Election Season 2020
A Letter-To-The-Editor NOT printed by the L.A. Times
Behind the scenes, in ways I cannot fathom, the LA Times is linked to a globalist, pro-capitalist agenda. Despite that, they occasionally do allow for alternative points-of-view — sometimes in guest editorials and especially with letters-to-the-editor. However, at critical moments, such as the lead-up to the 2020 election, it appears they have little or no room for alternative points-of-view.
This year from the day the Primary elections ended, the Times has been promoting one theme, every day: Biden Biden Biden. Joe Biden is, should be, will be, and must be the next President of the United States. One of their daily pro-Biden articles, published October 20, was entitled, In Biden, a climate ally. Democrat would propel the state ’s energy goals. Reporters Evan Halper and Anna M. Phillips describe giant batteries for storing solar and wind power, and other technologies that a Biden administration will pursue to combat global warming. Okay, who can argue with that?
Here’s what I wrote about it, in a Letter To The Editor which I mailed in on October 22. It’s a letter which the LA Times would not print. For your version, I added in the sentences about Wisconsin and Peru.
Re “In Biden, a climate ally,” October 20.
By promising to pass Comprehensive Immigration Reform, the Biden campaign is on the verge of skyrocketing the U.S. population level toward 400 million making it nearly impossible for this country to get its environmental problems under control. What kind of climate ally is that?! In the State of Wisconsin, the Democratic Party went to court to keep the Green Party candidates off the ballot, and they succeeded! A climate ally who stifles the Green Party?! The party of Biden and Harris consistently votes to renew military aid to Colombia — a country where environmental activists, labor leaders. and revolutionaries are getting gunned down, almost on a daily basis. The Democratic Party also votes each year to renew military aid to Peru — where three or possibly four environmental protesters got shot down in September 2015.
This year Californians have two parties on the ballot with the courage to stand up and oppose the environment-destroying world capitalist system: the Peace-and-Freedom Party, and the Green Party. These parties strongly oppose the imperialist military interventions in Latin America and around the world. Unfortunately on the issue of international migration, these two parties make the same mistake as the Democrats or sometimes try to outdo the Democrats.
US revolutionaries should support migration policies that will help people cope with the unfair, unequal world of today, while the revolutionary world of tomorrow gets on its feet — in countries like Cuba, Nicaragua, Bolivia, and now Mexico. We should support migration policies that treat all people decently while discouraging continued permanent immigration.
Revolutionary citizens of he high-paying countries need to make sacrifices, to support the changes now underway in revolutionary countries. We need to make financial sacrifices to help those countries succeed. That includes environmental success!
Steven T. Edinger, Los Angeles
Editor’s reply: While we agree that PFP and the Green Party oppose the environment-destroying global capitalist system, and Biden doesn’t, Comprehensive Immigration Reform is not a threat to the environment, whatever else may be wrong with it. The US carbon and generally anti-environment footprint is not based primarily on its population, but on its military — biggest polluter on the planet, including greenhouse gases — and its corporations, including the ones that operate in some of the countries you mention, where the environmental costs should be added to the US “ledger”, since US investment and capital flight means exporting US pollution and CO2 to other countries without diminishing its global impact on heating the planet and its oceans. The argument is made that because, per capita, people in the US produce more waste, adding population from other countries where they pollute less per capita will increase pollution. But poor people anywhere pollute less than wealthy people anywhere. Agreed that the US should stop funding repression and exploitation in Mexico, Colombia and elsewhere; but ending acceptance of refugees or immigrants cannot be dressed up as “environmentalism.” People have migrated from time immemorial and will continue to do so, just as butterflies, birds and whales do (and in both, or all, directions). Best to work on demilitarizing, decarbonizing and decarcerating the US economy, building affordable and environmentally sound housing, and ending US economic predation against the rest of the world.
