I am yet to be convinced that capitalism is the cause of climate change. Climate change is an evolution of the earth just as we humans are evolving. Capitalism has provided many of us living in Australia with choices. We can choose what products we wish to buy, how much water we use on our gardens, what forms of transport we take. There are times when i think the green movement has become so fearful, that it becomes undemocratic itself.

Liz
You fall into to the same hole most people do. Humanity is facing some serious global problems. The only way (I think) to overcome them is if we all (left/right, capitalist/socialist, theists/atheists, us/them, etc) work together in tackling them. There is really no point in bashing and blaming the "other side" if you need their help.

It's not easy, but leaders of the world's governments, major cities and captains of industry are trying via the UNFCCC process. The relatively short term problem of the global financial crisis will impact on this process, but the bigger issues remain.

I really can't see how your article (or movement) can engender support (that is required) from the very people you pillory. All I see is another rant that tries to use political ideology to draw lines in the sand when in fact something else is more important - the environmental, ecological and economic sustainability of the planet.

reforming capitalism is futile
it must under the market it rules by
be let to devour its own young

without workers nothing happens[but just name anything the govt couldnt provide better than some greedy banker seeking his highest return?

we have let the american nightmare become a dream, yes you get it all [and all paid for via a credit card [but if your debt increases more than your wages [then you loose it all][the rich as much as those they trod upon to gain it

we DONT need capitalists THEY NEED US

govt can plan damms , can and did build, the railways , the comunication pipes, the roads, BUT then did give to their mates the assets GOVT DID BUILD[that the people paid for and built once [now must pay off for the thief that STOLE IT via indexed price increases]

we NEED govt do do that buisness didnt see enough return for to do.
govt thus would better be getting on with doing what needs to be done

capitalists are bankrupted by their own need for ever more[by them doing ever less] they only rule over their advisers ,govt could better rule over them for their peoples betterment[not subsidising a failed[bankrupted] system

just to have it collase again in 7 years time
BOOM?BUST

in the process removing yet again the things we earned but never actually bothered paying for[thus we lost]the rich only lost more , but be it their fancy mansion[or humble dirt floor hut] what system can in all morality take away a mans home?[take away 10,000 americans homes each day]

rerform the rules of ursury

no one should be morrally obligated to repay intrest over 10 percent[that is pure capitalistic EXCESS]

Having read both of the articles by Liz, I can see that there is a lot of idealism there. Not necessarily a bad thing, but let's get a bit real.

While I am not a fan of out-and-out capitalism, I also don't subscribe to socialist doctrine either. One suggests a complete level of individualism that would lead to disastrous levels of greed along woth financial and mental burtality. This is likley to to lead to physical clashes in the long run. The other puts people in their 'boxes' and tells them they have to be happy with their lot in life, a recipe for much then same as the first option.

The government's role is to reign in capitalism to something that is manageable, and mix in bits and pieces of social doctrine to enure those less fortunate or broken members of society are not swept to oneside in the rush for the dollar. We would all, I would hope, like to see the problems of hunger and poverty solved, and a capitalist approach certainly wouldn't achieve this, and nor would a socialist approach. It's a mix, and it's a delicate balance. One which has not been achieved anywhere yet.

Once again ignoring the base cause of the worlds problems as seen by the socialists.
The world cannot support 6 billion people living the life style of the western world, yet this is the lifestyle that the workers of the world aspire to.
A Demographer's conferrence held in Canberra around 2004 came to the conclusion that the world could support sustainably, at western lifestyle levels, about 2 billion people.
It seem's arrogant on the part of SA to tell Rural Chinnese, Indians Indonesians, Africans etc etc that they will have to stay outside the room and just look in through the window at how workers in Europe, America, Australia, etc live.
Until groups like the Socialist Alt address the population issue the rest of the argument is moot.

“force companies to go green with legislation that has real teeth or use financial incentives to encourage sustainable production.”

Should government "force" companies, beyond the right of government to regulate and legislate?

Bearing in mind “companies” employ the majority of the electorate, should not there be some room for ‘listening’ and reflecting the will of the electorate, rather than ‘forcing’?

“So if the ruling class cannot provide the answers” here we go again. . . .

Wedge politics

Like “Workers and bosses”

“And more specifically it’s workers’ labour power that is the source of profit that the system so relies on.”

No it is the risk capital which the employer deploys and uses to fund the workers pay, rent or buy premises and equipment, fund debtors and stock (all easily seen in a start-up situation), before anything is even sold, which is the “source of profit”.

“Marx famously puts it” but Marx is a discredited moron.

“small numbers of active socialists around today” and hopefully turning extinct (probably because no one with any sense would breed with them).

“To begin to build a socialist society that can lay the basis for a sustainable world for the whole planet.”

Well, maybe the best thing is they cannot breed, “sustainability” is directly linked to population numbers