A central theme of ecosocialism is the relationship between humans and the natural world. The reliance of humans life on nature, and the environmental impacts of capitalism.
Modern theoretical socialists differ over the extent to which Marx and other early socialists brought nature into their theories. But ideas are not divorced from historical and material conditions. In the 19th century, the destruction of nature by uncontrolled industrialization was not nearly as apparent as it is today.
The massive industrial expansion during the 20th century resulted in pollution and environmental degradation, and this brought about a growing environmental awareness among people in industrial countries. Many socialists came to accept that environmental concerns should be an essential part of the critique of capitalism and the solution offered by socialism. The term “ecosocialism” was adopted to describe a socialist ideology that emphasized the idea that capitalism was damaging the environment and had alienated humans from nature.
The climate crisis has only reinforced the case for ecosocialism. It is also starting to force socialists to realize that if there is to be a socialist transformation, it won’t take place before a time of an immense global crisis caused by global warming.
The Logic of Capitalism
Industrial processes produce waste products. Controlling the waste products and minimizing pollution costs money, and reduces profits. This is why capitalism’s drive for expansion inevitably pushes it into opposition to the environment.
Under the logic of capitalism, only the quantity of production, consumption and growth is significant. Quality is only important for its influence on consumer choices and hence consumption and profits.
All goods are reduced to commodities. This commodification extends to the environment. Naturally occurring water is frequently regarded as something to be given a price, a commodity that can be traded. “Ecological services” is a term used to calculate the financial value of the environment, whether it involves the harvesting of natural resources or the ability of air and water bodies to assimilate pollutants.
Because of the growth of the environmental movement in the wealthy “north”, governments have been forced to pass legislation to curb the worst excesses of environmental destruction. But governments are always playing catch-up. When they come up against powerful interests such as the plastics industry, progress in protecting the environment is extremely slow.
The globalization of the world economy has not only produced huge inequalities in wealth between rich and poor countries. It has also led to industrial production and its associated pollution to be exported from the wealthy “north” to the poor “south”.
Capitalism and the Climate Crisis
Mining and extraction of natural resources is extremely profitable, and has been the cause of massive environmental destruction across the world. The profitability of fossil fuel extraction and the world’s need for energy has put fossil fuels at the center of the world’s economic system.
The free market system is incapable of preventing climate disaster. Emissions trading (“cap and trade”) has been the main framework for market based systems. Caps are set on the amount of greenhouse gases that can be emitted by countries or enterprises. Entities earn carbon credits by emitting less then their cap or implementing carbon mitigation schemes. Other entities can buy these credits to emit more than their cap. The Kyoto Protocol, implemented under COP in 2005, was the best known carbon trading scheme. Its success was limited, mainly because many governments failed to enforce the caps. Without state intervention, these market based systems are useless.
There has been much written and said about the “green economy”, in which green technology magically steers the world away from climate disaster. Unfortunately, the “green economy” is seldom more than a forlorn hope that new technologies will lead in themselves halt global warming.
Mitigation of global warming – rapidly bringing down the emission of greenhouse gases – will require wide ranging and rapid reforms in the material economy. This can only happen if governments use their powers to make it happen.
To limit global warming to 1.5°, or anywhere close to 1.5°, governments across the world would need to set definite limits on the burning of fossil fuel, and introduce deep changes to agricultural production. The failure of governments to live up to their international commitments or “ambitions” is a clear indication that market solutions will not work.
Under socialism, governments will set and enforce targets for emissions and make the enormous investments that will be necessary to replace fossil fuels with clean energy. Funding will initially come from taxes on large corporations and the very wealthy. A description of these measures is to be found in the “Global Transitional Ecosocialist Programme” and the “Socialist Program to End Global Warming”.
Socialism and “productivism”
Capitalist production relies on endless growth with no regard for the quality of its products, or the impacts on society and the environment. This undirected economic growth has been described as “productivism”. The climate crisis, caused by increasing levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, is the result of the “productivism” of capitalism.
Early socialists described a society of socialist abundance, with neither poverty nor deprivation. Ecosocialists hold to the same ideal – a just transition that won’t leave the world’s poorest inhabitants behind, But we are acutely aware of the planet’s fragile ecology, and finite nature of natural resources, The necessary growth in renewable energy and new green technologies will have to be balanced with a respect for the planet.
Jobs and Employment
For many climate activists, unions and workers in fossil fuel industries are obstacles in the fight against climate change. Campaigns to reduce fossil fuels often run into opposition from unions. Of course fossil fuel bosses always use the threat of job losses as a reason to avoid closing down fossil fuel businesses, and to continue to drill and mine for more oil, gas and coal.
One of the arguments advanced by climate activists is that the future of the planet is more important that the loss of fossil fuel jobs. And, in any event, the green economy will produce more jobs than fossil fuels.
For socialists, the fight to save jobs part of the general struggle against capitalist exploitation. The wish of workers to keep their jobs is entirely rational and understandable. Workers must not become victims or “collateral damage” in the climate fight.
The ecosocialist approach to reducing fossil fuel emissions is to give workers guarantees that their incomes and pensions will be protected, and an assurance that they will be first in line for new green jobs. This protection of fossil fuel workers should be supported by all who call for a just transition.
Internationalism
Socialism has always been internationalist in its outlook, and ecosocialism is no different. Capitalism not only condemns billions of people in the poor “south” to poverty. The climate crisis is also causing disproportionate damage to poor communities and countries.
CO2 emissions know no national boundaries. The climate crisis, by its very nature, demands an international response. But under capitalism, economies are tied to nation states, unable to break free from the competition between nations. And so political leaders are unable to put the climate crisis ahead of their own national interests.
An ecosocialist approach to the loss and damage suffered by poor countries will oversee a massive transfer of finance from the “north” to the “south”. This is increasingly what climate activists are calling for. But by itself it will not ensure global justice. A socialist transformation is required to end the exploitation of the workers in the south and, through planning and investments, transform their economies.
China, with its privileged, authoritarian and intensely nationalist leadership, is not a model to emulate. But it has shown how a planned economy is able to raise living standards of billions of people. With the support of the wealthy nations, development on a similar scale (but mindful of nature and the planet’s ecology) could happen across the world.
Ecosocialist Strategy
The climate protest movement has taken many forms: mass protests, divestment campaigns, pleading with world leaders, disruptions and the defacing of art works.
An ecosocialist strategy has to go beyond demonstrations and disruptions. It must be based on winning the support of millions of people to a common set of demands. The support of workers whose jobs will disappear or be threatened by a transition will be crucial. Ecosocialists will need to convince people that a better future is possible.
The yellow vest movement in France is a lesson in the need to link the climate struggle to people’s everyday lives. The French government introduced a carbon tax which increased the price of gasoline. For many people who did not have access to good public transport, and for small businesses using road transport, this tax was an unfair burden. It sparked a protest movement against unfair taxes and the government’s austerity policies. The opposition to fuel taxes wasn’t a protest against the need for climate policies. It was rather a demand that the climate policies should not harm the livelihoods of vulnerable people.
Workers in the fossil fuel and agribusiness industries are particularly vulnerable. An ecosocialist strategy must include support for their livelihoods and their communities. The term “red-green alliance” has been used by ecosocialists to describe the kind of political force needed for a just transition.
A strategy for a green transition must be based on a credible plan. Capitalists and their political parties will attempt market based solutions for as long as they can. Ecosocialists must not only show that the market economy is unable to address the climate crisis. We have to provide a comprehensive alternative that workers, vulnerable communities, and young people fearful of what the future holds, can all believe in.