Antropocene o Capitalocene? Scenari di ecologia-mondo nella crisi planetaria

by Jason W. Moore

Che i drammatici cambiamenti climatici degli ultimi decenni siano dovuti alle emissioni antropogeniche di gas serra è un fatto acclarato, che non suscita serie controversie se non da parte di qualche sparuta setta negazionista. Quali siano le conseguenze di tale situazione è invece oggetto di discussione. Sempre più spesso si sente parlare, nei circoli accademici ma anche sui mass media, di "Antropocene". Il premio Nobel per la chimica Paul Crutzen, che ha coniato il termine, intende con esso una nuova era geologica in cui le attività umane sono diventate il fattore determinante, decretando così la fine dell'Olocene. L'umanità come un tutto indifferenziato (e colpevole) da un lato, l'ambiente incontaminato (e innocente) dall'altro. Jason W. Moore rifiuta questa impostazione e parte dal presupposto che l'idea di una natura esterna ai processi di produzione non sia che un effetto ottico, un puntello ideologico su cui si è appoggiato il capitalismo. Al contrario, il concetto di ecologia-mondo rimanda a una commistione originaria tra dinamiche sociali ed elementi naturali che compongono il modo di produzione capitalistico nel suo divenire storico, nella sua tendenza a farsi mercato mondiale. Il capitalismo non ha un regime ecologico, è un regime ecologico. Sfruttamento e creazione di valore non si danno sulla natura, ma attraverso di essa - cioè dentro i rapporti socio-naturali che emergono dall'articolazione variabile di capitale, potere e ambiente. Si tratta dunque di analizzare la forma storica di questa articolazione - ciò che Moore chiama "Capitalocene": il capitale come modo di organizzazione della natura - per fronteggiare l'urgenza dei disastri ambientali che ci circondano.

Genres: Nonfiction, History, Politics, Sociology, Economics, Ecology, Philosophy

173 pages, Paperback

First published April 1, 2016

About the author

Jason W. Moore is an environmental historian and historical geographer at Binghamton University, where he is associate professor of sociology. He is author or editor, most recently, of Capitalism in the Web of Life (Verso, 2015), Capitalocene o Antropocene? (Ombre Corte, 2017), Anthropocene or Capitalocene? Nature, History, and the Crisis of Capitalism (PM Press, 2016), and, with Raj Patel, A History of the World in Seven Cheap Things (University of California Press, 2017). His books and essays on environmental history, capitalism, and social theory have been widely recognized, including the Alice Hamilton Prize of the American Society for Environmental History (2003), the Distinguished Scholarship Award of the Section on the Political Economy of the World-System (American Sociological Association, 2002 for articles, and 2015 for Web of Life), and the Byres and Bernstein Prize in Agrarian Change (2011). He is chair (2017-18) of the Political Economy of the World-System Section (ASA), and coordinates the World-Ecology Research Network.

Reviews

[Rhys · Rating 5 out of 5]

Each of the essays in this edited book was a pleasure to read - many interesting and new (to me) ideas related the topics of capital, power and nature.

Moore's world-ecology, cheap nature, and the Capitalocene were well teased out with contrasting concepts like Haraway's Chthulucene or McBrien's Necrocene.

I was also taken with Parenti's role of the State in world-ecology and his advice to the Left: "As we have seen, the history of capitalist development is almost always the history of state-guided development. To reform capitalism – and to move beyond it – the Left needs to place the state front and center in its strategic considerations. Appeals to corporate social responsibility, attempts to shame capital into reform, strategies that declare politics ‘broken” and seek to circumvent the state, or escapist hyperlocalism – all hallmarks of American environmentalism – are fundamentally unrealistic" (p.182).

I will definitely move on to Jason Moore's Capitalism in the Web of Life: Ecology and the Accumulation of Capital after having read this book.

[Javier · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was a pretty good volume deconstructing the recent move to rename the current geological epoch (the Holocene) "the Anthropocene." The essays by Eileen Crist and Justin McBrien were the best, in my opinion, with Jason Moore's article also being good. If it had just been these essays, I would have given the volume 4 or 5 stars. The problem is that the rest of the essays were sub-par to me. Elmar Atvater's essay on geoengineering didn't even really discuss geo-engineering, save for the last page or so, while Christian Parenti regurgitated the line he has been promoting for a few years now, i.e. that the left should try to "take over the State" in order to deal with the climate and ecological crises. This latter opinion was not very well-developed or convincing. Donna Haraway's essay was very intriguing but often quite difficult to understand, at least for me. Overall, it seems strange that the impetus to rename this epoch to "Anthropocene" should take on a technocratic, neo-liberal meaning, rather than lead to a profound questioning of the very factors that are impelling utter disaster, but the authors were right to call out this perplexing dynamic. McBrien's discussion of capitalism as "accumulation of extinction" is very apt.

[F. Rafael · Rating 2 out of 5]

2.5.

I feel as if I just read a book of opinions; with some theories scattered around. The main point of the book is to recommend changing the term Anthropocene, which glorifies human transformation of geology and ecology, for capitalocene, which states the destruction that the desire for increasing revenues at imperial, enterprise and personal level produces.
Some of the theories are that technology will not be able to produce a way for humans to keep harnessing the increasing demand for energy, and that changes need to be made. However, no recommendations for those needed changes are made, and no sustenance is given to this proposed idea.

The second essay is specially bad; I think this was the worst nonfiction writing I have ever read. At one point, the author compared everyone who didn't agree with her opinion a non-thinking Nazi, which was interesting.
The third essay is specially good, and would be my only recommendation in this book.

I found the most interesting point of the book the proposal to change perspective from thinking about humanity's endeavor as a worldwide enterprise, and see it as the initiatives of people in power. The Golden rule is that he who has the gold sets the rule; that applies to exploitation of resources as well.

My understanding is that the point of living beings, in a biological and almost cellular level is to harness as much energy as possible with as little work possible to keep your genes alive; it has been the story of all living things and the history of man-kind. Opinions that do not contemplate this fact of existence will mostly be illusions of a perfect world where everyone is happy while living less comfortable, and where power is not used to accumulate resources. I'm not sure who this book is for, but it feels more like a novel than as a serious publication.

[Alessandra · Rating 4 out of 5]

Libro letto per un esame, che si è rivelato essere l’unica parte utile dell’intero esame stesso…

Il fato ha voluto che qualche giorno dopo iniziassi un corso all’università che riguarda la filosofia del consumo, la storia del capitalismo, e tantissime altre materie sulle quali questo libro mi aveva già preparata.

La scrittura è scorrevole, i concetti chiari, e tutto arriva in maniera limpida e diretta, come dovrebbe essere sempre con questo genere di letture. Credo che si possa definire un piccolo capolavoro di saggistica.

Alcuni concetti sono sicuramente progrediti nel corso degli anni, ma anche chi non è alle prime armi con gli argomenti trattati troverà sicuramente delle sfumature interessanti, che vanno al di là dei nomi citati nel titolo. Piccole citazioni filosofiche, note su eventi, parole, e usi e costumi di tempi andati.
Un piccolo mondo a sé, in poche pagine.

Quattro stelle belle piene più che meritate.
E soprattutto più consapevolezza del mondo circostante, oltre che voglia di tenere gli occhi ben spalancati sulla società in costruzione.

[Nicolás Vallejo · Rating 3 out of 5]

Al ser una recopilación de articulos/ensayos, el lector encontrará variedad. De cualquier a forma, a mi modo de ver, la variedad no es necesariamente buena, especialmente cuando implica escritos como el de Crist, el cual parece me parece disparatado y al mismo tiempo escritos como el de McBrien que considero muy acertado.

[Lelia Solitaire · Rating 1 out of 5]

Un libro di rara bruttezza. Seppur d’accordo con le tesi dell’autore, la lettura è stata una vera tortura

[Daniel · Rating 4 out of 5]

The title of the book seems to indicate to the reader that this book is a comprehensive "state-of-play" of the current state of the world, and discuss the choice of either Anthropocene or Capitalocene as the current geological era. This book is not that. Such a book would be at least three times the length, and would not have been organized as a series of seven essays.

First disclaimer is that the essays in this book are clearly academic in formulation, with clear references to other articles and essays written about the topics. This was a bit of a jarring realization at first, though truly makes sense for this topic. Let's be clear, this book is designed as an academic/philosophical text aimed at properly describing the true state of today, which they somewhat unclearly (from the outset, though becomes quickly apparent) have all already decided is the Capitalocene.

The academic formulation is taken to its extreme in the second essay, which seems to be written with intention of confusing anyone who dares try to read it. In the first paragraphs a non-standard acronym is used, but is never defined or introduced despite it being the main focus of the essay. The first essay was a helpful introduction, and I really believe that the essays in the middle of the book truly stab at the heart of the topic, providing the reader with a good understanding of really what is happening to the world, and that the capitalistic model of environment shaping is how we got here, and perhaps most importantly that everything is interconnected in reality. Fossil fuels aren't solely to blame, big companies aren't solely to blame, but the "world-ecology" that capitalism has created is to blame. Saving rainforests won't save the planet, shifting the system in which we approach modern life and its relation with nature is necessary.

Disappointingly for me, the final two essays lack depth, and both seem preambles to larger topics that left me wanting. As a fan of history, I felt ready to dive into the details of how the natural environment meeting environment shaping got us to where we are today, but this seems to be introduced and then finished.

I think this is an important text to read for those truly interested in the issues of what has been done to the planet, yet there is much more to be dug into here. The second essay can be skipped without missing any real information besides the concept that everything is interconnected, which is neither cleanly nor clearly stated.

[Sam · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is an interesting collection of short essays, some more opinion pieces than others, that tie in with the idea that rather than seeing the current epoch as driven by humans (Anthropocene) it would be more apt to see and describe it as being driven by capitalism (Capitalocene). Personally I'm not convinced on the need to change this as either way people are at the core of the issue, be it as modern people or as consumers but I also agree with the opinions and evidence provided that it is our 'need' for more more more that is a big part of the issue. That and the hope/reliance/dream that the very thing that got us into this mess (technology, markets, capitalism, money, consumerism, whatever you want to call it) will also get us out of it without us having to make real changes. These essays focus on the fact that that approach will not work and that there needs to be a mental shift within governments, organisations, and individuals away from this if we are to have an hope of avoiding our own extinction.

[Ksenia Naydenova · Rating 4 out of 5]

It’s been pretty hard read for me since the book consists of academic language, but I enjoyed learning new ideas about the capital, nature, and the state. I don’t think I absorbed as much information as I wish I could have, but I also found one of the essays translated to Russian and it helped me a lot with understanding. Maybe one day they will realize the translation and I will definitely give it another try.

"We live at crossroads in the history of our species—and of planetary life. What comes next is unknowable with any certainty. But it is not looking good.
Environmental theory and research tells us, today, just how bad it is. Climate change. Ocean acidification. To these planetary shifts, one can add countless regional stories—runaway toxic disasters on land and at sea; cancer clusters; frequent and severe droughts. Our collective sense of "environmental consequences" has never been greater.”

[Tomek · Rating 3 out of 5]

This anthology of writings debates the utility and validity of the Anthropocene concept. It does not challenge the reality that the environment is undergoing rapid deleterious change, but that the naming of this new age, far from being mere pedantics, can powerfully shape how we go about addressing these issues. I took one star off for its being uneven; Moore's chapter stands out as being particularly good. The other essays are, in my opinion, either unnecessary convoluted (Haraway) or add little to the discussion beyond what is presented in other chapters (McBrien). I took off another star for the lack of any perspectives that supported the concept or offered rebuttals to the criticisms presented here, and I would have liked to see a more multidisciplinary approach involve a biophysical scientist or two.

[Gabriel Leibold · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a terrific book. Its major contribution seems to consist on the promotion of a deeply nuanced perspective on the problematics of naming our geological time The Anthropocene and giving space to a marxist overview of the ecological disaster our world is currently facing. A critical reading of the capitalist history appears to be the best way to understand the broadness of its influence on the current state of affairs.

[Cemresu · Rating 5 out of 5]

The way of focusing on cartesian dualism btw nature and humanity seems inspiring. Likewise anthropocene, capitalocene also depends on this dualism, though capitalocene is mostly preferred because it presents a different one to blame: capitalism. But is it that different? Is it that much the 'other' or just humanity wanna show themselves 'innocent'.

Inspiring.

[Osore Misanthrope]

Хтедох рећи да је МакБрајанов есеј дражесан, али сада уз две исправке: 1) фораминифере нису пужеви (ту ме је први пут сецнуло) и 2) еколошки мизантропи и ахуманисти нису исто што и малтусовски екофашисти.

[Alexander Pyles · Rating 4 out of 5]

*review forthcoming*

[Paz · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is the volume to read if you want to have at hand a founded critique on the concept of the Anthropocene.

[Denis · Rating 4 out of 5]

Deducting a star for the second chapter.
Honestly, just skip it if you're reading the book. The other chapters have interesting and great ideas and concepts.

[Ezequiel]

Los textos de Moore y McBrien son estupendos.

[Stanislao Turco · Rating 3 out of 5]

3,5

[Chiara · Rating 2 out of 5]

Se riuscissi a capire che cosa sta dicendo... Complesso e ripetitivo, peccato perché mi interessava molto il tema e invece ho avuto molta difficoltà a seguire

[Emma Sea]

not in library