11) IS MARXISM RELEVANT
TO ENVIRONMENTALISM?
(The following
article is from the May 16-31, 2010 issue of People's Voice,
Canada's
leading communist
newspaper. Articles can be reprinted free if the source is credited.
Subscription rates in Canada: $30/year, or $15 low income rate; for
U.S. readers - $45 US per year; other overseas readers - $45 US or $50
CDN per year. Send to:
People's Voice, c/o PV Business Manager, 706 Clark
Drive, Vancouver, BC, V5L 3J1.)
By Anna Pha, The
Guardian (newspaper of the Communist Party of Australia)
How often
have you heard it said
that Marxism has no relevance to the environmental crisis or that the
environment is not a class question? After all, Marx and Engels were
writing 150 years ago, long before the current environmental crisis.
Marx and
Engels certainly did
not have the benefit of the scientific knowledge that we enjoy today,
nor were there such imminent threats as climate warming or loss of
biodiversity. For example, the study of ecology - the interdependence
of the various components of nature - really only emerged as a widely
accepted science in the 1960s.
Engels
studied the historical
processes of the material world, the constant changes taking place and
the impact of each change on other aspects of that world. In the
Transition from Ape to Man, he says:
"Animals ...
change external
nature by their activities just as man does, if not to the same extent,
and these changes made by them in their environment ... in turn react
upon and change their originators. For in nature nothing takes place in
isolation. Everything affects every other thing and vice versa, and it
is usually because this many-sided motion and interaction is forgotten
that our natural scientists are prevented from clearly seeing the
simplest things."
"The animal
destroys the
vegetation of a locality without realising what it is doing. Man
destroys it in order to sow field crops on the soil thus released, or
to plant trees or vines which he knows will yield many times the amount
sown. He transfers useful plants and domestic animals from one country
to another and thus changes the flora and fauna of whole continents.
"More than
this. Under
artificial cultivation, both plants and animals are so changed by the
hand of man that they become unrecognisable. The wild plants from which
our grain varieties originated are still being sought in vain. The
question of the wild animal from which our dogs are descended, the dogs
themselves being so different from one another, or our equally numerous
breeds of horse, is still under dispute....
"But all the
planned action of
all animals has never resulted in impressing the stamp of their will
upon nature. For that, man was required.
"In short,
the animal merely
uses external nature, and brings about changes in it simply by his
presence; man by his changes makes it serve his ends, masters it...
"Let us not,
however, flatter
ourselves overmuch on account of our human conquest over nature. For
each such conquest takes its revenge on us. Each of them, it is true,
has in the first place the consequences on which we counted, but in the
second and third places it has quite different, unforeseen effects
which only too often cancel out the first."
How true!
Humans had no idea
that the extensive use of fossil fuels and other producers greenhouse
gas emissions would burn holes in the ozone layer, induce global
warming and bring the human race to the brink of extinction. This is
the same process that Engels is describing. Of course Engels had no
means to foresee the extent of revenge that nature would take on
humanity.
Engels
continues in the same
prophetic vein: "The people who, in Mesopotamia, Greece, Asia Minor,
and elsewhere destroyed the forests to obtain cultivable land, never
dreamed that they were laying the basis for the present devastated
condition of these countries, by removing along with the forests the
collecting centres and reservoirs of moisture.
"When, on
the southern slopes of
the mountains, the Italians of the Alps used up the pine forests so
carefully cherished on the northern slopes, they had no inkling that by
doing so they were cutting at the roots of the dairy industry in their
region; they had still less inkling that they were thereby depriving
their mountain springs of water for the greater part of the year, with
the effect that these would be able to pour still more furious flood
torrents on the plains during the rainy seasons..."
This
analysis stands the test of time.
"Thus at
every step we are
reminded that we by no means rule over nature like a conqueror over a
foreign people, like someone standing outside nature - but that we,
with flesh, blood, and brains, belong to nature, and exist in its
midst, and that all our mastery of it consists in the fact that we have
the advantage over all other beings of being able to know and correctly
apply its laws."
Engels
looked not just at the
impact on nature but on the social consequences of human actions. He
looked at the impact of primitive communal ownership of land and the
barest means of subsistence and compared this with higher forms of
production and the eventual division of the population into different
classes - the capitalist mode of production.
"The
individual capitalists, who
dominate production and exchange, are able to concern themselves only
with the most immediate useful effect of their actions. Indeed, even
this useful effect - as much as it is a question of the usefulness of
the commodity that is produced or exchanged - retreats right into the
background, and the sole incentive becomes the profit to be gained on
selling."
The
manufacturer Engels says, is "not concerned as to what becomes of the
commodity afterwards or who are its purchasers".
Engels asks: "What did the Spanish
planters in Cuba, who burned down forests on the slopes of the
mountains and obtained from the ashes sufficient fertiliser for one
generation of very highly profitable coffee trees, care that the
tropical rainfall afterwards washed away the now unprotected upper
stratum of the soil, leaving behind only bare rock?
"In relation
to nature, as to
society, the present mode of production is predominantly concerned only
about the first, tangible success; and then surprise is expressed that
the more remote effects of actions directed to this end turn out to be
of quite different, mainly even of quite an opposite, character."
That narrow
focus on immediate
outcomes, on profits, is what drives capitalism. The process described
by Engels was accelerated by colonialism and continues unabated today.
The result
is desertification,
salination, river-beds drying up, extreme weather conditions and the
many other forms of environmental crisis that people around the globe
have experienced.
The result
is global warming,
irretrievable loss of biodiversity, millions of people facing
starvation and many plant and animal species, including human beings,
facing the threat of extinction.
Marx also
recognised the
relationship between humans and nature: "man himself is a product of
Nature which has been developed in and along with its environment". (A
criticism of the Hegelian Philosophy of Law). If only the full
implications of their writings had been further studied.
Marxist
theory is a living tool,
a scientific approach to interpreting and understanding the universe.
Marxism is the application of scientific method to social, economic and
environmental issues. Scientific method is not static but continually
undergoes change reflecting our knowledge of the material world around
us.
Communists
bring something to
the environmental struggle that many other groups do not; that is their
class analysis of the causes of the crisis - capitalism. Based on that
analysis they also identify the only basis of a lasting solution -
socialism. They have an important role to play in tackling the pressing
questions of climate change, biodiversity and sustainable development.
Marxism serves all environmentalists, including communists, well.