Friday, May 27, 2011
Embedding Environmentalism in Marxist Theory of Development
Environmentalism should be embedded in a Marxist theory of socioeconomic development like Kalecki's, revisited by Jayati Ghosh in "Michal Kalecki and the Economics of Development." The main question underlying Kalecki's theory, as Ghosh sums up, was this: "which groups in society (or outside) would bear the burden of increasing capital formation through reductions in consumption"? This question can and should be supplemented by anthropocentric environmental concerns, i.e. quality of life questions: Which groups in society (or outside) would bear the burden of increasing capital formation through reductions in the environmental quality of life? Which groups in society (or outside) would bear the burden of increasing the environmental quality of life through reductions in consumption? Explicitly asked thus, the fact that it's all a matter of politically determined trade-offs becomes clear. Such an approach would be more useful to leftists actively involved in governments, political parties, and social movements than an approach that seeks to develop an enviro-Marxist crisis theory.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Although it is a politically difficult proposition, ecologically speaking environmentalism doesn't need to be embedded in Marxism. Marxism needs to be embedded in ecology, because nature can exist in a way that leaves no room for us, and human and especially leftist political action should start from that premise.
Well, nature doesn't have environmentalism or any other ism for that matter. We human beings do.
Yes that's true. But it seems to me that what we know of ecology has to be the starting point for a Marxist theory of development, rather than the other way around, because the limit for our societies is one set by nature, and it is within those limits that we can discuss human or Marxist theories of development. You should read this great essay by Colin Duncan:
On Identifying a Sound Environmental Ethic in History: Prolegomena to Any Future Environmental History
CAM Duncan - Environmental History Review, 1991
In the sense that any measure taken to advance socioeconomic development must take the best available science -- including environmental science -- into account, yes. But we take it into account because not doing so is detrimental to our wellbeing.
In any event, my point is that socialists should consider environmental questions from the POV of debating what actions to take to make things better for human beings, rather than from the POV of searching (in vain) for environmental limits to capitalism.
Post a Comment