Ecological socialism lacks only a revolutionary subject

“Andreas Malm and Klaus Dörre believe that climate change can only be tackled with socialism. For one, every means is right, the other relies on democratic expropriation.

The doubts as to whether a democratic-capitalist system can withstand climate change gives rise to an ecologically renewed socialism. The leader of his militant wing is the activist and human ecologist Andreas Malm, who describes himself as an eco-Leninist. The professor who teaches at Lund University drew attention to himself by calling for pipelines to be blown up and SUVs to be damaged. He wants to give the climate negotiations that pressure that democratic balancing alone could not bring about.

Malm does not present his own concept for a nature-friendly social order, which is why it is not even clear why his socialism does not particularly affect those poor whom it actually wants to protect. It also remains unclear how he intends to achieve the technological innovation that is considered necessary through militancy. More convincing would have to be done here. Socialism also has a gloomy ecological balance.

Nature and society are opposites

Still, Malm is not just a dull eco-warrior. His new book takes a step back and asks what newer cultural theories have to contribute to solving the climate problem. His answer is: nothing at all, they only harm. The demand for a new image of nature that is no longer based on domination and exploitation has produced a number of theoretical new formations in the wake of post-structuralism, which aim to dissolve the differences between nature and society. It is often denied that there is any nature outside of our perception at all. Climate change will become a discourse effect that can be interpreted away at will. In this way, these theories, which tend to be critical of rule, would ultimately have an affirmative effect.

As Malm astutely justifies, one can only advise against theories which, like New Materialism, elevate inanimate matter to quasi-intentional actors. He was particularly impressed by the theoretical statements by Bruno Latour and Donna Haraway. For Malm, their constructivism is nothing more than the culture-industrial counterpart of capitalism, which converts every patch of nature into profit, or, to put it more elegantly: culture. If these authors do warn of the dangers of climate change, then, as he convincingly explains, they can only do so because of their theoretical inconsistency.

A new economic collectivism

For Malm the following applies: You have to turn away from these theories as quickly as possible if you want to save nature. He is on par with the later Marx, who has a realistic picture of nature. Nature is real, nature and society are opposites. It took Malm a lot of effort to bring these simple distinctions back to life. However, his political statements do not provide any guidance for a more sensible social order.

You can learn more about this from the sociologist Klaus Dörre, who only has fun with the new magic of things like Malm, but does not share his fascination with violence. In climate change, Dörre discovers the momentum to revive starving socialism, simply because nature cannot be dealt with with a system that is designed for wear and tear, such as capitalism. With the rising temperatures, the pressure will increase to convert the capitalist system into a socialism that is compatible with society and nature.

Utopian exuberance and a hard sense of reality

Dörre does not want to repeat the old mistakes. The greatest for him is to see socialism as a scientific doctrine that must be carried out through a bureaucratic elite. His ideal is a democratic socialism that grows from below and flexibly combines climate goals with social demands. He is aware that the socialist re-enchantment of nature will not be carried out by magic. The UN development goals, which link social and ecological factors, are supposed to provide the pressure to justify themselves.

 

On this basis of legitimation, new transformation councils should examine political and economic processes for their social and ecological sustainability. If a company violates the eco-social imperative, this should give the impetus to its gradual transfer to collective common property. 

 

This is fair for Dörre also because large companies are not viable on their own. 

 

For him, the first industries to be socialized are the agricultural and banking sectors. 

 

It is realistic enough to see that a new economic collectivism is not a sure-fire success. Firstly, there is no proof of its economic viability. Second, climate change leaves little time it for extensive and risky social experiments.

Dörre has the greatest difficulty in identifying its carrier layer. The international development goals by no means exert the pressure to justify themselves that he attributes to them; and the networked coalition of precariously employed academics and sections of the lower class that he envisions will not be enough to corner large corporations. So eco-socialism lacks its (r) evolutionary subject. But that does not make the author's criticism of the system obsolete. The mixture of utopian exuberance and a hard sense of reality pleasantly sets the book apart from an idealistic criticism that is limited to appeals to common sense. It can also be read at a profit if the path to the utopian goal is not entirely convincing.

Andreas Malm: "The progress of this storm". Nature and society in its warming world. Matthes & Seitz Verlag, Berlin 2021. 330 pp., Hardcover, € 28.

Klaus Dörre: "The Utopia of Socialism". Compass for a sustainability revolution. Matthes & Seitz Verlag, Berlin 2021. 345 pp., € 24.00."