How have globalization, free market ideology, and/or austerity politics made the climate crisis worse?
What kind of policy changes must we demand of political elites?
This entry is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International license.
Globalization is when companies start to develop and operate internationally and cause an increase in demand and results in an increase of production. Companies open many factories and participate in mass urbanization overseas, to keep up with demand, both of which use fossil fuel to operate. Along with free trade, globalization increases the amount of pollution. Free trade allows people to sell their products internationally free of tariffs and restrictions. This increases the amount of transportation between countries by a significant amount and thus causes the burning of more fossil fuels. When a free market is involved companies are allowed to decide the price of their items based off of supply and demand without the intervention of the government. They can produce as much of their produce they want and can charge people as much as they won’t. This causes the increase of the use of factories and increase of pollution. In order to help climate change we need to change our thinking. The rich countries keep polluting so the poorer countries do too because they do not want to give up their right to pollute if the rich countries don’t have to. Inorder to reduce emissions both the rich and poorer countries decrease the amount of carbon they are creating
Within her novel, Klein believed that problem of climate change arose with the promotion of capitalism, and the aspects associated with it. Klein argues that the rather than the free market helping fight against climate change, it had actually hurt it severely. First of all, Klein cites that almost all industries are inevitably going to “profligate burning of fossil fuels”. Although it had caused those very same businesses some sort of set back, for instance the plane not being able to take off because of the tar being too hot from climate change caused by the burning of those fossil fuels. After the incident, the news had provided no coverage on climate change being at fault, Klein hinting at the idea that businesses are to blame for the lack of coverage of climate change, possibly due to them being the primary cause of it. With this in mind, it is obvious that the free markets are actually making the climate change crisis worse by not admitting to contributing to the crisis, and hiding any attempt to do so. Klein supports this claim by giving many more examples of this injustice, such as the “2013 historic foods in Calgary” and the “the drought that hit the Mississippi River”. The point of this argument is to push for certain policy changes so that climate change can be reduced. Klein believes that the enforcement of policies that lessen carbon emissions and publication of these problems are what we must demand of political elites.
Globalization and free-market ideologies have made the climate change crisis even worse. The mass popularity of globalization has caused an increase in the consumption of an array of products. Mass consumption of products led to the exploitation of raw materials like fossil fuels and a host of other resources which has tremendously left our environments in the mass ruins. The consumption happening around the world and the large-scale transportations of products in short time frames has led to the massive rise in pollutions levels in our environments. A rise in pollutions and greenhouse gases has caused the tremendous warming of temperatures around the world, even in the Artics. The rising temperatures are quite detrimental because they cause great catastrophic events like massive floods, a rise in sea-levels, storms, droughts, and more. The constant product consumptions even in the face of an on-going climate crisis worsen the situation to dangerously new heights. Free-market ideologies are also a huge factor in the worsening of climate change because the free-market promotes competition between businesses, which brings in more use of technologies and even the birth of a plethora of technologies to satisfy the consumers` taste. Free-market ideologies allow a great amount of innovation and competition between businesses but in these competitions, businesses engage in mass usage of raw resources for their production to win consumers. But in the battle to lure more consumers into their products, Businesses end up exploiting the earth`s finite resources and causes a great build-up of harmful greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. We must demand policies that encourage businesses and factories to limit their usage of finite resources like fossil fuels. We must also demand regulations that would invest in environment-friendly energy sources that would not harm our environments. Our governments need to pay attention to the on-going climate crises and treat it as an urgent crisis because its severe effects are already impacting people and environments like never seen before in the history of humanity.
Globalization has sped up the process of climate change by causing effects to be felt all over the globe. Being that many business companies have people working in all different areas, the effects of climate change are felt by many people. It is possible that if only one area was experiencing the effects of climate change it may have been reversible. Due to globalization, most places are interdependent, so the effects of climate change affect nations in different areas. For example, if the ocean conditions are too hot for fish to survive in, fishermen in one area cannot sell their product and it ripples throughout all the places depending on the fish. The fishermen are left with no money, which can negatively affect their economy, and consumers are left with no food. Places like the U.S who depend on other nations to guarantee their people’s well being will continue to be greatly affected by the effects of climate change in other nations. We must request policies that ensure better habits that can help reverse or slow the effects of climate change. We can also request to have more of our needs being taken care of inside our nation, so we won’t be completely affected by climate change in other areas.
Globalization, free market ideology, and austerity politics have made the climate crisis worse. Globalization creates an increase in businesses operating on a larger more worldwide scale. With that being said, the expansion of businesses means more factories that run on fossil fuels which then leads to an increase in pollution. The free marker ideology involves the transportation of these products created in the factories through globalization and thus, using more fossil fuels. The transport itself requires a great amount of fossil fuels that when burned, will release pollution into the atmosphere. Austerity politics cuts government funding preventing them from taking further action on the crisis at hand. The only way to remedy the climate crisis may be through government involvement. They can promote the use of more eco-friendly sources of energy. To do this, they may be able to place regulations that will make certain businesses much more eco-friendly. Without the aid of the government, businesses will go unchecked and in most cases, they do not care of what they will have to do to maximize profit even if it means destroying the environment around them.
The prioritization of capitalism over the environment has attributed to the growing climate crisis. Globalization projects such as NAFTA were intended to increase trade and stimulate the economies of the participating countries. As Klein mentions in her book This Changes Everything, “In the 1990s, as the market integration project ramped up, global emissions were going up an average of 1 percent each year” (18). As all these countries rush to acclimate to the competitive supply and demand system of globalization, production increases internationally, and so does the pollution. Moreover, the free market ideology has become the golden standard for economic growth. Many governments have resorted to deregulation to enable their businesses and economy to grow more rapidly and thus, straying away from imposing restrictions and taxes on businesses even though doing so would help lessen emission rates. Additionally, austerity politics have lessened the efforts to address climate change because the government’s desire to spend less (despite increases in taxes) is used as an excuse to not invest in greener technologies and in the wellbeing of the people. Overall, with money being on the mind of almost every world power, countries see their neighbors “as adversaries” rather than “as partners in a grand project of mutual reinvention” (21). Thus, some policy changes that we must demand of political elites is that they hold big businesses responsible for their pollution with taxations and regulation and work with other nations to act as a whole against climate change. We must also demand that the government act now and invest in greener alternatives as it will enhance the future of the people and environment.
Globalization has led to increased carbon emissions due to the global growth in transportation by land, sea and air. In particular, changes in population size, distribution, mobility, levels and types of economic activity, and global flows of capital and labor all have consequences for the environment, including the recent rapid increase in greenhouse-gas emissions as the primary cause of current climate change. Undertaking primary prevention at the source to reduce health risks resulting from these global influences is a formidable challenge. It requires conceptual insights beyond the conventional understanding of causation and prevention, as well as political will, trust, and resources. The complexities of policies to mitigate human-induced climate change are clear. Meanwhile, additional resources and strategies will be needed to reduce the health risks related to global change that have already arisen or are now unavoidable. For populations to live sustainably and with good long-term health, the health sector must work with other sectors in reshaping how human societies plan, build, move, produce, consume, share, and generate energy.
Humans have a drastic effect on the environment. Globalization is the expansion of cultural, economic, and political activities that lead to mass production with the help of industrial machinery. Industrial machines exhaust gases that slowly destroy the ozone layer, furthering global warming. As long as mass production is allowed, businesses will continue to use industrial machines to their advantage, disregarding any consequences. Any suggestions made by scientists to stop the constant destruction of the planet are considered to be “gentle suggestions” that don’t hold a lot of weight. The government should enforce companies to use environment-friendly machinery, an example being ones that generate energy without exhaust like windmills and solar panels, and possibly tax companies that do not so that they will save money using green machines. Doing so, we won’t have to use fossil fuel and instead rely on nature to generate electricity. This would slow down global warming and slow down the destruction of habits (from wildfires and melting ice caps) to have more time looking for a permanent solution.
Globalization and free market ideology has made the climate crisis worse, because despite knowing the crisis of climate change, people are not willing to change their lifestyle and are continuing to produce more products, causing the emission of fossil fuels to increase. Klein mentioned in the article that in order to reduce emission, everyone in the world has to work together. She recommended, “ to advance policies that dramatically improve lives, close the gap between rich and poor, create good jobs…”(9), to help people survive without relying too much on fossil fuels. The moment their problems are resolved, they would be able to focus on the environment. The reason many people think that climate change is less important, is because it is not directly affecting their normal lives since they are too focused on making money. Although the government promised that they would try to solve this issue, nothing has changed. There was the realization from people thinking, “no one was coming to save us.”(10) Showing that despite the government saying they are trying to solve the problem, no actual change was made. The actions the government took was not enough, causing the emission of Fossil fuels to increase.Klein also mentioned in the beginning, where businesses were earning a lot of profit from the use of mass production in products, showing how certain groups are refusing to participate in tring to reduce the emission. To change, everyone is required to work together after having their personal problems, such as poverty, solved.
The rise of Globalization has caused an increase in the number of chemicals being dispersed within the ecosystem. The more products being produced and the demand for these products, have caused a large-scale emission of these increasingly destructive by products. The fossil fuels created as result of these large companies, led to a massive problem of pollution, along with the issue of climate change that continues to rise. The increase of temperature and the emission of these greenhouse gases have irreversible impacts that is stressed by the involvement of businesses pushing their free-market economy forward. In order to change these impacts and reverse what has been done, more technology must be created such as “power from renewable sources like wind and water.” With the technology’s advancement seen in the past few years, it becomes easier to find a way to hinder to production of fossil fuels. The reluctance from larger corporations to adhere to strict guidelines makes it difficult for activists demands to be met and to prevent further destruction. Companies are sacrificing the sanctity of life by using these destructive energy sources.
In this particular essay, Klein visits the struggle to fight back climate change. Normally, the issue behind climate changed isn’t seen as something that could be solved with just putting a quota or a restriction in things we can purchase. When we observe the microscopic root of climate change, we view that the core of it is the growing economy: the mass consumption by global consumers. Today, the Marketing economy is known to be the most effective system to meet the needs and provide them to the people. Wealthy countries such as the “United States and China” are one of the two major contributors. It is viewed that an advanced country undergoes drastic changes, as it tries to keep up its economic growth. The idea of a free market economy is guided via chain effect. The promotion of products can attract global attention. As it gains popularity, businesses expand thus leading to greater production of items thus contributing to higher rates of emission. Also, CO2 emission is correlated with the transportation of products to relies on fossil fuels. This causes businesses to exploit resources and lands. One method Klein suggests is to lead a global mass movement. She argues “Slavery… Racial Discrimination … Sex discrimination … Apartheid” was not considered as a “crisis” until movements occurred. She wants global partners to unite and mind a method to approach the crisis (142).
Globalization and free market ideology have made the climate crisis worse by allowing for the operation of businesses around the world and the transportation of their goods. By trading on a global scale, they respond to more demand for products around the world, resulting in the need for transportation to locations that may be far from where they are produced. The increased production and transportation of these goods drives up the usage of fossil fuels which release pollution into the environment.
We must demand for increased regulation and taxation of large businesses that produce large amounts of goods and transport them around the world, specifically targeting the usage of fossil fuels. In doing so, we can hold these businesses accountable for their role in the climate crisis. This will also encourage businesses to use more environmentally responsible sources of power, namely renewable ones like wind and water, and to seek out more eco-friendly manners of production.
In Naomi Klein’s article, she discusses the different ways in which the environment is impacted by an increase and uprising in capitalism. She mentions how while people and markets are creating things that are trying to keep people alive, in reality, these things are actually making human lives shorter because the creation and manufacturing of certain products create byproducts that are harmful to the environment and when the environment is affected and deteriorating, humans cannot survive regardless of how technologically advanced they are. She writes “Faced with a crisis that threatens our survival as a species, our entire culture is continuing to do the very thing that caused the crisis, only with an extra dose of elbow grease behind it. Like the airline bringing in a truck with a more powerful engine to tow that plane, the global economy is upping the ante from conventional sources of fossil fuels to even dirtier and more dangerous versions” (Klein 2). In this quote, Klein explains how the hotheaded mindset of trying to develop a ‘cure’ or solution to a problem would only make the problem bigger as it creates other things that are just as harmful or even more harmful to the environment. In addition, she explains how businesses will essentially try to create a solution to a non-existent problem in order to make money. She writes “Global reinsurance companies are making billions in profits, in part by selling new kinds of protection schemes to developing countries that have done almost nothing to create the climate crisis, but whose infrastructure is intensely vulnerable to its impacts” (Klein 8). Here she explains how businesses and companies from larger developed countries will persuade smaller underdeveloped countries in trying to buy a form of protection when they themselves have done nothing that does damage. Unfortunately, for these people, they would be impacted the most by the impacts of climate change because even though they have done nothing to cause it, they also do not have any advanced technology or treatments that can help them when climate change becomes severe.
Some policies that should be adopted is that large businesses from large countries should not place their production in small countries because while the small countries do not contribute to climate change like the big countries do, they also do not have the assurance for treatment and solutions for climate change and if production moves to a smaller country, then the smaller country also be polluted but unlike the larger countries, there might not be a solution for them.
Climate change has been greatly impacted by globalization and the free market ideology. Globalization and the free market ideology have both excited capitalism. Both globalization and the free market economy have caused an increase for the demands of goods. This increase of demand has led companies to look away from using sustainable sources to produce their products. Companies continue to use harmful sources and produce products that increase the emission of fossil fuels. Additionally, the desire for lower costs of production in order to maximize profit has led to companies to use alternative routes that emit such harmful pollutants. This has led to an increase in the negative effects of climate change. The discoveries that scientists make are not given much attention and are often misportrayed by government officials. The author mentions how the current President denied current change and how she also did for a while as well. Thus, before demaning any policy from political elites, we must first get everyone on the consensus that climate change is very detrimental and will only get worse if not acted upon. Then, we can look to see how to inhibit companies from using such detrimental production methods. One example in which policy affected the production of goods was the plastic ban by the EPA in many states including NYC. Because of the detrimental effects of plastic on our oceans, land, and marine life, many states have banned the use of polyethylene bags and styrofoam containers because they cannot properly disintegrate. This ban has stopped companies from using these cheap solutions unless they would like to be fined. A fine would be a great step in ensuring that companies do not use detrimental methods of production.
Globalization and free market ideology has made our climate crisis worse. Because of globalization, markets are no longer limited to the immediate area in which the goods are produced, but the entire world. The larger markets cause a higher demand and thus more production. This combined with the transportation costs of the goods contributes to the pollutants in the air. In the article, it is also mentioned how although we believe globalization allows us to live better, it shortens our lifespan in the long run by introducing more pollutants into the atmosphere.
To slow down the progress of our current climate disaster, we must make it more expensive to produce or ship ecologically damaging goods. Another thing that can be done is the switch from fossil fuels to renewable energy such as solar power or even nuclear power. Although nuclear power typically is seen in a bad light, if they are operated correctly, they produce a lot of energy relatively cheaply.
In Naomi Klein’s, “This Changes Everything”, Klein speaks a lot about how the climate has changed and as a crisis has gotten worse. One argument she makes is how though this might be a crisis, this has become a great benefit for the “1 percent”, which are like businesses and companies. They take advantage of resources like forests to transform them as farms and preservatives. They make billions from take advantage of providing “protection schemes” to those who have fallen in climate change and are in need of them because of their valuable assets. Another argument she makes is the effects of austerity policies. Austerity policies lead to mass movements which were not effective as a form of opposition. Thus, Klein proposes policy changes that will help to lower the emissions caused by businesses. One plan she proposes is for the government to take action by replacing current practices for energy for more alternative practices better for the environment. Another is directed toward businesses which she proposes should stop taking advantage of the situation for themselves and work with the nation to help better circumvent the climate crisis.
The main reason we have not acted in lowering emissions is because it conflicts with deregulated capitalism or in other words, our economic system that favors the elite minority. Though, this is considered a complicated situation since this minority has control over the economic, social and political aspects of our government. The free market ideology crosses paths with globalization as the writer mentions the three policy pillars of, “privatization of the public sphere, deregulation of the corporate sector and lower corporate taxation, paid for with cuts to public spending” (153). These policies only widen the gap between the extremely rich and the poor. Therefore, there is no action being done towards fossil fuel companies or the whole issue in general because the government easily dismisses these issues, and would rather focus their time and money somewhere else. Additionally, as more countries are becoming globalized such as China, carbon is being burned even more due to the importation and exportation of products. The writer explains that one solution is that we must force “wealthy countries to cut their emissions by somewhere in the neighborhood of 8-10 percent a year.” This can’t be done by only the free market itself, but by these political elites.