Revolutionary rhetoric that doesn’t even mention the term ‘revolution’ is a form of daydreaming at this point. And ecologists end up with one track minds where we need a balanced totality: the issue is not climate change but a set of four problems in one, or more… Perhaps this is strategic reticence. How is capitalism to be overthrown? If these daydreamers could slash the tires of one SUV apiece one might take them seriously beyond hand wringers…I don’t recommend that, the idea is what counts here, to start. Was the end of slavery worth the union dead? What’s the body count estimates for postcapitalism and will the new cadre take the gandhians out to be shot?
To overthrow capitalism requires violent action on a massive scale, and it is not clear what these constant invocations of revolution in polite language really mean. Monbiot’s essay is important in any case. This is a transformation of the original thrust of working class revolution. The two must combine and/or restate their basics.
Revolt is illegal, you in? A whole movement could be wiped out in a week by the powers that be to prevent any change (which is not an argument against revolutionary action).
We should note the way the french and russian revolutions slipped into being unexpectedly…
The same will prove true in the coming crisis. But the revolutionaries must be ready and not blow it with leninist instant replays.
The revolution needs to be done right and stated clearly in advance.
We have suggested it many times here and at least adopted a comprehensive approach we call ES/DMNC or eco-socialist ‘democratic market socialism’ which is at least a theoretical focus on a basic four components for a new society, that plus an ecological content. You think about four problems in one: politics, planning/markets, a postcapitalist Commons and this four term reflection then proceeds to construct an interior of ecological socialism. This model can be expanded but the basic point is that we can’t just focus on ecological issues. This approach is adapted to evolutionary/revolutionary versions but it is hard to see how this can be done along an evolutionary path. As noted however the situation could suddenly ripen. We should proceed with an evolutionary version to start but state clearly the need for revolutionary potentials and honestly being to ask how a civil war against capitalist might be brought about.
“We have to overthrow this system which is eating the planet with perpetual growth. I mean since when was GDP a sensible measure of human welfare?”
Source: To Save Humanity and Planet, Says Climate Activist, ‘We Must Go Straight to the Heart of Capitalism and Overthrow It’
Source: Life on the Left: No shortcuts: The climate revolution must be ecosocialist
This useful and very specific essay outlines a whole series of issues in the range of eco-socialism and the whole discussion fits into our model of DMNC like a glove: this involves seeing our ‘democratic market neoo-communism’ as a version of eco-socialism. On paper the two fit together janus-faced and our ‘new economy’ can be adapted to minimal growth or no growth, regulation of all CO2 issues in the context of our ‘green neo-communism’, and a social project to move past fossil fuels in a constrained schedule. Only something like our DMNC could achieve this and its component of ecological courts and presidential component guarding/constructing a Commons could plan and execute an eco-socialist program inside our DMNC: a rolls royce successor to the ‘green new deal’. Our method of speaking to both the electoral and revolutionary options demands a review of the limits of ‘new deals’ and our version would be a ‘neo-communist’ (green) new deal.
This article clearly illuminates the revolutionary dilemma behind any real proposals to stay on a carbon reduction budget although there is the possibility of a hybrid as a chaotic collapse allows a combined electoral/revolutionary outcome.
Our analysis is uniquely defined but does inherit a fair use of legacy marxist ideas taken critically but we consider on the hand the idea of ‘socialism’ in one country AND an international.
Our model has set of sliding scales, one being its remaining use of ‘markets’ based on a Commons: it can throttle back and forth between percentages of planned and market sectors.
In an extreme situation the ES/DMNC can go into survival mode as a rescue degrowth outcome and move to prevent an elite bunkers in the arctic syndrome condemning billions to calamity.
This useful and compelling essay raises more questions than it answers and it is difficult to navigate the choppy waters of definitional socialism. We should note the term arises before the work of Marx and we are not bound by the legacy of marxism as such here. We have claimed that Marx’s theories are flawed and this may well muddle his brilliant classic, Critique of the Gotha Program. We need to construct a superset of the marxist legacy that can avail of its potential but recast the basics where needed. Continue reading “what is ‘democratic market neo-communism’…?//What is Socialism?”
For once I am almost in agreement with a marxist, but the reality is that marxists have made a mess of communism, they will surely make a mess of ecological socialism. Continue reading “John Bellamy Foster on the ‘Green New Deal’”
This quote shows directly that Marx’s thinking had a near-ecological aspect. But in the end marxism has no real ecological perspective. And conclusion is not to try and integrate ecology into marxism. The result will backfire because ecologial thinking integrated with the fallacies of marx’s theories will be a hopeless mess.
The left needs to leave hopeless case marxists behind, take a few good quotes from his works and start over from scratch….
Has noone heard of the Romantic movement? An immense resource in counterpoint to/with the Enlightenment is a part of modernity. We don’t need the dead hand of marxists to monopolize ecological thinking…
…all progress in capitalistic agriculture is a progress in the art, not only of robbing the labourer, but of robbing the soil; all progress in increasing the fertility of the soil for a given time, is a progress towards ruining the lasting sources of that fertility.– Karl Marx, Capital vol 1
Source: What Karl Marx has to say about today’s environmental problems