Marxism in the Anthropocene Degrowth Communism and Ecosocialist Strategy
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 сен 2024
- Join Spectre Journal and Haymarket Books for a rebroadcast of a discussion on ecosocialism with Kohei Saito
---------------------
Kohei Saito's recent book Marx in the Anthropocene (Cambridge University Press, 2023) has spurred renewed interest in Marx’s ecological thought and ignited further controversy around a number of key debates within contemporary left eco-theory - most notably concerning disagreements between Marxist ecomodernism and what Saito dubs “degrowth communism.”
In this Spectre Live feature, Saito will be joined by prominent climate researcher and author Holly Jean Buck and Spectre ecosocialist editor Dan Boscov-Ellen in a discussion about Marxism, degrowth, technology, and left strategy.
---------------------
Speakers:
Kohei Saito is an Associate Professor of Philosophy at the University of Tokyo. He is the author of (in English) Karl Marx's Ecosocialism, Marx in the Anthropocene, and the forthcoming Slow Down: The Deceleration Manifesto.
Holly Jean Buck is an Assistant Professor of Environment and Sustainability at the University at Buffalo. She is an environmental social scientist whose research focuses on public engagement with emerging climate and energy technologies. She is the author of After Geoengineering (Verso, 2019) and Ending Fossil Fuels: Why Net Zero Is Not Enough (Verso, 2021), and holds a Ph.D in Development Sociology from Cornell University.
Dan Boscov-Ellen is an Assistant Professor of Philosophy at Pratt Institute in Brooklyn, New York. His background is in environmental philosophy and critical theory. He is currently working on a book about the ethics of climate change, provisionally entitled Critical Climate Ethics: Capitalism, Colonialism, and the Climate Crisis.
---------------------
This event is sponsored by Haymarket Books and Spectre Journal. While all of our events are freely available, we ask that those who are able make a solidarity donation in support of our important publishing and programming work.
![ARGENTINA vs. CHILE [3-0] | RESUMEN | ELIMINATORIAS SUDAMERICANAS | FECHA 7](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/De3AWmXzhuA/mqdefault.jpg)
Buck seems to consistently miss the point that technologies are not neutral, something that theorists since at least Lewis Mumford (and Marx, on Saito's reading, not to mention numerous anarchists or media theorists like McLuhan) have pointed out ad nauseum. As Mumford argues in Authoritarian and Democratic Technics, technologies like nuclear energy reflect a certain form of social organisation (high levels of centralisation, securitisation, etc.) and inherently predispose society to amplifying these forms.
Beyond this, it seems patently weird to argue that technologies are neutral in the age of cellphones and the internet, things that have clearly profoundly transformed social relations.
19:28 agreed that we have to focus on decreasing or ending animal agriculture if we’re going to stop catastrophic climate change…we need to end the exploitation of animals and humans if we want to benefit the environment
1:17:55 it seems like it would be easier as well as more effective to convince people to be vegan than to reduce their meat intake
Getting people involved with growing and sharing food, permaculture gardens, food forests, showing people how amazing, diverse and healthful plant-based diet can be. I guess all that's concretely in our way is land ownership.
"I think we have this creative challenge to formulate what technology looks like without domination or capitalism."
💯
The entire talk is about finding solutions within capitalism. Although there are dispersed mentions about non-capitalist social relations or socialist production relations, there is no emphasis on how are we going to move towards socialism! Only focus is on changing attitudes of people, changing value systems and even cooperation with the state to bring change. This is pure reformism, not revolutionary politics. There can be no possibility of solving the climate crisis within capitalism. It is not sufficiently to just acknowledge that capitalism is the root cause of climate crisis, as most of the eco-socialists do. The point is to smash the capitalist state through proletarian revolution and build socialism. And this talk had no mention of this aspect.
Secondly, Prof. Saito didn't even mention a single source where Marx abandons his supposedly "promethean" ideas and became an advocate of Degrowth. The idea of putting a brake on the development of productive forces instead of changing production relations is a luddite position where technology itself is presented as the main villain and capitalist production relations are not radically subverted.
It’s essential to remove profit out of housing, healthcare, education, transportation, and energy.
So you want us to work for free?
No thanks. Maybe you need to pay your way kid.
@@imperialmotoring3789 Where even to begin with this rejoinder.
@@imperialmotoring3789
Do you think that people employed by non-profit ventures (including governments) don't get paid?
Non-profit doesn't mean free.
It just means it focuses on delivering services, not on making money.
And food production
@@qbas81 Poor understanding of complex issues give this kind of dumb answers.
First his remark was about the builder/developer not the worker, that means no one will build or sell houses except government and i have to give you the bad news you will not have a market so you will not have a market price it will be artificially set by the governmnet and from my communist experience in time will mean low quality and low supply and big waste of resources. Indeed there many people in the west that need to survive a gulag so can intelectually enter in this type of debate and have something relevant to say.
I find myself confused by Holly Jean Bucks points. The example of building a communal pool to convince people's not build a pool in their private homes or housing vs private mansion? Which ppl people is she addressing?
I just built an organic pool and it's beneficial for the environment in many ways, including a heat sink, not to mention wildlife. Do we need to build a municipal pool to make the world greener? Surely eco-socialism will enable us to jump into any body of water and have a pollution-free, chlorine-free swim.
@@guapochino140 a communal pool can be environmentally friendly as well. The point is around fair distribution of wealth. Private eco cars, and private eco pool in private eco mansions vs eco transport, eco communal leisure
@@maysoonelnigoumi5644 I don't think it will ever be about fair distribution of wealth, if you look at things from a global perspective. An environmentally-friendly communal pool is some first world, northern Europe type thing, and frankly you guys already have more than enough stuff. :) In degrowth you will have to get by with less, not more, but the idea is that what's left is better than the overload of nonsense that is humanity right now. So, you will be able to jump in a pristine river and you won't get a new communal pool.
@@guapochino140 interesting re: "you guys" comment. I am a citizen of the global north don't know why you assumed otherwise :) so I guess I'm with "you guys" as well, and unless consumption is curbed, "us guys" as I am also a citizen of the global south will not get to enjoy the pristine rivers. However curbing consumption can only be done through degrowth without that meaning "us guys" in the global north missing on leisure that is not sustainable through the current economic model that allows for private organic pools. This is a model that is attained by a capitalist model accessible by a privileged few.
Interesting discussion, thanks. I hope the speakers have all moved to a plant based model of consumption, the single most powerful thing we can do as individual humans in this time. From there, we organize 😊
How do we convince meat eaters who wont comply?
Mr. Post, please perhaps find a better way to come in after someone finishes speaking than barking "Okay!" It's kind of abrasive and dismissive sounding. Maybe a nod and a thank you before you go on?
The panelists do not address a simple and devastating question: how can the world discontinue carbon emissions, that result from almost 85% of fossil fuels that power the global economy, in order to prevent meeting 1.5C warming? It's not impossible --only, well, overwhelming. But it's coming.
Will China give up it's carbon once the USA collapses?
The discussion is over the preferred pathway out Saito, degrowth. Using less, doing what is necessary for human flourishing and reducing the rest. It is the simplest and ecologically best choice