Are Co operatives making a come back?

History: it’s a funny, cantankerous old thing. Any action seems to produce its opposite. It may be happening again. Starting in the South east London Borough of Lewisham.

As every schoolchild knows, the Industrial Revolution produced an atomised, nihilistic society where the overwhelming majority lived in slums, and worked every hour for pitiful wages. The new metropolises like Manchester drew waves of strangers into disease ridden slums. The results were far indeed from the hopes of the philosophers of the Enlightenment whose heady thoughts on free markets had kick-started the whole sorry mess. Yet somehow, in those desperate places, people began to come together. New community organisations began to thrive. Methodist Churches were one example. Trade Unions another. There were things like Working Mens clubs and libraries. Building Societies. And of course the Co operative movement, where poor people could club together to make their purchases at their own shops.(overseas readers might like to know it still exists today, but is barely differentiable from any other hight street grocer) Each in turn contributed to the foundation of the Labour Party. Fast forward one hundred years, what with the collective experience of wars and depressions and most people assumed that collective actions were the optimal solutions to most of our problems.

Following the world crisis of 1973-74,everything changed. Free marketeers saw their chance to exalt the individual above all else. Writers like Hayek and Friedman paved the way for politicians like Thatcher and Reagan. Even popular books like The Selfish Gene could be read in such a way as to exalt the cult of the sovereign individual . Down with the state! Taxes were an imposition on human liberty! Although the adherents of such doctrines could never explain how the National Health Service was Communist, but the Army was not, the individualistic tendency bit deep into our lives and culture. With the results we see today. Once again, atomised communities. Poverty. Capital in the hands of a very few, who invest with a grudging reluctance that would make Mr Gradgrind envious indeed. Pollution, rack rented slums, and growing poverty, especially among children.

Once again there seems to be a reaction setting in. Starting at the bottom, people are beginning to come together in groups to save what is important to them, from the all -dissolving solution of unrestricted free markets. As Kemi Alemoru explains in this article for The Standard [1], it seems to begin around the need to preserve collective things like music venues and pubs. Her piece treats the Southeast London area of Lewisham as a sort of living field experiment. But the thought strikes us. If it works for things like those, why not for bigger ones? Like housing. Controlling air pollution. Making roads safe. Even, whisper it, schools and collective education.

To borrow from another area of learning “every action produces an equal and opposite reaction. Maybe this is the start of one.

[1]https://www.standard.co.uk/homesandproperty/property-news/the-battle-for-lewisham-how-coops-are-reinvigorating-communities-b1157728.html

#free markets #collectives #cooperatives #hayek #keynes #methodist #coperative society #friendly society #trade union

Five Problems in the in-Box of a World Government

It’s election time in some of the world’s biggest democracies. This year India, the USA and UK all go the polls, and the EU has just done so (we don’t count the recent sham in Russia) All of these places face immense problems. And we don’t think they can solve them, because the root causes are global, making frontiers out of date. Imagine then, if a Global President were elected this year and took office on 1st January 2025. What would be the top five problems in their in-box?

1 Intractable conflicts. People draw imaginary lines and then fight bloody wars across them. The current conflicts between Russia-and -Ukraine and Israel- and- Palestine are current examples, with no obvious resolution, if the nation state remains the highest form of political organisation. Older readers will recall how the conflicts between Mercia and Wessex dwindled once they were combined into England. It was the same after France and Germany joined the EU. A World Presidency would imply that all these ancient hatreds are in fact futile.

2 Climate Change/Global Warming What happens in the Antarctic, the Amazon Basin and the Great Barrier Reef affects us all equally. The existence of endlessly competing polities, each jockeying for its own advantage may fatally slow efforts to deal with this existential threat. A World Government would rapidly co-ordinate mitigation efforts and resource allocation, and it is likely that this one would indeed soon be a memory.

3 Migration and identity crisis People move from poor areas to richer ones according to the same irrevocable laws that govern the movement of ions in an electric field. Yet the deep crisis of identity this provokes has produced toxic political and intellectual consequences in the richer countries, which make it impossible to transfer resources to the poorer ones. By ordering this done, a World Government would have essentially removed the motivation to migrate at all, thus ending the crisis forever.

4 Pandemics Recent experience has shown that economy-shattering pandemics can spread with lightning speed. And, believe us, Covid-19 was mild compared to some viruses which are waiting in the wings. For some reason, those pesky viruses don’t respect frontiers any more than molecules of carbon dioxide do, suggesting that the whole idea of national solutions may be somewhat out of date.

5 Grasping the Opportunity If humanity is to survive, it would be judicious to give ourselves extra chances. Colonising the Moon or Mars would provide ample second homes, even if our local tribesmen blow this one up with their nuclear weapons. Such a colonisation would be faster, more efficient and more just if all were invited to participate and share in the consequences. A World Government would mean that the undertaking would not only be successful, but that existing squabbles were not exported among the planets.

We know this will be saying the unsayable, especially among certain classes of society. Yet there comes a point when a society is bulging in crises, bursting against the limits which constrain it. It’s our contention that these limits are artificial and self imposed. There can never be a return to the good times of the past. But with thought and effort, they may come again in the future.

#world government #nation state #pandemic #global warming #migration #inequality

The Hidden Dangers #3: Microplastics

It’s hard to convey now what plastics meant to us Space-Age children of the 1960s. Bright, cheap, coloured, light, clean and multipurpose, they were the material of choice for a democratic age. They were what your new Fireball XL5 rocket was made of. The tape recorder for your Beatles songs. The beakers for your free school milk. The fittings in your Dad’s new Ford Anglia. With them we would create a new heroic age, and get to The Moon.

Sixty years on? Well, they’re just everywhere, aren’t they? Up on the top of Mount Everest. Deep at the bottom of the Marianas Trench. And everywhere, everywhere, in between. In the blossom in your garden. Blowing in the wind between the trees. In your water. In your food. In your bodies. And that last should afford pause for thought. Because the effects of all this plastic are not really understood. According to Anne Pinto-Rodrigues of Science News,[1] microplastics particles can be found in the gut biome; in the reproductive system; in breast milk; and in blood. What’s worse, some of the additives, such as BPA can act as endocrine disruptors (see LSS 26 3 24). There is even a chance that they may have a harmful effect on the immune system.

There’s lots more. Instead of summarising all the literature, which astute LSS readers will do for themselves, we’ll just point to one case study. It comes from Sue Hughes of Medscape, and though its primary focus is on cardio vascular disease, we think it’s a pretty good representative of what is to come, as more is found out in the next few years. And one other thought: how on earth do we clean this lot up?

_{with thanks to Gary Herbert}

[1]https://www.sciencenews.org/article/microplastics-human-bodies-health-risks

[2]https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/plastic-particles-carotid-plaques-linked-cv-events-2024a10004ge

#plastic #BPA #microplastics #health #pollution #contamination

Worms and trains gave us two unexpected shocks for the weekend

Photo by u0410u043bu0435u043au0441u0430u043du0434u0440 u041cu0430u043au0435u0434u043eu043du0441u043au0438u0439 on Pexels.com

A philosophy derailed For more than fifty years, the Mail and its collaborators in the right wing media have been pushing one simplistic mantra “Private Sector Good. Private Sector Bad.” So it came as a surprise to see this candid admission of the appalling state of Britain’s privatised railway system.[1] It’s a story that’s repeated across swathes of our economy. Public Housing, water and sewage, Forensic Science, energy regulation… the attempt to privatise and create a market at all costs has often been a costly failure. Now, anyone who has y worked in the public sector and seen its inefficiencies close up cannot remain a socialist. Or not enjoy the delight of pompous civil servants being exposed to a little competition. But the invariable prescription of a single nostrum, whatever the circumstances, that so appalled us. Good to see a little honest admission of error.

[1]https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13172415/Rail-cancellations-Avanti-Northern-CrossCountry-TransPennine-Express.html

Immunity to radiation? When we were young we thought “radiation is an ineluctable killer. It so affects the genetic material that there’s no way back.” Wrong again! As this intriguing article from the Independent shows, to our extreme chagrin. Apparently the famous nuclear disaster zone of Chernobyl in Ukraine has nurtured a whole new type of radiation resistant worms. [1] The implications for life on earth are intriguing enough. But even more so in our quest to find living creatures both in our own stellar system and in more distant ones. What a way to end the week.

_{thanks to p seymour}

[2]https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/chernobyl-worms-nuclear-power-plant-b2509161.html

#chernobyl #worms #radiation #privatisation #public sector

Kill Krill? You’ll pay a bill

Today we’re devoting our blog to Krill, those humble but immensely prevalent crustaceans which form the basis of immense and vital ocean food chains. [1]They even form the breakfast of the Blue Whale (Balaenoptera musculus), that mighty monarch of the sea. They may even play a role in carbon capture and sequestration [2 see part #9] and now, you’ve guessed it-they are under threat. From that brutal ignorant species that has the vanity to call itself Homo sapiens. Not only are they being massively overfished. But now the melting glaciers and ocean acidification, both caused by global warming, are starting to eat into their numbers at alarming rates. If that goes on happening then the whole ocean ecology will collapse, with incalculable consequences for the stability of human society.

“So-what can I do?” we hear you asking. It’s a perfectly good question. And in the last analysis, only you will know the answer, gentle reader. But here at LSS we know one thing. The days of living the quiet suburban lifestyle at sports ground and shopping mall are over. We’re not saying it wasn’t good while it lasted. But it can’t be sustained any longer, not at least without some major social and technological engineering. Could you at least help one organisation that is trying to do something? What about the WWF, who have supplied one of today’s links? What have you got to lose? Well you know the answer to that.

^{Thanks to Gary Herbert}

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krill

[2]https://www.wwf.org.uk/learn/fascinating-facts/antarctic-krill#:~:text=They%20are%20under%20threat,interest%20in%20the%20krill%20fishery.

#krill #crustaceans #ocean #food chain #blue whale #climate change #global warming #glacier #ice sheet

If the Gulf Stream collapses, you won’t need ice in your Gin and Tonic

According to the American writer Gore Vidal, one must choose between two missions in life. Either to Comfort the Afflicted; or to Afflict the Comfortable. Now, generally speaking, the Daily Mail is normally very much on the side of the Comfortable. Hardly a bunch of Islington Green Remoaner Marxist Liberals, you might say. So when they publish something which might in some way be slightly comfort-afflicting, we know it’s been through a pretty fine toothcomb first. And today we present just such a story by their admirable Jonathan Chadwick called The Real Life Day After Tomorrow. Not only does it speculate that the warming currents of the North Atlantic might collapse, plunging us into a new Ice Age. But there is a chance that it might happen rather soon. [1]

Most people know that the reason that Western Europe is tolerably warm is due to the fact that certain ocean currents move vast quantities of heat up from the warm waters of the Gulf of Mexico to these otherwise benighted shores. Thanks to global warming and melting ice caps, those currents could switch off as early as next year. We cannot hope to improve on the excellent explanations and top notch, easy-to-understand graphics in Jonathan’s article. But we could beg you to look at some of the comments. and the squeals and howls of outrage from those whose weltenschauung is horribly imperilled by Jonathan’s words. Denial, evasion and getting shouty are common psychological defence mechanisms of people who are often uncertain of their own case. Blaming the messenger can be another; although we are all guilty of that.

Perhaps the latter was on display in the case of climate scientist Michael Mann, who, because of his scientific work, became the subject of unpleasant personal attacks from those who objected to his findings. To us it all seems a bit reminiscent of what happened to Galileo in the 1640s. Fortunately Mann has won damages from some of his adversaries , and this may buy back some space for objective debate in some areas of science. We wait to see. Whatever happens, those who prefer to deny, for whatever reason, should remember. Reality, be it economic, physical or logical, will eventually come round to charge a price. The longer you leave it, the higher that price will be.

[1]https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-13073449/Gulf-Stream-plunging-Europe-deep-freeze.html

[2]https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-00396-y?utm_source=Live+Audience&utm_campaign=0f1db6493c-briefing-dy-20240212&utm_medium=email&utm_term=

#jonathan chadwick #climate change #global warming #ice caps #AMOC #climate denial

Air Pollution: what’s the worst bit?

We do quite a lot of pollution stories here. Too much carbon dioxide and methane are wrecking the climate. Too much sewage is turning the seas toxic. But there’s one area we haven’t covered enough. The effect of air pollution directly on our lungs. According to the latest report from the UK Government (which, after 14 years of Conservative rule can hardly be a bastion of woke tofu-eating commie liberals):

Epidemiological studies have shown that long-term exposure to air pollution (over years or lifetimes) reduces life expectancy, mainly due to cardiovascular and respiratory diseases and lung cancer. Short-term exposure (over hours or days) to elevated levels of air pollution can also cause a range of health impacts, including effects on lung function, exacerbation of asthma, increases in respiratory and cardiovascular hospital admissions and mortality.[1]

It is estimated that air pollution in the UK may be causing up to 36000 excess deaths per year.

The combined effects of all those cars, lorries, aeroplanes, factories, fossil fuel power stations and goodness-knows-what-else, produce quite a cocktail of potentially deadly things for us to breathe. But most experts agree that the Two Big Killers are particulate matter, the so-called PM_n series and nitrates, mainly NO₂. But which is worse? If we got rid of PM_2.5 for example, would the NO₂ still be murdering us? An ingenious study by Joshua Bateman and Martin Clift, reported in the Conversation, seems to suggest an answer. The researchers have created laboratory models of the alveolar epithelium, the key tissue of the human lung which interacts with the atmosphere. For the first time it was possible to expose these cells to different levels of pollutants, both singly and together.

The results suggest the Two Big Killers are at their worst when they act together. And this has a important implications in the struggle for clean air. Just like early attempts to reduce smoking, attempts to clean up the air have run into enormous resistance, which can be bolstered by generous funding from various interest groups which seem to have little interest in clean air. Might it be possible to concentrate first on reducing one of the Big Two Killers first? That would not save as many lives as eliminating both. But it is a much more achievable, and feasible, start.

[1]https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/health-matters-air-pollution/health-matters-air-pollution

[2]https://theconversation.com/air-pollution-we-recreated-the-deepest-sections-of-your-lung-in-a-laboratory-to-understand-how-polluted-air-can-affect-your-health-2220

#nitrates #particulate matter #air pollution #cancer #cardio vascular disease