[✔️] August 23, 2021 - Daily Global Warming News Digest
👀 Richard Pauli
richard at theclimate.vote
Mon Aug 23 09:14:37 EDT 2021
/*August 23, 2021*/
[Reuters]
*LIVE: A climate change protest takes place in London*
Started streaming Aug 23,2021
Reuters
Two weeks of London climate protests planned by Extinction Rebellion
start with an event in Trafalgar Square.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XT0-6Fi8jHU
["my existence is resistance"]
[opinion in the Guardian]
*Big oil coined ‘carbon footprints’ to blame us for their greed. Keep
them on the hook*
Rebecca Solnit
Climate-conscious individual choices are good – but not nearly enough to
save the planet. More than personal virtue, we need collective action...
- -
The main reason to defeat the fossil fuel corporations is that their
product is destroying the planet, but their insidious propaganda, from
spreading climate-change denial to pushing this climate footprint
business, makes this goal even more worthwhile...
- -
The goal for those of us with any kind of resources of time, rights, and
a voice, must be being part of the solution, pushing for system change.
To stop the murder...
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/aug/23/big-oil-coined-carbon-footprints-to-blame-us-for-their-greed-keep-them-on-the-hook
[Calamity humor - ha,ha,ha...]
*Trump's Border Wall Torn Apart by Arizona Monsoon Rains*
Record monsoon rains have blown floodgates off their hinges as Trump's
border wall breaks down.
- -
It turns out ignoring bedrock environmental laws may not have been the
best choice for a multibillion-dollar construction project. Photos show
former President Donald Trump’s border wall in deep disrepair after
summer monsoon rains literally blew floodgates off their hinges...
https://gizmodo.com/trumps-border-wall-torn-apart-by-arizona-monsoon-rains-1847535174
[Education and
outreachhttps://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMp4-pnpf05mBUOdMfTDusQ ]
*The Cost of Climate Migration*
Apr 22, 2021
Let's Talk About Water
Climate change has a price. As part of Earth Day, we hosted our global
academic forum to discuss the cost of climate-induced migration.
HOSTED BY
Dr. Jay Famiglietti, Global Institute for Water Security
FEATURED GUESTS
Abrahm Lustgarten, ProPublica
Robin Bronen, Alaska Institute for Justice; University of Alaska Fairbanks
Dr. Jesse Keenan, Tulane University
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wtxYD0SNaw
[Salon]
*Staunch atheists show higher morals than the proudly pious, from the
pandemic to climate change*
When it comes to the most pressing moral issues of the day, hard-core
secularists exhibit much more empathy
By PHIL ZUCKERMAN
PUBLISHED AUGUST 21, 2021
- -
Consider climate change. The best available data shows that — as a
direct result of human activity — we are destroying our planet. The
results are already manifesting with greater and deadlier frequency:
poisoned air and water, massive wildfires, stronger hurricanes, brutal
mudslides, quickly melting glaciers, rising sea levels, the wanton
disappearance of forests and coral reefs. Such developments do not bode
well for the future; more suffering and death are on the rapidly
approaching horizon. And, yet again, what do we see? It is the most
staunchly secular among us who understand the science behind climate
change and want to do what needs to be done in order to prevent it,
while it is the most pious among us who dismiss the science and don't
want to address the dire threat. For example, a recent PRRI study found
that over 80% of secular Americans accept the evidence that human
activity is causing climate change — and they place addressing climate
change at the top of the list of their political priorities — while only
33% of white Evangelicals accept such evidence, and thus place is
towards the bottom of their list of political priorities...
https://www.salon.com/2021/08/21/staunch-atheists-show-higher-morals-than-the-proudly-pious-from-the-pandemic-to-climate-change/
[Economic speculation]
*How The West Coast Drought Could Cause More ‘Water Wars’*
Jul 23, 2021
CNBC
Water is a cornerstone of economic activity, and when it runs low,
communities face tough choices. The U.S. West is facing extreme drought
conditions that are straining water resources and providing a fertile
ground for wildfires. How will the West Coast face this climate challenge?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOQ0FHxeRTs
[just follow the money]
*Why Bill Gates Is Buying Up U.S. Farmland*
Aug 21, 2021
CNBC
Bill Gates made headlines for becoming the largest private farmland
owner in the U.S. But he’s not the only one. Some of the wealthiest
landowners including Jeff Bezos, John Malone and Thomas Peterffy are
buying up forests, ranches and farmlands across the United States. Why?
Watch the video to find out.
Investments in farmland are growing across the country as people,
including the ultra-wealthy like Bill Gates, look for new ways to grow
their money.
In 2020, Gates made headlines for becoming the largest private farmland
owner in the U.S. He had accumulated more than 269,000 acres of farmland
across 18 states in less than a decade. His farmland grows onions,
carrots and even the potatoes that are used to make McDonald’s French fries.
“It’s an asset with increasing value,” American Farmland Trust CEO John
Piotti said. “It has great intrinsic value and beyond that, it is a
limited resource.”
The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates that 30% of all farmland is
owned by landlords who don’t farm themselves. Buyers often purchase land
from farmers who have owned it for decades; many of whom may be asset
rich but maybe cash poor.
“The economic realities for them are typical that they’ve spent their
life farming,” said Holly Rippon-Butler, land campaign director at the
National Young Farmers Coalition. “Their retirement, their equity is all
in the land and tied up in selling land.”
Private landowners are also making a profit by utilizing the land in
numerous ways. Approximately 39% of the 911 million acres of farmland
across the U.S. is rented out to farmers, and 80% of that rented
farmland is owned by landlords who don’t farm themselves data from the
Agriculture Department shows.
“The young farmers are just as happy to lease the land because whether
you are young or old, it’s a business, right?” said Thomas Petterfy,
chairman of Interactive Brokers and owner of 581,000 acres.
“You go buy a farm and you put that cash rental lease in place, you’re
going to be looking at about 2.5% return on your capital,” Peoples
Company President Steve Bruere said.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJVL9HegCr4
["climate change" cause = "fossil fuel emissions" cause]
*U.N. panel paints grim future for humanity without drastic action to
combat climate change*
Aug 9, 2021
PBS NewsHour
A new report out Monday warns that global temperatures will continue
rising in coming decades, and that human activity is driving that
increase. Those are among the conclusions reached by the U.N.'s
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Michael Oppenheimer, a
professor of geosciences and
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKc6HPgC3uc
[Scholarly sip]
*Science and Culture: Wildfires pose a burning problem for wines and
winemakers*
Jyoti Madhusoodanan
PNAS August 24, 2021 118 (34) e2113327118;
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2113327118
- -
Grapes exposed to smoke absorb chemicals that can alter—and sometimes
ruin—the taste and smell of resultant wines. This so-called “smoke
taint” has become a growing concern for the industry. Chemicals in smoke
obscure wine’s flavor and fragrance, Jacobson says. “You can smell the
taint on the aroma, like a campfire, and when you taste it it’s like an
ashtray,” she says. “It lingers for minutes after you spit or swallow.”
But not all wines are so severely affected. Grape growers, winemakers,
and researchers have been surprised by the complex, lasting effects of
wildfire smoke. The vagaries of plant physiology and microbial
fermentation and the influence of the wind and other elements all add up
to make taint an unpredictable and elusive phenomenon. Precisely when
smoke exposure will ruin a batch of wine is uncertain. “Just because you
have smoke exposure in your vineyard doesn’t mean you’ll taste it in the
wine,” says enologist Elizabeth Tomasino of Oregon State University in
Corvallis. “Two wines that have the same amount of smoke compounds might
taste very different. It’s tricky.”
- -
Indeed, she found similar chemical processes at play in grapes
themselves. Wildfires burn lignin in trees and produce volatile phenols
that can be toxic to plants. To protect themselves, grapevines react by
coupling these aromatic compounds to sugars. Once bound, these
conjugated chemicals are soluble in water and can be metabolized or
transported out of cells. The bound versions of smoke chemicals are no
longer volatile, so they can be tough to detect via smell or
taste—meaning a smoke-tainted grape may seem no different from one not
exposed to smoke. But during fermentation, yeast enzymes can break these
bonds, releasing the phenols once more and causing an ashy, smoky finish
to wines.
The process of binding phenols to sugars is surprisingly quick—an hour
or two of exposure can result in smoke taint, Wilkinson says. And smoke
doesn’t just deposit a residue on the fruit’s surface. Even after the
skins are removed, as in the process of making white wines, sugar-bound
phenols in the flesh of grapes can prove problematic. Wilkinson and her
student were the first to find that smoke could have a significant
impact on the grapevines in the field and the wine they produced (1).
Longer durations of smoke exposure also resulted in a heavier taint,
they found.
Although the enzymes that bind smoke compounds to sugars are common
across plant species, the problem of taint appears to be unique to
grapes. It’s possible that the chemical reaction occurs differently in
other plants, or that the fruits or vegetables are already harvested by
the end of summer, when wildfires usually flare up. “No one’s ever said
they’ve got smoke-tainted cauliflowers or oranges,” Wilkinson says.
“We’ve done experiments applying smoke to strawberries and cherry
tomatoes and haven’t seen the same taint.”
- -
Remedies will be essential, Jacobsen says. When wildfires loom, industry
workers scramble to protect their lives and belongings; they often can’t
reach their fields, let alone work on them, to protect or harvest
grapes. “We have to figure out how to make wines without smoke taint,”
she says, “But we also have to figure out how to live and work with the
threat of wildfires.”
https://www.pnas.org/content/118/34/e2113327118
[Study the misinformation battleground]
*The Creepy Line - Full Documentary on Social Media's manipulation of
society*
Aug 27, 2020
Janson Media
The Creepy Line reveals the stunning degree to which society is
manipulated by Google and Facebook and blows the lid off the remarkably
subtle – hence powerful – manner in which they do it. Offering
first-hand accounts, scientific experiments and detailed analysis, the
film examines what is at risk when these tech titans have free reign to
utilize the public’s most private and personal data.
See more Full Movies and Documentaries on Janson Media -
https://goo.gl/scnWDZ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0v6KBGr5IzY
- -
[Fake news in 2020]
*Fake: Searching For Truth In The Age Of Misinformation | Full
Documentary | Connecticut Public*
Feb 14, 2020
Connecticut Public
Given the sheer volume of news available, how can the average person
separate fact from fiction? This series draws from common sense,
critical thinking skills, and universal standards of journalism to give
viewers the tools to discern fact from fiction in news reports, identify
fake news, and evaluate the biases of real news.
This timely documentary explores how and why misinformation spreads, and
how to be a smarter information consumer in our increasingly digital world.
----------
Learn more about "Fake": https://cptv.org/fake/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMv4Mbdf9HA
- -
[TED speech]
*How we can protect truth in the age of misinformation | Sinan Aral*
Jan 16, 2020
TED
Visit http://TED.com to get our entire library of TED Talks,
transcripts, translations, personalized Talk recommendations and more.
Fake news can sway elections, tank economies and sow discord in everyday
life. Data scientist Sinan Aral demystifies how and why it spreads so
quickly -- citing one of the largest studies on misinformation -- and
identifies five strategies to help us unweave the tangled web between
true and false.
Get TED Talks recommended just for you! Learn more at http://TED.com/signup.
The TED Talks channel features the best talks and performances from the
TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers and doers give the
talk of their lives in 18 minutes (or less). Look for talks on
Technology, Entertainment and Design -- plus science, business, global
issues, the arts and more. You're welcome to link to or embed these
videos, forward them to others and share these ideas with people you
know. For more information on using TED for commercial purposes (e.g.
employee learning, in a film or online course), submit a Media Request
here: http://media-requests.TED.com
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7ORAKULel4
[The news archive - looking back at a long, difficult read]
*On this day in the history of global warming August 23, 1971*
August 23, 1971: Attorney and future Supreme Court Justice Lewis F.
Powell Jr. writes a memo to the US Chamber of Commerce urging a greater
special-interest pushback against public-interest groups. The memo
becomes the template for efforts by the fossil-fuel industry to generate
faux-outrage over, and ginned-up opposition to, efforts to regulate
greenhouse gases.
The full text of the Powell Memo is below or can be downloaded as a PDF
from
https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/PowellMemorandumTypescript.pdf
CONFIDENTIAL MEMORANDUM
Attack on American Free Enterprise System
DATE: August 23, 1971
TO: Mr. Eugene B. Sydnor, Jr., Chairman, Education Committee,
U.S. Chamber of Commerce
FROM: Lewis F. Powell, Jr.
This memorandum is submitted at your request as a basis for the
discussion on August 24 with Mr. Booth (executive vice
president) and others at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The
purpose is to identify the problem, and suggest possible avenues
of action for further consideration.
Dimensions of the Attack
No thoughtful person can question that the American economic
system is under broad attack. This varies in scope, intensity,
in the techniques employed, and in the level of visibility.
There always have been some who opposed the American system, and
preferred socialism or some form of statism (communism or
fascism). Also, there always have been critics of the system,
whose criticism has been wholesome and constructive so long as
the objective was to improve rather than to subvert or destroy.
But what now concerns us is quite new in the history of America.
We are not dealing with sporadic or isolated attacks from a
relatively few extremists or even from the minority socialist
cadre. Rather, the assault on the enterprise system is broadly
based and consistently pursued. It is gaining momentum and converts.
Sources of the Attack
The sources are varied and diffused. They include, not
unexpectedly, the Communists, New Leftists and other
revolutionaries who would destroy the entire system, both
political and economic. These extremists of the left are far
more numerous, better financed, and increasingly are more
welcomed and encouraged by other elements of society, than ever
before in our history. But they remain a small minority, and are
not yet the principal cause for concern.
The most disquieting voices joining the chorus of criticism come
from perfectly respectable elements of society: from the college
campus, the pulpit, the media, the intellectual and literary
journals, the arts and sciences, and from politicians. In most
of these groups the movement against the system is participated
in only by minorities. Yet, these often are the most articulate,
the most vocal, the most prolific in their writing and speaking.
Moreover, much of the media — for varying motives and in varying
degrees — either voluntarily accords unique publicity to these
“attackers,” or at least allows them to exploit the media for
their purposes. This is especially true of television, which now
plays such a predominant role in shaping the thinking, attitudes
and emotions of our people.
One of the bewildering paradoxes of our time is the extent to
which the enterprise system tolerates, if not participates in,
its own destruction.
The campuses from which much of the criticism emanates are
supported by (i) tax funds generated largely from American
business, and (ii) contributions from capital funds controlled
or generated by American business. The boards of trustees of our
universities overwhelmingly are composed of men and women who
are leaders in the system.
Most of the media, including the national TV systems, are owned
and theoretically controlled by corporations which depend upon
profits, and the enterprise system to survive.
Tone of the Attack
This memorandum is not the place to document in detail the tone,
character, or intensity of the attack. The following quotations
will suffice to give one a general idea:
William Kunstler, warmly welcomed on campuses and listed in a
recent student poll as the “American lawyer most admired,”
incites audiences as follows:
“You must learn to fight in the streets, to revolt, to shoot
guns. We will learn to do all of the things that property owners
fear.” The New Leftists who heed Kunstler’s advice increasingly
are beginning to act — not just against military recruiting
offices and manufacturers of munitions, but against a variety of
businesses: “Since February, 1970, branches (of Bank of America)
have been attacked 39 times, 22 times with explosive devices and
17 times with fire bombs or by arsonists.” Although New Leftist
spokesmen are succeeding in radicalizing thousands of the young,
the greater cause for concern is the hostility of respectable
liberals and social reformers. It is the sum total of their
views and influence which could indeed fatally weaken or destroy
the system.
A chilling description of what is being taught on many of our
campuses was written by Stewart Alsop:
“Yale, like every other major college, is graduating scores of
bright young men who are practitioners of ‘the politics of
despair.’ These young men despise the American political and
economic system . . . (their) minds seem to be wholly closed.
They live, not by rational discussion, but by mindless
slogans.”A recent poll of students on 12 representative campuses
reported that: “Almost half the students favored socialization
of basic U.S. industries.”
A visiting professor from England at Rockford College gave a
series of lectures entitled “The Ideological War Against Western
Society,” in which he documents the extent to which members of
the intellectual community are waging ideological warfare
against the enterprise system and the values of western society.
In a foreword to these lectures, famed Dr. Milton Friedman of
Chicago warned: “It (is) crystal clear that the foundations of
our free society are under wide-ranging and powerful attack —
not by Communist or any other conspiracy but by misguided
individuals parroting one another and unwittingly serving ends
they would never intentionally promote.”
Perhaps the single most effective antagonist of American
business is Ralph Nader, who — thanks largely to the media — has
become a legend in his own time and an idol of millions of
Americans. A recent article in Fortune speaks of Nader as follows:
“The passion that rules in him — and he is a passionate man — is
aimed at smashing utterly the target of his hatred, which is
corporate power. He thinks, and says quite bluntly, that a great
many corporate executives belong in prison — for defrauding the
consumer with shoddy merchandise, poisoning the food supply with
chemical additives, and willfully manufacturing unsafe products
that will maim or kill the buyer. He emphasizes that he is not
talking just about ‘fly-by-night hucksters’ but the top
management of blue chip business.”
A frontal assault was made on our government, our system of
justice, and the free enterprise system by Yale Professor
Charles Reich in his widely publicized book: “The Greening of
America,” published last winter.
The foregoing references illustrate the broad, shotgun attack on
the system itself. There are countless examples of rifle shots
which undermine confidence and confuse the public. Favorite
current targets are proposals for tax incentives through changes
in depreciation rates and investment credits. These are usually
described in the media as “tax breaks,” “loop holes” or “tax
benefits” for the benefit of business. * As viewed by a
columnist in the Post, such tax measures would benefit “only the
rich, the owners of big companies.”
It is dismaying that many politicians make the same argument
that tax measures of this kind benefit only “business,” without
benefit to “the poor.” The fact that this is either political
demagoguery or economic illiteracy is of slight comfort. This
setting of the “rich” against the “poor,” of business against
the people, is the cheapest and most dangerous kind of politics.
The Apathy and Default of Business
What has been the response of business to this massive assault
upon its fundamental economics, upon its philosophy, upon its
right to continue to manage its own affairs, and indeed upon its
integrity?
The painfully sad truth is that business, including the boards
of directors’ and the top executives of corporations great and
small and business organizations at all levels, often have
responded — if at all — by appeasement, ineptitude and ignoring
the problem. There are, of course, many exceptions to this
sweeping generalization. But the net effect of such response as
has been made is scarcely visible.
In all fairness, it must be recognized that businessmen have not
been trained or equipped to conduct guerrilla warfare with those
who propagandize against the system, seeking insidiously and
constantly to sabotage it. The traditional role of business
executives has been to manage, to produce, to sell, to create
jobs, to make profits, to improve the standard of living, to be
community leaders, to serve on charitable and educational
boards, and generally to be good citizens. They have performed
these tasks very well indeed.
But they have shown little stomach for hard-nose contest with
their critics, and little skill in effective intellectual and
philosophical debate.
A column recently carried by the Wall Street Journal was
entitled: “Memo to GM: Why Not Fight Back?” Although addressed
to GM by name, the article was a warning to all American
business. Columnist St. John said:
“General Motors, like American business in general, is ‘plainly
in trouble’ because intellectual bromides have been substituted
for a sound intellectual exposition of its point of view.” Mr.
St. John then commented on the tendency of business leaders to
compromise with and appease critics. He cited the concessions
which Nader wins from management, and spoke of “the fallacious
view many businessmen take toward their critics.” He drew a
parallel to the mistaken tactics of many college administrators:
“College administrators learned too late that such appeasement
serves to destroy free speech, academic freedom and genuine
scholarship. One campus radical demand was conceded by
university heads only to be followed by a fresh crop which soon
escalated to what amounted to a demand for outright surrender.”
One need not agree entirely with Mr. St. John’s analysis. But
most observers of the American scene will agree that the essence
of his message is sound. American business “plainly in trouble”;
the response to the wide range of critics has been ineffective,
and has included appeasement; the time has come — indeed, it is
long overdue — for the wisdom, ingenuity and resources of
American business to be marshalled against those who would
destroy it.
Responsibility of Business Executives
What specifically should be done? The first essential — a
prerequisite to any effective action — is for businessmen to
confront this problem as a primary responsibility of corporate
management.
The overriding first need is for businessmen to recognize that
the ultimate issue may be survival — survival of what we call
the free enterprise system, and all that this means for the
strength and prosperity of America and the freedom of our people.
The day is long past when the chief executive officer of a major
corporation discharges his responsibility by maintaining a
satisfactory growth of profits, with due regard to the
corporation’s public and social responsibilities. If our system
is to survive, top management must be equally concerned with
protecting and preserving the system itself. This involves far
more than an increased emphasis on “public relations” or
“governmental affairs” — two areas in which corporations long
have invested substantial sums.
A significant first step by individual corporations could well
be the designation of an executive vice president (ranking with
other executive VP’s) whose responsibility is to counter-on the
broadest front-the attack on the enterprise system. The public
relations department could be one of the foundations assigned to
this executive, but his responsibilities should encompass some
of the types of activities referred to subsequently in this
memorandum. His budget and staff should be adequate to the task.
Possible Role of the Chamber of Commerce
But independent and uncoordinated activity by individual
corporations, as important as this is, will not be sufficient.
Strength lies in organization, in careful long-range planning
and implementation, in consistency of action over an indefinite
period of years, in the scale of financing available only
through joint effort, and in the political power available only
through united action and national organizations.
Moreover, there is the quite understandable reluctance on the
part of any one corporation to get too far out in front and to
make itself too visible a target.
The role of the National Chamber of Commerce is therefore vital.
Other national organizations (especially those of various
industrial and commercial groups) should join in the effort, but
no other organizations appear to be as well situated as the
Chamber. It enjoys a strategic position, with a fine reputation
and a broad base of support. Also — and this is of immeasurable
merit — there are hundreds of local Chambers of Commerce which
can play a vital supportive role.
It hardly need be said that before embarking upon any program,
the Chamber should study and analyze possible courses of action
and activities, weighing risks against probable effectiveness
and feasibility of each. Considerations of cost, the assurance
of financial and other support from members, adequacy of
staffing and similar problems will all require the most
thoughtful consideration.
The Campus
The assault on the enterprise system was not mounted in a few
months. It has gradually evolved over the past two decades,
barely perceptible in its origins and benefiting (sic) from a
gradualism that provoked little awareness much less any real
reaction.
Although origins, sources and causes are complex and
interrelated, and obviously difficult to identify without
careful qualification, there is reason to believe that the
campus is the single most dynamic source. The social science
faculties usually include members who are unsympathetic to the
enterprise system. They may range from a Herbert Marcuse,
Marxist faculty member at the University of California at San
Diego, and convinced socialists, to the ambivalent liberal
critic who finds more to condemn than to commend. Such faculty
members need not be in a majority. They are often personally
attractive and magnetic; they are stimulating teachers, and
their controversy attracts student following; they are prolific
writers and lecturers; they author many of the textbooks, and
they exert enormous influence — far out of proportion to their
numbers — on their colleagues and in the academic world.
Social science faculties (the political scientist, economist,
sociologist and many of the historians) tend to be liberally
oriented, even when leftists are not present. This is not a
criticism per se, as the need for liberal thought is essential
to a balanced viewpoint. The difficulty is that “balance” is
conspicuous by its absence on many campuses, with relatively few
members being of conservatives or moderate persuasion and even
the relatively few often being less articulate and aggressive
than their crusading colleagues.
This situation extending back many years and with the imbalance
gradually worsening, has had an enormous impact on millions of
young American students. In an article in Barron’s Weekly,
seeking an answer to why so many young people are disaffected
even to the point of being revolutionaries, it was said:
“Because they were taught that way.” Or, as noted by columnist
Stewart Alsop, writing about his alma mater: “Yale, like every
other major college, is graduating scores’ of bright young men …
who despise the American political and economic system.”
As these “bright young men,” from campuses across the country,
seek opportunities to change a system which they have been
taught to distrust — if not, indeed “despise” — they seek
employment in the centers of the real power and influence in our
country, namely: (i) with the news media, especially television;
(ii) in government, as “staffers” and consultants at various
levels; (iii) in elective politics; (iv) as lecturers and
writers, and (v) on the faculties at various levels of education.
Many do enter the enterprise system — in business and the
professions — and for the most part they quickly discover the
fallacies of what they have been taught. But those who eschew
the mainstream of the system often remain in key positions of
influence where they mold public opinion and often shape
governmental action. In many instances, these “intellectuals”
end up in regulatory agencies or governmental departments with
large authority over the business system they do not believe in.
If the foregoing analysis is approximately sound, a priority
task of business — and organizations such as the Chamber — is to
address the campus origin of this hostility. Few things are more
sanctified in American life than academic freedom. It would be
fatal to attack this as a principle. But if academic freedom is
to retain the qualities of “openness,” “fairness” and “balance”
— which are essential to its intellectual significance — there
is a great opportunity for constructive action. The thrust of
such action must be to restore the qualities just mentioned to
the academic communities.
What Can Be Done About the Campus
The ultimate responsibility for intellectual integrity on the
campus must remain on the administrations and faculties of our
colleges and universities. But organizations such as the Chamber
can assist and activate constructive change in many ways,
including the following:
Staff of Scholars
The Chamber should consider establishing a staff of highly
qualified scholars in the social sciences who do believe in the
system. It should include several of national reputation whose
authorship would be widely respected — even when disagreed with.
Staff of Speakers
There also should be a staff of speakers of the highest
competency. These might include the scholars, and certainly
those who speak for the Chamber would have to articulate the
product of the scholars.
Speaker’s Bureau
In addition to full-time staff personnel, the Chamber should
have a Speaker’s Bureau which should include the ablest and most
effective advocates from the top echelons of American business.
Evaluation of Textbooks
The staff of scholars (or preferably a panel of independent
scholars) should evaluate social science textbooks, especially
in economics, political science and sociology. This should be a
continuing program.
The objective of such evaluation should be oriented toward
restoring the balance essential to genuine academic freedom.
This would include assurance of fair and factual treatment of
our system of government and our enterprise system, its
accomplishments, its basic relationship to individual rights and
freedoms, and comparisons with the systems of socialism, fascism
and communism. Most of the existing textbooks have some sort of
comparisons, but many are superficial, biased and unfair.
We have seen the civil rights movement insist on re-writing many
of the textbooks in our universities and schools. The labor
unions likewise insist that textbooks be fair to the viewpoints
of organized labor. Other interested citizens groups have not
hesitated to review, analyze and criticize textbooks and
teaching materials. In a democratic society, this can be a
constructive process and should be regarded as an aid to genuine
academic freedom and not as an intrusion upon it.
If the authors, publishers and users of textbooks know that they
will be subjected — honestly, fairly and thoroughly — to review
and critique by eminent scholars who believe in the American
system, a return to a more rational balance can be expected.
Equal Time on the Campus
The Chamber should insist upon equal time on the college
speaking circuit. The FBI publishes each year a list of speeches
made on college campuses by avowed Communists. The number in
1970 exceeded 100. There were, of course, many hundreds of
appearances by leftists and ultra liberals who urge the types of
viewpoints indicated earlier in this memorandum. There was no
corresponding representation of American business, or indeed by
individuals or organizations who appeared in support of the
American system of government and business.
Every campus has its formal and informal groups which invite
speakers. Each law school does the same thing. Many universities
and colleges officially sponsor lecture and speaking programs.
We all know the inadequacy of the representation of business in
the programs.
It will be said that few invitations would be extended to
Chamber speakers. This undoubtedly would be true unless the
Chamber aggressively insisted upon the right to be heard — in
effect, insisted upon “equal time.” University administrators
and the great majority of student groups and committees would
not welcome being put in the position publicly of refusing a
forum to diverse views, indeed, this is the classic excuse for
allowing Communists to speak.
The two essential ingredients are (i) to have attractive,
articulate and well-informed speakers; and (ii) to exert
whatever degree of pressure — publicly and privately — may be
necessary to assure opportunities to speak. The objective always
must be to inform and enlighten, and not merely to propagandize.
Balancing of Faculties
Perhaps the most fundamental problem is the imbalance of many
faculties. Correcting this is indeed a long-range and difficult
project. Yet, it should be undertaken as a part of an overall
program. This would mean the urging of the need for faculty
balance upon university administrators and boards of trustees.
The methods to be employed require careful thought, and the
obvious pitfalls must be avoided. Improper pressure would be
counterproductive. But the basic concepts of balance, fairness
and truth are difficult to resist, if properly presented to
boards of trustees, by writing and speaking, and by appeals to
alumni associations and groups.
This is a long road and not one for the fainthearted. But if
pursued with integrity and conviction it could lead to a
strengthening of both academic freedom on the campus and of the
values which have made America the most productive of all societies.
Graduate Schools of Business
The Chamber should enjoy a particular rapport with the
increasingly influential graduate schools of business. Much that
has been suggested above applies to such schools.
Should not the Chamber also request specific courses in such
schools dealing with the entire scope of the problem addressed
by this memorandum? This is now essential training for the
executives of the future.
Secondary Education
While the first priority should be at the college level, the
trends mentioned above are increasingly evidenced in the high
schools. Action programs, tailored to the high schools and
similar to those mentioned, should be considered. The
implementation thereof could become a major program for local
chambers of commerce, although the control and direction —
especially the quality control — should be retained by the
National Chamber.
What Can Be Done About the Public?
Reaching the campus and the secondary schools is vital for the
long-term. Reaching the public generally may be more important
for the shorter term. The first essential is to establish the
staffs of eminent scholars, writers and speakers, who will do
the thinking, the analysis, the writing and the speaking. It
will also be essential to have staff personnel who are
thoroughly familiar with the media, and how most effectively to
communicate with the public. Among the more obvious means are
the following:
Television
The national television networks should be monitored in the same
way that textbooks should be kept under constant surveillance.
This applies not merely to so-called educational programs (such
as “Selling of the Pentagon”), but to the daily “news analysis”
which so often includes the most insidious type of criticism of
the enterprise system. Whether this criticism results from
hostility or economic ignorance, the result is the gradual
erosion of confidence in “business” and free enterprise.
This monitoring, to be effective, would require constant
examination of the texts of adequate samples of programs.
Complaints — to the media and to the Federal Communications
Commission — should be made promptly and strongly when programs
are unfair or inaccurate.
Equal time should be demanded when appropriate. Effort should be
made to see that the forum-type programs (the Today Show, Meet
the Press, etc.) afford at least as much opportunity for
supporters of the American system to participate as these
programs do for those who attack it.
Other Media
Radio and the press are also important, and every available
means should be employed to challenge and refute unfair attacks,
as well as to present the affirmative case through these media.
The Scholarly Journals
It is especially important for the Chamber’s “faculty of
scholars” to publish. One of the keys to the success of the
liberal and leftist faculty members has been their passion for
“publication” and “lecturing.” A similar passion must exist
among the Chamber’s scholars.
Incentives might be devised to induce more “publishing” by
independent scholars who do believe in the system.
There should be a fairly steady flow of scholarly articles
presented to a broad spectrum of magazines and periodicals —
ranging from the popular magazines (Life, Look, Reader’s Digest,
etc.) to the more intellectual ones (Atlantic, Harper’s,
Saturday Review, New York, etc.) and to the various professional
journals.
Books, Paperbacks and Pamphlets
The news stands — at airports, drugstores, and elsewhere — are
filled with paperbacks and pamphlets advocating everything from
revolution to erotic free love. One finds almost no attractive,
well-written paperbacks or pamphlets on “our side.” It will be
difficult to compete with an Eldridge Cleaver or even a Charles
Reich for reader attention, but unless the effort is made — on a
large enough scale and with appropriate imagination to assure
some success — this opportunity for educating the public will be
irretrievably lost.
Paid Advertisements
Business pays hundreds of millions of dollars to the media for
advertisements. Most of this supports specific products; much of
it supports institutional image making; and some fraction of it
does support the system. But the latter has been more or less
tangential, and rarely part of a sustained, major effort to
inform and enlighten the American people.
If American business devoted only 10% of its total annual
advertising budget to this overall purpose, it would be a
statesman-like expenditure.
The Neglected Political Arena
In the final analysis, the payoff — short-of revolution — is
what government does. Business has been the favorite
whipping-boy of many politicians for many years. But the measure
of how far this has gone is perhaps best found in the
anti-business views now being expressed by several leading
candidates for President of the United States.
It is still Marxist doctrine that the “capitalist” countries are
controlled by big business. This doctrine, consistently a part
of leftist propaganda all over the world, has a wide public
following among Americans.
Yet, as every business executive knows, few elements of American
society today have as little influence in government as the
American businessman, the corporation, or even the millions of
corporate stockholders. If one doubts this, let him undertake
the role of “lobbyist” for the business point of view before
Congressional committees. The same situation obtains in the
legislative halls of most states and major cities. One does not
exaggerate to say that, in terms of political influence with
respect to the course of legislation and government action, the
American business executive is truly the “forgotten man.”
Current examples of the impotency of business, and of the
near-contempt with which businessmen’s views are held, are the
stampedes by politicians to support almost any legislation
related to “consumerism” or to the “environment.”
Politicians reflect what they believe to be majority views of
their constituents. It is thus evident that most politicians are
making the judgment that the public has little sympathy for the
businessman or his viewpoint.
The educational programs suggested above would be designed to
enlighten public thinking — not so much about the businessman
and his individual role as about the system which he
administers, and which provides the goods, services and jobs on
which our country depends.
But one should not postpone more direct political action, while
awaiting the gradual change in public opinion to be effected
through education and information. Business must learn the
lesson, long ago learned by labor and other self-interest
groups. This is the lesson that political power is necessary;
that such power must be assidously (sic) cultivated; and that
when necessary, it must be used aggressively and with
determination — without embarrassment and without the reluctance
which has been so characteristic of American business.
As unwelcome as it may be to the Chamber, it should consider
assuming a broader and more vigorous role in the political arena.
Neglected Opportunity in the Courts
American business and the enterprise system have been affected
as much by the courts as by the executive and legislative
branches of government. Under our constitutional system,
especially with an activist-minded Supreme Court, the judiciary
may be the most important instrument for social, economic and
political change.
Other organizations and groups, recognizing this, have been far
more astute in exploiting judicial action than American
business. Perhaps the most active exploiters of the judicial
system have been groups ranging in political orientation from
“liberal” to the far left.
The American Civil Liberties Union is one example. It initiates
or intervenes in scores of cases each year, and it files briefs
amicus curiae in the Supreme Court in a number of cases during
each term of that court. Labor unions, civil rights groups and
now the public interest law firms are extremely active in the
judicial arena. Their success, often at business’ expense, has
not been inconsequential.
This is a vast area of opportunity for the Chamber, if it is
willing to undertake the role of spokesman for American business
and if, in turn, business is willing to provide the funds.
As with respect to scholars and speakers, the Chamber would need
a highly competent staff of lawyers. In special situations it
should be authorized to engage, to appear as counsel amicus in
the Supreme Court, lawyers of national standing and reputation.
The greatest care should be exercised in selecting the cases in
which to participate, or the suits to institute. But the
opportunity merits the necessary effort.
Neglected Stockholder Power
The average member of the public thinks of “business” as an
impersonal corporate entity, owned by the very rich and managed
by over-paid executives. There is an almost total failure to
appreciate that “business” actually embraces — in one way or
another — most Americans. Those for whom business provides jobs,
constitute a fairly obvious class. But the 20 million
stockholders — most of whom are of modest means — are the real
owners, the real entrepreneurs, the real capitalists under our
system. They provide the capital which fuels the economic system
which has produced the highest standard of living in all
history. Yet, stockholders have been as ineffectual as business
executives in promoting a genuine understanding of our system or
in exercising political influence.
The question which merits the most thorough examination is how
can the weight and influence of stockholders — 20 million voters
— be mobilized to support (i) an educational program and (ii) a
political action program.
Individual corporations are now required to make numerous
reports to shareholders. Many corporations also have expensive
“news” magazines which go to employees and stockholders. These
opportunities to communicate can be used far more effectively as
educational media.
The corporation itself must exercise restraint in undertaking
political action and must, of course, comply with applicable
laws. But is it not feasible — through an affiliate of the
Chamber or otherwise — to establish a national organization of
American stockholders and give it enough muscle to be influential?
A More Aggressive Attitude
Business interests — especially big business and their national
trade organizations — have tried to maintain low profiles,
especially with respect to political action.
As suggested in the Wall Street Journal article, it has been
fairly characteristic of the average business executive to be
tolerant — at least in public — of those who attack his
corporation and the system. Very few businessmen or business
organizations respond in kind. There has been a disposition to
appease; to regard the opposition as willing to compromise, or
as likely to fade away in due time.
Business has shunted confrontation politics. Business, quite
understandably, has been repelled by the multiplicity of
non-negotiable “demands” made constantly by self-interest groups
of all kinds.
While neither responsible business interests, nor the United
States Chamber of Commerce, would engage in the irresponsible
tactics of some pressure groups, it is essential that spokesmen
for the enterprise system — at all levels and at every
opportunity — be far more aggressive than in the past.
There should be no hesitation to attack the Naders, the Marcuses
and others who openly seek destruction of the system. There
should not be the slightest hesitation to press vigorously in
all political arenas for support of the enterprise system. Nor
should there be reluctance to penalize politically those who
oppose it.
Lessons can be learned from organized labor in this respect. The
head of the AFL-CIO may not appeal to businessmen as the most
endearing or public-minded of citizens. Yet, over many years the
heads of national labor organizations have done what they were
paid to do very effectively. They may not have been beloved, but
they have been respected — where it counts the most — by
politicians, on the campus, and among the media.
It is time for American business — which has demonstrated the
greatest capacity in all history to produce and to influence
consumer decisions — to apply their great talents vigorously to
the preservation of the system itself.
The Cost
The type of program described above (which includes a broadly
based combination of education and political action), if
undertaken long term and adequately staffed, would require far
more generous financial support from American corporations than
the Chamber has ever received in the past. High level management
participation in Chamber affairs also would be required.
The staff of the Chamber would have to be significantly
increased, with the highest quality established and maintained.
Salaries would have to be at levels fully comparable to those
paid key business executives and the most prestigious faculty
members. Professionals of the great skill in advertising and in
working with the media, speakers, lawyers and other specialists
would have to be recruited.
It is possible that the organization of the Chamber itself would
benefit from restructuring. For example, as suggested by union
experience, the office of President of the Chamber might well be
a full-time career position. To assure maximum effectiveness and
continuity, the chief executive officer of the Chamber should
not be changed each year. The functions now largely performed by
the President could be transferred to a Chairman of the Board,
annually elected by the membership. The Board, of course, would
continue to exercise policy control.
Quality Control is Essential
Essential ingredients of the entire program must be
responsibility and “quality control.” The publications, the
articles, the speeches, the media programs, the advertising, the
briefs filed in courts, and the appearances before legislative
committees — all must meet the most exacting standards of
accuracy and professional excellence. They must merit respect
for their level of public responsibility and scholarship,
whether one agrees with the viewpoints expressed or not.
Relationship to Freedom
The threat to the enterprise system is not merely a matter of
economics. It also is a threat to individual freedom.
It is this great truth — now so submerged by the rhetoric of the
New Left and of many liberals — that must be re-affirmed if this
program is to be meaningful.
There seems to be little awareness that the only alternatives to
free enterprise are varying degrees of bureaucratic regulation
of individual freedom — ranging from that under moderate
socialism to the iron heel of the leftist or rightist dictatorship.
We in America already have moved very far indeed toward some
aspects of state socialism, as the needs and complexities of a
vast urban society require types of regulation and control that
were quite unnecessary in earlier times. In some areas, such
regulation and control already have seriously impaired the
freedom of both business and labor, and indeed of the public
generally. But most of the essential freedoms remain: private
ownership, private profit, labor unions, collective bargaining,
consumer choice, and a market economy in which competition
largely determines price, quality and variety of the goods and
services provided the consumer.
In addition to the ideological attack on the system itself
(discussed in this memorandum), its essentials also are
threatened by inequitable taxation, and — more recently — by an
inflation which has seemed uncontrollable. But whatever the
causes of diminishing economic freedom may be, the truth is that
freedom as a concept is indivisible. As the experience of the
socialist and totalitarian states demonstrates, the contraction
and denial of economic freedom is followed inevitably by
governmental restrictions on other cherished rights. It is this
message, above all others, that must be carried home to the
American people.
Conclusion
It hardly need be said that the views expressed above are
tentative and suggestive. The first step should be a thorough
study. But this would be an exercise in futility unless the
Board of Directors of the Chamber accepts the fundamental
premise of this paper, namely, that business and the enterprise
system are in deep trouble, and the hour is late.
Additional Resources:
The Powell Memo with an introduction and Lewis Powell‘s
footnotes is available on the Reclaim Democracy website.
Other overviews of the Powell Memo can be found at the following
sources:
Lee Drutman and Charlie Cray, The People’s Business: Controlling
Corporations and Restoring Democracy. San Francisco:
Berrett-Koehler, 2004. More information available at:
http://www.bkconnection.com/ProdDetails.asp?ID=1576753093.
Kim Phillips-Fein, Invisible Hands: The Making of the
Conservative Movement from the New Deal to Reagan. New York:
Norton, 2009. More information available at:
http://books.google.com/books/about/Invisible_hands.html?id=CcU7z9jLqXcC.
Jerry Landay, “The Powell Manifesto: How A Prominent Lawyer’s
Attack Memo Changed America,” Media Transparency, August 20,
2002. Available at:
http://old.mediatransparency.org/story.php?storyID=21.
Lewis H. Lapham, “Tentacles of Rage: The Republican propaganda
mill, a brief history,” Harpers Magazine, Vol. 309, No. 1852,
September, 2004. Available at:
http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2004/Republican-Propaganda1sep04.htm.
Mark Schmitt, “The Legend of the Powell Memo,” American
Prospect, April 25, 2005. Available at:
http://prospect.org/cs/articles?articleId=9606.
Chip Berlet, “Right-Wing Rollback: The Powell Memo,” Z Magazine,
October 2009. Available at:
http://www.zcommunications.org/right-wing-rollback-the-powell-memo-by-chip-berlet.
Dave Wheelock, “The Pencil Warrior: Lewis Powell’s Memorandum
was a Blueprint for Corporate Takeover,” Common Dreams, February
23, 2006. Available at:
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0223-25.htm.
Henry A. Giroux, “The Powell Memo and the Teaching Machines of
Right-Wing Extremeists,” the Commonweal Institute/Truthout,
October 1, 2009. Available at:
http://commonwealinstitute.org/archive/the-powell-memo-and-the-teaching-machines-of-right-wing-extremists.
John Amato, “The Powell Memo,” Crooks and Liars, June 23, 2011.
Available at: http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/powell-memo.
“40 Years Since ‘Powell Memo’ Laid out Corporate Agenda,”
Institute for Public Accuracy, August 30, 2011. Available at:
http://www.accuracy.org/release/40-years-since-powell-memo-laid-out-corporate-agenda/.
“Attack on American Free Enterprise System: Background,” Media
Transparency, December 12, 2008. Available at:
http://old.mediatransparency.org/story.php?storyID=22.
“The Powell Memo,” Twink.org. Available at:
http://www.thwink.org/sustain/manuscript2/PowellMemo.htm.
Hedrick Smith, Who Stole the American Dream. New York: Random
House, 2013.
Moyers & Co. (PBS): “The Powell Memo: A Call-to-Arms for
Corporations,” September 14, 2013.
https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/democracy/the-lewis-powell-memo-a-corporate-blueprint-to-dominate-democracy/
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------/
/Archive of Daily Global Warming News
<https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/2017-October/date.html>
/
https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote
/To receive daily mailings - click to Subscribe
<mailto:subscribe at theClimate.Vote?subject=Click%20SEND%20to%20process%20your%20request>
to news digest./
- Privacy and Security:*This mailing is text-only. It does not carry
images or attachments which may originate from remote servers. A
text-only message can provide greater privacy to the receiver and
sender. This is a hobby production curated by Richard Pauli
By regulation, the .VOTE top-level domain cannot be used for commercial
purposes. Messages have no tracking software.
To subscribe, email: contact at theclimate.vote
<mailto:contact at theclimate.vote> with subject subscribe, To Unsubscribe,
subject: unsubscribe
Also you may subscribe/unsubscribe at
https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/theclimate.vote
Links and headlines assembled and curated by Richard Pauli for
http://TheClimate.Vote <http://TheClimate.Vote/> delivering succinct
information for citizens and responsible governments of all levels. List
membership is confidential and records are scrupulously restricted to
this mailing list.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/attachments/20210823/49eeb57f/attachment.htm>
More information about the TheClimate.Vote
mailing list