The focus of degrowth is not capitalism but advanced ecological overshoot. Humans have destroyed their ecosystems long before capitalism. Capitalism, powered by fossil fuels, allowed us to do it on a global scale. In essence, degrowth is about radical reduction of material throughput - taking our boot off nature's neck. A consequence of such a reduction is reduced economic activity. Focusing on material throughput reduction instead of eliminating capitalism allows us to focus on the science of overshoot and avoid the ideological (and often idiotic) debates about capitalism. Reducing throughput is the goal (and inevitable at some point); eliminating capitalism is the consequence of reducing throughput.
I guess that radical degrowth is really only necessary for the wealthiest 3 or 4 percent of the world’s population to drop the energy demand, the emissions, and the whole "footprint" below the levels of a half century ago ... but ....
those are the very people who are least likely to cut back and are actually intending to increase their consumption.
Oh well, at least we know where to look for savings, and it's not the southern hemisphere.
Thanks for a superb article. What do think are the chances that it will happen? One way or another it's going to happen eventually either by choice or catastrophe. And is there enough time left to accomplish it by choice? My opinion at this stage is likely no. But it's still worth trying.
Well said Jack.
The focus of degrowth is not capitalism but advanced ecological overshoot. Humans have destroyed their ecosystems long before capitalism. Capitalism, powered by fossil fuels, allowed us to do it on a global scale. In essence, degrowth is about radical reduction of material throughput - taking our boot off nature's neck. A consequence of such a reduction is reduced economic activity. Focusing on material throughput reduction instead of eliminating capitalism allows us to focus on the science of overshoot and avoid the ideological (and often idiotic) debates about capitalism. Reducing throughput is the goal (and inevitable at some point); eliminating capitalism is the consequence of reducing throughput.
I guess that radical degrowth is really only necessary for the wealthiest 3 or 4 percent of the world’s population to drop the energy demand, the emissions, and the whole "footprint" below the levels of a half century ago ... but ....
those are the very people who are least likely to cut back and are actually intending to increase their consumption.
Oh well, at least we know where to look for savings, and it's not the southern hemisphere.
Thanks for a superb article. What do think are the chances that it will happen? One way or another it's going to happen eventually either by choice or catastrophe. And is there enough time left to accomplish it by choice? My opinion at this stage is likely no. But it's still worth trying.