Posted on 08/02/2002 3:02:04 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
Joel Kovel's recent (2002) book THE ENEMY OF NATURE is a book about capitalism and ecology. Kovel's thesis is simple: capitalism is destroying the world, and only ecosocialism can save us from it. His logic is impeccable; Kovel starts by impressing us with the gravity of the ecological crisis facing us today, and proceeds to an analysis of what "capital" is and why it is the enemy of nature.
First of all, capital is a relationship between human beings. "It is humans living as capital, people who become capital's personifications, who destroy ecosystems." (39) Capital "represents that regime in which exchange value predominates over use-value in the production of commodities." Capital, is, in short, humanity under the spell of money, and the business done in its name, and its results can be seen in (for instance) the disaster at Bhopal, global warming, world hunger, species dieoff, and deforestation. Why is capital so bad? Capital, says Kovel, speeds up production and consumption so as to increase profits, and in so doing generates the "throw-away society" (61). The world must be turned into a commodity, to be placed on a store-shelf, consumed, and thrown away as quickly as possible. "Logically, capital can never rest, but must continue taking over humanity and nature endlessly, albeit unevenly and with constant struggle." (69) A long two chapters of "The Enemy of Nature" explain how capital can arise out of nature, through humanity, through patriarchy, and through the will to dominate that became culturally enshrined in roles such as the "Big Man, the Chieftain, the King, the Emperor, the Pope, the Fuhrer, the Generalissimo, and the CEO." (121) Encompassing all these roles, and giving them their awesome powers, are societies that operate according to dominative principles -- the violent appropriation of labor, patriarchy, the warlike State, science, technology, industry. With industrial revolution, capital soon begins to encompass all of these principles.
Kovel goes on to discuss why other modes of ecological thought will only address the symptoms of ecological crisis without really getting at capital as the prime mover of ecodestruction. He then looks at "prefigurations," ways in which humankind displays viable alternatives to ecologically-destructive living. Christian communism, the free association of producers, ecologically-sustainable production. After all this, then, we are ready for Kovel's vision, which he calls "ecosocialism," to be created by independent (and coordinated) communities through a "World People's Trade Organization," which will exist in protest against, and as an alternative to, the WTO.
Two things that might be added to this analysis would be 1) a communications and educational analysis of the present-day society, and 2) an analysis of future energy shortages. Kovel fleetingly recognizes these -- he recognizes that "by organizing againt the system and criticizing its educational policy, one necessarily protests the regime of exchange inasmuch as education under capitalism moves toward standardization, quantification, and the treatment of children as passive containers" (229). And he also recognizes that the global economy of oil consumption threatens to move into the realm of permanent oil shortage, and the dawning end of an era of cheap oil. But the coming end of the era of cheap oil (in the next decade or so) threatens a capitalist crisis of significant proportions, and it will take a lot of positive education to overcome capitalism and create a humane alternative without falling into the bureaucratic traps that accompanied the creation of the USSR and the People's Republic of China. More should be said in the face of what Kovel says needs to be done -- but certainly a book like this is a seed for a thousand discussions of that sort that would grow from its core.
This is a visionary book, which means that it stands beyond the narrow notion of freedom as freedom to achieve "success" in a society whose paramount power is the right of the wealthy to do as they please with their wealth. The economic history of the past decade (and back) is the history of the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few who never fail to be satiated, for they embody the "success" of the whole system. As success becomes rarer for each of us, then, we enslave ourselves to its dictates more and more, and believe more and more compulsively in its promises of freedom, in order to grasp what little of it remains. Capital, then, has triumphed within each of us, and Kovel opens the land for the promised germination of a freedom beyond capital, albeit with diminishing hopes that the politico-economic ecology of today will let it grow. In his despairing conclusion, he espouses his hopes that he is wrong, and that we will indeed survive the onslaught of capital even as we believe in the righteousness of its dictates.
The war's over. No one is gong to invent a replacement for the "evil" internal combustion engine without the prospect of incredible profit.
But things like Kyoto, fake science (e.g., global warming), and CAFE standards are much more insidious.
Capitalism saved the world long ago.
On the contrary, bozo. Our society protects the power of EVERYONE to dispose of his wealth as he pleases, not just the rich. Furthermore, it empowers EVERYONE to gain as much wealth as they can, a concept alien to communism.
The economic history of the past decade (and back) is the history of the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few who never fail to be satiated, for they embody the "success" of the whole system.
If they never fail to be satiated, what prolongs their competition? I suspect the idiot was under the influence when he wrote this nonsensical line.
As success becomes rarer for each of us, then, we enslave ourselves to its dictates more and more, and believe more and more compulsively in its promises of freedom, in order to grasp what little of it remains.
Evidence, please? How is success becoming "rarer and rarer for each of us?" This century has seen the creation of more capital than any other MILLENNIUM in history! How does that make success rarer? Or are we going to hear more shopworn carping about "the rich getting richer ...?"
This is nothing but a Restatement of Marx, and a darn poor one at that. Buy the Manifesto. It's cheaper and it reads easier.
Well, those have all helped, but I think the big fires out West this year have done more. There is amazing unanimity EVEN IN THE USUALLY PRO-ECOFREAK MEDIA that this huge damage is due to the short-sighteness of the eco-nut forest "nonmanagement" practices. They would rather see all the trees burn down than see the "evil lumber companies" cut SOME of them down in an ecologically correct fashion and make some (evil) money.
To put it another way: "From each according to his ability to each according to his needs"
At least he lays his ugly communism out in the open for all to see, unlike the Kennedy's and Daschle's of the world.
The Eco-socialists only hope is to somehow destroy civilization and regovern it the way they see fit. Notice I didn't use the word "rebuild".
Ayn Rand had their number in 1970. Read: The New Left: The Anti-Industrial Revolution. Every word is as true--or truer--today as when she wrote it.
--Boris
The Fuhrer was a Socialist. And a tree-hugging mystic. The Fuhrer raved constantly against capital. As do, or did, most of those others on the list. Nice try Joel but no soup for you! Come back in a year.
There is another wacko who is with the Green Anarchist. He is John Zerzan I think. He was on Fox. He published the unabomber's latest dribble. It advocates the destruction of our power grid in the USA. Destruction of computers. Destruction of internet, etc. He also said that capitalism, and modern society are going to destroy all life on earth. When asked if he advocates bombing people and places like the unabomber he wouldn't say yes, but he didn't say no either. I looked up their website. They are GREEN ANARCHY. Green Anarchy
They support unabomber, & that crazy tree sitter, etc. They also sell items like posters which use paper [cutting down trees] and ink [from factories].
They sell shirts [made in factories using machines, oil, fuel, to run machines. Ink or paint for the logo.]
They sell books [made from cutting down trees for the paper and ink from factories, etc.]
You get the idea HYPOCRITES BIG TIME!!!!
Greens are like a watermelon, Green on the outside and red on the inside.
A theory to be any good must fit with known facts. The Soviet Union was socialist and is now an environmental disaster. The United States is capitalist and can afford the expensive fixes the greenie wackos impose. So overall its pretty clean. Not very good at picking apart bad theory if one can call this outright nonsense impeccable. This tripe is just another Trojan Horse of lies and half truths to try and impose the evil of socialism upon us.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.