Bluegreen Jobs

The New Republic is trying to figure out how to make environmentalism cool with the white working class.
Environmentalists must fight alongside unions for full employment in a green economy that uses union labor. American steel produced by United Steelworkers members must be used to make wind turbines erected by Laborers members. Unfortunately, most green energy capitalists hold anti-union positions, but environmentalists have to demand a change.
It's interesting how Blue Model this vision is, to use W. R. Mead's term.


David Foster said...

Even if you use 100% union labor for the wind farms, etc, you will still be increasing the cost of electricity...and that will cost the jobs of *other* blue-collar union workers in energy-intensive manufacturing businesses.

Gringo said...

Environmentalists must fight alongside unions for full employment in a green economy that uses union labor.

As only 6.7% of private sector workers belong to unions, environmentalists would be fighting for an anachronism.

The union membership rate for public-sector workers (35.2 percent) was substantially higher than the rate for private-sector workers (6.7 percent)

Unions are all but dead in the private sector. I don't see the point of trying to revive them, especially seeing how unions operate in the public sector.

The New Republic is simply showing, once again, how out of touch it it is.

Grim said...

...would be fighting for an anachronism.

Exactly. It's a very solid concept if we can return to the labor conditions of 1960 or thereabouts.

Texan99 said...

People can be so powerful if they find a way to harness their collective energies cohesively. Then some bright soul always figures out that the group will be more powerful if the harness becomes chains, they can't leave, and the bright soul gets to decide the collective goal from now on.

Gringo said...

Not coincidentally, the author of "how to make environmentalism cool" in TNR is Erik Loomis, who recently had an article on Fidel Castro: Castro: It’s Complicated!

Professor Loomis claims to have written a "balanced" article on Castro, and to a certain degree he has.

Fidel Castro was a tremendously complex person who attempted to rebuild a society around ideas of justice while also refusing to allow democratic institutions to form....
Castro’s policies were a mixed bag. He absolutely provided outstanding health care and education to his people. This is something beyond what far wealthier nations have achieved. No one can really deny the success of these policies...

Regarding the "success of these policies," one can put them in context.What is the point of being literate if all you can read is regime propaganda?Regarding health care: in 1960 Cuba was third in Latin America in Life Expectancy, behind Uruguay and Argentina[Romance language speaking countries]. In 2014, Cuba was third in Latin America in Life Expectancy, behind Chile and Uruguay. This points out that the Cuba that Castro inherited was relatively well-off in health care. Does Professor Loomis write praises of Chile and Uruguay? No.

And this is the world context in which we have to evaluate Castro. In the end, which nation is better off today, Cuba or the Dominican Republic?

There is a comment which puts that question in its proper place.
Apparently you are not aware that had you asked the following question in 1959 or 1960- which is better off, Cuba or the Dominican Republic- you would have been laughed out of the room, for asking a question with a VERY OBVIOUS ANSWER.
For example, consider Physicians per 1,000 people in 1960: 0.95 for Cuba, and 0.12 for the Dominican Republic.

A better question would be: which nation has improved more, Cuba or the Dominican Republic?
Life Expectancy, 1960
Cuba 63.9 years
Dominican Republic 51.8 years

Life Expectancy, 2014
Cuba 79.4 years
Dominican Republic 73.5 years

Increase in Life Expectancy, 1960-2014
Cuba 15.5 years
Dominican Republic 21.7 years

As the Dominican Republic has increased its Life Expectancy from 1960-2014 6.2 more years than Cuba has during the same time span, by this measure the Dominican Republic has improved more than Cuba.

As the Dominican Republic has considerably closed the gap with Cuba, it would appear that the Dominican Republic has done better.

You are not the only person who ignores two important facts about evaluating Cuba. First, while the Cuba that Castro inherited in 1959 had its problems, it was relatively well off. Cuba’s Life Expectancy was 8 years higher than that of Latin America when Castro took over. Cuba’s Life Expectancy in 1960 was higher than Portugal’s. Second, many countries have made comparable or greater improvements in health and education since then without imposing a totalitarian System. From 1960 to 2014, Latin America’s Life Expectancy improved 19.1 years, compared to Cuba’s 15.5.

World Bank: World Development Indicators

jaed said...

Not just how Blue Model it is... I am also struck by how 1930s it is. I can almost see the huge Socialist-Realism-style murals showing burly workers flexing their muscles under the supervision of heroic union officials, with wind turbines in the background against a blue sky.

Ymar Sakar said...

They just need to make it into a religion where the members become the Elect. The Left should follow the Roman Catholic model and setup a stable religious head that can give pardons and indulgences.