|
Staff Contributors
Guest Contributors
|
||||
Green movements or green paintChina's central government faces a choice between democracy and eco-collapsePosted by Jon Rynn (Guest Contributor) at 11:07 AM on 27 Aug 2007"Choking on Growth" is the apt title of the new New York Times series on the "human toll, global impact and political challenge of China's epic pollution crisis." Epic, indeed. The first installment shows how "As China Roars, Pollution Reaches Deadly Extremes." The statistics are daunting: Public health is reeling. Pollution has made cancer China's leading cause of death... Nearly 500 million people lack access to safe drinking water. Chinese cities often seem wrapped in a toxic gray shroud. Only 1 percent of the country's 560 million city dwellers breathe air considered safe by the European Union... China has become the world's biggest producer of greenhouse gases, much of it from its coal-powered plants -- and if you think that Coal Is Evil, you will see pictorial confirmation in the slideshow with the article. There is one statistic I actually find encouraging: "Officials blame fetid air and water for thousands of episodes of social unrest." To borrow an idea from Paul Hawken's latest book Blessed Unrest, it is as if Chinese society is building an immune system that rejects the damage being done to its ecosystems. But if history is any guide, the existence of dictatorship will make the work of these social antibodies more difficult. After all, the worst ecological damage in the world occurred within the Soviet Union. In China, the problem of active state suppression of environmental activism is combined with China's age-old problem: how to control the world's largest political system. The NYT gives an example of the problem: Provincial officials, who enjoy substantial autonomy, often ignore environmental edicts, helping to reopen mines or factories closed by central authorities. Over all, enforcement is often tinged with corruption. This spring, officials in Yunnan Province in southern China beautified Laoshou Mountain, which had been used as a quarry, by spraying green paint over acres of rock. Even if the central government wanted to change course -- and the article details evidence that a sizeable faction within the ruling elite does -- it can't force the provinces to change. The only way the provinces will change is if the provinces become democratic, because only grassroots pressure can lead to the kinds of changes in China that will prevent eco-collapse. In other words, the Chinese Communist Party is faced with a stark choice: they either allow the democracy that was suppressed in Tianamen square in 1989 to spread throughout the society, or the corruption and greed that are endemic in local jurisdictions will strangle the Chinese economy. The NYT comes to pretty much the same conclusion, if not as explicitly: China's authoritarian system has repeatedly proved its ability to suppress political threats to Communist Party rule. But its failure to realize its avowed goals of balancing economic growth and environmental protection is a sign that the country's environmental problems are at least partly systemic, many experts and some government officials say. China cannot go green, in other words, without political change. In other words, it's either free green movements or more green paint.
You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.
|
sign in
Search Gristmill
Using Gristmill
Recent Comments
|
|||