Repost: Fighting With Broken Weapons

This blog, The Well Run Dry, started out to be a blog ostensibly about resource depletion.  I have to admit that it has morphed into something of a social commentary on the tantrums being thrown by a certain demographic of the Global North (and of the United States in particular) in response to the inevitable and irresistible shifting of their place in the world.  For a certain key segment of this demographic - namely, those aligned with white American evangelicalism - the tantrums have been spectacular.  Just this week a former policeman in Texas was arrested after running an air conditioning repairman off the road and threatening him at gunpoint.  Why did he do it?  Because he erroneously believed that the air conditioning repairman was smuggling fraudulent ballots.  Yet another cop goes to jail.  And if you want to see more criminal behavior, note that U.S. taxpayers were forced this past year to support "struggling" megachurches whose revenue took a hit due to the coronavirus pandemic.  Thank Donald Trump for that.  I'm glad we the people of the United States were able to put a smile on Joel Osteen's face.  Otherwise, he might have thrown a great big tantrum.

All this has me thinking of a blog post I wrote over a decade ago concerning the difference between the supposed mission of the white American evangelical church and its actual aims - the aims sought by the politicians whom white evangelical pastors tell us we must support.  Here is a link to that post.  Enjoy.

From D to D, Chapter 4: Power Analysis

This post is a continuation of our commentary and "study guide" for the book From Dictatorship to Democracy by Dr. Gene Sharp.  In this series of posts, I have shortened the title of the book to From D to D.  The consideration of this book is highly relevant for these times, in which Donald Trump, a would-be autocrat and oppressor who wanted to Make America Great Again by trashing all the nonwhite people and poor people on earth, has lost his attempt to have the United States Supreme Court overturn his election loss.  Trump's late-game strategic goal has been the goal of the Republican Party and the Global Far Right for a very long time: namely, to create a world in which a select few get to Make Themselves Great by exploiting everyone else.  Their strategic method has been to disenfranchise as many people as possible in order to cement the control of the "chosen few."  And although Trump's legal challenges have largely failed, the Republican Party is actively planning measures for further disenfranchisement of the poor and the nonwhite who live in the United States.  Therefore, it is up to us who are not counted among these "chosen few" to learn to organize ourselves in order to thwart the power of the few and to ensure the emergence of a world which is shared equally by all of its peoples.

We have been considering Chapter 4 of From D to D.  The title of Chapter 4 is "Dictatorships Have Weaknesses."  After a brief review of the weaknesses identified by Sharp, we discussed the fact that dictatorships have learned to adjust their tactics over the years, and that this highlights the need for democratic resisters to engage in a careful strategic analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the autocratic regimes they are resisting, as well as the strengths and weaknesses of the democratic resistance group.  This strategic analysis is known by the terms "power analysis" and "power mapping" by students of community organizing.  

The basis of this analysis is the recognition that a ruling elite depends on the subjects whom it rules, and that the power which this elite exerts over its subjects is based on the extent to which the elite can make its subjects dependent on the elite.  This principle is stated in a number of Gene Sharp's writings, including his three-volume work titled, The Politics of Nonviolent Action.  A variant of this insight has also been stated by Marshall Ganz, who said that systems of oppression always depend on the people they exploit.  The relative degree of dependence of each side on the other side determines the relative power each side has over the other.  As Ganz says in his community organizing curriculum materials, if you need my resources more than I need your resources, I have potential power over you.  If I need your resources more than you need my resources, you have potential power over me.  Consider the case in which a few people hold control over a large body of resources needed by the many.  This is exactly the case when a rich but small elite holds power over a large mass of poor people.  Each member of the rich elite holds much more power per capita than each member of the poor masses.  However, if the members of the poor masses organize to withhold from the rich elite the aggregate fruits of their labor on which that rich elite depends, the poor masses can control, curtail, and even shatter the power of that rich elite.

Thus the first questions of a power analysis are these (taken from "Speaking of Power - the Gettysburg Project" by Marshall Ganz):

• What change do we want?
• Who has the resources to create that change?
• What do they want?
• What resources do we have that they want or need?
• What's our theory of change?  In other words, how can we organize our resources to give us enough leverage to get what we want?  Or, how will what we are doing lead to the change we want to see?  "Theory of change" is another term for strategy, which Gene Sharp discusses in Chapters 6 through 8 of From D to D.

Additional questions related to the existing exercises of power in a pre-existing oppressive society are these:

• Who usually wins?
• Who usually gets to set agendas?
• Who usually benefits or loses from the decisions of the powerful?

The answer to these three questions reveal to the democratic resisters the three faces of power as seen in the oppressed society prior to the beginning of a liberation struggle.  The third face of power frequently forms the psychological backdrop of an oppressive society, the understanding by the oppressed of "the way things just are."  All three faces must be challenged by those who resist an oppressive system.

The relations of power and dependence can be captured visually by means of a map of actors.  An example of such a map is shown below:

Map of actors.

Graphic created by me, adapted from the work of Marshall Ganz.

Click on it to make it larger.

Such a map is a great aid in tracing dependencies and beginning to identify the most promising points at which to begin a nonviolent attack against an oppressive regime.  This is key to the creation of a viable strategy which has the greatest chance of success.

Veteran organizer Jane McAlevey elaborates on the concept of power analysis (which she calls power structure analysis) in her book No Shortcuts: Organizing for Power In the New Gilded Age.  She makes the very important point that a key reason for power analysis is to map the power your side will need to generate in order to get the members of a rich elite to change goals that are very important to these elites.  To make this point, she quotes Joseph Luders' book The Civil Rights Movement and the Logic of Social Change, in which he asserted that "the most successful organizing drives in the civil rights movement...were those that carried high economic concession costs for the racist regime, that is, those by which movement actors could inflict a high degree of economic pain."  Therefore, a goal of mapping power is to determine first, how much it will cost the members of the elite to grant the demands of the resisters, and second, how much economic disruption and pain the resisters must inflict on the members of the elite in order to make the cost of that disruption greater than the cost to the elites of granting the resisters' demands.  Knowing how these two costs compare to each other before beginning a resistance campaign is key to beginning to formulate an effective strategy of disruption.

Lastly, the mapping of power and dependence serves as a starting point for the democratic resisters to strategize how to reduce their dependence on the ruling elite as much as possible.  This reduction of dependence further weakens the power the elite has over the oppressed society.

The next post in this series will begin to delve into Chapter 5 of From D to D.  Feel free to read ahead.  And feel free to read some of the books I mentioned in this post.  Also, here's a link to another community organizing study guide based on the teaching of Marshall Ganz.  And last, but not least, here's some homework: Study the Cochabamba Water War which took place in Bolivia in 1999 and 2000.  Here and here are sources which describe the conflict.  (Feel free to find other sources as well.)  See if you can identify a map of actors and their interests, resources, and dependencies.  How did the poor Bolivian peasants identify the Achilles' heel of their opponents?  How did they reduce their dependence on their opponents?

The Gross Polluter of the North

Jalopy car in Joshua Tree National Park

Image by Jarek Tuszynski

Posted to Wikimedia Commons on 28 December 2008 under a 

Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license

"Jalopy": an old car in a dilapidated condition.  Definition by Oxford Languages.  Synonyms: "rust bucket", carcancha.  Rust buckets are often "gross polluters" - that is, cars that can't pass smog or DEQ tests no matter how much money you throw at them.  I know this, because many years ago, when I was still living in Southern California and I was a dirt-poor undergraduate college student, I drove one.

As we look at what are hopefully the last gasps of the Trump presidency, I think it is helpful to explore the role that the Russian government played in Trump's initial rise to power, as well as the motivations which the Russians had for playing that role.  Trump showed himself to be every bit a "blast-from-the-past" racist, bigot, big-shot Republican, friend of the rich, and anti-environmentalist.  In this, he was a mirror of the regime and mindset of Vladimir Putin.  I have previously traced on this blog the motivations for the racism and revanchism ("Let's Make Ourselves Great Again!") of both these men.  (See this, this, and this, for instance.  Also see this by Olga Doroshenko.)  Trump's friendliness toward the rich has obvious motives.  But why did the Russians see fit to help the rise of such a rabid anti-environmentalist?

As I have considered this question over the last few weeks, I have come to the conclusion that the anti-environmental motives of Trump and Putin have less to do with deep psychological causes than with a certain perverted pragmatism.  Let's look at that pragmatism from a Russian perspective, and we'll start with the current state of the Russian economy.  According to Investopedia, Russia's economy in March 2020 was smaller than any of the top ten national economies in the world.  (It is interesting to note that each of the economies of India and Brazil is larger than that of Russia.)  And according to a 2018 Forbes article, Russia's economy is smaller than that of the U.S. state of Texas.  However, the Russian economy is still very heavily dependent on the export of minerals, whereas the economy of Texas is more diversified.  (Don't let that make you complacent if you live in Texas - the U.S. economy also has certain weaknesses, which I will continue to explore in future posts.)  The Russian economy has not been able to transition to reliance on export of high-value manufactured goods, despite recent dubious Russian claims of having invented a coronavirus vaccine.  

To see how dependent Russia is on exports of raw materials, consider the top ten Russian exports according to this source:

1. Mineral fuels including oil (52.2 percent of total exports)
2. Iron, steel (4.3 percent)
3. Gems, precious metals (3.6 percent)
4. Machinery including computers (2.1 percent)
5. Wood (2 percent)
6. Fertilizers (2 percent)
7. Cereals (1.9 percent)
8. Aluminum (1.4 percent)
9. Electrical machinery & equipment (1.3 percent)
10. Copper (1.2 percent)

As can be seen, the export of finished high-value manufactured goods comprises only 3.4 percent of the total value of Russian exports.  The bulk of the export revenue earned by Russia consists of sales of mineral fuels including oil.

But there's a problem.  While it is certainly true that the global peak of production of conventional oil has certainly passed, it is also true that advances in renewable energy technology have made this peak far less relevant and far less disruptive to industrial societies overall than many of the "peakists" were predicting from 2007 onward.  In fact, the German Energy Watch Group, which correctly tracked the peaking of global conventional oil production, also correctly tracked the rise in use of renewables, particularly solar photovoltaic power production.  This rise in use is being driven by continued advances in solar PV cell manufacturing and battery storage which are driving down the cost of solar PV systems and making them affordable to ever-wider markets.

This presents a big problem for countries whose wealth is predicated so heavily on a foundation of exporting mineral fuels.  I would like to suggest the possibility that the power base of Russian elites relies heavily on the foundation of the extraction and sale of raw materials including oil, gas, and other mineral fuels, and that developments which threaten global markets for these resources or which drive down the price of these resources are a serious threat to the survival of the members of these Russian elites.  It is therefore interesting to note the connection between climate science denialism and the positions of many (but certainly not all) of the most prominent members of the Global Far Right.

Thus it is that in Russia, according to a June 2020 Moscow Times article, renewables (excluding hydropower) account for only 0.16 percent of electric energy production.  Investment in renewable energy installation is almost completely nonexistent.  On the other hand, China is one of the world's leading investors in wind and solar energy, and is a major manufacturer of solar and wind energy conversion equipment.  China is also poised to take the lead in innovative renewable energy technologies.  Thus, the future looks bright for Chinese plans to transition to a non-polluting future, according to this August 2020 Forbes article.  And China is by no means the only nation investing in renewable energy technology.  

Therefore technological advances, serious investments, and the emergence of global climate preservation movements have threatened a key source of Russian export revenue.  Let's consider one potential implication of a successful "Green New Deal": a reversal of Arctic sea ice loss that is potentially great enough to deny Russian access to hypothetical mineral deposits as far north as the North Pole.  Putin showed his own belief in climate change by laying claim to these mineral deposits as far back as 2001 - a claim which the Russian government renewed in 2015.  If the Arctic sea ice returns to anything like its normal non-climate-altered extent, that spells the end for cheap and easy Russian access to additional mineral resources.

Let's close with a snapshot of pollution in Russia, which has recently been "enjoying" record high levels of air pollution (including a city which routinely has the dirtiest air on the planet) and coastal waters that are sickening surfers and killing thousands of animals.  A small price to pay in order to keep certain elites in power, eh?  And now you can understand the helpfulness of the Trump administration toward those Russian elites in the rolling back U.S. vehicle fuel economy standards this year.