SEVEN: POLITICAL OBJECTIVES.

Having looked at the nature of a sustainable Planet, and outlined some of the transitional policies needed to create a sustainable Planet, this chapter summarizes what the Green party's main goals should be. The Green party should adopt the following political objectives.

i) The Regulation of the Earth's Climate.

There is one fundamental and overriding issue at stake in green politics and that is ensuring climatic stability. Humans have got to regulate the Planet's climate to avoid the extremes of an ice age and global warming. What is more, humans must regulate the climate not merely to protect the Planet's life-sustaining processes, but to protect Biodiversity.

ii) The Creation of Global Ecological Justice between Nations; A New Ecological Order.

It has been pointed out above that it has been the over-industrialized nations which have caused the greatest ecological devastation and, correspondingly, it will be possible to create a sustainable Planet only if these countries pay off their ecological debts to third world countries. A sustainable Planet is possible only where there is global ecological justice between all nations. The adoption of the global Carbon cycle analysis would provide greens with the methodological tools to create a sustainable Planet on the basis of global ecological justice.

There is a lot of twaddle talked by both decentralists and the eco greens within the Green party about the 'dilemma' of either protecting the environment or protecting the poor. The decentralists believe the party's objectives should be to help the poor and promote social justice. The eco greens accuse them of ignoring the environment and refusing to face up to the problems caused by over-population. It has to be admitted that this is often true - a lot of them wouldn't recognize an ecological disaster if it flooded their living room or blew down their garage; and most of them are repulsed by any idea of limiting the exponential growth in human numbers. On the other side, the eco greens want the party to protect the environment but, in turn, are accused of ignoring the poor and overlooking the true causes of ecological destruction. And these criticisms are also true. The proponents of eco-politics tend to come from the middle classes and want the party to protect middle class interests. They won't even talk about the ecological devastation caused by capitalism for fear of frightening potential middle class punters (most of whom are actually anti-green), even though only the most bigoted Earth-wreckers could fail to appreciate that capitalism is one of the major causes of the current ecological disasters. These two factions within the Green party are heavily into reality-denial - one side refuses to talk about over-population and the environment (blaming all problems on capitalism), the other refuses to talk about capitalism and global poverty (blaming all problems on over-population).

The supposed dichotomy between social justice and protecting the environment is just a figment of their collective bigotry. Firstly, there can be no sustainable Planet without global ecological justice. The more that the oppressed are pushed into wretchedness, the more they destroy their local environment, and the bigger the global ecological devastation. A global Carbon analysis is essential for creating a system of global justice. Secondly, it has to be recognized that global ecological problems are beginning to generate more and more poverty. This is not just a phenomena restricted to the third world. The biggest cause of homelessness in America over the last three years has not been poverty but the series of ecological disasters such as the hurricane which hit Miami, the widespread flooding of the Mississippi, and the Californian drought and forest fires. Stopping ecological disasters would thus reduce homelessness. Thirdly, the best way of solving global poverty is by demanding that the world community tackles global environmental issues and creates a sustainable planet. Since tackling global ecological threats is possible only on the basis of global ecological justice this will necessitate the alleviation of global poverty. It is in the best interests of the world's poor to demand a sustainable Planet. The rich have never had any interest in abolishing poverty. On the contrary, their wealth comes from other people's poverty. Why should they make other people rich by making themselves poor? The threat posed by the destruction of the Planet's life support system, however, changes this situation. The rich have got to help the poor or they will eventually become poor before the Planet's ecology collapses. For the first time in human history, it is in the material, and most importantly the ecological, interests of the rich to abolish global poverty.

iii) The Creation of Justice between Species.

Morally, humans ought to pay off their evolutionary and existential debts to Wildlife. Geophysiologically, it will be possible to create a sustainable Planet only if there is global justice between species. Humans must regulate the climate not merely to protect the Planet's life-sustaining processes, but to protect Biodiversity.

The Green party is opposed to racism, sexism, genderism, ageism, etc., but has not yet stated its opposition to speciesism. Until it does so it will remain just another humanist party pursuing the same types of policies as other political parties destroying the Planet's life support system. The Green party should adopt an anti-speciesist stance and adopt the biocentric principle.

I: The Creation of Wilderness Areas.

The Green party must give a high priority to the creation of Wilderness areas. The creation of Wilderness zones and the guaranteeing of Animal freedom is partly a scientific matter, since humans cannot survive on Earth without Animals, and partly moral because humans ought to repay their existential and ecological debts to Wildlife. It is morally and geophysiologically incumbent upon humans to create Wilderness areas in which Wildlife can flourish.

II: Animal Freedom.

Animal welfare is concerned with reducing the pain which humans inflict on Animals but it does not stop Animals from being killed - as long as it done painlessly; Animal conservation focuses primarily on the preservation of habitats that humans have not yet 'developed' but which they will eventually expropriate; Animal rights are transcendental rights not suited to the finite nature of the Earth; and Animal liberation is concerned primarily with liberating Animals even though it is increasingly the case that there are no natural habitats to which Animals can be returned. It is imperative, therefore, to go beyond Animal welfare, Animal conservation, Animal rights, and Animal liberation, in order to promote Animal freedom. The basis for Animal freedom is the creation of Wilderness zones. There is no other way of guaranteeing the survival of Wildlife than by creating huge Wilderness areas over which Animals would have complete sovereignty. Globally, greens should demand that a third of each country should be put aside as Wilderness for the exclusive use of Wildlife.

iv) The Creation of a Sustainable Planet.

The Green party currently plays no role in promoting a sustainable Planet. It should campaign not only on national issues but for the creation of a sustainable Planet. The basis of a sustainable Planet is regional Wood economies.

Unfortunately, the creation of a sustainable Planet requires the impossible - global peace, global equality between all peoples, and equality between species. It will require an end to all military conflict, to the over-industrialized nations' exploitation of the third world; to humans war against the Earth; to humans exploitation of Animals; and an end to the exponential growth in the five main human activities which are currently devastating the Earth. Given the time which is left before a geophysiological collapse these objectives are impossible to accomplish - but the effort still needs to be made. The nature of a sustainable Planet is outlined in the following chapter.

v) The Founding of a Sustainable Planet.

The Green party should demand the foundation of a sustainable Planet. This would consist of:-

* a Global Eco-Constitution;

** A Bill of Earth Rights;

*** a Compact with the Earth; and,

**** a World Climate agreement, the New Ecological Order.

The Foundation of a Sustainable Planet should have all the pomp and ceremony that accompanied the foundation of the American constitution for this foundation will provide the legitimacy and legality of the institutions running the Earth. There should be no more pathetic Earth Days - what is wanted is a Foundation of a Sustainable Planet Day.

I: A Global Eco-Constitution.

A global eco-constitution would lay out the powers of the global scientific council, the world government and regional governments.

II: A Bill of Earth Rights.

A bill of Earth rights would protect individuals' rights within each region and Wildlife's sovereignty within Wilderness areas.

III: A Compact with the Earth.

A compact with the Earth would be vital so that all humans acknowledge their evolutionary and existential debts to Wildlife; agree to share the Earth with what have been called their "fellow travellers"; and delineate humans' relationship to the Earth. Everyone on Earth would have to sign, and abide by, this Compact. It would be each individual's pledge of loyalty to the Earth and its Wildlife.

IV: A World Climate Agreement and the New Ecological Order.

The World Climate agreement would consist of the global Carbon audit, an assessment of each countries Carbon status since the beginning of the industrial revolution, and the global Carbon budget. Once the world Climate agreement had been signed this would be the start of the New Ecological Order.

V: The Importance of the Foundation; the Big-Bang Solution.

There is no way of solving the Planet's geophysiological problems in a reformist, incremental, fashion in which a few governments make a few environmental reforms here, and the occasional global forum agrees to a few reforms there. The piecemeal approach to solving environmental problems simply allows governments to go on destroying the environment whilst protesting they are trying to protect it. If anything, piecemeal reforms are exactly what most governments welcome, despite their pleas to the contrary, because they are an invaluable device for covering up continued environmental destruction. There is no point in passing environmental legislation to limit the damage caused by the exponential growth in the numbers of cars, or kids, or cattle, or capital or carnage, unless all five are tackled simultaneously. The world's environmental problems can be solved only at one go, at the global level involving all countries and all peoples and covering all issues i.e. through the creation of a sustainable Planet so that everyone can see the justice in giving up certain privileges. There has got to be an agreement between the rich and the poor (both between nations and within each nation) in which the rich give up their excessive wealth in return for ecological security and the poor stop over-populating the Earth in return for a decent, healthy, rewarding, ecologically sound way of life.

The over-industrialized nations are not going to pour vast amounts of money and technological resources into third world countries simply to help eradicate poverty. They won't do it because firstly, they say they have to look after their own poor; secondly, they fear a shift of military power if weaker countries become stronger; thirdly, their wealth depends on the exploitation of poverty; and, finally, they don't give a damn about the colossal scale of third world poverty. The over-industrialized nations have never been perturbed by third world poverty and they never will be - other than the most token gestures of civility to appease a few overactive consciences. However, geophysiologically, the over-industrialized nations are compelled, for their own ecological safety, to help third world countries to avoid the destruction of their part of the global environment. Even so, this still does not mean that the over-industrialized world will pour vast amounts of money into third world countries to help create a sustainable Planet. This is because they still fear a shift in the military balance of power; they fear that such resources would be used to finance ecological destruction or boost population growth leading eventually to even more ecological devastation. These fears are legitimate. It is a waste of time for the over-industrialized nations to give money to stop environmental degradation in third world countries. It wouldn't even alleviate poverty. The over-industrialized nations will agree to help third world countries only if the agreement also includes military power and population.

As far as third world countries are concerned, if they are not given vast amounts of financial and technological resources they will not desist from exploiting their Forest resources as rapidly as possible, especially when such vast numbers of people are living in absolute destitution; when there is a military imbalance between themselves and the over-industrialized nations; and when the over-industrialized nations are refusing to protect their own ecological resources. The third world is not going to stop environmental degradation unless there is an agreement about military power/global security, the ecological devastation in the over-industrialized nations and the rich countries' exploitation of third world poverty.

This analysis indicates firstly, that all problems are linked - environmental destruction, military power, and global injustice. It is not possible to deal with each issue separately because this would invariably involve some injustice as relevant considerations are left out of account. Secondly, the world's ecological problems cannot be solved using money. If the over-industrialized nations give money to the third world they will seek to generate this money through economic growth which causes ecological destruction; and the third world will use the money it is given to cause more ecological destruction. Trying to solve the world's ecological problems with money is like carrying out a brain operation with a knife and a fork.

The only way to stop this slide into ecological oblivion is through a system of global ecological justice leading to a New Ecological Order and the creation of a sustainable Planet. This does not mean that the foundation of a sustainable Planet will require an agreement about how many cars, kids, and capital construction projects there will be in each country. This would be too complicated to negotiate. The agreement would concern only countries Carbon status so that each country would then be free to determine what proportion of its Carbon resources should be spent on cars, kids and capital. It might be objected that even if a global Carbon budget and regional wood economies are established this would still leave the rich with all of their possessions and the poor with none. However, the advantages for third world countries are firstly, that as Carbon creditor nations they would still be able to develop to overcome their poverty and, secondly, they would be able to exchange Carbon credits for the over-industrialized nations' technologies (not money) to enable them to produce goods without breaching their Carbon budgets. This Carbon exchange would benefit both the over-industrialized nations and third world nations and, of course, the Earth.

The problems of the exponential growth in the numbers of cars, kids, cattle, capital and carnage; the problems of the over-consumption in first world countries and the underconsumption in third world countries; and the problem of protecting of the Earth's life support system can be solved only in one big, across-the-board, agreement which should be ratified at one big conference, the Foundation of a Sustainable Planet - preferably as soon as possible.