We are excited to announce that DSA is endorsing Bobby Nichols for Tempe City Council!

Bobby, of Phoenix-Metro DSA, is a public interest lawyer running to make Tempe affordable for everyone, building public housing and making it easier to form a union

Bobby is part of a slate of candidates in the Socialist Cash Takes Out Capitalist Trash fundraising project!

Congratulations to Andrew Hairston of Austin DSA, our endorsee for Travis County Justice of the Peace!

Andrew is a civil rights attorney who will stand up for working-class students and tenants of color facing unequal treatment in a court system that needs to serve working people, not landlords’ profit motives.

Andrew is part of a slate of candidates in the Socialist Cash Takes Out Capitalist Trash fundraising project!

Congratulations to Adam Bojak of Buffalo DSA, our newest endorsee for New York’s State Assembly!

Adam is a proud democratic socialist and a housing lawyer who will continue the fight to protect working-class people from crooked landlords across the state.

Adam is part of a slate of candidates in the Socialist Cash Takes Out Capitalist Trash fundraising project!

Atlanta DSA vehemently condemns the abhorrent execution of Alex Pretti by a Border Patrol agent on January 24, 2026. Multiple DHS agents fired on Alex as he was attempting to help assist a community member assaulted by a federal agent moments prior. Further, an agent appeared to have removed Alex’s pistol that he was legally permitted to carry before he was executed in cold blood. Plain and simple, this is an attack on the 1st and 2nd Amendment rights every citizen is entitled to in the United States. The federal government then continued its vile tradition of publishing slanderous lies about those it murders in fabricating false narratives about the peaceful, non-violent behaviors of Alex. To us, it is clear that the purpose of a system is what it does and, so, the purpose of DHS (and specifically ICE) is death and violence. Videos and photos over the past century of black, brown, and tan bodies being butchered by human instruments of the law were ignored, minimized, and treated as inconsequential. Now, we live in the darkening shadow cast by the willing and conscious decision of hundreds of Democrat politicians from Washington to Peachtree Street to further increase funding to cops, ICE, and border patrol. Barely one year into the second Trump presidency, the full weight of the American imperial machine has turned inward to crush any act of resistance, no matter how small.

Just this past week, Democrat leaders have continued their decades-long complicity in the manufacturing of divisions between working people through measly gestures at reform of ICE. These ineffective measures follow in the wake of the killing of Renee Nicole Good not even a month ago, to say nothing of the numerous other deaths on the streets and even more in detention centers over the past year. Yet we know, as workers organizing in our workplaces and communities, this fascist regime is composed of incompetent losers that need you to feel small and isolated to succeed. Together, as an organized multi-racial working class, we can build a new, better world as the old neoliberal world order shakes itself to pieces under the weight of its own contradictions. Beyond polls or optics, it is clear that for working people our only position can be that of calling for the complete abolishment of ICE. It continues to serve as the foot soldier force of a burgeoning fascist regime determined to foment further class divisions based on racist, imperialist border policies.

Atlanta DSA once again calls for the abolishment of ICE and the removal of all DHS agents from our communities, as well as the full prosecution of all those involved in acts violating basic human rights under international laws.

We stand in solidarity with those participating across the country in the general strike taking place today. We strongly encourage our members, fellow comrades and union allies, elected politicians, and neighbors to organize with us in the face of this disgusting atrocity.

• If you can, donate to the efforts of Twin Cities DSA to fight ICE and build a better world. You can do so here: https://twincitiesdsa.org/donate/
• Honor the life and memory of Alex Pretti with us at a vigil hosted by National Nurses United, the American Federation of Government Employees, and other community orgs on Thursday, February 5th at 1670 Clairemont Rd in Decatur (the Atlanta VA Medical Center) from 6:30pm-7:30pm.
• Join DSA to support and lead our organizing efforts against ICE and this fascist federal administration: https://atldsa.org/join/

As the name implies, in The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State [year], Friedrich Engels attempts to build an understanding of how the family, divisions of class, gender, and the modern nation-state evolved over time. At first glance, it’s simply an anthropological and sociological text about ancient and indigenous cultures. But on a deeper level it shows how economic factors have an outsized influence on how society is organized.

Some people will tell you that things like the nuclear family, “traditional” gender roles, and capitalism are natural and have always existed, but if we look back only a few hundred years, we see many societies around the world that were organized very differently. Engels started his study with the book Ancient Society [year] by Lewis H. Morgan, an American lawyer who represented the Seneca nation of New York, who are part of a larger confederacy called the Haudenosaunee, also known as the Iroquois.

He {Morgan or Engels?} found that the Haudenosaunee shared striking similarities with other indigenous cultures around the world, and with the early histories of cultures in Europe such as the Greeks, Romans, and Germans.
Using the Marxist philosophy of historical materialism, Engels built on Morgan’s work to show that most societies passed through the similar stages of development between hunter-gatherer tribes, settled agriculture, and ultimately modern capitalism.  Most importantly, he showed that the dominant economic mode of production and distribution is enormously impactful on society as a whole, especially on property relations, government and laws, and even family structures.  These societal structures tend to reinforce and strengthen the underlying economic systems, until some change forces a rupture, and a new system takes its place.

Going all the way back to the beginning, the earliest bands of nomadic hunter-gatherers owned {word choice} nothing beyond what they could carry on their backs, and had to rely on scarce and sporadic sources of food.  In these conditions, cooperation and sharing were necessary for survival.  This spirit of sharing extended to childcare, which was often communal -- and even romantic relationships, where polyamory and plural marriage tended to be more common than they are today. Because strict monogamy was almost unheard of, families tended to be matrilineal, since you can be sure of who a child’s mother is.  Morgan observed how extended families formed into matrilineal clans among the Haudenosaunee, and called them gentes (singular: gens), after a similar Roman family structure.

Over time, technologies like fishing, fire, the bow and arrow, and horticulture {word choice} (farming) allowed people to settle in villages, and this stage of development is where Morgan found the Haudenosaunee.  It was through the gens that land was owned in common, labor was organized, food and other goods were distributed, inheritance was passed on, and laws were administered. There was very little division of labor into separate job roles, and hardly ever would a leader inherit their office from a parent.  The Haudenosaunee had organized themselves into a representative democracy based on clans or gentes that ultimately came to include six related nations, but they didn’t have anything that we would call a state in the modern sense.  At this stage they had no use for taxes, standing armies, or private property, which is why Engels called this type of society “primitive communism.” Despite what the anarcho-primitivists might say, we can’t actually go back to this type of society by destroying modern technology. {too declarative, where’s you evidence or argument?}

Engels next shifts his focus onto Ancient Greece, specifically Athens, which developed along a similar path during its prehistory.  By the time that written language was introduced to Greece, the old structures of the gens was starting to unravel due to changing economic conditions. As technologies like metal axes and plows were invented, more land could be cleared and cultivated than before.  The domestication of animals allowed for a more calorie-dense diet with less manpower.  This surplus of food demanded more organization, and technologies like written language and mathematics were invented to keep track of who owed what to whom.

At this stage, some men, probably the elected leaders of their gentes, decided that it was important to pass down their valuable farmland and herds of animals to their sons, and suddenly strict monogamy for women became important, so that men could be sure that their heirs are legitimate.  Of course men were still free to have multiple wives, or even take female slaves as concubines.  At this point the gentes still existed, but we see them change from matrilineal to patrilineal ways of reckoning relations.

Where before a prisoner of war was just another mouth to feed, at this time it made economic sense to conquer and enslave neighboring tribes.  Suddenly, land was worth fighting for, and the collective property of the gens started to be divided up by households.  Free citizens found it increasingly difficult to compete with slave labor, and found that after a bad harvest they might have to mortgage or sell their land to a wealthier landowner.  At best they would end up as a sharecropper or landless peasant; at worst they might be sold into slavery to cover their debts.

So we see how the emergence of private property lead to class stratification.  At this time we also see the beginning of the division of labor, with specialized farmers and artisans making commodities specifically as commercial trade goods to sell, rather than for use in their own households or communities.  Thus people came to be divided into classes based on their relations to the means of production, with an emergent class of aristocrats controlling the bulk of the government and land. At its peak, Athens had about 90,000 citizens, 365,000 slaves, and 45,000 free non-citizens.  There still was a form of democracy, but only for a shrinking number of male citizens.  As Athens transformed fully into a slave society, the old rules based on the gens became less and less relevant.  Trade and commerce incentivized many of people to move away from their home villages, disconnecting them from their mother gens.

These changes lead to the emergence of a centralized government that ruled based on divisions of geography rather than family.  The gentes lost all political relevance, and stayed around merely as social and religious organizations.  A state apparatus emerged to collect taxes, maintain a police force, and raise a standing army for the conquest of their neighbors.  But the contradictions inherent in such a top-heavy and expansionist empire ultimately lead to the downfall of Athens.

Engels goes on to cite other examples from history that chart the transition from the Roman Empire to medieval feudalism, and from feudalism into modern capitalism, but we don’t have the space for that here, so you’ll have to read the book yourself for the full story.

So how does this apply to us today?  My take-away is that human nature is a multi-faceted thing, that throughout history humans have organized themselves into various types of societies, and we can consciously work towards creating a society that is more equal, democratic, and free.

I want to leave you with a hopeful vision of how socialism has transformed and will transform society for the better, and how economic liberation leads to more freedom for everyone.  Socialized medicine means that you don’t have to stay in a shitty job just for the health insurance.  Socialized housing means that you don’t have to stay in a shitty relationship just to keep a roof over your head.  Socialized childcare means that no one has to put their career on pause in order to start a family.  And the abolition of private property means an end to divisions of class, and the coersive[sp.] power of the bourgeoisie.

I also hope that I’ve inspired you to read and study Origin of the Family or any of the other foundational Marxist texts, to gain a better understanding of how the capitalist mode of production impacts our daily lives. Most of those texts are free and in the public domain, and may[del.] can be found in e-book formats at marxists.org, or as audiobooks at librivox.org.

High up in the ranks of social media companies, there exists a job title that probably wont surprise you. Behavioral engineers at Meta, Tik Tok, Reddit, or any other algorithmically generated place you might scroll, are getting paid hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to figure out ways to keep us online. The good feelings we get from [scrolling] social media keep us entertained, but it’s the feelings of fear and especially anger that keep us addicted. Rage is the currency of the modern age, and I think this is hurting our movement more than it's helping it. Organized socialists need to develop defensive strategies to handle these attacks on our psyches from the bourgeois, and fast.

Capitalists will be the first to (proudly) admit that social media algorithms are designed to work like a slot machine. You put your attention in, pull the lever, and see what happens next. The addictive part about a slot machine is that when you pull the lever, you don't know what you're going to get. You might line up three cherries in a row and get a decent payout, or more often than not, you'll lose and pull the lever again. We pull the lever again because we're seeking out the dopamine from a payout. The machine trains our brains using conditioning tactics to seek out the reward of a big payout, in spite of the negative consequences.

The thing about social media is the illusory reward isn't even money, it's just exploitation. When we see a sad video when scrolling, the response planned by the bourgeois is for us to keep scrolling until that feeling can be reconciled. They’ve researched the emotions of the working class, they’ve researched the mechanisms of learning and behavior, and they’ve landed on an equation that keeps us online. And while the interplay between positive and negative emotions alone is enough to pull us in, some emotions do a better job than others. Anger, for example, does both. The endorphins released when we get embroiled in some heated argument on Reddit are addictive on their own, even though most people would not exactly classify rage as positive.

Anger isn't bad. It's a reasonable response to the state of things, and, in the right circumstances, it's one of the cornerstones of emotion that movements are built on. You should be angry! The thing is, behavioral engineers at social media companies know what they're doing. They're not manufacturing the kind of rage that gets most people off their asses and into the streets. The kind of rage they want on their platforms is designed to keep people glued to comment sections– brooding, and scared, but complacent. They want us to be good little soldiers of a culture war that none of us ever consented to fighting. In most circumstances, online discourse is a shell of what debate should be by design. These jerks deal in the business of exploitation, like all great capitalists do. Every second of doomscrolling means another dollar in their offshore banks to them.

Propaganda isn’t always explicit, and the content of a medium isn’t always the only thing impacting us. How we engage with the internet can and does impact our behavior off of it, even if the effects are subtle. The way that social media is designed means that we are constantly battling propaganda that urges us to stay online, to disregard complexity, and to stay angry, even when avoiding the more obvious pro-fascist content. A working class that is distracted by their anger is a lot easier to beat than one motivated to organize by it. To me, the scariest part is that these companies aren't only keeping us scrolling, commenting, and fighting. They're actively making it harder to organize a united front against their BS, using tactics ranging in complexity from simple algorithm planning and shadow banning to literally hiring trolls to agitate activists online.

For every DSA member there is a platoon of people who are just as activated by the media they consume on these platforms as they are paralyzed. And just because you and I, comrade, broke through the fog to join DSA, doesn't mean we're free from their psychological warfare. Now, I’m not saying we should give up on social media entirely. Many of us woke up to the tyranny of the modern age through social media, and it is necessary that we be engaging with primary sources as our country descends even further into fascism. It’s also necessary that we use these platforms to urge our future comrades to join the fight. Instead, I’m saying this as a reminder that none of us are immune to propaganda, and that propaganda isn’t always what it seems. Stay angry, but be mindful of who is benefiting from it- us or them?

Oxford report on industrial social media manipulation by political actors:
https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-01-13-social-media-manipulation-political-actors-industrial-scale-problem-oxford-report
Hooked: How to Build Habit Forming Products by Nir Eyal, Israeli born (surprise, surprise) behavioral engineer
https://denver.overdrive.com/media/1817200

This past November, baristas turned up the heat in their campaign to unionize Starbucks by launching a nationwide multi-week strike to win a first union contract. Their escalation came after nearly four years of challenging shop-by-shop organizing across the country, Starbucks’ relentless union-busting tactics, numerous unfair labor practice violations filed against Starbucks at the National Labor Relations Board, and months of contract negotiations that brought the Unfair Labor Practice Strike that DSA has been supporting over the last 2 months.

DSA Los Angeles has been shoulder-to-shoulder with Starbucks workers in Los Angeles County for four years as they have worked meticulously to unionize stores across the region. The chapter has organized sip-ins, mass calls, panel discussions, and has turned out for rallies and pickets. Our consistent solidarity with Starbucks Workers United has helped the chapter build meaningful relationships with rank-and-file, member leaders, and staff organizers. These relationships and the trust that comes with them have been incredibly important during the ongoing strike, as DSA-LA has been the primary community partner supporting these striking baristas who are engaged in their longest work stoppage to date.

Over the last 2 months, DSA-LA members have walked the picket line at various stores, blocked delivery vehicles from making deliveries to Starbucks stores, and fed striking baristas throughout December with financial support from the Labor Solidarity Fund of DSA’s National Labor Commission. DSA-LA Socialists in Office, like City Councilmembers Eunisses Hernandez and Hugo Soto-Martinez, and LAUSD School Board member Dr. Rocío Rivas have been out walking the picket lines and rallying supporters during the strike, and DSA-LA-endorsed candidates like Marissa Roy, who is running for LA City Attorney, have used their platform to elevate a key action everyone can do to support Starbucks baristas: do not buy anything from Starbucks during the strike! 

Isabella S., a rank-and-file member of Starbucks Workers United and a DSA member, explains better than anyone the value and impact of DSA’s strike solidarity: 

Without community support much of our efforts as striking workers becomes moot. In order to effectively make change at Starbucks we need support from the community to pressure the company to return to the bargaining table by divesting their money from Starbucks and convincing others to not cross our picket line. DSA members have been among the most dedicated and inspiring supporters to join our picket. DSA-LA members help set up our picket, amplify our voices, and put into context what our actions are all about. Their support energizes me, makes me feel less alone, and demonstrates the power we can have if we show up as a community for each other. No one needs to struggle alone.

While in some areas across the country, Starbucks baristas have paused their strike activity and shifted to other tactics to advance the contract campaign, Los Angeles remains a key area for continuing the open-ended strike. As with any open-ended strike, there are challenges. Starbucks Workers United in Los Angeles is grappling with Starbucks escalating its use of scab labor at stores that have been shut down for nearly 2 months due to successful striking. This has meant that Starbucks baristas and DSA-LA have had to be flexible and adjust to changing dynamics on the ground, and explore additional tactics and avenues to bring the pressure on Starbucks to agree to the union contract that Starbucks baristas deserve. In January, a large contingent of Starbucks baristas went to the Los Angeles City Council to elevate their fight for a union contract and to demand that Los Angeles pass a Fair Work Week ordinance that includes workers at companies like Starbucks, Subway, Taco Bell, and other fast food chains that are often exempted from such ordinances. Councilmember Soto-Martinez, a DSA-LA Socialist in Office, is a proud champion for the ordinance Starbucks baristas are demanding in Los Angeles. 

With every week that goes by, it has been inspiring to see Starbucks baristas continue to take the bold and brave step of refusing to go to work until they are afforded the respect they deserve. These Starbucks baristas are in an open fight with a multi-national mega-corporation led by a greedy capitalist billionaire, and for that, their struggle is our struggle. DSA is proud to stand with Starbucks Workers United one day longer, one day stronger.

On December 6, 2025 on a partly cloudy morning when the sun was just starting to peek out and make itself known, community organizers and members from the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (ACCE), SEIU locals United Service Workers West (USWW) and 221, San Diego DSA, Indivisible San Diego, and a significant number of other community and labor organizations did not gather at the usual protest spaces of Waterfront Park or the Edward J. Schwartz Federal Building. Instead we rallied in the heart of La Jolla, California— a high-end coastal enclave of luxury hotels, designer boutiques, and some of the most expensive homes in the county. In the curated scene of Ellen Browning Scripps Park, ACCE organizers in their signature yellow shirts filed into the park ready for a morning of chanting and marching. 

On this statewide day of action, 300 San Diegans proudly declared that the existing priority of “billionaires first” was unacceptable and we demanded an agenda of “People Over Billionaires.” Determined to not just be a crowd yelling at the clouds, we took the message right to their doorsteps. Neither La Jolla nor Ellen Browning Park were picked at random. In fact, the march route was carefully planned to ensure that the protest passed the home of the richest man in San Diego, Joe Tsai, founder of the AliBaba group and owner of several WNBA teams, as well as that of Andrew Viterbi, a co-founder of Qualcomm. While they try to insulate themselves from realities on the ground and the real life pain that they cause while enriching themselves, we decided to make ourselves heard, loud and proud.

A vibrant community space

Armed with yellow safety vests, flags, bullhorns, and inflatable costumes, community members from all over the county rallied around an impromptu stage and pop-up tents to hear speeches from community organizers working in a plethora of activist spaces from tenant organizing and labor unions to migrant rights and anti-surveillance work. Mariachi Cali scored the rally, performing familiar cultural anthems and providing customized intro and outro music for each speaker, transforming a manicured park into a vibrant community space.

After a number of speeches—including from Kyle Weinberg (director of the San Diego Educators Association), Ramla Sahid (Partnership for the Advancement of New Americans, representing the Transparent and Responsible Use of Surveillance Technology (TRUST) Coalition), and Tazheen Nizam (San Diego director of the Council on American Islamic Relations), it was time to take the streets. San Diego DSA had taken the initiative to provide safety marshals for this action, and after a quick but substantive safety brief with an SEIU 221 organizer the yellow vests were ready to take the streets. 

The route was only about two miles, starting on Girard Street right in front of Ellen Browning Park and up a small incline where our differently-abled comrades set the pace. We turned on to Prospect Street where stunned residents met our chants with intermixed looks of uncomfortable skepticism and support. Then we hooked a u-turn heading north and marched north past a number of high-end art galleries, jewelers, and eateries. Spirits were high as we passed diners with a look of shock that our protest dared to interrupt their brunch activities on a cool Saturday morning. Further down the road, we turned left onto Coast Boulevard and headed back towards the park, but not before occupying the mouth of Coast Walk Trail for a proud display of Latine culture. El Arcoiris del Sur, a local Baile Folclórico group, performed to the tune of the Mariachi band and gave their progressive take on Mexican cultural classic performances such as the Jarabe Tapatio. This closed us out before returning to Ellen Browning Park for a feast of burritos provided by USWW and tacos provided by ACCE. 

An ACCE organizer from the People Over Billionaire coalition assured us that there are more of us than there are of them and this will not be the last time the wealthy communities of San Diego get reminded that a community of workers makes the city run.

INTRODUCTION

Climate change is the issue that looms over all others. A livable planet is prerequisite to every policy goal. Without one, nothing else matters. Yet humanity has generally failed to meet the moment. Our addiction to growth, creature comforts, and heavy industry — most pronounced in the West — is driving us to the abyss. We live for the day, and forfeit tomorrow. As a result, our planet is hurtling toward irreversible tipping points — and may have already passed them. 

Our recklessness has eliminated entire species of animals and insects critical to our ecology, created countless climate refugees in parts of the world having already endured generations of colonized existence, and cost us billions (if not trillions) of dollars. Yet the political class has done little to mitigate this crisis. Many summits have passed. Task forces have convened. And what we have to show for it is the Paris Agreement— an unambitious, largely unbinding pledge that’s proven ineffective.

Climate change is a global problem. As such, it calls for international collaboration — especially between the world’s two biggest emitters, the United States and China. So far, that has been lacking. America has been all too happy to jettison cooperation for a policy of saber rattling and encirclement. Not only is the United States continually announcing the construction of new bases in the Asia-Pacific region, it pushes forward in a Cold War logic of seeking to humiliate China rather than honoring its basic needs and interests. Infamously, America sacrificed climate talks through Nancy Pelosi inflaming tensions over Taiwan and blatantly violating established precedent in US-China relations. Unfortunately, this has become the norm. The Americans would seemingly rather destroy the globe if it means winning a few political skirmishes with China and the Chinese people.

Such antagonism is incredibly distressing. As the world’s two largest emitters, the two powers should be working together to prevent and even reverse ecological breakdown. Quite literally everything depends on it. Instead, the U.S. has continued its ravaging of the environment for short-term economic gain when in fact, it should not only be working with China, but learning from the ways it has mitigated carbon emissions over the last few decades. It is clear Washington will not lead us into a more sustainable future. Beijing might.

UNCLEAN HANDS

In the 10 years since negotiators drafted the Paris Accords, the United States has been an unmitigated climate disaster. Less than a year after drafting, Americans elected a president who called climate change a Chinese hoax. Trump, once assuming power, began his regime by withdrawing from the Paris Agreement. The United States stood alone as the only “major emitter… to repudiate the agreement.” Of course, Trump was not done. He then moved to the domestic front. Trump allowed oil and gas drilling in wildlife refuges, coastal waters, and other formerly protected areas. A particularly sweeping executive order directed all federal departments to eliminate any rules restricting energy production. Further orders sought to accelerate “approval and construction of fossil fuel projects by limiting state environmental reviews.” And this just scratches the surface. A Pulitzer-winning environmental reporter described the first Trump administration as a “relentless drive toward fossil energy development.”

During those dark years, the White House suppressed “climate and related science” to conceal the harm of its boneheaded policies. The administration infamously “edited a major Defense Department report to downplay its climate findings.” It altered the contents of government websites to reduce public access to scientific data. While hiding the truth, Trump also muddied the waters via his own “climate denial and denigration of renewable energy.”

After him came Joe Biden, who supporters heralded as the first climate president. It was not to be. He let the world know early on that environmentalism was categorically not “his thing.” In March 2021:

Biden approved the Willow Project — an Alaska oil drilling venture of appalling scope. The development includes 200 oil wells connected by multiple pipelines.

Under Biden, the Department of Interior “auctioned an Italy-sized chunk of the Gulf of Mexico for drilling.” Biden also reopened “massive tracts of the Gulf for extraction.” Amazingly, the rate at which his administration approved oil permits actually outpaced Trump. Not to be outdone, Trump’s second term has arguably been the greatest calamity of all.

In Trump’s first 100 days this year, he instigated more rollbacks of environmental rules than during his entire first term. After Biden reentered the Paris Agreement, Trump again withdrew. He has earmarked massive expanses, including in the Arctic, for new drilling. After erroneously declaring a national “energy emergency,” Trump exempted dozens of coal-fired power plants from clean air rules. He also blocked “the approval of new solar projects and wind turbines, which he has called ‘ugly’ and ‘disgusting.’” In September, Trump revoked the $7,500 federal tax credits for electric cars. Analysts fear this could spell “big trouble” for the industry and, by extension, the environment.

The pace of destruction has been frenetic. On March 12th alone, “Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency… announced 31 actions” revising pollution standards projected “to save 200,000 lives.” The agency’s head, whose job is to protect the environment, celebrated “driving a dagger into the heart of… climate change.” And the worst is likely yet to come. “[T]he pressure on our regulatory system and our democracy will… ramp up,” said Michael Burger, a climate law scholar.

STARK CONTRAST

In addition to their climate malfeasance, radicalized Republicans are rabidly sinophobic. Relative to the current administration, previous American diplomats were sometimes more neutral on China. Just two years ago, special envoy on climate John Kerry advocated “genuine cooperation” between America and China on environmental issues. “China and the United States are the two largest economies in the world,” he stressed. “It’s clear that we have a special responsibility to find common ground.”

Naturally, the backlash from what became the new guard was fierce. Republican representative Michael McCaul of Texas criticized Kerry’s willingness to negotiate, labeling China “not an honest broker.” McCaul’s colleague Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, representing the far-right Freedom Caucus, attacked Kerry for caring about climate change at all. Perry dubbed global warming “a problem that doesn’t exist.” He then accused the scientific community of “grifting” — lying for pecuniary gain. Of course, this is not just false but highly hypocritical. If anyone is grifting, it’s Perry himself. His denialism probably has something to do with the massive bribes he gleefully accepts from the fossil fuel industry. Unfortunately, inmates like him are now running the asylum.

But the rot has infected members of both parties. Yes, Kerry has had lucid moments. But, overall, he too has a deeply flawed climate record. Under Barack Obama, Kerry abetted an administration which took “disastrous steps that worsened the climate crisis.” This included lifting “the ban on exporting crude oil… thanks to… multiyear lobbying efforts… by… industry groups.” Kerry was hardly a bulwark against special interests trying to destroy the environment.

Kerry also actively supports fracking, which belches methane — one of the most dangerous greenhouse gases — into the atmosphere. Moreover, as recently as 2020, Kerry led the advisory council of a bank that dumped massive sums into fossil financing. That’s not all. Kerry is notoriously weak on climate mitigation funds, insisting the United States can’t afford to assist the developing world. While special envoy on climate under Joe Biden, he said “under no circumstances” would America pay any climate reparations. This contradicts the advice of experts, including economic anthropologist Jason Hickel, who see reparations as necessary for ecological justice.

Yet, in a country as environmentally disastrous as the United States, Kerry seems like a climate hawk. America is history’s worst carbon emitter by far. Today, it ranks among the top per capita emitters according to the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). The United States also finds itself toward the very bottom of the Sustainable Development Index (SDI).

Compare that to China. UNEP data shows that China’s per capita emissions are 40% less than America’s. China also ranks 21 spots above the United States in the SDI. And the country is taking considerable steps to further green itself.

In the first four months of 2023, China added a whopping 62 gigawatts of solar and wind capacity. No other country has made comparable strides, with 80 percent of China’s new power capacity coming from renewable sources. China alone accounts for over 35 percent of all global investment in the transition to clean energy in 2021. These facts have led scholars, including the University of Michigan’s Tom Lyon, to remark that “green is everywhere in China.”

Rather than resting on its laurels, the Middle Kingdom is upping the ante. Even otherwise unsympathetic observers, including the capitalist press, cannot help but marvel. The Economist recently acknowledged that “[t]he scale of the renewables revolution in China is almost too vast for the human mind to grasp.” By the end of last year, “the country had installed 887 of solar-power capacity — close to double Europe’s and America’s combined capacity.” In 2024, it deployed over 24 million tons of steel to build new wind turbines and solar panels. This “would have been enough to build a Golden Gate Bridge on every work day of every week that year.”

Yet there is great room for improvement. Despite historic expansions in clean energy, China remains heavily dependent on dirty sources for its energy demands. Coal still comprises a majority of its energy production. Air pollution is consequently a major problem in Chinese cities. Sulfates fill the skies, typically tracing to coal and fuel oils. Their concentration peaked in the early 2010s, which commentators dubbed an “air-pocalypse.” But China got serious. As The Economist reports:

[C]hemical devices were installed to remove sulphur from the flue gases pumped out by power stations. These steps, along with others, greatly improved air quality in Chinese cities. Its citizens’ lungs are much the better for it, and their lives the longer.

But China’s “war against pollution” is far from over. When it comes to the most harmful particulate matter, China still vastly overshoots World Health Organization standards. This causes a slew of health problems including even premature deaths. Much of the blame for that, however, lies with the United States and its rich allies. As Roger Bybee, a Milwaukee-based freelance writer, explains in his article ‘Scapegoating China,’ “U.S.-based corporations, their contractors, and other Western multinationals… are responsible for a majority of China’s fossil-fuel effluents.” Economist Rob Larson makes a similar point in his book Bleakonomics. American multinationals, he writes, play a “crucial role in exporting polluting industries.” Consequently, residents of major Chinese cities often wear face masks to avoid inhaling harmful amounts of toxic smog.

But at least they wear them, rather than turning masks into a political maelstrom — as was, embarrassingly, the case here. The Trump administration demonized masking and vaccines, continuing its push against the latter to this day. China, meanwhile, treated the pandemic with requisite seriousness. It was easily the world’s largest producer of personal protective equipment, generously exporting excess supply to help other countries cope. While COVID ravaged America, and arguably still does, China conquered it — with a tiny fraction of the death rate. On public health, Beijing showcased its immense superiority.

Many have dubbed tensions between these two great powers, the United States and China, a “New Cold War.” This New Cold War mirrors the old one. In years past, for all its flaws, the Soviet Union led on guaranteeing basic social rights. Citizens enjoyed free college and healthcare alongside universal housing which basically abolished homelessness. Meanwhile, the Soviet Union’s Western counterparts — namely, the United States — spread death and destruction abroad as greed ran rampant domestically. The difference could not have been clearer. 

We see this contrast today too. As the United States descends into fascism, embracing old ways of thinking, China is revolutionizing itself for humanity’s betterment. The Middle Kingdom is greening industry, innovating technologically, and continues opening itself to the outside world. For all its flaws, chief among them cowardice (or indifference) amid Zionist criminality, China is leaping into the new age. In the New Cold War, it is plainly the preferable option. The choice is between civilization and barbarism. Socialists the world over should act accordingly.

LESSONS

There is much to learn from China’s successes. For one, they show the power of innovation. A common narrative in the West is that China is merely an appropriator, and not an originator. China, the story goes, ruthlessly poaches Western technology with little regard for intellectual property because it cannot solve problems itself. But “any doubts about China’s ability to produce… innovative solutions have been disproven with its rapid uptake of green technology.”

Look no further than its booming vehicle industry. Over the years, more than 500 electric car companies have sprouted in China. Although, for efficiency’s sake, that number is rapidly falling due to consolidation. China manufactures over 70% of the world’s electric cars and accounts for 40% of global exports. This is thanks partly to generous government subsidies and otherwise supportive policies to buttress that critical sector.

And that brings us to another common Western common narrative. It is the idea that capitalism promotes innovation better than any other economic system, with socialism paling in comparison. Yet China’s immense environmental progress was produced by a careful series of five-year state plans guiding a largely socialist economy. The ruling Communist Party does not allow the country to fall prey to the anarchy of the market. Its planning outlines $16 trillion of investment to reach carbon neutrality by 2060. A particularly noteworthy proposal is China’s Biodiversity Conservation Strategy and Action Plan. It “aims to vigorously develop green finance… and integrate biodiversity data into… environmental disclosures and sustainability reports.”

There is a lesson here for the United States. More state intervention in the economy can work wonders, and breathe new life into this decaying power. The tools to do so already exist. One is the Defense Production Act, a congressional response to Harry Truman’s 1950s call to supply the Korean War effort. Today, the Defense Production Act is a powerful tool in the presidential arsenal to mobilize private industry to fulfill social priorities. 

Namely, “the executive branch could use the Defense Production Act… to accelerate the clean energy build-out.” Importantly, it could do so while bypassing Congress and subfederal authorities and “without regard to the limitations of existing law.” The ability to override contrary “federal, state, and local laws that privilege corporate short-termism” is bursting with promise.

But none of that matters absent the requisite political will. The United States remains committed to the path of climate doom. A bold transition to renewables is not on the horizon. The Green New Deal, though blindingly necessary, is nothing more than a few bits of paper. America is refusing to face the growing environmental crisis that threatens organized human life as we know it.

Therefore, the global masses — especially in developing nations, which are most at risk — look to China for vision and leadership. And the reason is clear. In staking our collective future, Beijing — and its commitment to expanding green energy — is a safer bet and steadier hand. There is no debate. And there never was.