Hillary Clinton

By Van Gosse - Convergence, April 9, 2022

Many political analysts, including some on the Left, are positing a radically new configuration of class in the United States. Their argument, reduced to its essence, is that the traditional markers of class are no longer relevant, and now the great divide is between those who have graduated from college versus the rest. It is further argued that this new class structure is reshaping our political party system in dramatic ways:  the Democrats are becoming the party of the educated, in addition to traditional constituencies among African Americans and single women. Conversely, the Republicans are becoming a party of the working class—defined as the non-college-educated—across traditional racial and ethnic lines (for a cogent example of this analysis, see Matt Karp’s “The Politics of a Second Gilded Age”).

I think this analysis is wrong in all respects.  We need an analysis of how class functions in the U.S. that is based in our distinct history of stratification (and division) along ethno-racial lines.  Beyond that, we need an accurate reading of the Democratic Party in particular, if we are to advance the struggle for a multiracial democracy against white nationalism.

By Dyanna Jaye and William Lawrence - Convergence, March 24, 2022

Sunrise melded mass protest, electoral work, and distributed organizing to great effect, but 2020 upended its plans and forced a reassessment.

Sunrise Movement grew from a labor of love by 12 young people, including the two of us, into the most prominent climate justice organization in the country. We put the Green New Deal on the map, strengthened the Left insurgency in the Democratic Party, and helped drive youth turnout to defeat Trump in 2020. Climate change became a political priority for the Democratic Party, and Sunrise directly influenced Biden’s Build Back Better agenda.

In the last year, though, despite a few impactful protests demanding ambition and urgency from Congress, Sunrise members and observers alike have noted a loss of strategic clarity and organizing power compared to 2017 through 2020. And it’s not just Sunrise: the entire Left has struggled to make the jump from punching upwards in the Trump era to winning material reforms in the Biden era.

In this essay, we’ll pull back the layers of Sunrise’s organizing model: how we actually recruited young people and united them in a structure for collective action. We’ll first discuss the major influences on Sunrise’s organizing and run through how it all played out in practice, the good and the bad.

We share a diagnosis that a central shortcoming in Sunrise’s organizing model was the absence of a sustained method of mass organizing at a local level, which left us nowhere to go once we could no longer rely on the fast-but-shallow growth of distributed organizing methods. We’re proud of the movement’s accomplishments while humble about its shortcomings. We offer our reflection in the practice of learning together in public; we hope our transparency can empower the next generation of movement builders—in Sunrise and across movements—to lead transformative organizing for the next era.

By William Lawrence - Convergence, March 14, 2022

Sunrise Movement made climate change a key political issue, but new conditions require new theory and strategy.

The state of Sunrise Movement, one of the more successful and visible U.S. Left organizations to emerge in the last five years, reflects trends in the broader Left. We hit a high-water mark with Sen. Bernie Sanders’ February 2020 victory in the Nevada caucus. Shortly after, the revenge of the Democratic establishment and the COVID pandemic halted all momentum and put Sunrise into a rear-guard attempt to salvage what could be won in a Biden administration. The underwhelming first year of that administration has left us floundering.

Today, a private and public reckoning is well underway. A new generation of leaders is taking account of Sunrise’s successes and failures, and working to design the next life of the movement. Early Sunrise leaders—of which I am one—are in the process of moving on, and handing over leadership of this youth organization to a more youthful cohort.

As a leader in Sunrise’s development from its founding in 2017 through early 2021, I feel obliged to offer an evaluation of our strategy and methods. My aim is to offer a detailed account of Sunrise’s aims and influences, in order that the next generation of strategist-organizers both inside and outside Sunrise may learn from what we did well, while overcoming our limitations.

You can consider just about every word of this essay as a self-critique and a practice of learning in public. As ever, I write with deep appreciation for all the climate justice fighters who find a place to place their hope amidst the looming dread of this crisis.

Part 1 of this essay, which you are reading now, focuses on Sunrise’s strategy, including our demands, rhetoric, and relation to the US party system. Part 2 will look at Sunrise’s methods of organizing.

I hope these essays not only illuminate our specific choices and why we made them, but demonstrate how the theoretical concepts on which we build our organizations actually shape their development. Sunrise’s successes owe much to the theories underpinning our strategy and methods, and our failures reveal much about where these theories fall short. I hope my reflections on these recent experiences may aid in developing better theory to face the challenges of the 21st century.

By Jacob Morrison - Jacobin and Labor Notes[1], May 17, 2021

A supposed defense of coal miners, their families, their way of life, and their culture has been front and center of the Republican agenda ever since the push for decarbonization began. It was a key part of the Right’s pushback against Obama and his “war on coal.” Hillary Clinton faced tremendous pushback for her awful statement on the 2016 campaign trail that she was going to “put a lot of coal miners out of business.”[1] In contrast, Trump said, “we’re going to put these coal miners back to work,” even bizarrely donning a hard hat in coal country at one point.

Many leftists have long argued that this faux-populist rhetoric was empty. Of course this advocacy ostensibly on behalf of coal miners was really only ever meant to help coal bosses.

Miners Walk Out

The last seven weeks confirms it: Republicans’ rhetoric is all a ruse. Why? Because since April 1, eleven hundred coal miners at Warrior Met coal mine have been on strike — first over unfair labor practices, then for a fair contract.

These miners have sacrificed for the company to bring it into solvency following a bankruptcy in 2015, when they accepted a contract with major concessions including a $6/hour pay cut, frequent seven-day workweeks, a loss of their guaranteed paid lunch break, and overtime compensation. They did their part, and now the company is solvent. In fact, two of the last five years saw record-breaking coal production, and the company’s CEO now has a record-breaking annual compensation of $4 million. But Warrior Met Coal did not hold up their end of the bargain.

First, they negotiated in such bad faith without any concrete proposals that workers were forced to go on an unfair labor practices strike. This forced the company to the table, but with an offer that workers found insulting, including up to $1.50/hour raise over five years.

The workers rejected this offer overwhelmingly, with an overwhelming majority of the miners voting against its ratification and opting to continue the strike.

To add insult to injury, while they were on strike, the company filed a complaint against the workers in an attempt to suppress their speech by limiting their ability to picket. The courts, as they have so often throughout American labor history, gladly cooperated, first limiting picket lines to six people per entrance, and then allowing the union a whole ten people per entrance. All the while, the miners have faced intimidation from the cops, who falsely tell them they are not allowed to walk on their picket lines. Meanwhile, the company buses in scabs to undercut them.

By Sophie Yeo - Carbon Brief, January 4, 2017

Tackling climate change is good for the economy, good for business and good for people. This is the narrative often pushed out by campaigners, researchers and governments around the world.

But while measures to curb emissions and reduce the impacts of rising temperatures will be good for the many, the few who work in industries affected by climate policies risk losing their livelihoods as the economy leans increasingly upon renewable energy.

Around the world, there is a growing movement demanding a “just transition” for the workforce, so that workers are not left in the cold as fossil fuels become consigned to the past.

Peabody and the Navajo tribe

Arizona’s Navajo tribe is one example of a community already fighting for a just transition. This Native American group signed a lease in 1964 allowing Peabody Energy, America’s largest coal company, to mine for coal on reservation lands. Now, 50 years later, many are battling against the impacts of this deal.

When they signed the lease, the company agreed to “employ Navajo Indians when available in all positions for which…they are qualified”. Since then, Peabody has been a major employer of tribe members — 90% of the 430-person workforce of its Kayenta mine are native people.

Yet, while Peabody has provided jobs and money, poverty rates on the Navajo Nation Reservation are more than twice as high as the Arizona state average, and benefits have come at the expense of the local environment.

The Navajo tribe has seen their water sources dwindle as Peabody has used the reservation’s aquifer to turn coal into slurry and pump it down a pipeline. Coal plants surrounding the reservation have polluted the air, clouding the view of the nearby Grand Canyon and other national parks. It is also a source of CO2, the primary contributor of human-caused climate change.

Members of the Navajo tribe, alongside the Hopi tribe that also lives in the area, are calling for a “just transition” away from coal — one that will see old jobs tied to the polluting coal industry replaced with clean and profitable work.

One group, the Black Mesa Water Coalition, is trying to create economic opportunities that will help to release the community from its reliance on coal. For instance, they have tried to revive the traditional Navajo wool market, developing partnerships with wool buyers and organising an annual Wool Buy.

It has also started a solar project, which aims to install a series of 20MW to 200MW solar installations on abandoned coal mining land, transforming the reservation’s old role as an energy provider.

The idea has gone global. In Ghana, for instance, the government has developed a programme to plant more trees, simultaneously improving the landscape, providing jobs, and offering a diversified source of livelihoods for farmers. Peasant farmers and the rural unemployed were involved in planting species such as teak, eucalyptus, cassia and mahogany, generating 12,595 full-time jobs.

In Port Augusta, a town of 14,000 people in South Australia, there is a plan underway to install a solar thermal plant to replace the town’s coal industry. This became even more urgent after the Alinta power station announced that it would close, potentially putting 250 jobs at risk.

By Kevin Gosztola - Shadow Proof, October 15, 2016

At a private meeting with the Building Trades Council, Hillary Clinton bashed environmentalists who oppose natural gas fracking and insist the United States must keep all fossil fuels in the ground. She said these environmentalists need to “get a life.”

A transcript of a part of the meeting, which took place on September 9, 2015, was published by WikiLeaks. It was attached to an email from Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s account, which he claims was hacked.

Clinton met with the Building Trades Council, which is part of North America’s Building Trades Unions (NABTU). She sought their endorsement, however, she wanted to be clear about what she was willing to support in the way of new pipeline construction. The labor organization is very pro-pipeline because its members work on pipelines.

“Bernie Sanders is getting lots of support from the most radical environmentalists because he’s out there every day bashing the Keystone pipeline,” Clinton stated. “And, you know, I’m not into it for that.”

“My view is I want to defend natural gas. I want to defend repairing and building the pipelines we need to fuel our economy. I want to defend fracking under the right circumstances,” Clinton added. She made it clear she was willing to defend new, modern energy sources.

Then, on environmentalists, Clinton shared, “I’m already at odds with the most organized and wildest. They come to my rallies and they yell at me and, you know, all the rest of it. They say, ‘Will you promise never to take any fossil fuels out of the earth ever again?’ No. I won’t promise that. Get a life, you know.”

By Jake Johnson - Common Dreams, Spetember 29, 2016

Just months after becoming president of the United States, Barack Obama met with some of the world's most powerful executives.

It was a time of crisis: The economy was wavering dangerously in the aftermath of the housing bubble's great burst, and many of the nation's largest financial institutions had just been yanked from the brink of collapse.

Though the effects of the most severe economic downturn since the Great Depression were disastrous for countless Americans, the executives with whom the president spoke on that day in March of 2009 were doing just fine. In fact, many were doing better than ever.

While millions faced the prospect of losing their homes, their jobs, and their life savings, the same CEOs that helped spark the crash were paying themselves and their employees lavish bonuses.

The executives reportedly "offered several explanations" for their salaries, but the president quickly reminded them, "The public isn't buying that."

"My administration," Obama famously added, "is the only thing between you and the pitchforks."

It was a striking, even prescient, remark. Having ascended to the White House on a wave of grassroots support, the president was expected to take a stand for the public—it was expected that those guilty of wrongdoing would be held to account, that those harmed by Wall Street's rampant fraud would receive the full support of the administration.

But such high hopes were quickly dashed.

Or perhaps they were, from the start, misplaced. While President Obama did indeed ride a wave of grassroots support into the White House, that wave, it must be remembered, was generously bolstered by Wall Street cash.

And while the hopes of the millions who voted for change they could believe in may have, in the last analysis, been ill-advised, Wall Street certainly got its money's worth.

"Obama had a clear mandate to rein in Wall Street," Matt Taibbi noted in 2009. "What he did instead was ship even his most marginally progressive campaign advisers off to various bureaucratic Siberias, while packing the key economic positions in his White House with the very people who caused the crisis in the first place."

The Obama administration quickly downplayed such concerns, attempting to foster a genial relationship between the winners and losers of the crisis.

"The President emphasized that Wall Street needs Main Street, and Main Street needs Wall Street," Robert Gibbs, Obama's press secretary, said after the high-profile meeting.

Thankfully, the public didn't buy that either.

Compiled by x344543 - IWW Environmental Unionism Caucus, September 13, 2016

A supplement to Eco Unionist News:

Lead Stories:

• Neither the TPP Nor National Sovereignty – By Elliot Sperber, CounterPunch, September 9, 2016; [related]: Leading Economists Oppose TPP Provision Giving Corporations Upper Hand in Investor-State Disputes – Lori Wallach interviewed by Amy Goodman and Nermeen Shaikh, Democracy Now!, September 8, 2016 | As White House Spotlights Conflict With Democratic Presidential and Congressional Candidates by Escalating Toward TPP Lame-Duck Vote, Sen. Warren and Hundreds of Academics Urge Rejection – By Jeffrey Sachs, et. al., Public Citizen, September 7, 2016 | Good News for the People of Europe: The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) Is Dead. Negotiations have Failed – By Peter Koenig, Global Research, September 7, 2016 | Obama’s TPP Would Widen the Divide –  By Manuel Pérez-Rocha, Institute for Policy Studies, September 1, 2016
• Humans have destroyed a tenth of Earth's wilderness in 25 years – By Adam Vaughan, The Guardian, September 8, 2016; [related]: The Sick Ocean – By Robert Hunziker, CounterPunch, September 8, 2016
• Our energy system has changed since 1913; why hasn’t this subsidy? – By Julia Raven, Oil Change International, September 7, 2016
• Frack, Rattle and Roll: Drilling into Oklahoma’s Earthquake Epidemic – By Joshua Frank, CounterPunch, September 6, 2016; [related]: ‘Preemption’ Is Major Obstacle Across the Country as Progressive Laws Like Fracking Bans Passed in Liberal Cities Are Immediately Crushed by Right-Wing State Legislatures –  By Abby Rapoport, The American Prospect, September 2, 2016

The Man Behind the Curtain:

• The Clean Power Plan: Justice Delayed — For Whom the Rule Tolls – Joel B. Stronberg, Renewable Energy World, September 9, 2016
• Fox News acknowledged climate change, then promptly took it back – By Katie Herzog, Grist, September 8, 2016
• 13 Academics Who Have Become Shills for Corporate Giants in the Food, Agrochemical and Fossil Fuel Industries – By Lorraine Chow, AlterNet, September 8, 2016
• The Truth Behind The Kochs’ New Fossil Fuel PR Campaign – By Jeremy Deaton, Think Progress, September 8, 2016
• To Fight Clean Power Plan, Fossil Fuel Companies Paid for Private Meetings with Republican State Prosecutors – By Ashley Braun, DeSmog Blog, September 7, 2016; [related]: Confidential Documents Show Fossil Fuel Industry Plotted With GOP AGs to Attack Clean Power Plan – By Climate Denier Roundup, EcoWatch, September 8, 2016 | Fossil Fuel Industry Paid for Meetings With GOP Attorneys General to Plan Attack on Clean Power Plan – By Nick Surgey, PR Watch, September 7, 2016 | Republican State AGs Met With Coal, Electricity Companies Before Filing Against The EPA’s Carbon Rule – By Samantha Page, Think Progress, September 7, 2016
• Hillary Clinton Is Raking In Fossil Fuel Money At An Alarming Rate – By Farron Cousins, DeSmog Blog, September 7, 2016; [related]: Big Oil is backing Hillary Clinton – By Emma Foehringer Merchant, Grist, September 7, 2016
• U.S. companies tout climate policies, fund climate skeptics – By Richard Valdmanis and Grant Smith, Reuters, September 6, 2016; [related]: New Reuters Exposé On Climate Change Denial Aims At Small Fry, Misses The Big One – By Tina Casey, Clean Technica, September 8, 2016 | Major corporations that claim to support climate action are funding politicians who oppose it – By Ben Adler, Grist, September 7, 2016 | U.S. Companies Publicly Support Climate Action, Privately Fund Deniers – By Natasha Geiling, Think Progress, September 6, 2016
• Conservative media bias is inflating American climate denial and polarization – By Dana Nuccitelli, The Guardian, September 6, 2016; [related]: Who's Driving Climate Denial? Big Companies and Conservative Media – By Jax Jacobsen, EcoWatch, September 6, 2016

Compiled by x344543 - IWW Environmental Unionism Caucus, August 24, 2016

A supplement to Eco Unionist News:

Lead Stories:

• As Sirens Go Off, Richmond Residents Fear the Worst - By Isabella Zizi, Richmond Pulse, August 17, 2016
• Prepare for TPP’s Big Brother: The Trade In Services Agreement - By Paola Casale, Economy in Crisis, August 17, 2016
• Can a 'green growth' strategy solve climate change? - Samuel Alexander interviewed by Ian Sinclair, Open Democracy, August 16, 2016
• An Indiana City Is Poised To Become The Next Flint - By Alex Zielinski, Think Progress, August 15, 2016
• Political revolution can stop Trans-Pacific Partnership - By Larry Cohen, Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement, August 15, 2016
• We have almost certainly blown the 1.5-degree global warming target - By Andrew King and Benjamin J. Henley, The Conversation, August 15, 2016
• Free People from ‘Dictatorship’ of the 0.01% - By Vandana Shiva, Common Dreams, August 10, 2016
• As Coal Mining Declines, Community Mental Health Problems Linger - By Roberta Attanasio, The Conversation, August 1, 2016

The Man Behind the Curtain:

• Ohio Residents Clash With State and County Government in Fight to Ban Fracking via the Ballot - By Simon Davis- Cohen, DeSmog Blog, August 20, 2016
• British Columbia’s cynical new climate plan proposes new fossil fuel subsidies and banks on climate catastrophe - By Alex Doukas, Oil Change International, August 19, 2016;  [related]: Christy Clark Hopes You’re Not Reading This - By Emma Gilchrist, DeSmog Canada, August 18, 2016
• Changing the Language of Renewable Energy, the Electric Monopoly’s Newest Ploy - By Nick Stumo- Langer, Institute for Local Self-Reliance, August 18, 2016
• Koch Brothers Waging War Against Local Effort to Expose Dark Money - By Lauren McCauley, Common Dreams, August 17, 2016
• Scott’s Undeclared Polluters’ Holiday Stains Florida - By Kirsten Stade, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, August 17, 2016
• The Steel Magnate Helping Trump Assail Pollution Regulations - By Marianne Lavelle, InsideClimate News, August 17, 2016
• Clinton Transition Team Headed by Anti-Climate 'Powerbroker' - By Nadia Prupis, Common Dreams, August 16, 2016; [related]: Clinton’s Transition Team: A Corporate Presidency Foretold - By Norman Solomon, Common Dreams, August 22, 2016 | Why Did Clinton Just Tap a Pro-TPP, Pro-KXL, Pro-Fracking Politician to Head Her Transition Team? - David Sirota interviewed by Juan González and Amy Goodman, Democracy Now!, August 17, 2016 | Clinton’s Salazar Pick Undermines Her Climate Promises, Putting Fracking Industry Before People - By Molly Dorozenski, EcoWatch, August 16, 2016
• Feeling Cornered, Coal Industry Borrows From Tobacco Playbook, Activists Say - By John Schwartz, New York Times, August 16, 2016
• Instead of Supporting Trump, Here's What the Koch Brothers Are Doing With Their $750 Million - By Climate Denier Roundup, EcoWatch, August 16, 2016; [related]: DeSmog Reporter Interviewed on Thom Hartmann About New Koch-Funded Initiative, Fueling U.S Forward - By Graham Readfearn, DeSmog Blog, August 18, 2016 |  As Renewables Soar, Oil Industry Launches New PR Offensive - By Andy Rowell, Oil Change International, August 16, 2016 | Koch bros want you to think fossil fuels are great for the whole family - By Katie Herzog, Grist, August 16, 2016
• Environmentalists split over Jay Faison and his push for “conservative clean energy” - By Ben Adler, Grist, August 15, 2016
• WEA lawsuit appears to blame BLM for low oil prices - By Chris Saeger, Western Values Project, August 12, 2016
• Why Bill Gates Is Hugely Misinformed About Renewables & Loves Impractical Nuclear - By Zachary Shahan, Clean Technica, August 11, 2016
• Ending Tax Dodging by Utilities Can Prompt Clean Energy Transition - By Janet Redman, The Real News Network, July 21, 2016

Green is the New Red:

• The spirit of Berta Cáceres: The power and playful defiance of Indigenous women at the World Social Forum - By Rachel Warden, Rabble.Ca, August 17, 2016
• Did federal agents spy on offshore oil lease protesters in New Orleans? - By Sue Sturgis, Facing South, August 11, 2016
• In Latin America, environmentalists are an endangered species - By Lindsay Fendt, Mongabay, August 11, 2016