery is still officially forbidden, the relevant laws have been weakened over time to such an extent that human and civil rights can actually only be claimed by people with money. Probably not exactly like that, but it’s going to be similar. Civil rights will be seen by many as decadent nonsense in the face of doom. At least as long as they themselves are so privileged that they do not have to take advantage of them.
Poor people are worse off
People who already either don’t care or hate protecting the vulnerable will struggle to assert themselves. The polarization that is already much lamented today will increase above all where the situation is particularly bad. Eco-terrorism will increase in the future. People who already see themselves as victims of fascist terror because they are held up for half an hour by a sit-in will then completely freak out and some will certainly become violent.
This will create a spiral of violence, just as Butler describes it. No negative image of man should be drawn here. Most people are basically good. The problem is that negative dynamics can be set in motion by bad events and a few very aggressive actors. It will not happen at the same time and to everyone. But it will happen. More frequently.
Or we as humanity still manage to organize ourselves in such a way that we create a good future for everyone. Butler also reports on this in her books. Namely, Lauren founds a new, very sane religion and joins forces with others in a free and friendly community. Something like that is also possible. More likely is the coming, non-simultaneous and unjust end of the world.
The regenerative livestock farming of the El Mate project in Córdoba, Argentina: A proposal for a radical change.
Bruno Vasquetto and his family have a farm in Córdoba, Argentina, where they have been practicing an alternative way of raising cows for the consumption of their meat for several years. Some call this set of new practices “agroecological meat” but he prefers to call it regenerative farming.
Ver completo
Cardinal Barreto supports divestment campaign promoted by Churches and Mining network
The president of the Ecclesial Conference of the Amazon sees in the Pope’s trip to Canada an opportunity to advance another attitude on the part of the Catholic Church towards indigenous peoples
The Peruvian cardinal supports the disinvestment campaign promoted by the Churches and Mining network, to deny support to companies that threaten the Common Home.
Barreto expresses solidarity with the Colombian diocese of Mocoa-Sibundoy, in its rejection of donations from the Libero Cobre mining company within parish communities. “That money is from the devil,” he says.
| Miguel Estupiñán, correspondent in Colombia On Twitter: @HaciaElUmbral
Within the framework of the most recent extraordinary assembly of CELAM, held at the institution’s new headquarters, a newly built building in the north of Bogotá, the president of the Ecclesial Conference of the Amazon, Pedro Barreto , responded to this medium of communication a miscellany of questions. Assaulted in a corridor, the topics of the conversation were very diverse, namely: the penitential attitude of the Church in dealing with indigenous peoples, the prevention of sexual violence in ecclesial environments, the divestment campaign of the Iglesias network and Mining, the refusal to accept donations by mining companies in areas of socio-environmental conflicts and female ordination. Straight to the point. Here the interview.
In the Catholic Church there are those who conceive so many good deeds in favor of the defense of the Amazon biome and the peoples of this region as a very positive expression of reparation against what other forms of ecclesial treatment of the communities of these regions have been in history. regions. The Pope in Canada is expected to make a penitential pronouncement in the name of the Church and to show solidarity with what has been done in terms of recognition of the abuses against indigenous people, to advance in another form of relationship, in the way that is trying to do in the Amazon. Let’s talk about that penitential attitude.
It is not only a question of repairing the irrationally mistreated nature, but it is also necessary to recover the dignity of the people who have been mistreated and raped by Church personnel. Therefore, the repair has to be comprehensive. We have to be very aware that we are clearly determined not to look back, regretting something that we cannot change; but we are very determined not to return to the serious mistakes that we have in our conscience as the Church in the Amazon and in the universal Church. This recognition drives us to have, with greater force, a renewal of all our pastoral work, from REPAM, which is in the territory, and from CEAMA, which will mark pastoral work in the coming years.
How does CEAMA promote the prevention of sexual violence in ecclesial environments in the Amazon?
Prevention against sexual and psychological abuse is already part of the identity of a church. Sometimes a little was left aside to solve the bishop and sometimes in the wrong way, without facing the root of the problem. CEAMA, which is the ecclesial conference of the Amazon, is very aware of prevention, in a transversal way in all the pastoral areas that we have. In this sense, thank God, the people are already alert to any sign that may be from the territory itself. There are no closed areas, but a moral area of openness to be able to effectively ensure this care for life, for children, throughout the Amazon.
What prevention actions are they taking?
In the universal Church there is already a guide for the bishops of the world and it has been applied in each diocese. It is a manual of functions for prevention, with the wide experience that the Church has. In this sense, the CEAMA is not outside the Church; therefore, everything that means the prevention of sexual abuse is within our work and, in addition to having a specialized commission for that, we are very aware that in a transversal way in any area that pastoral care is carried out, we must have that attitude of anticipation of these difficulties.
The Churches and mining network promotes a divestment campaign by sectors of the Church from mining or hydrocarbon exploitation companies. This in view of the ethical commitment of the Church with these efforts for the care of our common home. How does CEAMA participate or can it participate in these strategies to gain moral authority by ceasing to support companies that exploit the Amazon biomes? What place does this type of reflection have in your pastoral agenda?
There are two aspects that must be distinguished. The first thing is that mining is necessary for humanity, for technological development. Second, any mining pollutes and destroys nature. But here you have to have an ethical balance of not damaging nature more and more constantly, because that also affects the life of the person. So the Church is not against mining, but it is in favor of responsible, transparent mining that not only seeks economic profitability, but also how to give back to the populations that are mostly poor where it is exploited. In the case of the Amazon, it is evident how to return not only the economic wealth, but also the cultural and social wealth that these original peoples have. In this sense, The Catholic Church in the Amazon is especially supporting this disinvestment proposal, because there are areas where investment should not be made and we have to be very aware. Believers and non-believers, scientists or non-scientists, say: In this area there can be no investment; and there you have to have a lot of unity to defend this position. This investment can be made in other places, as long as the extremely high environmental standards that must be demanded are strictly complied with.
I tell you a story. In the jurisdiction of the Diocese of Mocoa, the Libero Cobre company has already approached the community a couple of times to offer repairs to small neighborhood chapels, with donations; in the middle of a process to exploit copper. The local bishop rejects this type of irruption on the stage of parish life, telling Catholics not to accept such donations, as it is a company strategy to win over the community. The prelate invites to protect the Amazonian territory and to avoid this exploitation. He himself opposes her. What do you think of this type of actions by companies to enter the communities with donations, in exchange for their approval for eventual exploitation and using ecclesial symbols?
The first thing is to support the bishop’s decision. I have experienced it in my own experience. I have had to confront Doe Run Peru, a corrupt North American company that did the same thing; not only with the population but with the Government itself, extending a proposal for environmental remediation, buying with money. That money is from the devil, it is from lies, it is from corruption; And that is why these mining companies that do this type of thing must be rejected, because with money you cannot buy people’s consciences and lives. That is why I am very happy that the bishop had this courage. In my own flesh, they attempted against my life, because they said this and that. Unfortunately there are some alleged Catholics who supported the company against the bishop and the Church.
Cardinal Rodríguez Maradiaga says that he is sorry that sectors of the Church demand female ordination or optional celibacy, maintaining that this is part of the reform of the Church, being, according to him, something very superficial. However, these issues involved a very serious debate on the eve of the Amazon Synod. Do you also feel sorry that sectors of the Church, based on greater pastoral care in areas such as the Amazon, demand either female ordination or “viri probati”?
The issue is not about saying yes or no to female priesthood. The problem is that the role of women in the Church right now is very important for the evangelizing process, for reform. I have spoken with various groups of women and they are not interested in being priestesses, but rather that they be taken into account, that their opinion be valued. Therefore, I believe that there will always be sectors that want to dilute the fundamental demands of every Christian and consecrated person. I am convinced that priestly celibacy with all its limitations is a richness and a gift for the Church. Myself, in my own experience, almost at the end of my life, I thank God that celibacy has enhanced my ability to love everyone and not to stay in a family and a small group. That is my vocation, the call that God has given me. So,
Raw material for green energy
Many raw materials are mined in developing countries, with devastating consequences for nature and people. Even more lithium, copper, cobalt and bauxite are needed for the energy transition. Can you win it responsibly?
Ver completo
Freeway blocking allowed
“Fridays For Future” is allowed to organize a bicycle demo on the A7. But the group in Hildesheim had to make compromises.
At first they weren’t allowed, but with a few changes they were: “Fridays For Future” received permission to protest with a bicycle demo on the A7 near Hildesheim. Last year, the Lüneburg Higher Administrative Court prohibited the demo. Now the activists have found a compromise in cooperation with the city of Hildesheim and the police. What does this mean for the protest?
The activist group “Last Generation” has recently been increasingly criticized for demonstrations and blockades on freeway ramps. She is accused of blocking emergency vehicles, coercion or extortion. Justice Minister Marco Buschmann even called the sit-in protests illegal. The legal classification of this form of protest is not that easy from a legal point of view.
Freedom of assembly is paramount. Although it is enshrined in the Basic Law, it can be restricted under certain conditions. A central role is played in road blockades by second-tier jurisdiction. She describes deliberately stopping the first row of waiting cars in order to set up a physical barrier for the following motor vehicles as an act of coercion.
If the blockades move in the sense of freedom of assembly, the fact of coercion is still given, but the physical blockade of the cars from the second row is no longer illegal.
The highway is officially closed
The Federal Constitutional Court writes as a specification for the resolution of such actions after a precedent in 2004: “Important weighing elements here are the duration and intensity of the action, its prior notification, alternative options via other access roads, the urgency of the blocked transport, but also the factual connection between the in persons impaired in their freedom of movement and the object of the protest.”
The interpretation in individual cases is possible within a relatively large framework. Even if the demos against food waste by the “last generation” always raise the question of the material reference, the legal scholar Tim Wihl argues in a guest article for the legal magazine LTO that there is a kind of “permanent emergency” especially in the climate crisis. In the climate emergency , the factual reference could be justified by the fact that the object of protest is omnipresent in society.
Legally, it’s even easier with Fridays For Future. “The content of the demonstration focuses on climate protection in the transport sector, where Germany is still stagnating at the emissions level of 1990,” writes “Fridays For Future”. The reference to the people restricted in private transport is therefore clearly given in a demonstration on the motorway.
With the agreement with the city and the police, however, the activists have circumvented the legal dispute: the motorway is officially closed, traffic can easily bypass the area with a detour of about ten minutes.
Demo on Sunday instead of Friday
The fact that the protest was now approved was justified by the city with the new time of the action, reports “Fridays For Future”. In 2021, the demo was still planned for Friday afternoon, but now they want to start cycling on Sunday, July 10th at 9.30 a.m. with 600 participants at Hildesheim Central Station. It’s about three kilometers on the A7, until 11 a.m. at the latest, motorized traffic is allowed to drive unhindered again.
The group chose the route via the A7 “to give our demand for a traffic turnaround more emphasis,” Vera Wagner from “Fridays For Future” Hildesheim told the taz. They also hoped to attract new participants with this form of protest. After all, cycling on the autobahn doesn’t work every Sunday.
The fact that the protest will not hit too many cars on a Sunday morning and that a detour is possible due to the route is the price for the city permit. Stop the climate crisis yes – but please only on Sunday. After all, nobody has to deal with the interpretation of the right to demonstrate anymore.
Beast And Beauty: Extractivism And Good Living
The tentacle of mining extractivism has been present in the southwestern region of Antioquia; but thanks to the resistance from the defense of the territory, predatory greed has not been able to get away with it to date. Resistance goes hand in hand with a dynamic of regeneration towards good living and post development.
What may grow, what must shrink
“The Limits to Growth”. This Club of Rome report, published 50 years ago, is still one of the most cited, most influential and most controversial publications in the history of environmental policy. It was published in 35 languages with a total circulation of over 30 million. Together with Rachel Carson’s “The Silent Spring”, it is one of the early classics of the environmental movement.
The analysis then used a computer model called World3 to model the interaction of five stylized variables over the period 1972-2100: population, technology, industrial production, non-renewable resources and pollution. The gross national product, which is generally meant in the concept of economic growth, was not included, but at most indirectly included in the concept of industrial production.
The authors modeled several scenarios that assumed, among other things, different resource availability and different technology developments. Most led to collapse during the 21st century. However, the Club of Rome emphasized that the report also contained a positive message: With forward-looking politics, this collapse could be avoided.
The authors published updates to the report after 20 and 30 years, which basically confirmed the original results. However, resource availability was not the first limit the world system encountered. On the other hand, environmental pollution in the form of non-toxic, at first glance seemingly harmless substances such as CO₂ and now also plastic has proven to be the most stubborn problem to date, which is difficult to get a grip on and unbalances our global ecological systems.
Independent analyzes also essentially confirmed the original results. Yale researcher Gaya Herrington compared 2021 World3 model results with empirical data and found good agreement, particularly with the scenarios assuming increased resource availability (BAU2) and accelerated technology development (CT). However, they both lead to a decline in industrial output from 2040, albeit with very different consequences.
The report was highly controversial from the start, and flagrantly false claims, such as the report predicting a collapse in 1990, were also widely circulated. He generated a controversy that continues to this day. Because in the end there remains a dilemma: our societies have so far been dependent on economic growth – from social security to taxes and the stability of the financial system. Even the investments required for the energy transition generate an impetus for growth. And while the energy turnaround meets with broad approval in principle, it would certainly not be feasible to shrink the gross national product by the magnitudes in which climate protection is concerned.
Ultimately, it must be a question of clearly distinguishing between what is allowed to grow and what must shrink: the use of nature in its various dimensions must shrink radically. The environmentally relevant end values of human consumption (living space per capita, mobility kilometers, etc.) must certainly increase somewhat in the global south, and at least remain stable in the north. And the growth of the gross national product is not the central objective from this perspective, but at best the resultant and possibly a condition for economic stability.
The concept of the Great Transformation, brought into the debate by the German Advisory Council on Global Change (WBGU) in 2011, also makes an important contribution. The term, which goes back to the social historian Karl Polanyi, first of all emphasizes the processual, dynamic nature of the upcoming change. Usually classified as «social-ecological» as an adjective, it makes it clear that it is not about marginal adjustments to an otherwise wonderfully running economy, but about a fundamental change in the essential systems that determine our way of life: energy, transport, housing, nutrition, industry.
Technological changes are often closely intertwined with lifestyle changes: the change from the car-centric city to an attractive mix of bicycles and e-bikes, networked local public transport and various sharing services – including a remnant of electrified, shared automobility – is beginning to emerge interlocking system of technical innovation, infrastructure and the resulting changes in behavior. From this point of view, the “lifestyle versus technology” debate, which is repeated on many talk shows, turns out to be a false dichotomy.
From the point of view of the transformation of the systems energy, transport, housing and nutrition that are essential for our environmental consumption, life cycle assessments carried out at a single point in time for individual technologies become questionable. For example, the CO₂ balance of electromobility in a coal-fired power system may not be particularly convincing compared to an efficient diesel. However, if you understand the transition as part of a major transformation of the energy and transport system, it makes more sense.
Such a transformation takes many years, even if it has to happen very quickly due to the failures of the past 50 years. There is no panacea. CO₂ pricing, highly praised by many economists, will at best play a supporting role ( see the contribution by Cullenward and Victor ).
In each of the sectors, transformation pathways need to be explored that intertwine technical practices, infrastructure and technologies with behavioral changes, social coalitions for change need to be forged and politically effective in order to square the circle of ambition and pragmatism. The increasing moments of crisis must be used for quantum leaps in the right direction instead of falling back into old patterns.
Technological developments are indispensable, but their implementation can no longer be left to the profit motive alone. Their opportunities must be used to reduce the ecological footprint, not to fulfill our dreams. Whether air taxis or space tourism, supersonic flight and Bitcoin mania: Not everything that is technically possible and fulfills individual wishes or even greed for profit is also of general interest. Because then the growth of desires, not infrequently even greed, drives the world into the abyss. A clever, socially negotiated self-restraint is necessary at these points: Our world has enough for everyone’s needs, but not for everyone’s greed (M. Gandhi).
In all of this, the Great Transformation will not be linear. History will inevitably zigzag forward. Despite all setbacks and growing ecological crises, it is always about keeping an eye on the goal: the fastest possible socially sustainable transformation of our way of life and economic activity towards 100 percent renewable energies, environmentally friendly land use and a comprehensive circular economy.
We will not get away scot-free as things stand now. The “impacts” are getting closer: Burning forests, thawing permafrost, heat waves and melting polar ice caps are just a few warning signs. Numerous global ecosystems have been damaged too massively, from the climate to the oceans and forests to the soil. But with a great deal of effort, the coming crises can perhaps be used as moments of transformation that will still prevent the collapse predicted by the Club of Rome models in the 1930s to 1950s and at least allow for a “soft landing” (Adam Tooze & Jonathan Barth) can enable.
Solidarity with the most vulnerable in our global society is a prerequisite for this. The best moment to initiate the Great Transformation would have been 50 years ago. The second best is today – and parts of it are already on the way.
Jörg Haas is a consultant for international politics at the Heinrich Böll Foundation.