Scholar: COP26 Dominated by ‘Fossil Fuel Polluting Countries and Large Corporations’

Writing at The Conversation on Tuesday, Institute of Development Studies Professional Fellow Ian Scoones saw a schism developing between the technocratic elite of the climate change movement and hardcore true believers, who see forced re-primitivization and agrarian collectivism as the only way to achieve their climate goals.

In other words, the communists are losing patience with big corporations and politicians from rich nations using climate change to advance their agendas, when they should be busy teaching people in developed nations to abandon industry and economic freedom to embrace the more primitive lifestyle necessary to save the Earth.

Scoones used a term increasingly popular with the communist revolutionaries at the ideological heart of the climate change movement, “greenwashing,” to deride corporate leaders and politicians who think capitalism and industry can be saved:

The contradictions were all too apparent at this year’s conference, known as COP26. The hired exhibition spaces in the conference center were hosted by fossil fuel polluting countries and sponsored by large corporations. Corporate spin, also known as greenwash, abounded. There were a few African delegations with their own space and a vanishingly few civil society voices in the main venue.

Meanwhile, the discourse was very different in parallel fora. Here the talk was of inequality, climate justice and reparations. The focus was on radical transformations of systems of production and consumption. Many were critical of business-led and market-based solutions to climate change.

There was passion, commitment and a real sense of anger and frustration about the main conference. Huge suspicion around the corporate takeover of the climate agenda swirled, with much commentary on the double standards of the UK hosts, still proposing a new coalmine and oilfield as part of a so-called ‘transition’.

Of course, like most climate activists, Scoones did not dwell on the inconvenient fact that the worst polluter on Earth is the world’s communist superpower, China. If he had any hard feelings about China pumping record amounts of greenhouse gas to fuel its gigantic array of coal-fired power plants, Beijing’s refusal to make any concessions whatsoever at COP26, or Chinese President Xi Jinping’s decision not to attend the climate summit in Scotland, he did not divulge them in the article.

Instead, he mused at length about the incompatibility of capitalism with climate change solutions and social justice. Scoones dismissed “green” capitalist promises to “save the day through technology investment and market mechanisms” as fantasies and shredded “net-zero” pledges as bookkeeping exercises with a “plethora of offsetting schemes” that will not reduce carbon emissions by nearly enough to reverse climate change.

“By contrast, critical civil society and youth voices argue that capitalism is the root cause of the problem, together with its handmaiden colonialism. The only solution therefore is to overhaul capitalism and dismantle unequal global power relations. But how, through what alliances?” he wondered.

Scoones himself is a “pastoralist,” which as a political project means forcibly de-industrializing the developed world as much as possible and moving people back onto farms, which of course would be collectivist enterprises in a world where capitalism has been rubbed out. The last time humanity tried this system, the result was mass starvation and a mountain of bullet-riddled corpses, but the carbon footprint of the dead was decreased considerably. 

Amusingly, Scoones mentioned the pastoralists must defend themselves from the even harder core of climate activists who worry about the methane emitted by the nether regions of their animals. 

The pastoralists responded with a Sheep for the Climate exhibit at COP26 to “discuss why livestock are not always bad for the planet.” There has also been talk of giving the animals medicine that would make them fart less, and perhaps making cows wear face masks.

The key takeaway from all this is the growing tension between committed climate activists and the political and corporate leaders who believe they can negotiate a “compromise” that will fatten their wallets and flatter their interests, while preserving recognizable living conditions in the developed world. 

The alliance between communists, hardcore environmentalists, “moderate” left-wing politicians, and opportunistic corporations has been politically and financially profitable for all concerned – but it is reaching its limits, because the first two groups are serious about forcing a radical transformation of Western life, and it won’t be padded with decades of “transitional” clean industry and green capitalism.