Grenelle of the environment: the monstrous deception

Books, television programs, films, magazines or music to share, counselor to discover ... Talk to news affecting in any way the econology, environment, energy, society, consumption (new laws or standards) ...
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79114
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972

Grenelle of the environment: the monstrous deception




by Christophe » 13/11/07, 10:49

Too bad there is so much "free" hatred towards Sarko and the bosses ... it somewhat discredits this Grenelle analysis:

Grenelle of the environment: "the monstrous deception" (Yann Fiévet) or "when ecology is soluble in sarkozysme" ...

They saved the furniture, their furniture. They have been able to find suitable allies whom they hope will last. They sold their new product to the mass media, which were so little criticized.
They pretend to be “green revolution” crusaders that others really want to do.
They did not want to take the full measure of the ecological dangers present and to come. They do not give up the absurdity of infinite economic growth in a finite world. They do not know that the "progress" of science and technology will not save humanity from the announced chaos. They are not ready to return the economy to the service of men when, today, it enslaves them.
In short, they have the power to rehash the recipes of the capitalist past of the "modern world" as they wish, while the inventors of an ecologically balanced future only have the power to believe in the sincerity of their desire for change.

Who are these men with immediate interests well understood and unable to look beyond the end of their profit? All those who, through the "Grenelle of the environment", try to persuade us that to solve the ecological crisis it is enough to repaint in green the machine to produce dirty and to overconsume stupidly. It is first of all the members of the political class who, after decades of total immobility in the face of the foreseeable magnitude of the ecological question, are forced to concern themselves with it - certainly in their own way - in the hope of gaining an advantage. Politics.

Then come the directors and shareholders of firms that have become sprawling through the unbridled globalization of the past thirty years, which will find in the development of green capitalism enough to prolong their opulence.

Finally, these first knives of the new crusade are joined by all those who have, near or far, seriously something to lose in the ecological overhaul of the capitalist economy. It makes people, but it does not make "the" world!

Quoting Wangari MAATHAI, Mr. Sarkozy warned us on the evening of his Grenelle: "the planet will not rise from blindness and selfishness". How right he is! And as he will hasten to do nothing to appease the legitimate fear of this woman with sincere and selfless commitment.

Yes, that Grenelle was, is, and will be, a monstrous deception thrown in the face of the world.

Understanding deception and its monstrous nature requires situating the Grenelle of the environment in a broader context than its apparent direct object. It is at this price that we can grasp the full scope of the real challenges of the project, the reality of the power relations present, the easy acceptance by such a wide spectrum of actors of what must be properly named. the trompe-l'oeil of the proposals from the "thing". The context is that of Sarkozysm as a neo-conservative political system that goes far beyond the person of Nicolas Sarkozy.

Sarkozysm in the broad sense comes to us from afar, has long simmered on the embers of neoliberalism, pitifully accommodated by the multiple renunciations of the Left. It is crystallized today in sarkozysm in the strict sense, a particular way of exercising power by falsely adorning its holder with the clothes of the providential man living with his time.
The warmest supporters of the current regime understand well that this original and temporary reign will be prolonged by the inscription in the marble of recent and future reforms.

Thus, sarkozysm is the accelerated pursuit of two dramatic trends: the sacking of the social protection system inherited from the Liberation and the "grooming" of labor law on the one hand; the depoliticization of the affairs of the City on the other hand. It is under this double auspice that we must understand the main message of the Grenelle of the environment.

In the ecological turmoil that there is no longer any question of denying under pain of ridicule, we are all in the same boat. All responsible and all victims in the same way of environmental damage, we will row together while being careful not to undermine the forces of those who really create wealth
thanks to which we will overcome the crisis. It will not be long before we see it in the application of the few measures already decided: the financial burden that the most modest will have to bear to become “clean” will be inversely proportional to their ecological footprint. Working more to earn more, they will pay more.
More than before and relatively more than the rich, whose overconsumption - everyone is well convinced of this now - is in no way responsible for the mistreatment of the planet.

That this Right neoconservative and the employers who savor their revenge every day on the "Thirty glorious" hold this reasoning is not to surprise. They are there in their traditional role, that of the unwavering defense of the wealthy.

That Mr. Sarkozy is the candidate of the rich even in the Grenelle of the environment, that he uses it for his strategy of domination of the social by the economic is in the order of things. On the other hand, it is a major incongruity, an insult to him, that the Left and the players in the environmental movement quickly follow suit or stand at a short distance in order to be sure not to be let go at the first acceleration of the leader. political intelligence.
The tragedy is that politics, in the true sense of the term, has disappeared, body and property, in the twists and turns of neoliberal soft consensus and galloping market liberalization.

Political intelligence would require that we make the link between the fight for more social justice and the fight for a livable environment, that we take into account the fact that the poor suffer more from a depreciated environment because they are poor, that we denounce the responsibility of the rich - nations and individuals - in the degradation of ecosystems, that we begin to compensate for all this by another sharing of wealth. Political intelligence would like, once established the gravity of the ecological crisis, that the powers in place take their responsibility by decisions and actions at the height of the dangers to be combated.

Political intelligence would have consisted - and will have to consist tomorrow - in proclaiming that the ecological challenge is not negotiable. In the negotiation game, the powerful, the cunning, the fakers come out victorious, more powerful, more cunning, more fake than at the entrance. In the Grenelle the humble and honest people were not only humble and honest.

They were overwhelmed. They weighed little or nothing at all in terms of mercantile interests and the ulterior motives of power, but they were negotiators. Who will dare to claim that the policy has emerged strengthened from the Grenelle of the environment?

The Grenelle deception is also that a lot of what was decided would have been without the Grenelle, while nothing that it would have been imperative to decide to loosen the grip of the ecological crisis significantly summer. We will not have any of the four moratoria necessary to begin the beginning of the Green Revolution.

We will keep our nuclear power plants that no one wants and build new ones to further fuel the opacity of Areva. We will keep our dioxin-producing incinerators and build new ones so as not to damage the Veolia empire.
We will not build new highways. except to bypass urban agglomerations (?), except for reasons of national security (??), except for reasons of local interest (???).
For GMOs in the open, this is at least the big blur. We freeze the marketing of GMO-pesticides but we promise FNSEA - and through it to agro-bio-business firms - freedom of culture.
And we would like the account to be there! And the President of the Republic has the superb audacity to say that France should not be ashamed of what it has already done in terms of the environment!

The man of rupture does not want rupture with the essential.
Curious rupture, indeed, that that of pushing, to respond to the ecological crisis, all the fires of Growth, the very ones that are the cause of the crisis. The planet's natural resources are running out? Never mind: let's liquidate the stocks before final closure. Are inequalities growing? Never mind: we must be careful not to make any sacrifice to reduce them.

The climate-energy tax envisaged by the champion of ruptures that break nothing is the height of cynicism. It will be offset by an equivalent reduction in labor taxation in order to leave intact the share of profits in sharing the added value produced by businesses. In 2006, the profits of CAC 40 companies increased by 17% while wages progressed painfully by 2% on average, provided that those of the big bosses were excluded. The income of the fifty best-off French bosses was 3,8 million euros on average for 2006, or for each of them the value of 316 years of wages of a smicard. The first of them, M. Louis Schweitzer, CEO of Renault, received 11,6 million euros in one year. Almost 950 years of minimum wage!

What is this country where a man's work is deemed to be worth a thousand times that of his fellow man? Globally, the richest 95 people receive the equivalent of 000% of global GDP.

How can such an unbalanced world survive? "Profit is their moral", once wrote Claude Julien.

Still it has not known the most recent evolution of financial capitalism by which private equities - new category of “vulture funds” - investment funds with unlimited rapacity, take control of a number every day growing companies.

In the United States, one in four employees works for them. They bought 400 companies in France last year and do not intend to stop there. In light of the morality of six or nine zeros for business owners, will we dare to align the six million children who die of hunger or associated diseases each year in the world?
Let us denounce with Jean Ziegler the crime against humanity which tomorrow will constitute
unbridled development of agro-fuels. This is the latest avatar of deception: the invention of a new "growth factor", infamous calculation according to which we feed the cars of the north rather than the kids of the South. The Grenelle of the environment passed there next to the fifth moratorium, a way to finish filling the cup with
unconsciousness.
Profit and overconsumption are insatiable monsters.
By putting a serious brake on it, it is possible to think of solving the environmental crisis. The question is eminently political.
This is why it is necessary to "re-politicize ecology". Get it out of the claws of vultures who are about to butcher it to feed on it without scruples or sharing. The re-politicization of ecology involves the emergence and structuring of a social movement which consubstantially combines environmental and social issues.
The societies subjected to the brazen law of globalized profit are much richer than we think of forces of resistance, certainly dispersed, awaiting a project by which men would inscribe their imprint more dignely in the space of living together.
By rehabilitating the politics today deflected, by substituting conviction for belief, the federation of wills and actions would force the political power to come out of its impotence.
Then, as Edgar Morin says, the hope of a “civilizational change” will be born.

Yann Fievet
Professor of Economic and Social Sciences
Vice-president of Action Consommation
The Sarkophage No 3 - November 15, 2007
Last edited by Christophe the 13 / 11 / 07, 18: 04, 1 edited once.
0 x
User avatar
gegyx
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6930
Registration: 21/01/05, 11:59
x 2870




by gegyx » 13/11/07, 11:15

It is an analysis, and its observation.
There is no hatred, only clairvoyance.
If the gentleman seems to you unnecessarily vindictive, it is because he surely has a passive already noted on the Individual-President (Sarcophagus I and II), and felt by quite a few people (apart from the "dreamers", and the "interested" workers).
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79114
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 13/11/07, 11:29

The problem is that 53% of French people, reading this yet intelligent analysis, will inevitably not adhere to it ... and classify the teacher as a "dissident" of the republic, not to say: anti-democrat. . (I read it about myself from pro visitor sarko ... so good ...)

Sometimes to get a message across, you have to swallow your convictions a bit ... hence my "introduction" ...
0 x
User avatar
jean63
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2332
Registration: 15/12/05, 08:50
Location: Auvergne
x 4

Re: Grenelle of the environment: the monstrous deception




by jean63 » 13/11/07, 11:45

The climate-energy tax envisaged by the champion of ruptures that break nothing is the height of cynicism. It will be offset by an equivalent reduction in labor taxation in order to leave intact the share of profits in sharing the added value produced by businesses. In 2006, the profits of CAC 40 companies increased by 17% while wages progressed painfully by 2% on average, provided that those of the big bosses were excluded. The income of the fifty best-off French bosses was 3,8 million euros on average for 2006, or for each of them the value of 316 years of wages of a smicard. The first of them, M. Louis Schweitzer, CEO of Renault, received 11,6 million euros in one year. Almost 950 years of minimum wage! What is this country where a man's work is deemed to be worth a thousand times that of his fellow man? Globally, the richest 95 people receive the equivalent of 000% of global GDP.

How can such an unbalanced world survive? "Profit is their moral", once wrote Claude Julien.

that is not hatred towards Sarko, it is a world reality which always aims at more profit for the richest and to exploit a maximum the poorest, so that a maximum of people consume and throw the faster possible to re-consume.

I came across this forum to an argument by crispus on the lifespan of cars (and the rest ... household appliances ... etc), which shows that everything is done to ensure that a product has a relatively short lifespan because of maintenance or replacement costs of parts (sold by "pack" - electronics or airbags -) at exorbitant prices making the vehicle "economically irreparable" in the event of an accident. I learned there that after 15 years the set of airbags and pretensioners must be replaced for a sum of around 7500 euros, which automatically condemns the vehicle to breakage even if it is roadworthy. When I see my R25 running very good with 310 km and its 000 years old, but also thanks to the cheap parts found in the scrap yards.

I am looking for the link of the post and I put here => https://www.econologie.com/forums/wv-1l-100k ... t3497.html (crsipus July 15, 2007 / eloi / re-crispus).
Last edited by jean63 the 13 / 11 / 07, 12: 02, 1 edited once.
0 x
Only when he has brought down the last tree, the last river contaminated, the last fish caught that man will realize that money is not edible (Indian MOHAWK).
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79114
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 13/11/07, 11:52

Nan is not ... but there is a package ... and it is not good for the rest of the argument It's everything I wanted to say!

Well, let's stop beating around the bush ... sarkozyme is not econology ... let's focus on the ECONOLOGICAL FACTS of this text please ...
0 x
Christine
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 1144
Registration: 09/08/04, 22:53
Location: In Belgium, once
x 1




by Christine » 13/11/07, 13:56

Christophe wrote:. let's focus on the ECONOLOGICAL FACTS of this text please ...

Yes but which ones? I only see platitudes in this text. Surely the kind of literature that makes 1st year students swoon in the lecture halls but nothing constructive.

Gentle workers oppressed against wicked CAC 40, GMOs and waterways. It smacks of the leftist student union. I want to say: "and what, then? Take all the proposals of the Grenelle de l'Environnement, demonstrate their weaknesses, argue what the devil!"
... and it is explained to me that the bosses are not nice paske they are not nice otherwise they would not be bosses and that the workers are necessarily oppressed paske them they are nice, otherwise they would not be oppressed and that first of all not their fault paske it is the host to the owners who are not nice (etc).
:frown:
0 x
rooster
I discovered econologic
I discovered econologic
posts: 2
Registration: 22/02/07, 08:12
Location: St Julien de Jonzy

Grenelle of the Environment: the monstrous deception !!




by rooster » 13/11/07, 15:00

Hello,

Of course, this text is worthy of a student protester 1ère year and this teacher definitely a nostalgic 68 see former member !!
No, it's not Areva, or Véolia, or the CAC 40, and not obviously Sarko 1er who are rogue bosses and their followers, but it is obviously all these backward-looking young and old who still find a way to want to fuck the shit in this pretty and melodious concert orchestrated by all these beautiful people gathered, arm in arm, all opinions combined during this "Grenelle de l'Environnement".
Oh!!! what are so beautiful all the wonderful and idyllic promises ridges by the newly risen by itself 140% before his courtier court (s) hungry for his words and his largesse doing the poorer back and therefore more at the expense of what it seeks to bring down these same learning which GrenelleThe real one, not this ersatz, we were still with anyway.
But no, the "future" economic and ecological bubble will not benefit the same people who have always led these environmental policies which have led us to where we are, ie in a wall of radioactive waste and obsolete power plants. EDF does not have the least cents in advance for their dismantling, it would have been gambled and lost on the stock market !!!
But no, GMOs, there is good for health, dixit the FNSEA, but do not touch my subsidies that starve the peasants of the third world.
Highways strangely profitable recently found themselves privatized by a magic wand and what was used for their maintenance, refer to other sectors, find themselves between the sharp and eager pognes same speculators and profiteers of public money as are all the friend (s) Dwarf Elyos.
I understand some who find the text insulting towards the one, who without any shame, has brought "types" like Hortefeux into his government, with supporters like Devedjian, sinister men from a past to the right of the extreme, like their protector, moreover, but who dare to give lessons to who will upset the one who demands 25000 evictions this year, and whatever the means, provided that this quota is met. So, if people want me to believe that this same kind of enigumene cares about the future of our planet, we should perhaps first stop taking all French people for idiots.
So I persisted and I want the same sign, it is only a Grenelle catcher couillon more orchestrated by one who is a real danger to our democracy.
G. Lecoq. : Cheesy:
0 x
User avatar
jean63
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2332
Registration: 15/12/05, 08:50
Location: Auvergne
x 4




by jean63 » 13/11/07, 15:00

Christine wrote:
Christophe wrote:. let's focus on the ECONOLOGICAL FACTS of this text please ...

Yes but which ones? I only see platitudes in this text. Surely the kind of literature that makes 1st year students swoon in the lecture halls but nothing constructive.

Gentle workers oppressed against wicked CAC 40, GMOs and waterways. It smacks of the leftist student union. I want to say: "and what, then? Take all the proposals of the Grenelle de l'Environnement, demonstrate their weaknesses, argue what the devil!"
... and it is explained to me that the bosses are not nice paske they are not nice otherwise they would not be bosses and that the workers are necessarily oppressed paske them they are nice, otherwise they would not be oppressed and that first of all not their fault paske it is the host to the owners who are not nice (etc).
:frown:

The good guys and the bad guys ...... that's not the problem.
There are not only platitudes, it is enough to extract what is a little extreme and questionable, there are many true things.
For example, that's a reality =>
Profit and overconsumption are insatiable monsters.

THE PROBLEM is "growth and waste" or "non-growth at all costs to make the system work", because who says GROWTH with waste means pollution, CO2 emissions ... etc. They will not make me believe that by putting taxes everywhere prevents them from polluting and sending CO2 into the atmosphere (a good example, airlines are all in the process of increasing their "kerozene" cost in the price of plane ticket, which means that there will be more and more planes that will fly - just look at the AIRBUS order book in recent days - and the "kerozene" taxes will continue to 'increase with the price of this fuel) ........ OR we are in a WASTE system because it is necessary to consume to make the system work .. read =>
https://www.econologie.com/forums/wv-1l-100k ... t3497.html (crispus July 15, 2007 / eloi / re-crispus).

Crispus wrote:
Even if there are reports of HDI vehicles having traveled 500000 km, it should be noted that these are company vehicles which reached them in 4 years, with maintenance followed under penalty of forfeiture of the maintenance contract.

Admitting that it reaches the age of 15, an average vehicle will hardly have traveled more than 150000 km. The longevity of the engine is not a determining criterion.

In the long term, other concerns are to be expected.
Current cars are calculated "as accurately as possible" following a perverse "quality approach" including among others:

- lowest cost price : "quality" comes at the expense of subcontractors. Their margins are so tight that the slightest mistake is bankruptcy. A fictitious but unfortunately credible example: "the electronic card must contain a philips circuit and not its motorola equivalent". And hop, 2000 km round trip by truck for a stock of "non-conforming" parts.

- the minimum of defects during the warranty period : it is not a bad thing, the purchaser of the new vehicle is satisfied, and the car magazines give a good image of it which is reflected on the price of the occasion. Sustained rating and credit organizations satisfied.

- planned obsolescence. We have already discussed this forum about home appliances.

Recyclable plastic but suddenly "degradable", electronics hardly exceeding 5 to 10 years, trade-in offer with "scrapping" after 7 years, after sale providing parts by "pack" of 500 € when the only part "at risk" costs 10 .. . The list is long. The manufacturer must dissuade the buyer from keeping his vehicle, otherwise goodbye to "growth" ...

almost all current vehicles will not exceed 15 years, for the good reason that this is the deadline at which the exchange of pyrotechnic systems is compulsory. My AX is 16 years old and does me a lot of services (1000 km AR in 1 day recently).

At ~ € 7500 for the set of airbags, pretensioners and labor cost (installation invoice required), no need to talk about longevity.

In fact there are statistics at the level of breakages: age, km and cause of the reform. It could be instructive ...
The Grenelle is a facade, I am not saying that it is useless for an awareness because it will perhaps allow to isolate a lot of old dwellings but nothing certain, it risks to make "pschitt" like for housing that was to be built for the non-housed who camped in the streets of Paris again this year (working-poor) while Borloo (qd he was city minister) had promised miracles in social housing.

I'm not saying it's Sarko's fault, but surely a problem of distribution of wealth despite everything.

PS: I thought you were under the same roof with DEOM and underfloor heating for the 2 Chris ?? or else I misunderstood ... but it is surely indiscreet, in this case I did not write anything.
0 x
Only when he has brought down the last tree, the last river contaminated, the last fish caught that man will realize that money is not edible (Indian MOHAWK).
Christine
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 1144
Registration: 09/08/04, 22:53
Location: In Belgium, once
x 1

Re: Grenelle Environment: the monstrous deception !!




by Christine » 13/11/07, 17:10

coqeole wrote:I understand some who find the text as insulting to someone, who shamelessly, ...

Personally, I do not find this text insulting to anyone ... except perhaps for those who need to be told endlessly that everything is the fault of the "dwarf" and his friends so that they don't have to think about their own responsibilities ...

coqeole wrote: the brand new increased by himself by 140% before his court of courtiers hungry for his words and his generosity

same as above: see a little further than the tip of your nose ...
Besides I propose that the salary be lowered, to 100% as before: thus the environmental problems will be solved, the poor will be better housed and the children of the Third World will all have a full stomach (attention second degree: I I'm sure there are some who will still believe that I want to starve small children).

coqeole wrote:these old-young backward-looking people who still find the way to want to screw up

If "fuck it" is a solution, so be it. As far as I'm concerned, I'd rather build to try to make things better than live in a "crappy" world. Besides, about "young-old pastists", their generation has been in power for 40 years and it is they who built the world as it is, with its sarko, its Bush and their little friends. .
In short, they messed up well, so they don't come to take high.

coqeole wrote:I therefore persist and I am willing even to sign,

But persist - even if it's your first intervention - and sign. But beware, now that they have your coordinates ... torture and the camps are not far away, these days. I'm kidding of course, but that's because I find fascinating this sort of anti-sarkosism "police" who put into practice exactly what they denounce in their "enemy". When will the purification be?

jean63 wrote:The good guys and the bad guys ...... that's not the problem.

Absolutely, you sum up exactly what I was saying. There is so much to do that we must stop wasting our time in Manichean speeches. And this is precisely what I reproach the article proposed by Christophe: a lot of simplistic blabla (even if not entirely false) just intended to titillate an already convinced public (I would be surprised that those who read "le sarkophage" are executives leaders).

jean63 wrote:PS: I thought you were under the same roof with DEOM and underfloor heating for the 2 Chris ?? or else I misunderstood ...

Jean, there, you grieve me. I thought as a regular at this forum you knew my opinions at least a little.IT IS NOT BECAUSE I DO NOT WRITE "A MORT SARKO" ON ALL THE WALLS OF FRANCE AND NAVARRE THAT I APPROVE THIS MONSIEUR I do not feel the need to howl with wolves, and I believe that the nuance and discretion are much more effective.

Besides, since in your eyes I am visibly no longer worthy of having ecological heated floors, I am going to start the oil boiler on the way : Mrgreen: : Mrgreen: : Mrgreen:
0 x
User avatar
jean63
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2332
Registration: 15/12/05, 08:50
Location: Auvergne
x 4




by jean63 » 13/11/07, 17:27

I didn't say anything, let's turn the page .....
0 x
Only when he has brought down the last tree, the last river contaminated, the last fish caught that man will realize that money is not edible (Indian MOHAWK).

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Media & News: TV shows, reports, books, news ..."

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : Google [Bot] and 180 guests