Refusing to deal with global warming in the name of "traditional core issues" is like refusing to deal with an ongoing world war; it means betraying the working class. The point is whether the working-class has its own program for dealing with global warming.
Any serious program to deal with global warming would strike at neo- liberalism, and would call for integrating planning to deal with the economic security of the masses with planning to rescue the environment. It would not mean lauding austerity, but would reinforce the fight against the ravages of the international economic crisis, the cutbacks, and the sacrifice of the masses and of the environment to the rich. By way of contrast, the advocacy of market measures, whether carbon trading or the carbon tax, does in fact mean "becom(ing) an appendage of bourgeois environmentalism." Similarly the reduction of working-class interests to simply hoping for "green jobs" is nothing but trickle-down economics.
So, for example, Al Gore is right about the dangers of global warming, but wrong about what to do about it: his "solutions" would lead us to our doom. I wrote about this in, for example, the article " '24 hours of reality' about global warming, but continuing fantasy about market-based measures" (www.communistvoice.org/46cGore.html).
-- Joseph Green