评论
打印
While capitalists profit off of their destructive production choices, the people selling their labor power to those capitalists to survive, aka the working class, face the brunt of these companies’s destruction in the form of wage exploitation and workplace pollution that seeps out into communities and the environment.
当资本家从他们破坏性的生产选择中获利时，那些为了生存而向资本家出售劳动力的人，也就是工人阶级，面临着这些公司破坏的冲击，即工资剥削和渗透到社区和环境中的工作场所污染。
Unlike the rich who have the luxury of shielding themselves from the worst of the climate change they’ve caused, the working class often live in communities hit hardest by these crises.
面对富人引起的气候变化，富人本身拥有保护自己免受其最严重影响的优势，而没有这种优势的工人阶级往往生活在受这些危机影响最严重的社区。
They exist in what a working paper from the UN calls a “vicious cycle” of inequality, wherein initial inequality increases people’s exposure to climate hazards like droughts or hurricanes as well as increases the potential damage that those disasters could cause.
联合国的一份工作论文将他们的处境描述为不平等的“恶性循环”，即最初的不平等增加了人们遭受干旱或飓风等气候危害的风险，也加剧了这些灾害的潜在损害。
And once a disaster has passed this inequality decreases the ability of those who have been exploited to adequately recover from those disasters, making them even more vulnerable to the next crisis.
一旦灾难过去，这种不平等会降低那些被剥削的人从灾难中充分恢复的能力，使他们更容易受到下一场危机的影响。
Essentially, the centuries of dispossession of the working class at the hands of capitalists means they are especially vulnerable to the threats of climate change.
究其本质，工人阶级几世纪以来在资本家手中遭到的剥削，导致他们特别容易受到气候变化的威胁。
That UN working paper notes something interesting however: citing a community’s resilience in Bangladesh because of their access to a nearby communal mangrove forest, the authors write that “common property resources shared by the community can be an important part of a coping and recovery strategy of the climate affected people.”
然而，联合国的这份工作文件又指出了一些有趣的事情：该文作者提到了孟加拉国的一个社区，称该地拥有恢复能力的原因在于当地人可以进入附近的公共红树林，该作者写道：“该社区共享的共同财产资源，可以成为受气候影响的人们应对气候变化并恢复自身状态的重要战略。”
So, the more control communities have over resources and the points of production, the more resilient they are in the face of climate change.
因此，社区对资源和产地的控制越多，他们应对气候变化的恢复能力就越强。
So not only does the concentration of control of production in the hands of the few lead to unsustainable practices, but it hamstrings our ability to be resilient in the face of disaster.
因此，将生产控制权集中在少数人手中不仅会产生不可持续的生产方式，还会削弱我们在面临灾难时的恢复能力。
But unfortunately, environmental policymakers seem to ignore that climate chaos is rooted in the unequal possession of production concentrated in the hands of the few.
但不幸的是，环境保护政策制定者似乎忽视了这样一个事实，即气候混乱的根源是集中在少数人手中不平等的生产资料占有权。
In November of 2018, the famous Parisian Champs-Elysees turned into a hellscape.
2018年11月，著名的巴黎香榭丽舍大道变成了地狱。
Burning cars set the night aflame as protesters wearing yellow vests clashed against heavily armed riot police.
当身穿黄色背心的抗议者与全副武装的防暴警察发生冲突时，燃烧的汽车点亮了夜晚。
This was the beginning of the yellow vest protests that rocked France for months.
这就是震动法国数月的黄色背心抗议活动的开始。
These protests are a perfect example of why environmental action needs to address class inequality.
这些抗议完美说明了为什么环境行动需要解决阶级不平等问题。
Sparked by Emmanuel Macron’s environmental proposal of raising the gasoline tax, millions of working class French folk took to the streets.
埃马纽埃尔·马克龙提出的提高汽油税的环保提议，引发了数百万法国工人阶级走上街头抗议。
Their reason was quite simple: The fuel tax was yet another proposed policy that disproportionately burdened people who were barely making ends meet.
他们抗议的理由很简单：提高汽油税不过就是进一步给勉强维持生计的人雪上加霜的又一项政策。
In the words of one of the yellow vest protestors, while the “elites are talking about the end of the world, we are talking about the end of the month.”
用一位黄色背心抗议者的话说：“当精英们在谈论世界末日时，我们连月底都挺不过去。”
So, even though Macron was trying to create action that might reduce emissions, it did so in a way that demanded the working class consume less while capitalists who owned the fossil fuel companies and car production facilities that are actually driving emissions got away relatively unscathed.
因此，尽管马克龙正试图想出办法来减少排放，但他想出的办法是要求工人阶级减少资源消耗，而拥有化石燃料公司和实际推动排放的汽车生产设施的资本家却毫发无损。
Macron’s fuel tax fell into the carbon footprint trap.
马克龙的燃油税落入了碳足迹陷阱。
It tried to change people’s choices at the point of consumption rather than addressing the few rich folks who make choices for millions at the point of production.
它试图改变人们在消费方面的选择，而不是解决少数富人在生产时为数百万人做出选择的问题。
We will never build power and create change by telling someone who’s living paycheck to paycheck to pay more for gas or give up driving to work.
我们永远不会让那些靠薪水过活的人多付油钱，或放弃开车上班，以此来建立权力和创造变化。
What’s interesting is that the yellow vests are a collection of people across the political spectrum.
有趣的是，穿黄色背心的人来自不同的政治派别。
They reveal that class can be a powerful tool of solidarity.
这表明，阶级可以成为团结民众的强大工具。
But they also demonstrate that solutions to climate change that focus on individual consumption are unpopular and not effective because they disproportionally hurt the wallets of the working class.
但这也表明，以个人消费为重点的气候变化解决方案不受欢迎，也没有效果，因为它们严重损害了工人阶级的财产。
The politics of the gas tax, and of the carbon footprint, are ultimately a politics of less for the masses.
燃油税和碳足迹的政治手段，对大众来说归根结底是一种少数人的政治手段。
In order to truly dismantle the power of the rich, to reverse their environmental impact, we need a politics of more.
为了真正瓦解富人的权力，扭转他们对环境的影响，我们需要一种多数人的政治手段。
We need to establish democratic control of the means of production.
我们需要建立生产资料的民主管理制度。
