Hugendubel.info - Die B2B Online-Buchhandlung 

Merkliste
Die Merkliste ist leer.
Bitte warten - die Druckansicht der Seite wird vorbereitet.
Der Druckdialog öffnet sich, sobald die Seite vollständig geladen wurde.
Sollte die Druckvorschau unvollständig sein, bitte schliessen und "Erneut drucken" wählen.

Eco-Socialism or 'Green' Capitalism?

E-BookEPUBePub WasserzeichenE-Book
330 Seiten
Englisch
Books on Demanderschienen am11.10.20231. Auflage
After the ignominious fall of the classical Soviet model of "socialism" in the early 1990s, socialists, communists, and all other kinds of Leftists had felt to have been left in the lurch. With his book Eco-Socialism or Eco-Capitalism? A Critical Analysis of Humanity's Fundamental Choices (1999), Saral Sarkar presented and laid the theoretical foundation of a new conception of socialism, which convinced because it organically synthesized the newly arisen imperative of ecological sustainability and the old ideal of equality among members of humanity. On their part, all opponents of any kind of socialism have also been trying to somehow accommodate the inexorable insights and demands of true ecological sustainability in extant conceptions of capitalism. What they have achieved is not a synthesis, but merely a fake and self-contradictory phrase that does not deserve the prefix "Eco-", and should properly be called "Green"-Capitalism. But they succeeded in hoodwinking millions of worried human beings all over the world. In the last thirty years, Sarkar has been relentlessly trying through speeches and writings to counter their misconceptions of the ecological and social imperatives. In the present two volumes of his Collected Writings, readers will find some of the fruits of his endeavor. Table of Contents, Vol. 2: Ch. 5: On Population Growth and Unwelcome Mass Immigration Ch. 6: On Fascism, Secessionism, Identity Politics and Other "Reactionary" Trends Ch. 7: Futility of Activism Without Analysis Ch. 8: Concluding Essays Table of Contents, Vol. 1: Ch. 1: Polit-autobiographical Essays Ch. 2: Essays on the Renewable Energies Question Ch. 3: The Recent Economic Crises Ch. 4: More on Socialism, Eco-Socialism, Leftism

Saral Sarkar was born in 1936 in a village of West Bengal, India. After graduating from the University of Calcutta (Kolkata), he studied German language and literature for five years at the Goethe Institute in India and Germany. From 1966 to 1981, he was lecturer of German at the Goethe Institute in Hyderabad, India. Since 1982, he has been living in Cologne, Germany, where he has been active in the Green Movement, Anti-Globalization Movement, and all kinds of ecological and leftist movements. He was member of the Green Party of Germany from 1982 to 1987, but left the party in deep disappointment. Over the years, Sarkar has taken part in many discussions and debates in the above-mentioned areas and published widely in political journals in India, Europe, and the American Continent. His basal theoretical work "Eco-Socialism or Eco-Capitalism? A Critical Analysis of Humanity's Fundamental Choices" (1999, London) has also been published in German, French (in internet), Chinese and Japanese. His other major works are: Green-Alternative Politics in West Germany, Vol. I & II (1993, 1994, Tokyo), and The Crises of Capitalism - A Different Study of Political Economy (2012, Berkeley), which was originally published in German (2010, Neu-Ulm).mehr
Verfügbare Formate
BuchKartoniert, Paperback
EUR15,00
E-BookEPUBePub WasserzeichenE-Book
EUR8,99

Produkt

KlappentextAfter the ignominious fall of the classical Soviet model of "socialism" in the early 1990s, socialists, communists, and all other kinds of Leftists had felt to have been left in the lurch. With his book Eco-Socialism or Eco-Capitalism? A Critical Analysis of Humanity's Fundamental Choices (1999), Saral Sarkar presented and laid the theoretical foundation of a new conception of socialism, which convinced because it organically synthesized the newly arisen imperative of ecological sustainability and the old ideal of equality among members of humanity. On their part, all opponents of any kind of socialism have also been trying to somehow accommodate the inexorable insights and demands of true ecological sustainability in extant conceptions of capitalism. What they have achieved is not a synthesis, but merely a fake and self-contradictory phrase that does not deserve the prefix "Eco-", and should properly be called "Green"-Capitalism. But they succeeded in hoodwinking millions of worried human beings all over the world. In the last thirty years, Sarkar has been relentlessly trying through speeches and writings to counter their misconceptions of the ecological and social imperatives. In the present two volumes of his Collected Writings, readers will find some of the fruits of his endeavor. Table of Contents, Vol. 2: Ch. 5: On Population Growth and Unwelcome Mass Immigration Ch. 6: On Fascism, Secessionism, Identity Politics and Other "Reactionary" Trends Ch. 7: Futility of Activism Without Analysis Ch. 8: Concluding Essays Table of Contents, Vol. 1: Ch. 1: Polit-autobiographical Essays Ch. 2: Essays on the Renewable Energies Question Ch. 3: The Recent Economic Crises Ch. 4: More on Socialism, Eco-Socialism, Leftism

Saral Sarkar was born in 1936 in a village of West Bengal, India. After graduating from the University of Calcutta (Kolkata), he studied German language and literature for five years at the Goethe Institute in India and Germany. From 1966 to 1981, he was lecturer of German at the Goethe Institute in Hyderabad, India. Since 1982, he has been living in Cologne, Germany, where he has been active in the Green Movement, Anti-Globalization Movement, and all kinds of ecological and leftist movements. He was member of the Green Party of Germany from 1982 to 1987, but left the party in deep disappointment. Over the years, Sarkar has taken part in many discussions and debates in the above-mentioned areas and published widely in political journals in India, Europe, and the American Continent. His basal theoretical work "Eco-Socialism or Eco-Capitalism? A Critical Analysis of Humanity's Fundamental Choices" (1999, London) has also been published in German, French (in internet), Chinese and Japanese. His other major works are: Green-Alternative Politics in West Germany, Vol. I & II (1993, 1994, Tokyo), and The Crises of Capitalism - A Different Study of Political Economy (2012, Berkeley), which was originally published in German (2010, Neu-Ulm).
Details
Weitere ISBN/GTIN9783758385247
ProduktartE-Book
EinbandartE-Book
FormatEPUB
Format HinweisePub Wasserzeichen
Erscheinungsjahr2023
Erscheinungsdatum11.10.2023
Auflage1. Auflage
ReiheEco-Socialism or 'Green' Capitalism? Collected Writings of Saral Sarkar
Reihen-Nr.2
Seiten330 Seiten
SpracheEnglisch
Artikel-Nr.12531578
Rubriken
Genre9200

Inhalt/Kritik

Leseprobe

Polemics is Useless - A Proposal For an Eco-socialist Synthesis in the Overpopulation Dispute
First published (on the blog-site): 18.08.2012

This essay was originally published in 1993. Twenty years later, with 7 billion people living on the planet today and a projected world population of 9 billion in 2050, its importance has sharply increased. Some facts and figures on the ground have of course changed since 1993, especially with regard to India. But the basic facts and arguments remain the same. And the problem still remains unsolved.

The problem of population growth is not only a very important topic, it is also a delicate, even an explosive one. In many leftist, feminist and Third World solidarity circles it is almost impossible to mention it as a serious problem. For many ecologists of the North it is a taboo-topic. They are often afraid of raising this issue, afraid of being abused as eco-imperialists.

That is understandable. As long as imperialist institutions like the US government, Rockefeller Foundation, World Bank or individual experts like Garrett Hardin1 and Maurice King2 (but also the rulers of the South) are the main protagonists of birth control, the objects of their policies would naturally view every population policy with suspicion. As long as the former think that the latter produce children like rabbits or look at them as if they were weeds, the latter and their political sympathizers will shout back. As long as population policies are implemented at the cost of the health of women, women's groups will naturally reject them.

As a result of this situation, a genuine discussion between the two sides - the ecologists of the North on the one side and the leftists, feminists and Third World solidarity circles on the other - cannot (and actually does not) take place. What takes place is usually merely polemics. But polemics is of no use. A sincere discussion between the protagonists and opponents of population control is necessary, because the problem is very serious, because a solution must be found soon.

For a genuine discussion on this topic to be possible, it is necessary to break two taboos. One has already been mentioned above. Ecologists of the North must be allowed to raise the issue without being abused as eco-imperialists. And leftists and others must be allowed to raise the system question without being accused of not having learnt anything. History has not come to an end.3 Capitalism, free market economy, the present world economic order etc. must be allowed to be brought into the discussion. The discussion must be freed from polemics. All of us, who are concerned about the whole situation - about ecology, hunger, poverty, exploitation, oppression, war, peace and the fate of the future generations - must for once forget our opponents, think the problem through, and ask ourselves what we would do if we had to decide what is to be and can be done today.
Malthus: The Difference Between Problem and Policy
The thinking through must begin with Malthus. We must differentiate between problem and policy. Population policy can be so or so. The one policy can be rejected, the other accepted. But the population problem is an objective state of affairs, which cannot be conjured away. Mixing up the two in discussions creates only confusion.

The indignation against Malthus is justified. According to him, the poor are themselves to be blamed for their poverty. Without doubt, he was an apologist of the then still ruling class of landlords- This class did not want any social change, and so also Malthus considered it impossible to change society. But the question is whether, for this reason, Malthus'es presentation of the problem is also wrong.

The harshest critics of Malthus have always been the leftists4. Marx considered the essay of Malthus to be a libel on the human race . Engels wrote in 1865: Economic laws are not eternal laws of nature but historic laws which arise and disappear. He thought, what is tenable in the so-called Malthusian theory is valid only for societies based on class rule and class exploitation . That was no proper refutation. But serious efforts were also made to refute one of the two laws of Malthus. Engels and Lenin recognized that Malthus'es law regarding food production, namely that it increases only in arithmetical progression, is actually based on the law of diminishing returns. They declared that the progress of science and technology is limitless and that this factor of production nullifies the law of diminishing returns, which is otherwise valid, i.e. with regard to the factor of production labour. Basing himself on this optimism, Fidel Castro said in the early sixties:

Nobody who is conscious of what man can achieve with the help of science and technology will want to set a limit to the number of people that can live on the earth. 5

For a few decades after the death of Marx, Engels and Lenin, Malthus indeed appeared to be refuted through the factual developments. Thanks to science and technology, food production increased by leaps and bounds. At least in the industrial societies there was no hunger.

But science and technology have in the meantime disappointed further expectations. F. E. Trainer (I suppose a leftist) quotes scientists who ascertained in 1979 and 1980 that returns to technology were generally falling.6 In 1934, Lester Brown wrote:

The response of crops to the use of additional fertilizer is now diminishing, particularly in agriculturally advanced countries. During the fifties, the application of another ton of fertilizer on average yielded 11.5 more tons of grain. During the sixties, fertilizer grain response ratio was 8.3 to 1. By the seventies it had fallen to 5.8. 7

So far as food production is concerned, Trainer informs us, not only is the per capita production stagnating for quite a few years, but in some branches also the absolute production.8 And the ecological and social havocs that modern science and technology have caused (e.g. the green revolution, chemical and radioactive poisoning) and are threatening to cause (genetic engineering) have induced many people to demand a return to the traditional methods of cultivation, which yield less harvest per hectare.

The other law of Malthus - population grows, if not controlled, in geometrical progression - is more difficult to refute. The only thing that his opponents can do in this respect is to point at the fact that in industrial societies population has stopped growing or is growing very slowly. But that is also no real refutation inasmuch as the couples of these countries are using various means to control birth. An average healthy German couple could, if it would not use any method of contraception or abortion, produce 15 children in 30 years. Obviously, the two laws of Malthus are natural laws.
The Present-day Controversy: What Should Come First?
In the seventies and eighties, the controversy has undergone a qualitative change. The problem is no longer only that of poverty and hunger. Exactly the factors that in the past helped overcome hunger - science, technology and industrialization - have presented us with the global ecological crisis. Neo-Malthusian Paul Ehrlich wrote: In the long run, the progressive deterioration of our environment may cause more death and misery than any conceivable food-population gap .9

A few leftists (surely not the majority) have conceded that the problem, as the neo-Malthusians describe it, does indeed exist. One of them, Steve Weissman, wrote as early as in 1971:

[...] the neo-Malthusians quickly confound the answer given Reverend Malthus by the nineteenth century, and by most Marxists. This time around, we can't simply wait for science and technology to get us out of the hole. New miracle grains [...] But we now know the cost in environmental destruction. [...] the green revolution might not even deliver the agricultural goods. 10

Also a few neo-Malthusians (here also not the majority) have moved beyond Malthus. Ehrlich, e.g., wrote:

The battle to save our planet is not just a battle for population control and environmental sanity, it is also a battle against exploitation, against war, and against racism. 11

The two authors quoted here and their intellectual kin differ mainly in their political approach, in their policy priority. Ehrlich probably interpretes the term "exploitation" less radically than Weissman. But the main question is still: What should come first? Development and radical social change or stopping the population growth? It looks almost like a vicious circle. Ehrlich wrote addressing the leftists: Whatever your cause, it's a lost cause unless we control population. 12 That means, population growth must be stopped first. But Weissman as well as all leftists who have realized that the earth cannot carry an unlimited number of humans are of the opinion that population control cannot function at all under the present-day social conditions (or it may function only if the ruling classes use massive force). That means, they demand radical social change first. Weissman wrote:

[...] it is capitalism which creates this irrationality and hastens the destruction of the environment [...], and without destroying capitalism, neither green revolutions nor...
mehr