The early socialist struggles in the 1800s gave birth to “minimum demands”, which were demands that could, in theory, be accommodated in a capitalist economy. In the early 1900s, radical socialists criticized minimum demands as an excuse for inaction, and called for demands that capitalist governments could not or would not be prepared to implement. These became known as “transitional demands”, which would reveal the inability of capitalism to transform itself into a society based on fairness and meeting human needs.

The call by climate activists for “system change” is similarly a recognition that capitalism is incapable of providing solutions for the climate crisis.

The program described in this article is what the outlines of a global ecosocialist transitional program would look like. The focus is on measures to fight climate change, and a full transitional program would include many other policies and actions.

This global program would be mirrored by similar, more detailed national programs.

The costs are large. The central principle for raising the required funding will be ability to pay – most of the costs will fall to large corporations, very wealthy individuals and the rich countries. Past national contributions to greenhouse gases will also be taken into account.

Any successful international program will require world leaders to end the protectionist obstructions that have been significant obstacles to effective agreements up to now. Moreover, every national leader will have to commit to a program for his/her country.

Global state of emergency

An effective global response to the climate crisis is not possible under free market conditions. It also cannot wait for legislation to be enacted. This is especially true in the US. Emergency measures that bypass normal business practices will be essential. This is recognized by all the climate activists who have called for the imposition of a climate emergency.

Various organizations and experts have pointed to the US government’s mobilization of industry during the Second World War, calling for a similar mobilization to fight climate change.

Governments will eventually be compelled to use emergency measures for effectively reducing greenhouse gases. The question is, how long will they wait.

Ending greenhouse gases from energy, transport, industry, buildings, waste

Every country will end the generation of electricity from fossil fuels by a date between 2031 and 2035. The year for each country will be calculated using an equity based formula. This is the fundamental demand in the program.

Fossil fuel companies, especially big oil, will be implacably opposed to such a measure, and governments will have to use their emergency powers to push it through. Price controls will probably be required, especially for petrol/gasoline and diesel. Oil companies will have to:

• transform their operations to renewable energy or other acceptable products,
• get nationalized, or
• go bankrupt (workers’ salaries and pensions to be guaranteed)

The driving of small combustion vehicles will also end by a date between 2031 and 2035. Governments will invest in new transport infrastructure to provide alternatives.

New factories to build solar panels and wind turbines will be constructed across the world, and electricity grids will be modernized and extended. Factories built with international funding will become the property of the host country or a consortium of countries in a region.

Similar plans to substantially reduce greenhouse gas emissions from industry, buildings and waste will be drawn up and implemented.

Farming, agriculture, rewilding

All deforestation for agriculture, industry and mining will be ended within one month from the enactment of the emergency.

All countries will end intensive beef production by 2035.

No timber harvesting or the cultivation for palm oil, soya and other crops will be allowed in rainforest areas.

Changes to farming practices will be legislated for large scale agriculture. Communication and education on more sustainable and climate friendly agriculture will be provided to all farmers, large and small.

Rewilding of huge areas, especially tropical rainforests, will be carried out. Protection of natural areas and rewilding will be done with the close involvement of indigenous and other local communities.

Jobs

All workers whose jobs are lost will have their salaries and pensions guaranteed. Alternative employment will be provided where possible through environmental programs to restore old mines and oil fields, to install green energy and other infrastructure.

Loss and damage, adaptation and building resilience

Poor countries will receive fair and adequate payments for past loss and damage, and to improve resilience and adaptation to climate change.

Research

A properly funded international body will be established to develop green technologies, environmental practices, adaptation and planning for resilience.

Budgets

Item	Budget	Time frame
Infrastructure	125 trillion dollars over 15 years	15 years
Loss & damage and adaptation	Increasing annually from 3 trillion dollars per year	Annual
Research, technology development	Increasing annually from 50 billion dollars per year	Annual
Salaries and pension guarantees for affected fossil fuel workers	One and a half trillion dollars over 15 years	10 years, then declining annual amounts in subsequent years
Salaries and pension guarantees for other affected workers	Five trillion dollars over 15 years
Debt write-off for poorer countries	Five trillion dollars once off, creditors to be paid over 15 years.	Once off

Sources of finance (over 15 years)

Source	Amount (to be spent over 15 years unless annual figures)
Wealth tax on wealthy, individuals and families owning over 5 million dollars	31 trillion dollars
Tax on companies that have hidden money in tax havens	25 trillion dollars
Tax on companies that have paid less than 30% tax on profits over the past 15 years
Tax on assets of largest 1000 companies across the world (with guarantees for bone fide private investments)	50 trillion dollars
Soft loans from worlds 100 largest banks	Three trillion dollars per year
50% of current arms spending	750 billion dollars per year
Spending from national budgets (could take the form of “green bonds” – government borrowing from the public and financial institutions)	85 trillion dollars (about 50% of which would be aid from richer to poorer countries)

Except the tax on money hidden in tax havens, these taxes are not penalties. They are a way of using the world’s financial resources to avert catastrophe.

Are these huge amounts realistic?

The mainstream economist Nicholas Stern wrote a report on the economics of global warming and climate change. His conclusion (which was based on all sorts of assumptions about market behavior) was that the cost of combating climate change was much less than the economic costs of doing nothing. In other words, spending to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is a rational investment for humanity to make. The amounts in this program would be investments that would benefit everyone, especially the young and future generations.

The finance from government budgets would be of a similar order to the global spending on Covid, which amounted to about $7 trillion per year. https://www.imf.org/en/Topics/imf-and-covid19/Fiscal-Policies-Database-in-Response-to-COVID-19.

Unstable world

This program shows that a transition to net zero and a world which provides protection from people affected by climate change is possible. Most socialists will argue that such a transition is impossible under capitalism. The economic and political changes that this program requires would dramatically overturn much of the political and economic environment we are familiar with. It would create a much more unstable world than we have now. Indeed, it is only likely to be possible after being triggered by catastrophic climate events and huge social movements.

But this program would open up the prospect of a transition to a socialist society, based on human need rather than profits.