The climate deniers’ greatest success during the early 2000s was the apparent conversion of Margaret Thatcher – when she abandoned the climate cause she so forcefully and eloquently championed as the British prime minister.

Thatcher published her autobiography Statecraft in 2002, shortly before she stepped out of the limelight due to her failing health. The autobiography included a long passage in which she renounced her former beliefs and even revised the meaning of her original 1990 address.

In her 1990 speech, Thatcher praised the creation of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), called for precautionary action, and argued that economic growth must benefit “future as well as present generations everywhere.”

Economic Growth

But, her autobiography states: “By the end of my time as Prime Minister I was also becoming seriously concerned about the anti-capitalist arguments which the campaigners against global warming were deploying.

“So in a speech to scientists in 1990 I observed: whatever international action we agree upon to deal with environmental problems, we must enable all our economies to grow and develop because without growth you cannot generate the wealth required to pay for the protection of the environment.”

The Iron Lady‘s complete and dramatic U-turn meant that her free market admirers could reclaim her legacy and erase from history her arguments that economic growth must be environmentally sustainable while the public seemed to have mostly forgotten that one of the earliest champions of legally binding international agreements was, in fact, a staunch Conservative and economic Liberal.

Environmental Enemy

The cause of this volte-face was very evidently the belief that environmentalism was simply the old enemy of Socialism in a new guise, as presented by free market economists Friedrich von Hayek and Antony Fisher, and the think tanks they inspired.

“The doomsters’ favourite subject today is climate change,” she wrote. “Clearly no plan to alter climate could be considered on anything but a global scale, it provides a marvellous excuse for worldwide, supra-national socialism.”

She attacked former US vice president Al Gore directly and argued that “Kyoto was an anti-growth, anti-capitalist, anti-American project which no American leader alert to his country’s national interests could have supported.”

Free Market Inspiration

Thatcher, in her notes, expressed gratitude for the fact that “the issues have been clearly analysed and debated by scholars in the United States.”

She informed her readers that her revised position on climate change was based on reading Julian Morris’s Climate Change: Challenging the Conventional Wisdom published by her old friends at the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA), Richard Lindzen’s Global Warming: The Origin and Nature of the Alleged Scientific Consensus from the Koch- and Exxon-funded free market Cato Institute and Fred Singer’s Climate Policy: From Rio to Kyoto: A Political Issue for 2000 and Beyond put out by the right wing Centre for the New Europe.

All three men were members of free market think tanks and were funding recipients from the fossil fuel industry. And so the former prime minister, in turning to scepticism, relied almost entirely on publications put out by free market lobby groups, rather than relying on the scientific literature.

Successfully neutralised

Her new denial of the science rested on a pamphlet from the Reason Foundation published in December 1997 and titled A Plain English Guide to Climate Science.

The guide claimed that: “It is widely acknowledged that the potential temperature changes predicted by global warming theory do not pose a direct threat to human life. Human beings, and a myriad of other organisms, exist quite comfortably in areas with temperature ranges more extreme than those predicted by global warming models.”

The Foundation received $70,000 the following year from ExxonMobil to “assess public policy alternatives on issues with direct bearing on the company’s business operations and interests.”

And so, the political consensus – that the science of climate change had alerted the world to the need for urgent and dramatic improvements to the clean production of energy – had been broken, and one of the earliest and keenest advocates had been successfully neutralised by the sceptics.

Thatcher’s legacy would simply be the rapid and controversial implementation of the free market in Britain, which would reverberate through the economies of the world and have serious ecological implications.

This Author

Brendan Montague is editor of The Ecologist, founder of Request Initiative and co-author of Impact of Market Forces on Addictive Substances and Behaviours: The web of influence of addictive industries (Oxford University Press). He tweets at @EcoMontague. This article first appeared at Desmog.uk.

Food sovereignty involves people cultivating self-determination, solidarity and social, political, economic, environmental and gender justice.

It brings together and builds on different sensibilities, and counters the homogenising discourse of agribusiness, while resisting its physical expansion. For Friends of the Earth International, strengthening food sovereignty is key to achieving peoples’ emancipation.

But how can we make progress in the current context of the unbridled expansion of fascism? To change the system, it is imperative to cast out fascism.    

Post-truth distortions

Fascism, according to Umberto Eco‘s characterization, is a social, political and cultural ideology that it is racist, xenophobic, misogynist, male chauvinist, homo-lesbo-transphobic, acritical, simplistic, anti-pacifist, elitist and aporophobic, antipolitical and antidemocratic, totalitarian, and homogenising.

It’s a social practice that some European comrades describe as necropolitics, whereby those in power decide who should die and how people should live in order to sustain the system.

Resisting fascism is a categorical imperative and an urgent tactical necessity that requires organised unity. In this post-truth era, unified peoples must acknowledge the diversity of struggles, while avoiding falling into antagonistic traps. 

‘Post-truth’ refers to “the deliberate distortion of reality to influence public opinion and social behaviors”. Such distortions increase and strengthen the hold of agribusiness giants on the global food and agriculture system and its profits.

Undeniably, the agribusiness model has resoundingly failed, leaving in its wake a global swathe of social, economic, environmental and nutritional destruction. This has even been acknowledged by the director-general of the Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO).

Anti-capitalist movements

The lie, repeated ad nauseam, that agribusiness is necessary to feed the world is no longer effective. The proponents of agribusiness are now recognising the failure of their model – as the World Economic Forum recently did – only to advance alternatives that further entrench their power.

This year’s FAO State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World report illustrates this failure. It acknowledges the links between the climate and food crises, but the ‘alternative’ it advances is climate-smart agriculture – agriculture with no people on the land. The report makes no mention of agroecology, which is a real alternative practised by those who grow the vast majority of the food we eat.  

Another example – as Filardi and Prato state in this year’s Right to Food and Nutrition Watch – is that we are facing “processes of dematerialisation, digitalisation and financialisation [that] are deeply changing the character of the corporate food system.

The result of this includes the shifting of power to new actors who are often increasingly distant from food production [and] are altering the conception of the food market, and food consumption habits within urban centers and beyond”.

Social movements have been resisting agribusiness and its post-truths for decades, and instead promoting food sovereignty – a project by and for those always left behind: peasant, indigenous, family farmer, fisher folk, rural and urban men and women. Food sovereignty is an anti-capitalist and anti-patriarchy project that transforms the living conditions of the working and popular classes.

Peasant to peasant 

We need to learn from Cuba, which reinvented its food production in the wake of the crisis of the socialist block and the aggravation of the inhumane US blockade. 

This reinvention was led by the knowledge and methodologies of “de campesino a campesina” (peasant to peasant), with supportive public policies and investments.

Cuba and its peasantry have become engines for the development of agroecology, demonstrating that this paradigm can indeed feed the masses and generate dignified living conditions in rural areas.  A pathway by and for the peoples.

Fascist projects, on the other hand, always serve the interests of the elites and ignore or attack any form of organisation that defends the interests of the people they claim to represent and that proliferate with the consent – whether by active support or by omission – of the dominant mainstream media.     

Strengthening the convergence of the peoples is essential to halt this expansion of fascism and transform our realities.

It will require political will from organisations, and resources and dedication from every comrade, to work around the nuances and differences of opinion on the basis of the common agreements that unite us.

It also requires formation, and the generation of information and communication tools created by and for the people, powered with technological sovereignty and digital security that enable us to bypass the media responsible for spreading lies to serve the system’s interests.   

Antifascist front 

Can we not, now, recognise fascism when we see it coming? Do we need to put our bodies on the line – the final frontier of adversity – to resist the expansion of fascism?

We must take bold and solid steps towards unity, without forgetting the urgent threat we are facing.

Fortunately, many voices in the popular camp are rising to the challenge. We may need to urgently build an international antifascist front, as Victor Baez, the secretary general of the Trade Union Confederation of the Americas (TUCA) recently commented. 

Let’s make “No Pasarán” – they shall not pass – a reality. 

This Author 

Martín Drago is Friends of the Earth International’s program coordinator for Food Sovereignty. He is a member of REDES/Friends of the Earth Uruguay and works closely with La Via Campesina, TUCA, World March of Women and other social movements.

Food sovereignty involves people cultivating self-determination, solidarity and social, political, economic, environmental and gender justice.

It brings together and builds on different sensibilities, and counters the homogenising discourse of agribusiness, while resisting its physical expansion. For Friends of the Earth International, strengthening food sovereignty is key to achieving peoples’ emancipation.

But how can we make progress in the current context of the unbridled expansion of fascism? To change the system, it is imperative to cast out fascism.    

Post-truth distortions

Fascism, according to Umberto Eco‘s characterization, is a social, political and cultural ideology that it is racist, xenophobic, misogynist, male chauvinist, homo-lesbo-transphobic, acritical, simplistic, anti-pacifist, elitist and aporophobic, antipolitical and antidemocratic, totalitarian, and homogenising.

It’s a social practice that some European comrades describe as necropolitics, whereby those in power decide who should die and how people should live in order to sustain the system.

Resisting fascism is a categorical imperative and an urgent tactical necessity that requires organised unity. In this post-truth era, unified peoples must acknowledge the diversity of struggles, while avoiding falling into antagonistic traps. 

‘Post-truth’ refers to “the deliberate distortion of reality to influence public opinion and social behaviors”. Such distortions increase and strengthen the hold of agribusiness giants on the global food and agriculture system and its profits.

Undeniably, the agribusiness model has resoundingly failed, leaving in its wake a global swathe of social, economic, environmental and nutritional destruction. This has even been acknowledged by the director-general of the Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO).

Anti-capitalist movements

The lie, repeated ad nauseam, that agribusiness is necessary to feed the world is no longer effective. The proponents of agribusiness are now recognising the failure of their model – as the World Economic Forum recently did – only to advance alternatives that further entrench their power.

This year’s FAO State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World report illustrates this failure. It acknowledges the links between the climate and food crises, but the ‘alternative’ it advances is climate-smart agriculture – agriculture with no people on the land. The report makes no mention of agroecology, which is a real alternative practised by those who grow the vast majority of the food we eat.  

Another example – as Filardi and Prato state in this year’s Right to Food and Nutrition Watch – is that we are facing “processes of dematerialisation, digitalisation and financialisation [that] are deeply changing the character of the corporate food system.

The result of this includes the shifting of power to new actors who are often increasingly distant from food production [and] are altering the conception of the food market, and food consumption habits within urban centers and beyond”.

Social movements have been resisting agribusiness and its post-truths for decades, and instead promoting food sovereignty – a project by and for those always left behind: peasant, indigenous, family farmer, fisher folk, rural and urban men and women. Food sovereignty is an anti-capitalist and anti-patriarchy project that transforms the living conditions of the working and popular classes.

Peasant to peasant 

We need to learn from Cuba, which reinvented its food production in the wake of the crisis of the socialist block and the aggravation of the inhumane US blockade. 

This reinvention was led by the knowledge and methodologies of “de campesino a campesina” (peasant to peasant), with supportive public policies and investments.

Cuba and its peasantry have become engines for the development of agroecology, demonstrating that this paradigm can indeed feed the masses and generate dignified living conditions in rural areas.  A pathway by and for the peoples.

Fascist projects, on the other hand, always serve the interests of the elites and ignore or attack any form of organisation that defends the interests of the people they claim to represent and that proliferate with the consent – whether by active support or by omission – of the dominant mainstream media.     

Strengthening the convergence of the peoples is essential to halt this expansion of fascism and transform our realities.

It will require political will from organisations, and resources and dedication from every comrade, to work around the nuances and differences of opinion on the basis of the common agreements that unite us.

It also requires formation, and the generation of information and communication tools created by and for the people, powered with technological sovereignty and digital security that enable us to bypass the media responsible for spreading lies to serve the system’s interests.   

Antifascist front 

Can we not, now, recognise fascism when we see it coming? Do we need to put our bodies on the line – the final frontier of adversity – to resist the expansion of fascism?

We must take bold and solid steps towards unity, without forgetting the urgent threat we are facing.

Fortunately, many voices in the popular camp are rising to the challenge. We may need to urgently build an international antifascist front, as Victor Baez, the secretary general of the Trade Union Confederation of the Americas (TUCA) recently commented. 

Let’s make “No Pasarán” – they shall not pass – a reality. 

This Author 

Martín Drago is Friends of the Earth International’s program coordinator for Food Sovereignty. He is a member of REDES/Friends of the Earth Uruguay and works closely with La Via Campesina, TUCA, World March of Women and other social movements.

Food sovereignty involves people cultivating self-determination, solidarity and social, political, economic, environmental and gender justice.

It brings together and builds on different sensibilities, and counters the homogenising discourse of agribusiness, while resisting its physical expansion. For Friends of the Earth International, strengthening food sovereignty is key to achieving peoples’ emancipation.

But how can we make progress in the current context of the unbridled expansion of fascism? To change the system, it is imperative to cast out fascism.    

Post-truth distortions

Fascism, according to Umberto Eco‘s characterization, is a social, political and cultural ideology that it is racist, xenophobic, misogynist, male chauvinist, homo-lesbo-transphobic, acritical, simplistic, anti-pacifist, elitist and aporophobic, antipolitical and antidemocratic, totalitarian, and homogenising.

It’s a social practice that some European comrades describe as necropolitics, whereby those in power decide who should die and how people should live in order to sustain the system.

Resisting fascism is a categorical imperative and an urgent tactical necessity that requires organised unity. In this post-truth era, unified peoples must acknowledge the diversity of struggles, while avoiding falling into antagonistic traps. 

‘Post-truth’ refers to “the deliberate distortion of reality to influence public opinion and social behaviors”. Such distortions increase and strengthen the hold of agribusiness giants on the global food and agriculture system and its profits.

Undeniably, the agribusiness model has resoundingly failed, leaving in its wake a global swathe of social, economic, environmental and nutritional destruction. This has even been acknowledged by the director-general of the Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO).

Anti-capitalist movements

The lie, repeated ad nauseam, that agribusiness is necessary to feed the world is no longer effective. The proponents of agribusiness are now recognising the failure of their model – as the World Economic Forum recently did – only to advance alternatives that further entrench their power.

This year’s FAO State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World report illustrates this failure. It acknowledges the links between the climate and food crises, but the ‘alternative’ it advances is climate-smart agriculture – agriculture with no people on the land. The report makes no mention of agroecology, which is a real alternative practised by those who grow the vast majority of the food we eat.  

Another example – as Filardi and Prato state in this year’s Right to Food and Nutrition Watch – is that we are facing “processes of dematerialisation, digitalisation and financialisation [that] are deeply changing the character of the corporate food system.

The result of this includes the shifting of power to new actors who are often increasingly distant from food production [and] are altering the conception of the food market, and food consumption habits within urban centers and beyond”.

Social movements have been resisting agribusiness and its post-truths for decades, and instead promoting food sovereignty – a project by and for those always left behind: peasant, indigenous, family farmer, fisher folk, rural and urban men and women. Food sovereignty is an anti-capitalist and anti-patriarchy project that transforms the living conditions of the working and popular classes.

Peasant to peasant 

We need to learn from Cuba, which reinvented its food production in the wake of the crisis of the socialist block and the aggravation of the inhumane US blockade. 

This reinvention was led by the knowledge and methodologies of “de campesino a campesina” (peasant to peasant), with supportive public policies and investments.

Cuba and its peasantry have become engines for the development of agroecology, demonstrating that this paradigm can indeed feed the masses and generate dignified living conditions in rural areas.  A pathway by and for the peoples.

Fascist projects, on the other hand, always serve the interests of the elites and ignore or attack any form of organisation that defends the interests of the people they claim to represent and that proliferate with the consent – whether by active support or by omission – of the dominant mainstream media.     

Strengthening the convergence of the peoples is essential to halt this expansion of fascism and transform our realities.

It will require political will from organisations, and resources and dedication from every comrade, to work around the nuances and differences of opinion on the basis of the common agreements that unite us.

It also requires formation, and the generation of information and communication tools created by and for the people, powered with technological sovereignty and digital security that enable us to bypass the media responsible for spreading lies to serve the system’s interests.   

Antifascist front 

Can we not, now, recognise fascism when we see it coming? Do we need to put our bodies on the line – the final frontier of adversity – to resist the expansion of fascism?

We must take bold and solid steps towards unity, without forgetting the urgent threat we are facing.

Fortunately, many voices in the popular camp are rising to the challenge. We may need to urgently build an international antifascist front, as Victor Baez, the secretary general of the Trade Union Confederation of the Americas (TUCA) recently commented. 

Let’s make “No Pasarán” – they shall not pass – a reality. 

This Author 

Martín Drago is Friends of the Earth International’s program coordinator for Food Sovereignty. He is a member of REDES/Friends of the Earth Uruguay and works closely with La Via Campesina, TUCA, World March of Women and other social movements.

Food sovereignty involves people cultivating self-determination, solidarity and social, political, economic, environmental and gender justice.

It brings together and builds on different sensibilities, and counters the homogenising discourse of agribusiness, while resisting its physical expansion. For Friends of the Earth International, strengthening food sovereignty is key to achieving peoples’ emancipation.

But how can we make progress in the current context of the unbridled expansion of fascism? To change the system, it is imperative to cast out fascism.    

Post-truth distortions

Fascism, according to Umberto Eco‘s characterization, is a social, political and cultural ideology that it is racist, xenophobic, misogynist, male chauvinist, homo-lesbo-transphobic, acritical, simplistic, anti-pacifist, elitist and aporophobic, antipolitical and antidemocratic, totalitarian, and homogenising.

It’s a social practice that some European comrades describe as necropolitics, whereby those in power decide who should die and how people should live in order to sustain the system.

Resisting fascism is a categorical imperative and an urgent tactical necessity that requires organised unity. In this post-truth era, unified peoples must acknowledge the diversity of struggles, while avoiding falling into antagonistic traps. 

‘Post-truth’ refers to “the deliberate distortion of reality to influence public opinion and social behaviors”. Such distortions increase and strengthen the hold of agribusiness giants on the global food and agriculture system and its profits.

Undeniably, the agribusiness model has resoundingly failed, leaving in its wake a global swathe of social, economic, environmental and nutritional destruction. This has even been acknowledged by the director-general of the Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO).

Anti-capitalist movements

The lie, repeated ad nauseam, that agribusiness is necessary to feed the world is no longer effective. The proponents of agribusiness are now recognising the failure of their model – as the World Economic Forum recently did – only to advance alternatives that further entrench their power.

This year’s FAO State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World report illustrates this failure. It acknowledges the links between the climate and food crises, but the ‘alternative’ it advances is climate-smart agriculture – agriculture with no people on the land. The report makes no mention of agroecology, which is a real alternative practised by those who grow the vast majority of the food we eat.  

Another example – as Filardi and Prato state in this year’s Right to Food and Nutrition Watch – is that we are facing “processes of dematerialisation, digitalisation and financialisation [that] are deeply changing the character of the corporate food system.

The result of this includes the shifting of power to new actors who are often increasingly distant from food production [and] are altering the conception of the food market, and food consumption habits within urban centers and beyond”.

Social movements have been resisting agribusiness and its post-truths for decades, and instead promoting food sovereignty – a project by and for those always left behind: peasant, indigenous, family farmer, fisher folk, rural and urban men and women. Food sovereignty is an anti-capitalist and anti-patriarchy project that transforms the living conditions of the working and popular classes.

Peasant to peasant 

We need to learn from Cuba, which reinvented its food production in the wake of the crisis of the socialist block and the aggravation of the inhumane US blockade. 

This reinvention was led by the knowledge and methodologies of “de campesino a campesina” (peasant to peasant), with supportive public policies and investments.

Cuba and its peasantry have become engines for the development of agroecology, demonstrating that this paradigm can indeed feed the masses and generate dignified living conditions in rural areas.  A pathway by and for the peoples.

Fascist projects, on the other hand, always serve the interests of the elites and ignore or attack any form of organisation that defends the interests of the people they claim to represent and that proliferate with the consent – whether by active support or by omission – of the dominant mainstream media.     

Strengthening the convergence of the peoples is essential to halt this expansion of fascism and transform our realities.

It will require political will from organisations, and resources and dedication from every comrade, to work around the nuances and differences of opinion on the basis of the common agreements that unite us.

It also requires formation, and the generation of information and communication tools created by and for the people, powered with technological sovereignty and digital security that enable us to bypass the media responsible for spreading lies to serve the system’s interests.   

Antifascist front 

Can we not, now, recognise fascism when we see it coming? Do we need to put our bodies on the line – the final frontier of adversity – to resist the expansion of fascism?

We must take bold and solid steps towards unity, without forgetting the urgent threat we are facing.

Fortunately, many voices in the popular camp are rising to the challenge. We may need to urgently build an international antifascist front, as Victor Baez, the secretary general of the Trade Union Confederation of the Americas (TUCA) recently commented. 

Let’s make “No Pasarán” – they shall not pass – a reality. 

This Author 

Martín Drago is Friends of the Earth International’s program coordinator for Food Sovereignty. He is a member of REDES/Friends of the Earth Uruguay and works closely with La Via Campesina, TUCA, World March of Women and other social movements.

Food sovereignty involves people cultivating self-determination, solidarity and social, political, economic, environmental and gender justice.

It brings together and builds on different sensibilities, and counters the homogenising discourse of agribusiness, while resisting its physical expansion. For Friends of the Earth International, strengthening food sovereignty is key to achieving peoples’ emancipation.

But how can we make progress in the current context of the unbridled expansion of fascism? To change the system, it is imperative to cast out fascism.    

Post-truth distortions

Fascism, according to Umberto Eco‘s characterization, is a social, political and cultural ideology that it is racist, xenophobic, misogynist, male chauvinist, homo-lesbo-transphobic, acritical, simplistic, anti-pacifist, elitist and aporophobic, antipolitical and antidemocratic, totalitarian, and homogenising.

It’s a social practice that some European comrades describe as necropolitics, whereby those in power decide who should die and how people should live in order to sustain the system.

Resisting fascism is a categorical imperative and an urgent tactical necessity that requires organised unity. In this post-truth era, unified peoples must acknowledge the diversity of struggles, while avoiding falling into antagonistic traps. 

‘Post-truth’ refers to “the deliberate distortion of reality to influence public opinion and social behaviors”. Such distortions increase and strengthen the hold of agribusiness giants on the global food and agriculture system and its profits.

Undeniably, the agribusiness model has resoundingly failed, leaving in its wake a global swathe of social, economic, environmental and nutritional destruction. This has even been acknowledged by the director-general of the Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO).

Anti-capitalist movements

The lie, repeated ad nauseam, that agribusiness is necessary to feed the world is no longer effective. The proponents of agribusiness are now recognising the failure of their model – as the World Economic Forum recently did – only to advance alternatives that further entrench their power.

This year’s FAO State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World report illustrates this failure. It acknowledges the links between the climate and food crises, but the ‘alternative’ it advances is climate-smart agriculture – agriculture with no people on the land. The report makes no mention of agroecology, which is a real alternative practised by those who grow the vast majority of the food we eat.  

Another example – as Filardi and Prato state in this year’s Right to Food and Nutrition Watch – is that we are facing “processes of dematerialisation, digitalisation and financialisation [that] are deeply changing the character of the corporate food system.

The result of this includes the shifting of power to new actors who are often increasingly distant from food production [and] are altering the conception of the food market, and food consumption habits within urban centers and beyond”.

Social movements have been resisting agribusiness and its post-truths for decades, and instead promoting food sovereignty – a project by and for those always left behind: peasant, indigenous, family farmer, fisher folk, rural and urban men and women. Food sovereignty is an anti-capitalist and anti-patriarchy project that transforms the living conditions of the working and popular classes.

Peasant to peasant 

We need to learn from Cuba, which reinvented its food production in the wake of the crisis of the socialist block and the aggravation of the inhumane US blockade. 

This reinvention was led by the knowledge and methodologies of “de campesino a campesina” (peasant to peasant), with supportive public policies and investments.

Cuba and its peasantry have become engines for the development of agroecology, demonstrating that this paradigm can indeed feed the masses and generate dignified living conditions in rural areas.  A pathway by and for the peoples.

Fascist projects, on the other hand, always serve the interests of the elites and ignore or attack any form of organisation that defends the interests of the people they claim to represent and that proliferate with the consent – whether by active support or by omission – of the dominant mainstream media.     

Strengthening the convergence of the peoples is essential to halt this expansion of fascism and transform our realities.

It will require political will from organisations, and resources and dedication from every comrade, to work around the nuances and differences of opinion on the basis of the common agreements that unite us.

It also requires formation, and the generation of information and communication tools created by and for the people, powered with technological sovereignty and digital security that enable us to bypass the media responsible for spreading lies to serve the system’s interests.   

Antifascist front 

Can we not, now, recognise fascism when we see it coming? Do we need to put our bodies on the line – the final frontier of adversity – to resist the expansion of fascism?

We must take bold and solid steps towards unity, without forgetting the urgent threat we are facing.

Fortunately, many voices in the popular camp are rising to the challenge. We may need to urgently build an international antifascist front, as Victor Baez, the secretary general of the Trade Union Confederation of the Americas (TUCA) recently commented. 

Let’s make “No Pasarán” – they shall not pass – a reality. 

This Author 

Martín Drago is Friends of the Earth International’s program coordinator for Food Sovereignty. He is a member of REDES/Friends of the Earth Uruguay and works closely with La Via Campesina, TUCA, World March of Women and other social movements.

Barclays has increased its loan to Yorkshire fracking company Third Energy by £1.5m to a total of 16.9m, Drill or Drop reported last week.

The bank had committed at its 2017 AGM to sell its holdings in Third Energy. Yet 12 months on – at the 2018 AGM – and it had not done so.

John McFarlane, the bank chairman told shareholders: “We regret that we made this investment. We’re hoping to divest this company at the appropriate time. As soon as possible.”

Fossil fuel finance

Some campaigners suspected that Barclays would not be divesting themselves of Third Energy ‘as soon as possible’ but may instead wait for fracking to begin so that their returns would be more lucrative.

The inaction over this investment is just one example of Barclays’ endemic failure to respond to public calls to end its financing of rogue fossil fuel companies.

The bank also lags on reviewing its policy on coal and tar sands, despite those fuels’ popularity falling off a cliff edge in the finance and insurance sectors and its continued £3.6bn financing of all fossil fuels per annum. Its inaction underlines the disregard with which it treats concerned customers and members of the public.

The lesson of this incident is that we cannot rely on asking nicely that Barclays and other major banks put social and environmental justice at the core of their investment policies.

Sending shareholder resolutions and taking action at local branches alone will not force Barclays to budge on its deep commitment to fossil fuel finance.

Bank accounts

Alongside the carrot of ‘looking green’, we need to exercise a stick of mass collective action to win our demands of Barclays and other banks.

This is why groups like People & Planet are calling for a wave of institutional boycotts to leverage demands for Barclays to ditch fossil fuel finance for all companies and extraction projects through their Divest Barclays campaign.

The idea is that public or reputable institutions like universities, students’ unions, faith groups, sports teams, cultural spaces, large events and local businesses are composed of and represent many broad cross-sections of society.

By organising for our institutions to boycott fossil fuel financing banks, we can communicate our collective demands for a different finance system with power and leverage greater than any individual consumer boycott.

While an average consumer may have between a few hundred or thousand pounds running through their bank account at any time, the institutions we belong to command bank accounts sometimes reaching hundreds of thousands if not millions.

Student campaigners

Barclays feels the effect when those institutions move their money in ways they never will with individual consumers. Institutions like universities or sports teams also have huge cultural reach and political clout.

Drawing on the logic of the successful divestment campaign, by disassociating themselves with banks or fossil fuel companies reputable institutions contribute to widening political space to reign them in.

This isn’t to say that individuals moving their money to a more ethical bank shouldn’t be facilitated, but it is to recognise that when acting together using our institutions as leverage, we are all more powerful.

For People & Planet, the institutional boycott campaign begins on university campuses where they have recent success of organising against the fossil fuel industry.

With 68 UK universities having made a divestment commitment after student pressure, People & Planet’s network of student campaigners know how to get quick wins out of their institutions.

Finance sector

Already Sheffield, Bristol and Trinity St David students’ unions have boycotted Barclays as part of the campaign. This year they’re expecting universities to follow suit.  

Institutional boycott campaigns sit alongside creative actions at branches in the community and disruptions at major Barclays events like their AGM, and collaborative partnerships with other NGOs who are using their seat at the table to lobby hard on the inside of the bank.

Though People & Planet’s Divest Barclays campaign may be organised from the campus and make initial demands of the University, these local and national actions exemplify the potential of fossil free finance campaigning and institutional boycotts as a tactic to drag the climate justice movement off campuses and into local communities.

For a long time, divestment campaigners have spoken of the need to build a mass movement to dismantle the fossil fuel industry.

This could not be more clearly emphasised by the scale of our ambitions to transform the finance sector by severing its ties to fossil fuels and putting it to work in favour of climate justice.

Get involved

By drawing on the experience of successful university divestment campaigns, Divest Barclays’ next step can be organising for local businesses and sports teams to boycott the bank too.

Imagine if every chip shop, takeaway or café in a town or city boycotted Barclays until they ditched fossil fuel finance.

This tactic is not the preserve of privileged students at wealthy universities. Institutional boycotts can be won by anybody active in civil society.

It is time to radically expand the base of climate justice movement organising for fossil free finance, giving ordinary people real power to determine and win solutions to the climate crisis by acting through their institutions.

If “the hothouse earth”, the IPCC report or fracking in Lancashire have got you scared or angry about the trajectory of our planet, then now is the time to get active. Start a campaign for the institutions of your community to boycott Barclays until they ditch fossil fuel finance.

This Author

Chris Saltmarsh is co-director: climate change campaigns at People & Planet where he manages the UK university divestment and Divest Barclays campaigns.  He tweets at @chris_saltmarsh.

The UK’s energy minister has suggested the government could weaken seismic activity standards at fracking sites, according to documents obtained by Unearthed. The revelation comes as Cuadrilla starts fracking in Lancashire.

In a letter sent to pro-fracking Conservative MP Kevin Hollinrake in July, Claire Perry said the traffic lights system (TLS) the government currently uses to issue alerts of seismic activity is “set at an explicitly cautious level.”

She added: “[A]s we gain experience in applying these measures, the trigger levels can be adjusted upwards without compromising the effectiveness of the controls.” 

Premature

Fracking began just a week after the UN’s scientific body on climate change delivered a special report that warned that global carbon emissions need to be halved by 2030 in order to meet the ambition set by the landmark Paris deal.  

In order to achieve this, it suggested natural gas use would have to fall sharply without the rapid and widespread deployment of untested carbon capture technology. Government advisers have previously warned that new onshore oil and gas extraction could jeopardise the country’s legally-binding climate targets.

The traffic light system came into effect in 2014 following a series of earthquakes linked to early fracking efforts.  

The policy is widely-regarded as stringent, with drillers required to ‘proceed with caution at reduced rates’ in the event of any seismic activity, no matter how small, and to stop fracking immediately if activity exceeds 0.5 on the richter scale. Activity at this level would be imperceptible to households.

Hollinrake, MP of Thirsk and Malton constituency in North Yorkshire, who has supported fracking if well regulated, declined to back the government’s proposal, claiming it was premature.

Local communities

“At this point in time I think we need to know a lot more before I’d support that position. The Traffic Light System is there for a reason,” he told Unearthed,

“To be fair to this government and the responsible approach I think we do take to oil and gas exploration, we haven’t fracked for seven years as a result so clearly we do take this seriously.”

Earthquakes have been linked to fracking in the United States, particularly in Ohio. Much of this has been thought to relate to wastewater re-injection, an activity that is not expected to take place in the UK. However it is also believed there is some link to the fracking process itself.

The seismic activity experienced so far in the UK from fracking were sufficiently small to cause no recorded surface damage, but the Royal Academy of Engineering and Royal Society analysed risks from fracking and concluded that damage to well integrity was a hazard.

Claire Stephenson from Frack Free Lancashire said: “This move can only be beneficial to the fracking industry and not to local communities who are being forced to endure this technology.

“The fact that they are already deciding to change the safety levels to the industry’s favour, suggests fracking will likely cause seismic events.”

This Article

This article first appeared at Unearthed, from Greenpeace.

Neoliberal think tanks enjoyed a boom period in the 2000s thanks to ExxonMobil’s lavish spending , fuelling the fire against the climate science consensus.

The think tanks gathered together a group of hand-picked “independent” scientists who were “not usually published in the mainstream journals” – in line with the Climate Action Plan, written in 1998 as a blueprint for sceptic industry action.

The ‘90s old-timers, like Richard Lindzen, Patrick Michaels and Fred Singer, were still producing a steady stream of second rate scientific research but, with the new glut of funding, the crew were given turbo boosters.

Turbo-boosters

Among the new arrivals was Ross McKitrick, a senior fellow at libertarian, Antony Fisher‘s Fraser Institute. With a PhD in economics and a passion for the free market, he has published 14 peer-reviewed economics articles.

Despite being an economist, it is McKitrick’s work on climatology that has brought him prestige. McKitrick’s crowning glory was “Corrections to the Mann et al.,” a climatology paper published in a social science journal in 1998.

The paper, which argued Mann’s graph was false, made the national news and was quoted in evidence given to the U.S.Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, convened by the notorious climate denier, Senator James M. Inhofe.

At the same time, the Fraser Institute received $60,000 in funding specifically designated for “climate change” work by ExxonMobil. In 2004, the institute received another $60,000 from the company for the same purpose.

Soon’s Science

Another well-oiled scientist gaining steam at the time was Willie Soon, a doctor of aerospace engineering who got his first job under the Trusteeship of Robert Jastrow, founder of the Koch-funded Marshall Institute.

Between 1991 and 1997, Soon worked at the Mount Wilson Observatory inbetween writing a few corporate-funded papers for Texaco, Mobil and the American Petroleum Institute (API). In 1997 he was appointed senior scientist at the Marshall Institute, as well as moonlighting as a blogger for Koch’s Heritage Foundation.

Throughout the decade, Soon published around two articles a year funded directly by ExxonMobil, Koch, Southern Electric and the API, which earned him $1,322,980. His grants from the API started in 2001, and by 2007 they totalled $274,000. The vast majority of these grants were directed towards exploring the relationship between the sun and climate change.

Soon’s 2003 study “Proxy climatic and environmental changes of the past 1000 years” was one of the first, and most prominent, challenges to Mann’s hockey stick. Soon and his co-author Sallie Baliunas claimed that the 20th century was not the warmest of the past millennium and that the climate had not changed significantly during that time.

Scientific Outrage

The authors told the journal Climate Research that the paper was sponsored by the API but did not disclose the sum that was paid: an estimated $118,443 over two years. The study was thoroughly debunked, but in the meantime it got huge press and was re-published by the Marshall Institute.

The scientific community was outraged. Realising that the paper was funded by the API, Mann insisted that what appeared to be an academic paper was really a tool for “creating a highly visible critique of our work that could be used in political circles. They were funding the work and these guys were working closely with them. The White House was using Soon’s ‘paper’ to undermine our work.” 

Members of the Climate Research editorial board resigned in protest at the publication, including its editor-in-chief, Hans von Storch. But, this was by no means the last that the denial machine had to say about Mann’s work.

This Author

Brendan Montague is editor of The Ecologist, founder of Request Initiative and co-author of Impact of Market Forces on Addictive Substances and Behaviours: The web of influence of addictive industries (Oxford University Press). He tweets at @EcoMontague. This article first appeared at Desmog.uk.

Fracking has begun in Britain for the first time since drilling caused earthquakes seven years ago.

Shale gas operator Cuadrilla confirmed the move at its Preston New Road site in a statement. “Hydraulic fracturing of both horizontal exploration wells is expected to last three months after which the flow rate of the gas will be tested,” it read.

The company’s operations outside Blackpool were given the final nod from government in September.

Tokenistic event

A last-ditch attempt to prevent it was launched by local resident Robert Dennett, who won an interim injunction against Lancashire County Council on the grounds that its emergency planning was inadequate. But on Friday, the High Court rejected the injunction.

More than 40 activists from campaign group Reclaim the Power also attempted to stop drilling by blockading the site with a van during the early hours of the morning. The erected a scaffold structure on top with a banner reading, “Stop The Start. Don’t Frack the Climate”.

Charlie Edwards, from Reclaim the Power said: “Today the government launched its ‘Green Great Britain’ week – a tokenistic attempt to hide a series of climate wrecking decisions such as expanding Heathrow airport and forcing fracking on the local communities.”

The government was heavily criticised by Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth and the Green Party for maintaining its support for the industry, despite warnings from climate scientists last week that time was running to keep global temperature rises within 1.5C.

It was also hypocritical in the light of energy minister Claire Perry’s request to its climate change advisers for advice on reducing the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions to net-zero, they said.

This Author

Catherine Early is a freelance environmental journalist and chief reporter for The Ecologist. She was formerly the deputy editor of the Environmentalist. She can be found tweeting at @Cat_Early76.