chp3: green new deal needs ethic for martyrdom

1 files changed, 81 insertions, 2 deletions

diff --git a/chapter3.md b/chapter3.md
index cfbb06e..262c084 100644
--- a/chapter3.md
+++ b/chapter3.md
@@ -10,5 +10,84 @@ their audiences to a martyrdom ethic.
 
 In the previous two chapters, I've explored how and why contemporary green
 rhetoric is too often failing, and argued that the apocalyptic form is not one
-of the root causes. In this chapter, I aim to show that when green rhetoric
-succeeds, it draws much deeper on apocalypse than catastrophic narratives do.
+of the root causes. In this chapter, I aim to show that in order for green
+rhetoric to succeed, it must imitate some of the rhetorical strategies of the
+Apocalypse.
+
+In order to consider how green rhetoric might succeed, I have to specify: what
+is the rhetor trying to achieve? How are they hoping that it will be achieved?
+And: who are they trying to persuade to do the achieving?
+
+So, for the sake of a discussion point, I will take the example of the Green
+New Deal.  The idea behind a Green New Deal, alluding by its name to the 'New
+Deal' of US President Franklin D. Roosevelt \[?\], is a large programme of
+government action at the nation-state level aiming to significantly change the
+way the economy is structured for the better.
+
+There is no fixed list of measures a Green New Deal might contain, but the
+centrepiece measures are likely to include strengthening environmental
+regulations on industry and beefing up enforcement agencies; renationalising
+key industrial sectors, particularly those in control of public goods such as
+transport infrastructure or energy infrastructure; increasing tax on wealth and
+corporations and closing tax loopholes; and spending the money on investment in
+improving and expanding the public realm and subsidising local green
+industries.
+
+The package may also extend, for example, to increasing spending on research
+and development; raising tarrifs on underpriced imported solar panels and wind
+turbines to support the development of national green industries; banning
+fracking and other extreme forms of fossil fuel extraction; instituting a
+moratorium on new data centres; making it easier for corporations to be sued
+for environmental damages; subsidising heat pumps and home insulation; and,
+yes, perhaps even raising carbon taxes.
+
+As with the original New Deal, the wide-ranging scope is thought to be a
+crucial part of the proposal. Each measure is made more attractive to its
+potential supporters because it comes as part of a package promising to
+transform society for the better.
+
+Like the original New Deal, it is not intended to be attractive to everyone. It
+is not designed to be attractive to owners of capital or senior managers, for
+whom a Green New Deal would be very expensive indeed: it would result in huge
+cuts to their salaries, bonuses and dividends, and reduce their power over the
+economy. Nor is the Green New Deal designed to be attractive to neoliberal
+ideologues, who determinedly believe that the invisible hand of the market will
+eventually, eventually, eventually bring about a just society. It could, however,
+be attractive to a large majority of, say, the UK electorate, covering proletarian
+households in both the working classes and many of those in the middle classes.
+
+The original New Deal was largely made possible by an enormous (not to say
+'apocalyptic') wave of industrial action. However, in the US in the 1930s, a
+large proportion of the workforce was unionised, and employed in sectors such
+as manufacturing, energy, and transport, where workers are gathered in
+tight-knit communities on shop floors and strikes hit shareholders hard. In the
+present UK context, unions encompass a much smaller proportion of the
+workforce, and much of the workforce is employed in the service sector, where
+industrial action can be difficult to organise and less effective than in
+primary industries. Industrial action can still play an important role, and
+Matt Huber [@climate-change-class-war] gives an excellent discussion of how
+green rhetoric might be effective in that arena. But because of the structure
+of the UK economy, it's likely that industrial action would have to work
+alongside other forms of political action if a Green New Deal is to be brought
+about in the UK in the next decade or two, and it's those other forms of action
+which I'll focus on.
+
+Alongside industrial action, people in the UK can join political parties, where
+they can shape policies by engaging in internal politics, by voting for
+candidates for election, and by standing for election themselves. They can also
+vote in general elections, ultimately resulting in electing a government which
+prioritises a Green New Deal policy. In order to increase momentum behind the
+movement, they can also join protests or take part in direct action.
+
+Notably, all of these actions may be difficult for those called to take part in
+them. Getting involved in politics in any but the most trivial capacity
+requires giving up evenings and weekends: annoying for, say, a Masters student,
+but potentially a major sacrifice for an exhausted parent working a full-time
+job. Standing for election could be costly to your relationships, and expose
+you to ridicule and abuse. Depending on the action involved, protesting or
+taking direct action could get you arrested. Meanwhile, the benefits of a Green
+New Deal stand far off, and remain largely outside your control. The call must
+then be to make a sacrifice for what is good, even if, paradoxically, it costs
+you.
+
+This is, in John Collin's terms, an 'ethic for martyrdom.'