A new Left has to be an ecological Left, or it won’t be left at all. Environmental change ‘changes everything’ for the Left too, Naomi Klein argued. Capitalism requires constant expansion, an expansion predicated on exploitation of humans and non-humans, that irreversibly damages the climate. A non-capitalist economy will have to sustain itself while contracting. But how can we redistribute or secure meaningful work without growth? There is not yet a concrete ‘economics of degrowth’. Lamentably, Keynesianism is the most powerful tool the Left, even the Marxist Left, has for dealing with issues of policy. But this is an economics of the 1930s when unlimited expansion was still possible and desirable.
Read the whole article in the New InternationalistEine deutsche Version des Textes findet sich hier. When it comes to technological development, I often hear the words: What can be done will be done – sooner or later. Many people think that technological development follows a path directed by quasi-natural laws that head into one and only one direction – called “progress” – which is: to use more technology, more complex technology, more exp...
Die Anmeldung für das MOVE UTOPIA Zusammen!Treffen! für eine Welt nach Bedürfnissen und Fähigkeiten vom 21.-25.Juni 2017 in Lärz (Mecklenburg) ist ab sofort geöffnet. Wir veröffentlichen ein Interview der Zeitschrift arranca! mit zwei Organisator*innen des Treffens, bei dem der Zusammenhang zwischen MOVE UTOPIA und der Degrowth-Bewegung im Mittelpunkt steht. Im Juni findet das MOVE UTOP...
While agreeing with many points of van den Bergh's excellent review of the growth versus climate debate, I would like to point to a fundamental misrepresentation of the quoted research on degrowth: degrowth is not a strategy "aimed at reducing the size of the GDP". In fact, the degrowth proposition is that the relationship between fossil fuels/carbon emissions and GDP growth is mutual, and th...
