This article was downloaded by: [Temple University Libraries]On: 10 September 2013, At: 11:45Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

International Critical ThoughtPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rict20

A class approach to ecological crisisMarc Brodine aa Social Activist, New York, USAPublished online: 30 Mar 2012.

To cite this article: Marc Brodine (2012) A class approach to ecological crisis, International CriticalThought, 2:1, 63-70, DOI: 10.1080/21598282.2012.660054

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21598282.2012.660054

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

A class approach to ecological crisis

Marc Brodine∗

Social Activist, New York, USA

Humanity is inextricably linked to the natural world on which we depend. We are facingenvironmental issues that threaten human development. Sustainable economics are not aboutsustainable profits for the few, they are about what is best for all humankind. Environmentalissues are also class issues – struggles over political and economic power, control, anddecision-making. The working class has a crucial role to play in the fight to save the earth’scapacity to provide the essentials of life. Socialists must address the new challenges posedby the latest ecological science, by the limits on growth required by nature’s limits.

Keywords: environment; class struggle; socialism

In his graveside address for Marx, Frederick Engels (1883) noted that Marx discovered the law ofdevelopment of human history: the simple fact, hitherto concealed by an overgrowth of ideology,that mankind must first of all eat, drink, have shelter and clothing, before it can pursue politics,science, art, religion, etc.

These are the fundamental realities of all human life: our lives are based on food, water, andresources that come from nature. As well, the ways in which we create and distribute food, drink,and shelter impact the natural world we depend on. We need nature for our survival. If the airbecomes too polluted for human health, we cannot simply breathe something else. Pollutionthat is blown away is blown away to somewhere else; it does not just disappear. We cannotjust stop eating. We require clean water daily. This understanding must underpin our views on‘politics, science, art, religion, etc.’, as well as our views on economics, class struggle, andsocialism.

Humans are not separate from their environment, and the environments of different countriesare not separate from each other. What we experience in one region of the world is intimately con-nected to what people experience in other regions. What happens to natural global systemshappens to all of us.

All value to humanity comes either directly from nature or from nature altered by humanlabor. If we compromise nature’s ability to regenerate the materials we need for our survival,we compromise our own ability to survive. We face a series of linked environmental problems– climate change, water use, soil depletion – which have the potential to negatively affect sealevels, weather systems, our ability to grow food and drink water, and other essential aspectsof human life. We cannot endlessly alter the balance of natural systems like the atmosphere orthe oceans without suffering the consequences of that alteration.

ISSN 2159-8282 print/ISSN 2159-8312 online

# 2012 Chinese Academy of Social Scienceshttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21598282.2012.660054

http://www.tandfonline.com

∗Email: marcbrodine@inlandnet.com

International Critical ThoughtVol. 2, No. 1, March 2012, 63–70

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

11:

45 1

0 Se

ptem

ber

2013

Human survival requires a rebalancing of human activity with natural systems and resources.The list of environmental problems and crises that humanity faces is long and growing: globalclimate change; decreasing agricultural yields; increasing water stresses; the accumulation of per-sistent organic pollutants in the water, soil, and air; depletion and destruction of fisheries; oceanacidification; the depletion of many kinds of non-renewable resources; annihilation of manyspecies of plants and animals; increases in extreme weather events; rapid increases in urbanizationwithout corresponding increases in water and sewage infrastructure; destructive mining practices;deforestation; and more. The reality is that the world can no longer afford our current energysystems, our current financial system, our current industrial system. All these and more willhave to change in order for the balance of humanity with nature to readjust to sustainable levels.

Issues of building the capacity to save the planet from environmental devastation are issues ofdemocratic power for the majority. This means power for workers, their families, and poor peoplewho together make up the vast majority of all societies.

Humanity in general is not causing these problems. Capitalism, in addition to exploitinghuman nature, relies on ever-expanding markets, ever-expanding production of commodities,ever-expanding development, and ever-expanding growth of private profit, which are all rootcauses of the imbalance with nature. Short-term, short-sighted calculations of profit, as the solemeasure of value, underlie many of the crises which affect humanity. Capitalism operates onseveral deadly assumptions: that nature is ‘free’, that natural resources are limitless, that thewaste-absorbing capacity of nature is infinite, that economic activity and the natural world areseparate, that short-term profit is more important than long-term sustainability, that economicprofit can be reasonably calculated while ignoring social and environmental costs borne bysociety as a whole, and that the production of more commodities without end represents real pro-gress. These are in addition to the human exploitation and oppression capitalism engenders andprofits from.

There are direct human costs of capitalism, but there are also serious indirect costs, ascapitalist production and agriculture exploit the non-renewable resources we depend upon inan ever-speedier race to catastrophe.

Capitalism is the root cause of most of the environmental problems we face, and the biggestobstacle to finding real solutions. To counter the power of the capitalist class and its control of thelevers of power in much of the world, the organized power of the working class is the only forcecapable of saving humanity from capitalism.

This is why environmental issues are working-class issues, and why supposed solutions whichignore the class divisions in society can at best only postpone the worst impacts of globalwarming, the spread of persistent organic pollutants all over the world, and other environmentalcrises that face all of humanity. Without the organized force of the working class, we are stuckwith an unsustainable economic system which will cause ever-increasing environmentalcatastrophes.

We can either work with nature, or nature will work against us. Nature does not ‘care’ abouthumanity; humanity must care about nature. We must work to enable nature to sustain us.

Limitations of environmental discussion

Most discussions of global climate change and other serious environmental challenges arelimited. The problems are seen as problems of human interaction with natural systems (whichthey are) or as problems in need of technological solutions (which they are). But little is doneto connect any of this to our economic and social systems. In a private property system, whenwe collectively face problems that need collective solutions (and it does not get much biggeror more collective than global climate change, both on the problem side and the required solution

64 M. Brodine

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

11:

45 1

0 Se

ptem

ber

2013

side), we run into private property rights and private decision-making about production, land use,resources, disposal of waste, and investment. We also run into the limits of capitalist-funded pol-itical systems.

Much of the agitation and media discussion of global warming and other ecological crisespromote a valuable goal: educating the public about the gravity of these problems and theneed for action. However, most of that publicity blames the problem on ‘overpopulation’ or‘excessive consumption’. This lets the capitalist system off the hook, and in the long rundefeats the goal of decreasing the amounts of greenhouse gases, the main immediate causes ofglobal warming, and of solving the other symptoms of the imbalanced human relationshipwith the environment on which we depend.

Approaches that blame ‘people’ in general fail to address the underlying causes of globalwarming. Few people, in any country, have or had much to do with the decisions that are causingmany rapidly-developing environmental crises. Those decisions were private decisions, made bycapitalists and their managers. As long as that continues to be the case, efforts to slow globalwarming and solve other environmental problems will fall far short of the fundamental transform-ations needed in our economic, political, agricultural, industrial, transportation, and social systems.

International environmental problems are often explained using gross averages, which end upconcealing more than they reveal. When figures for ‘average per capita energy consumption’ areused to compare the ‘energy footprint’ of people in different parts of the world, those averagesconceal the gross differentials in energy usage within countries, and conceal who has decision-making authority over industrial production, energy production, distribution systems, andnational environmental policy. The average person in the United States has no more of a rolein deciding whether or not to build another coal-fired electricity generating plant than theaverage person in Indonesia plays in deciding how much of the rainforest to cut down. Theaverage North American plays no more of a role in setting up the systems that require constantcar use by individuals (suburbs, lack of public transportation, long commutes) than the averagesub-Saharan African plays in setting up the systems (or lack thereof) that result in cuttingdown precious trees to make charcoal.

Most people are relegated to the role of victims, victims who are blamed for the problems towhich they are subjected. People are blamed for a profligate lifestyle while corporations advertiseendlessly for more consumer spending, more consumer debt, and more consumer behavior thatignores the effects of the increasing burden on the environment.

Class aspects of environmental problems

What are some of the main class aspects of environmental issues? One, while the main per capitaemitters of greenhouse gases are the United States, Australia, Japan, and Western Europe, themain victims of global warming, at least in the early stages, are in the poorest countries. Thosepoorest nations are most negatively affected by capitalist resource extraction, by imperialistoppression, by the history of European colonialism, by the problems of international debt(which benefits the major capitalist banks), and by living the closest to the edge of survivalalready. Sometimes portrayed as a ‘North–South’ issue, this reality follows identically thecenters of financial power and the current pathways of international trade.

Justice, fairness, and basic human decency are all affronted by efforts to blame the globalwarming crisis on ‘too many people’. Acknowledging this is basic humanity, but it is alsoclass reality – the international corporations did the most to create the problem, they benefitmost from the way things are, and they also are among the main obstacles to seriously tacklingsolutions. Real solutions will hurt their bottom line and challenge their power and control overproduction decisions.

International Critical Thought 65

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

11:

45 1

0 Se

ptem

ber

2013

Two, in any class-divided society, the rich and powerful use their wealth and power to escapethe consequences of any type of crisis, including any type of environmental crisis. They seek toplace the blame and the burden on workers and poor people. They seek to find ways to profit fromhuman suffering. The rich and powerful have the largest vested interest in continuing to profitfrom maintaining unsustainable industry and resource extraction.

Three, when environmental movements seek to bring about fundamental change, they run intoaspects of capitalist power. The struggle over implementing real solutions to environmental pro-blems is a struggle over control – control of resources, control of institutions, control of decision-making, control of production and industrial processes, control over land and land-use, andcontrol over the political process. These struggles are class issues too.

The struggles of workers to wrest power away from ‘employer prerogatives’ parallel andcomplement the struggle of citizens to wrest power away from private property prerogatives.The struggle for real democratic control over the economic decisions that affect our livesrelates directly to the struggle for real democratic control in communities over the economicdecisions that produce pollution, environmental degradation, reckless development, and manyother challenges to a sustainable balance between immediate human needs and the long-termhuman need for a healthy environment.

A short-sighted focus on environmental problems to the exclusion of the economic frameworkthat creates and maintains those problems is as self-defeating as a short-sighted focus on globalwarming and greenhouse gases to the exclusion of other environmental threats. As dialecticalmaterialism shows, the world and all its systems are one interconnected web.

The environmental movement needs workers, needs alliances with and participation fromunions. Because organized workers have the potential power to wrest control of production decisionsaway from the capitalist class, they are an essential element to fighting for fundamental change.

Another class issue is that workers are among the first to be victimized by toxic chemicals onthe job, before those toxic chemicals are dumped in ways that affect all of us. Workers in the fac-tories and workplaces die, contract environmentally induced diseases, and get a double dose ofpollutants – by being exposed both where they work and where they live. Corporations are nomore hesitant to hurt their employees than they are hesitant to hurt the communities wherethose employees and many others live. This is not a new phenomenon – coal miners and theircommunities have suffered severe respiratory problems for hundreds of years, and efforts to ame-liorate those problems have been resisted by the corporations at every step.

Energy consumption and water consumption are driven by more than individual choice. Indi-vidual consumer choice has little to do with irrigation systems that draw down the water tablefaster than rainfall replenishes aquifers; little to do with power plant construction; little to dowith the financial decisions that result in massive loans for energy industry projects; little to dowith whether or not governments decide to subsidize nuclear energy plants or coal-fired plants.Individual choice has even less to do with foreign policy towards oil-producing countries (orelse the majority of US individuals who wanted an end to the Iraq War would have ended ityears ago1).

Environmental approaches that blame ‘all of us’ ignore the class divisions in society, ignorethe predominant role of money, wealth, and power in governmental decision-making, ignore that

1In CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll conducted in March 2008, 68% respondents opposed the IraqWar; in the Gallup poll conducted in April 2008, 63% respondents believed that going to war in Iraq was amistake; in the CBS poll conducted in February 2009, 55% respondents believed that United States shouldhave stayed out of Iraq; in the CBS poll conducted in August 2010, 59% respondents believed that going towar in Iraq was a mistake; in the Gallup poll conducted in November 2011, 75% respondents approvedObama’s decision to withdraw US troops.

66 M. Brodine

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

11:

45 1

0 Se

ptem

ber

2013

the financial benefits from the economy as currently constructed go disproportionately to the topfew percent of the population (in other words, to the biggest capitalists), and ignore which groupswithin society have a vested interest in preventing change. Such limited approaches ignore theclass divisions within ‘rich’ countries.

Hurricane Katrina provided many examples of the existence of widespread poverty in theUnited States. The government and government agencies (i.e. the US Army Corps of Engineers)ignored clear warnings of the danger to the levee system, allowed thousands of poor people toremain in the path of the oncoming destruction, and responded slowly to the rising human cata-strophe. This again proved that oppressed and exploited people do not share in the benefits of theUnited States’ ‘high standard of living’ (which has been going down for the majority for severaldecades now), and proved again that inequality and injustice exist within supposedly ‘rich’societies.

Such class divisions within developed industrial countries show that the conflict is notbetween the ‘rich North’ and the ‘poor South’ of the world, it is between capitalists and rich land-owners the world over on the one hand, and workers, family farmers and poor people the worldover on the other.

Sustainability

The world and all the world’s peoples need a sustainable economic system, which includes sus-tainable agricultural and industrial processes for our survival. ‘Sustainability’ does not mean howto continue to make excess profits on endless development and endless production of more com-modities. The keys to human sustainability are not gross economic measures; people and naturemust be the measures of sustainability, not profits.

Various capitalist interests are trying to take advantage of the climate crisis for their ownadvantage. The nuclear power industry wants the government to make it easier for them tobuild more nuclear power plants, which they claim produce no carbon dioxide emissions.They want us to ignore or forget that considerable carbon dioxide is created in the constructionprocess, and creates more in the process of moving toxic nuclear waste for disposal, andignore that no one knows how to deal with or protect us from that nuclear waste.

There are differences between real solutions and advertising campaigns. Changing our indus-trial production so that it runs on different kinds of energy and so it does not create pollution in thefirst place are not the same as ‘green marketing’. Major government investments in improving theefficiency and affordability of solar power are not the same as adverts from British Petroleumclaiming that it is now an energy company rather than an oil company. Figuring out how tobetter insulate our housing stock so that less energy is wasted is not the same as figuring outhow to make money by trading carbon credits.

Sustainability is all about human survival at a level of advanced technological production andhealth. All humans have a powerful self-interest in their own survival and that of their offspring.When a few powerful capitalists maintain their power and enrich themselves by ignoring the needfor immediate action or by obstructing positive action, it is foolish to expect them to lead pro-grams for making changes that challenge their power and wealth.

The issues facing humanity are not simple. They require many fundamental changes in howwe produce food and goods, how we transport and distribute them, and how we stop depleting thesoil, water, oil, forests, and natural gas. They require increasing the capability of the atmosphere,oceans, and climatic systems to absorb pollution and greenhouse gases. While these issues are inpart about individual choices, lifestyles, and habits, the biggest impacts must come from changingour major agricultural, industrial, transportation, and marketing systems. These issues are classissues, and they need working-class solutions.

International Critical Thought 67

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

11:

45 1

0 Se

ptem

ber

2013

Working-class solutions do not limit themselves just to consideration of carbon footprints orindividual recycling. They do not rely on some magical market to solve problems for us. Solutionsare based on understanding that technology is a tool, and that technological solutions andimprovements must go hand in hand with social and economic changes to be effective.

Workers need to work in safe workplaces, free of toxic chemicals. They need to live in neigh-borhoods and houses which minimize energy loss due to inadequate housing construction andendless commutes. They need to live free from toxic waste and industrial pollution. They needsources of clean, safe water. They need healthy, affordable food supplies that do not use chemicalpesticides, and do not rely on carbon-burning transportation over huge distances. They want andneed to know that their children will have the possibility of living healthy lives in a world whereall people have choices, opportunities, and democratic and economic power. Workers need toshoulder their share of the costs of change, but they do not need to shoulder the share of the capi-talists, their luxuries, their conspicuous consumption, their arrogant use of power, or their resist-ance to any change that challenges their ‘right’ to make excessive profits.

Any serious discussion of environmental solutions points to more social decision-making, tomore social control over what is produced, where it is produced, and how it is produced, pack-aged, distributed, and consumed. Society’s ability to implement solutions requires changes in pol-itical power, changes in governmental structures, changes in national priorities, and significantchanges in economic decision-making.

Serious solutions require peace and international cooperation on a new level. Pre-emptivewar, invasion, and occupation, research on developing ‘bunker-busting’ nuclear weapons, unilat-eral militarization of space, are the antithesis of what humanity needs. War is among the worstcauses of serious environmental degradation, carbon dioxide release, and wasteful productionunrelated to real human needs.

Environmental challenges to socialism

Socialism, the collective ownership of and authority over the major means of production, distri-bution, and finance, is necessary to mobilize the resources of whole societies and of the wholeworld to fund and accomplish the massive changes we need to make, to change the tools weuse to measure progress and development, to put people and nature before profits.

Socialism is an essential aspect of the changes we need to protect the survival of our species.Socialism is a necessary, essential precondition, but is not sufficient by itself. While socialismmakes possible the massive changes we need, socialism by itself is no guarantee that the rightchoices will be made about what to do with limited resources. We also need education, democraticinputs from popular struggles, independent environmental organizations, more scientific knowl-edge, and a deeper understanding of the interrelationships between land, water, air and weather,agriculture, industry, and society.

Contradictions are not just between exploiters and exploited. There are many contradictionsand tensions between humans and nature, and socialism does not make them disappear – thosecontradictions will still drive struggle and change. As well, uneven development is a reality of allchange and that by itself can result in contradiction and conflict, and this is not only true of changefrom primitive society to feudalism to capitalism, it is true of socialism. The basic truth is that alldevelopment and change is driven by contradiction. Neither socialism nor communism will alterthis fundamental reality – contradictions of many kinds will continue to challenge humanity.

Marxist economic concepts have to be expanded to include the restrictions of limited naturalresources, the requirements of nature to not be so overloaded that it cannot absorb waste products,and the necessary limits of planetary climatic systems. Planned economies need to includenature’s requirements and limits in their plans.

68 M. Brodine

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

11:

45 1

0 Se

ptem

ber

2013

Marxist economists pay great attention to the necessary balance between production of con-sumer goods and production of the means of production. These concepts have to be expanded toinclude the limits of natural resources, and the environmental effects of production decisions.

Serious environmental solutions require socialism based on a scientific understanding of theneed to correct the current imbalance between human activity and production and the naturalsystems essential for human survival.

Socialism is about ending hunger and poverty, about creating health care, jobs, equality,peace, international cooperation, an end to the exploitation of human labor for private profit,and about planned social and economic development. But it must also include what is beneficialfor the environment. If we destroy the ability of natural systems to regenerate and recuperate, wedestroy the possibility of all kinds of growth for humanity. We cannot have a healthy humanitywithout a healthy natural world.

An often unnoticed secondhand affect capitalism has on socialist countries is that in the rushto industrialization, when socialist countries adopt technology and machinery directly from capi-talist countries, they unintentionally import the built-in capitalist economic and environmentalassumptions made by engineers and designers. Those include assumptions about labor, waste dis-posal, and natural resource use.

Ultimately, problems and shortcomings of socialism represent a failure to think, research, andimplement dialectically and democratically. Economics and development are ultimately based onthe ability of nature to reproduce itself, based on maintaining a healthy balance between humanneeds and the needs of the natural systems humanity depends on. If development does not work tomaintain that balance, it works against the healthy survival of humanity, and that is as true ofsocialist development as any other kind.

While we can find in Marx and Engels many references to the necessity of basing ourselves onthe imperatives of the natural world, many socialist planners subordinated these to the imperativesof increased production, increased industry. When these imperatives came into conflict, usuallyindustrialization won out. Often, objective needs and pressures contributed to over-centralizationand to ignoring the environmental consequences of development decisions.

Unlike so-called ‘deep ecologists’ who argue for ignoring human needs to let nature triumph,and unlike limited socialist thinking based on fallacious assumptions of ‘man’s triumph overnature’, we need a rounded, all-sided, in-depth understanding of the interrelationships betweenhuman and natural systems.

To accomplish the kind of socialism required needs greater cooperation and unity between thecommunist parties of the world, needs a higher level of scientific and environmental awareness inthe programs of these parties, and needs increased communist, union, and workers participation inthe growing environmental movements.

Environmental issues, like issues of nuclear war and peace, are class issues but they also affectall humanity. As a result, it is possible and necessary to gather, around the working-class forces forchange, broad coalitions that include cross-class forces – forces such as peace movements,environmental movements, movements for equality for women, movements for equal civilrights for racial minorities and nationalities, youth movements, and other movements for socialand political change. This is not a substitute for working-class leadership and organization, butcan complement it and bring additional strength to the movement for an environment that cansustain all humanity.

Conclusion

Nature is letting us know in no uncertain terms (through global warming, extreme weather events,decreasing agricultural yields, declining fisheries, and other escalating environmental problems)

International Critical Thought 69

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

11:

45 1

0 Se

ptem

ber

2013

that the development path taken by Western Europe, Japan, Australia, and the United States is notavailable to other countries, not without hurting everyone including the vast majority of people inthe developing nations themselves.

Humanity needs all developing countries to take a different path to industrialization. All ofhumanity also needs the United States, Europe, and other developed countries to transformtheir industrial production, transportation, and agricultural systems.

As a world, we are headed for serious adjustments, either planned or involuntary or both,which will recalibrate the balance between humans and the nature on which we depend. Thesooner we take a planned, cooperative approach to finding solutions, the less expensive and dis-ruptive those changes will be. Conversely, the longer we take to seriously tackle these issues, thesolutions will be more expensive and difficult. Since the world’s ecosystem is shared by all of us,changes to protect it must fall on all of us.

More and more people are starting to understand that continuing in the old way is no longer apossibility. Part of our job is to help convince them that another world is possible, another systemis necessary, and that human survival requires fundamental change.

Environmental change will not happen just because it ‘should’, just because humanity needssuch change. Environmental change requires organized social forces to push and create suchchange. Fundamental change requires class struggle, along with scientific and educational work.It is not enough to understand environmental problems and their causes, we must change our indus-trial, agricultural, energy, and transportation systems; we must change our economic and financialsystems.

We, the workers of the world, must transform the world. Humanity’s survival depends on it.

Notes on contributorMarc Brodine is a social activist and a member of the National Committee of the Communist Party USA. Hechaired the committee that drafted the first new CPUSA program in 25 years, The road to socialism USA,adopted at the CPUSA’s 28th National Convention in 2005. He is co-author of the CPUSA’s environmentalprogram, People and nature before profits. He is author of a mystery novel, Blood pressure (2010), andedited and wrote the introduction to Red roots, green shoots (2007), a collection of environmental writingsby his mother, Virginia Brodine, a pioneering Marxist environmentalist. He is a community activist, writer,guitarist, and woodblock print artist.

ReferencesCNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll. Summary of CNN Iraq War polling from 2006-2008.

Pollingreport. http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm.Engels, Frederick. 1883. Frederick Engels’ speech at the grave of Karl Marx. http://www.marxists.org/

archive/marx/works/1883/death/burial.htm.Jones, J. Opposition to Iraq War reaches new high. Gallup. http://www.gallup.com/poll/106783/opposition-

iraq-war-reaches-new-high.aspx.Jones, J. Three in four Americans back Obama on Iraq withdrawal. Gallup. http://www.gallup.com/poll/

150497/Three-Four-Americans-Back-Obama-Iraq-Withdrawal.aspx.Montopoli, B. Poll: Most Americans say Iraq War was a mistake. CBS. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-

503544_162-20014856-503544.html?tag=contentMain;contentBody.Roberts, J. Poll: Fading support for Iraq War. CBS. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/10/opinion/

polls/main930772.shtml.

70 M. Brodine

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

11:

45 1

0 Se

ptem

ber

2013