Articles by David Roberts

Julieclipse, R.I.P.

Gristmill reader Julieclipse wrote what follows, intending to post it on this thread. She died in a automobile accident before she had the chance. Thanks to her boyfriend for sharing it with us.

Rest in peace, Julia. Your hope and humanity are an inspiration.

Progressive realism

Check out Robert Wilson's essay on "progressive realism" in the Sunday NYT.

The basic idea is that ...

... the national interest can be served by constraints on America's behavior when they constrain other nations as well. This logic covers the spectrum of international governance, from global warming (we'll cut carbon dioxide emissions if you will) to war (we'll refrain from it if you will).

And it is based on a fundamental change in international relations:

[T]echnology has been making the world's nations more interdependent — or, as game theorists put it, more non-zero-sum. That is, America's fortunes are growing more closely correlated with the fortunes of people far away; fewer games have simple win-lose outcomes, and more have either win-win or lose-lose outcomes.

This principle lies at the heart of progressive realism. A correlation of fortunes — being in the same boat with other nations in matters of economics, environment, security — is what makes international governance serve national interest. It is also what makes enlightened self-interest de facto humanitarian.

Word.

Jacobs does Gore

You have to wade through a painful Flash site to see them, and go to San Francisco to buy them, but hipster designer Marc Jacobs has a line of Al Gore t-shirts, tote bags, and trucker hats (click on "special items"). Apparently they're all the rage this season.

Are there Gristmill readers in San Francisco? Email me.

(via The Notion)

Hertsgaard on the environmental movement

Mark Hertsgaard's cover story in The Nation this week is a long look at the current fortunes and reconfigurations of the environmental movement: "Green Goes Grassroots."

To eco-geeks like yours truly, it's a familiar story: the movement realizes it's gotten top-heavy and D.C.-centric, too reliant on wonky techno-language, too depressing, and too insular. So it is:

• pouring more money and resources into supporting local organizing;
• trying to speak in simple language;
• focusing on solutions and can-do spirit; and
• creating alliances with a variety of other interest groups.

I've heard all this before. My worry has been that it is, in a phrase made famous by hapless terrorist wannabes loudly arrested by the Bushies in the run-up to the mid-terms, "more aspirational than operational." Hertsgaard's piece does marshal some solid examples, but not quite enough to make a convincing case there's a real, broad, sustained change taking place. I hope there is.

The piece touches briefly on a subject that's extremely important and too-little-discussed inside the movement (for obvious reasons): the role of foundations. This captures the problem well: