What do you think?
Rate this book
People' Power: Reclaiming the Energy Commons
The science is conclusive: to avoid irreversible climate collapse, the burning of all fossil fuels will have to end in the next decade. In this concise and highly readable intervention, Ashley Dawson sets out what is required to make this momentous shift: Simply replacing coal-fired power plants with for-profit solar energy farms will only maintain the toxic illusion that it is possible to sustain relentlessly expanding energy consumption. We can no longer think of energy as a commodity. Instead we must see it as part of the global commons, a vital element in the great stock of air, water, plants, and cultural forms like language and art that are the inheritance of humanity as a whole.
People’s Power provides a persuasive critique of a market-led transition to renewable energy. It surveys the early development of the electric grid in the United States, telling the story of battles for public control over power during the Great Depression. This history frames accounts of contemporary campaigns, in both the United States and Europe, that eschew market fundamentalism and sclerotic state power in favor of energy that is green, democratically managed and equitably shared.
“An elegant, controversial thesis” —The Guardian on Ashley Dawson’s Extinction
People’s Power provides a persuasive critique of a market-led transition to renewable energy. It surveys the early development of the electric grid in the United States, telling the story of battles for public control over power during the Great Depression. This history frames accounts of contemporary campaigns, in both the United States and Europe, that eschew market fundamentalism and sclerotic state power in favor of energy that is green, democratically managed and equitably shared.
“An elegant, controversial thesis” —The Guardian on Ashley Dawson’s Extinction
160 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2020
8 people are currently reading
377 people want to read
About the author
Ashley Dawson
65 books25 followersAshley Dawson is a professor of English at CUNY, New York City. He is the author of Extinction, Mongrel Nation and The Routledge Concise History of Twentieth-Century British Literature, as well as a short story in the anthology Staten Island Noir.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
April 18, 2024
Power Struggle in the Climate Crisis…
Preamble:
--If we rely on Bill Gates’ How to Avoid a Climate Disaster: The Solutions We Have and the Breakthroughs We Need and Gates’ favourite author Vaclav Smil’s How the World Really Works: A Scientist's Guide to Our Past, Present and Future, we are left with no critical analysis on the causes of the “climate crisis”.
…This is deliberate, as readers can comfortably assume the status quo narrative… some vague notion of the individualist greed in “human nature”, upon discovering “technology”, sleepwalked into the climate crisis. And the solution is to re-design “technology”, to be designed by technocrats like themselves of course!
--Thus, Dawson’s book is a crucial intervention, revealing the constant power struggles behind technologies (focusing on crucial histories of energy production in the Global North) and the range of different paths we can take.
The Missing:
1) Systems-level delivery:
--The main strength in Gates’/Smil’s books is their concise delivery from a systems level, carefully presenting the big picture with accessible technical lenses esp. involving time/space. Given the complexity and abstract scales involved in the climate crisis, this is essential. Also see: Thinking in Systems: A Primer
…Liberal (i.e. cosmopolitan capitalist) technocrats have substantial institutional resources devoted to managerialism/engineering; of course, we should be wary relying on their framing.
--Still, Dawson’s book, and his social science readers, can benefit from upgrading their technical tools. A related resource is the “evidence-based” research methodologies which Goldacre introduces (paired with critical social analysis):
-Bad Science: Quacks, Hacks, and Big Pharma Flacks
-I Think You'll Find It's a Bit More Complicated Than That
--Otherwise, Dawson leaves us with important passages on scale that are unnecessarily vague:
i) Ex. “The energy sector is responsible for at least two-thirds of all greenhouse gas emissions.”
…It would help to start with a table of how we are breaking down emissions here…presumably by “sectors”, so which sectors are we categorizing? Are there other more-accessible ways to break this down, for example by activities (production/electricity/agriculture/transportation/heating and cooling, in Gates’ book)?
ii) Ex. “[…] the transportation and heating and cooling sectors, which together account for 80 percent of global final energy demand […]”
…It would help to explain what “final energy” is. Our World in Data, one of those institutional resources which predictably Gates’ Foundation has donated to, has a clear description of energy definitions. “Final energy” is the energy received by consumers, after “Primary energy” (raw resources; most widely used stat) and “Secondary energy” (transformed into transportable form), with energy losses at each stage.
…“80 percent” sounds like a lot, but the total here is only consumers’ direct (“final”) energy demand. In Gates’ breakdown for total emissions, “transportation” (16%) and “heating/cooling” (7%) are less than:
a) “production” (37%): this involves (a lot of) indirect (not “final”) energy demand/emissions, esp. the raw materials cement/steel/plastics.
b) “electricity” (27%): I’m assuming the mismatch here (why transportation/heating and cooling make up less than electricity in Gates’ emissions breakdown vs. Dawson’s final energy demand) is because much of electricity generation is outside Dawson’s “final energy”, so Gates’ 27% electricity captures all the stages (“Primary”, “Secondary”, “Final”) of electricity generation.
c) “agriculture” (19%): includes forestry and other land use, another major indirect consumer demand (esp. food).
iii) Ex. “And yet industrial production consumes more of the world’s energy than transportation, residential, and commercial sectors combined.”
…Exactly, so sprinkling these huge statements haphazardly in the text makes it very difficult for readers to piece together and build a coherent big picture.
2) Global South examples:
--Dawson’s main case studies are all in the Global North, mostly US and a bit from Germany.
--A great intervention to technocratic solutions creating further displacements with more focus on Global South is A People’s Green New Deal. It’s also a relief to see more Global South examples in progressive analyses: The Climate Book: The Facts and the Solutions
The Good:
1) Power Struggles in State Capitalism:
--I cannot describe how much I love critical history, synthesizing macro structures with visceral micro examples. Take any everyday materialist topic, investigate it in this manner, and I will find the results more mesmerizing than any fiction. Ex. Gone Tomorrow: The Hidden Life of Garbage
--The overarching theme here is the battleground of “the State”, where:
a) The public (through a range of means) try to demand some regulatory protection/redistribution/provisioning of social goods. With such reforms, we have to consider the opportunities they provide, i.e. whether they create dependency on managerialism thus become long-term limitations that can be easily withdrawn (reformist reforms), or whether they build public participation/empowerment thus can expand in the long-term (revolutionary reforms).
b) The private sector (i.e. the hierarchy of capitalists/rentiers) pushes for managerialism, where the State “socializes” risks and privatize rewards.
…Note: I know this phrase is used as a “gotcha!” to demonstrate how capitalists actually rely on the State the most, inversing Thatcher’s “ The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.” and Friedman’s “There’s no such thing as a free lunch”. However, I still think it’s unfortunate that “socialize” still comes off as a negative. If risk was actually socialized, i.e. under public control, then the 1% better pray there are no critical accountants in the public. Because the mountain of private debts weighing down the public and raising cost of living (housing/healthcare/education/precarious jobs etc.) are the assets of the 1% (their speculative gambling/passive income), so a critical public would love nothing more than to control this fictitious superstructure (a parasite on the public’s actual social operating costs) and abolish it (the materialist history of revolutions).
--The case study is the history of the US’s electrical grid:
i) The transition from steam to electricity, given capitalism’s need for capitalist ownership/artificial scarcity/profit, meant a continuation towards greater capital concentration, now in the form of the robber barons of the Second Industrial Revolution.
…Despite the concentrated capital, since the service was run for profit it meant neglect for poor users (unprofitable), thus a fragmented rather than universal grid.
ii) Progressives (reformist with some revolutionary urges) wanted to counter the excesses of the robber barons, running in 1926 on “Giant Power” for more accessible electrification.
…However, they settled on a compromise (I guess the robber barons were decent people and good friends of progressives, right Bernie?), opting for regulation (reformist, esp. when so much is stacked in favour of private corporations) rather than public ownership (revolutionary). It took just 1 decade for these private power companies to grow from city to regional level.
…These “Investor-owned Utilities” (IOUs) monopolized, captured users, and encouraged more energy-use to maximize profits.
iii) Progressives had to intervene again, this time with the New Deal to try and relieve the endless The Great Depression.
…The Rural Electrification Administration (REA) provided long-term low interest loans to communities/farmer cooperatives (direct democracy with revolutionary potential) rather than just Federal government control (dependency)/public-private (where corporations take over).
…The Federal Theatre Project used “Living Newspaper” productions to dramatize and popularize investigative journalism (ex. dramatizing the 1932 Confessions of a Power Trust).
…More centralized progressive projects include the 1934 Grand Coulee Dam.
iv) Now, capitalists pulled back on the New Deal in fears of demonstrating that socialism works, so it took the insatiable war markets of the greatest war in human history (WWII) to revive profits and end the Great Depression.
…Not discussed in this book, but the fear of another depression after the end of WWII’s war markets meant shifting to both mass consumerism (“American way of life”: suburbia’s single-family houses/cars/highways/shopping malls) and the military industrial complex (Harry S. Truman and the War Scare of 1948: A Successful Campaign to Deceive the Nation), leading to the “Great Acceleration” in ecological degradation (Facing the Anthropocene: Fossil Capitalism and the Crisis of the Earth System).
…see comments section below for the rest of the review…
Preamble:
--If we rely on Bill Gates’ How to Avoid a Climate Disaster: The Solutions We Have and the Breakthroughs We Need and Gates’ favourite author Vaclav Smil’s How the World Really Works: A Scientist's Guide to Our Past, Present and Future, we are left with no critical analysis on the causes of the “climate crisis”.
…This is deliberate, as readers can comfortably assume the status quo narrative… some vague notion of the individualist greed in “human nature”, upon discovering “technology”, sleepwalked into the climate crisis. And the solution is to re-design “technology”, to be designed by technocrats like themselves of course!
--Thus, Dawson’s book is a crucial intervention, revealing the constant power struggles behind technologies (focusing on crucial histories of energy production in the Global North) and the range of different paths we can take.
The Missing:
1) Systems-level delivery:
--The main strength in Gates’/Smil’s books is their concise delivery from a systems level, carefully presenting the big picture with accessible technical lenses esp. involving time/space. Given the complexity and abstract scales involved in the climate crisis, this is essential. Also see: Thinking in Systems: A Primer
…Liberal (i.e. cosmopolitan capitalist) technocrats have substantial institutional resources devoted to managerialism/engineering; of course, we should be wary relying on their framing.
--Still, Dawson’s book, and his social science readers, can benefit from upgrading their technical tools. A related resource is the “evidence-based” research methodologies which Goldacre introduces (paired with critical social analysis):
-Bad Science: Quacks, Hacks, and Big Pharma Flacks
-I Think You'll Find It's a Bit More Complicated Than That
--Otherwise, Dawson leaves us with important passages on scale that are unnecessarily vague:
i) Ex. “The energy sector is responsible for at least two-thirds of all greenhouse gas emissions.”
…It would help to start with a table of how we are breaking down emissions here…presumably by “sectors”, so which sectors are we categorizing? Are there other more-accessible ways to break this down, for example by activities (production/electricity/agriculture/transportation/heating and cooling, in Gates’ book)?
ii) Ex. “[…] the transportation and heating and cooling sectors, which together account for 80 percent of global final energy demand […]”
…It would help to explain what “final energy” is. Our World in Data, one of those institutional resources which predictably Gates’ Foundation has donated to, has a clear description of energy definitions. “Final energy” is the energy received by consumers, after “Primary energy” (raw resources; most widely used stat) and “Secondary energy” (transformed into transportable form), with energy losses at each stage.
…“80 percent” sounds like a lot, but the total here is only consumers’ direct (“final”) energy demand. In Gates’ breakdown for total emissions, “transportation” (16%) and “heating/cooling” (7%) are less than:
a) “production” (37%): this involves (a lot of) indirect (not “final”) energy demand/emissions, esp. the raw materials cement/steel/plastics.
b) “electricity” (27%): I’m assuming the mismatch here (why transportation/heating and cooling make up less than electricity in Gates’ emissions breakdown vs. Dawson’s final energy demand) is because much of electricity generation is outside Dawson’s “final energy”, so Gates’ 27% electricity captures all the stages (“Primary”, “Secondary”, “Final”) of electricity generation.
c) “agriculture” (19%): includes forestry and other land use, another major indirect consumer demand (esp. food).
iii) Ex. “And yet industrial production consumes more of the world’s energy than transportation, residential, and commercial sectors combined.”
…Exactly, so sprinkling these huge statements haphazardly in the text makes it very difficult for readers to piece together and build a coherent big picture.
2) Global South examples:
--Dawson’s main case studies are all in the Global North, mostly US and a bit from Germany.
--A great intervention to technocratic solutions creating further displacements with more focus on Global South is A People’s Green New Deal. It’s also a relief to see more Global South examples in progressive analyses: The Climate Book: The Facts and the Solutions
The Good:
1) Power Struggles in State Capitalism:
--I cannot describe how much I love critical history, synthesizing macro structures with visceral micro examples. Take any everyday materialist topic, investigate it in this manner, and I will find the results more mesmerizing than any fiction. Ex. Gone Tomorrow: The Hidden Life of Garbage
--The overarching theme here is the battleground of “the State”, where:
a) The public (through a range of means) try to demand some regulatory protection/redistribution/provisioning of social goods. With such reforms, we have to consider the opportunities they provide, i.e. whether they create dependency on managerialism thus become long-term limitations that can be easily withdrawn (reformist reforms), or whether they build public participation/empowerment thus can expand in the long-term (revolutionary reforms).
b) The private sector (i.e. the hierarchy of capitalists/rentiers) pushes for managerialism, where the State “socializes” risks and privatize rewards.
…Note: I know this phrase is used as a “gotcha!” to demonstrate how capitalists actually rely on the State the most, inversing Thatcher’s “ The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.” and Friedman’s “There’s no such thing as a free lunch”. However, I still think it’s unfortunate that “socialize” still comes off as a negative. If risk was actually socialized, i.e. under public control, then the 1% better pray there are no critical accountants in the public. Because the mountain of private debts weighing down the public and raising cost of living (housing/healthcare/education/precarious jobs etc.) are the assets of the 1% (their speculative gambling/passive income), so a critical public would love nothing more than to control this fictitious superstructure (a parasite on the public’s actual social operating costs) and abolish it (the materialist history of revolutions).
--The case study is the history of the US’s electrical grid:
i) The transition from steam to electricity, given capitalism’s need for capitalist ownership/artificial scarcity/profit, meant a continuation towards greater capital concentration, now in the form of the robber barons of the Second Industrial Revolution.
…Despite the concentrated capital, since the service was run for profit it meant neglect for poor users (unprofitable), thus a fragmented rather than universal grid.
ii) Progressives (reformist with some revolutionary urges) wanted to counter the excesses of the robber barons, running in 1926 on “Giant Power” for more accessible electrification.
…However, they settled on a compromise (I guess the robber barons were decent people and good friends of progressives, right Bernie?), opting for regulation (reformist, esp. when so much is stacked in favour of private corporations) rather than public ownership (revolutionary). It took just 1 decade for these private power companies to grow from city to regional level.
…These “Investor-owned Utilities” (IOUs) monopolized, captured users, and encouraged more energy-use to maximize profits.
iii) Progressives had to intervene again, this time with the New Deal to try and relieve the endless The Great Depression.
…The Rural Electrification Administration (REA) provided long-term low interest loans to communities/farmer cooperatives (direct democracy with revolutionary potential) rather than just Federal government control (dependency)/public-private (where corporations take over).
…The Federal Theatre Project used “Living Newspaper” productions to dramatize and popularize investigative journalism (ex. dramatizing the 1932 Confessions of a Power Trust).
…More centralized progressive projects include the 1934 Grand Coulee Dam.
iv) Now, capitalists pulled back on the New Deal in fears of demonstrating that socialism works, so it took the insatiable war markets of the greatest war in human history (WWII) to revive profits and end the Great Depression.
…Not discussed in this book, but the fear of another depression after the end of WWII’s war markets meant shifting to both mass consumerism (“American way of life”: suburbia’s single-family houses/cars/highways/shopping malls) and the military industrial complex (Harry S. Truman and the War Scare of 1948: A Successful Campaign to Deceive the Nation), leading to the “Great Acceleration” in ecological degradation (Facing the Anthropocene: Fossil Capitalism and the Crisis of the Earth System).
…see comments section below for the rest of the review…
February 12, 2021
This was a very good book - along the lines of a world to win, but maybe more focused on renewables and electricity. I found the section on decolonization particularly lacking - Dawson talks about dispossession associated with mining and big power projects in the global south on Indigenous territories, but doesn't talk at all really about his own settler colonial home. I appreciated the focus on the commons and empirical examples from Germany, Detroit, etc.
A very readable book, even though informed by academic theory on the commons, energy democracy, state theory - Poulantzas.
A very readable book, even though informed by academic theory on the commons, energy democracy, state theory - Poulantzas.
March 4, 2025
The colonial construction of humanity and the extractivism that it legitimates is predicated on two key falsehoods: that nature is dead and that land is empty. — activist Bhumika Muchhala.
Broken Hope as a Postcolonial Condition
Broken hope might perhaps be seen as a prototypical postcolonial condition, as many movements for national liberation have transformed into authoritarian oligarchies. This betrayal by elites is not new and can be observed in various postcolonial contexts.
1. The Case of India and Large-Scale Displacement
In India, the history of constructing hundreds of big dams, particularly in places like the Narmada Valley, exemplifies this phenomenon. These projects submerged vast tracts of land and displaced hundreds of thousands of people, failing to deliver the promised abundance of water and energy. The corruption and injustice embedded in such energy-generating megaprojects mirror similar failures across the Global South, from the Democratic Republic of Congo to Colombia.
2. Frantz Fanon’s Warnings on Postcolonial Leadership
Anti-colonial thinkers such as Frantz Fanon foresaw these pitfalls. He argued that instead of fostering popular engagement in economic redistribution and participatory democratization, nationalist leaders often succumb to the temptation of self-enrichment while silencing dissent through "baton charges and prisons." Fanon lamented the tendency of postcolonial bourgeoisie to collaborate with imperial powers, such as the United States, to continue exploiting their nations' resources despite gaining formal independence. His words, written during the peak of decolonial movements, have proven to be tragically prescient.
*
The Persistence of Fossil Fuels in Energy Markets
1. The Challenge of Stranded Assets and Infrastructure Lock-in
A major reason utilities continue relying on fossil fuels is the existence of stranded assets—fossil-based infrastructure that has required significant investment and now acts as a constraint on transitioning to renewables. As renewable energy becomes more affordable, the value of fossil-fuel infrastructure declines, yet utilities remain entangled in maintaining these assets.
2. Balancing the Grid: Base Load Power and Public Funding
Technical challenges also hinder the transition. Since renewable sources like wind and solar are intermittent, utilities must balance the grid by relying on fossil fuels for "base load" power, which can be quickly deployed when renewable generation drops. Public funds are funneled into keeping fossil-based plants on standby, creating a paradox where utilities must maintain costly infrastructure despite dwindling investment.
3. The Market Fallacy: Why Cheap Renewables Won’t Automatically Replace Fossil Fuels
A fatal flaw in market-driven energy transitions, such as South Africa’s REI4P, is the assumption that the affordability of renewables will inevitably eliminate fossil fuels. The dominant policy narrative suggests that cheaper renewables will drive investment away from fossil fuels, leading to an automatic shift. However, the reality contradicts this expectation: fossil fuels are not disappearing but expanding alongside the growth of renewables.
*
Toward Global Energy Democracy from Below
1. The Paradox of Energy Dependence in India and South Africa
India and South Africa, two of the world's most vibrant democracies, paradoxically remain highly dependent on fossil fuels despite their vulnerability to climate change. This dependence is rooted in the legacy of the Minerals-Energy Complex and systemic disregard for marginalized communities whose lands and health are sacrificed for coal extraction.
2. The Shift of Coal Production to the Global South
While coal production was historically concentrated in the Global North—such as the US, Germany, and the Soviet bloc—today, the majority of coal-related jobs are in China, India, and Indonesia. Despite mounting evidence of coal's catastrophic climate impact, national energy sovereignty narratives have driven both India and South Africa to intensify coal extraction rather than curtail it.
3. The Democratic Republic of Congo and the Expansion of Fossil Fuels
This pattern extends beyond India and South Africa. In July 2022, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), home to one of the world's largest old-growth rainforests, auctioned vast tracts of land to oil companies in an effort to position itself as "the new destination for oil investments." These decisions illustrate how postcolonial nations, despite climate realities, are incentivized to deepen their reliance on fossil fuels.
*
The World Bank and the Contradictions of Neoliberal Energy Policies
1. Undermining the Public Sector While Supporting Fossil Fuels
The World Bank continues to advocate neoliberal energy policies, such as auction-based renewable energy systems, which systematically undermine the public sector. Despite its 2014 announcement that it would cease funding fossil fuel projects, the institution continues to bankroll fossil fuels under the guise of "energy access."
2. Hidden Channels of Fossil Fuel Financing
Funding still flows to fossil fuel projects in multiple ways: through its subsidiary, the International Finance Corporation (IFC), which financed India’s Tata Mundra coal plant; by supporting transmission lines that distribute coal-generated electricity; through policy "advice" that facilitates fossil fuel expansion; and by lending to Wall Street firms that subsequently invest in fossil energy. In 2020 alone, 52% of IFC funding was directed to Wall Street, enabling entities like India’s Adani Group to raise over $9 billion in offshore bonds for coal projects.
3. The Imperative of Financial Accountability
A just transition in nations like India and South Africa hinges on international financial institutions fully divesting from fossil fuels—not just in extraction but across the entire industry, including transport, production, and distribution.
*
Resistance and Alternative Pathways
1. The Rise of Global Blockadia
Efforts to challenge fossil capitalism are not solely about shutting down polluting projects; they also involve fighting to retain community control over land. This struggle, which characterizes movements like Global Blockadia, resists not only oppressive material conditions but also the erosion of collective identity and culture.
2. Challenging the Colonial Logic of Extractivism
Activist Bhumika Muchhala articulates a critical insight into this struggle: colonialism legitimized extractivism through two foundational falsehoods—first, that nature is dead, and second, that land is empty. These assumptions continue to undergird contemporary extractive policies, reinforcing the structural injustices that climate activists and local communities resist worldwide.
Broken Hope as a Postcolonial Condition
Broken hope might perhaps be seen as a prototypical postcolonial condition, as many movements for national liberation have transformed into authoritarian oligarchies. This betrayal by elites is not new and can be observed in various postcolonial contexts.
1. The Case of India and Large-Scale Displacement
In India, the history of constructing hundreds of big dams, particularly in places like the Narmada Valley, exemplifies this phenomenon. These projects submerged vast tracts of land and displaced hundreds of thousands of people, failing to deliver the promised abundance of water and energy. The corruption and injustice embedded in such energy-generating megaprojects mirror similar failures across the Global South, from the Democratic Republic of Congo to Colombia.
2. Frantz Fanon’s Warnings on Postcolonial Leadership
Anti-colonial thinkers such as Frantz Fanon foresaw these pitfalls. He argued that instead of fostering popular engagement in economic redistribution and participatory democratization, nationalist leaders often succumb to the temptation of self-enrichment while silencing dissent through "baton charges and prisons." Fanon lamented the tendency of postcolonial bourgeoisie to collaborate with imperial powers, such as the United States, to continue exploiting their nations' resources despite gaining formal independence. His words, written during the peak of decolonial movements, have proven to be tragically prescient.
*
The Persistence of Fossil Fuels in Energy Markets
1. The Challenge of Stranded Assets and Infrastructure Lock-in
A major reason utilities continue relying on fossil fuels is the existence of stranded assets—fossil-based infrastructure that has required significant investment and now acts as a constraint on transitioning to renewables. As renewable energy becomes more affordable, the value of fossil-fuel infrastructure declines, yet utilities remain entangled in maintaining these assets.
2. Balancing the Grid: Base Load Power and Public Funding
Technical challenges also hinder the transition. Since renewable sources like wind and solar are intermittent, utilities must balance the grid by relying on fossil fuels for "base load" power, which can be quickly deployed when renewable generation drops. Public funds are funneled into keeping fossil-based plants on standby, creating a paradox where utilities must maintain costly infrastructure despite dwindling investment.
3. The Market Fallacy: Why Cheap Renewables Won’t Automatically Replace Fossil Fuels
A fatal flaw in market-driven energy transitions, such as South Africa’s REI4P, is the assumption that the affordability of renewables will inevitably eliminate fossil fuels. The dominant policy narrative suggests that cheaper renewables will drive investment away from fossil fuels, leading to an automatic shift. However, the reality contradicts this expectation: fossil fuels are not disappearing but expanding alongside the growth of renewables.
*
Toward Global Energy Democracy from Below
1. The Paradox of Energy Dependence in India and South Africa
India and South Africa, two of the world's most vibrant democracies, paradoxically remain highly dependent on fossil fuels despite their vulnerability to climate change. This dependence is rooted in the legacy of the Minerals-Energy Complex and systemic disregard for marginalized communities whose lands and health are sacrificed for coal extraction.
2. The Shift of Coal Production to the Global South
While coal production was historically concentrated in the Global North—such as the US, Germany, and the Soviet bloc—today, the majority of coal-related jobs are in China, India, and Indonesia. Despite mounting evidence of coal's catastrophic climate impact, national energy sovereignty narratives have driven both India and South Africa to intensify coal extraction rather than curtail it.
3. The Democratic Republic of Congo and the Expansion of Fossil Fuels
This pattern extends beyond India and South Africa. In July 2022, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), home to one of the world's largest old-growth rainforests, auctioned vast tracts of land to oil companies in an effort to position itself as "the new destination for oil investments." These decisions illustrate how postcolonial nations, despite climate realities, are incentivized to deepen their reliance on fossil fuels.
*
The World Bank and the Contradictions of Neoliberal Energy Policies
1. Undermining the Public Sector While Supporting Fossil Fuels
The World Bank continues to advocate neoliberal energy policies, such as auction-based renewable energy systems, which systematically undermine the public sector. Despite its 2014 announcement that it would cease funding fossil fuel projects, the institution continues to bankroll fossil fuels under the guise of "energy access."
2. Hidden Channels of Fossil Fuel Financing
Funding still flows to fossil fuel projects in multiple ways: through its subsidiary, the International Finance Corporation (IFC), which financed India’s Tata Mundra coal plant; by supporting transmission lines that distribute coal-generated electricity; through policy "advice" that facilitates fossil fuel expansion; and by lending to Wall Street firms that subsequently invest in fossil energy. In 2020 alone, 52% of IFC funding was directed to Wall Street, enabling entities like India’s Adani Group to raise over $9 billion in offshore bonds for coal projects.
3. The Imperative of Financial Accountability
A just transition in nations like India and South Africa hinges on international financial institutions fully divesting from fossil fuels—not just in extraction but across the entire industry, including transport, production, and distribution.
*
Resistance and Alternative Pathways
1. The Rise of Global Blockadia
Efforts to challenge fossil capitalism are not solely about shutting down polluting projects; they also involve fighting to retain community control over land. This struggle, which characterizes movements like Global Blockadia, resists not only oppressive material conditions but also the erosion of collective identity and culture.
2. Challenging the Colonial Logic of Extractivism
Activist Bhumika Muchhala articulates a critical insight into this struggle: colonialism legitimized extractivism through two foundational falsehoods—first, that nature is dead, and second, that land is empty. These assumptions continue to undergird contemporary extractive policies, reinforcing the structural injustices that climate activists and local communities resist worldwide.
December 13, 2020
Good rundown of the challenges ahead for transitioning away from fossil fuels, as well as interesting stories of past and current victories and setbacks (including a description of a 1930s NYC play called “Power”).
Dawson makes a convincing case for an anti-capitalist, public approach being an absolute requirement for us to have any chance of avoiding climate catastrophe. The book can be a bit of a downer at times because of the seemingly monumental task ahead of us, but hopefully this will spur us into action more than the naive “green capitalism will magically save us and we don’t have to worry” idiocy (which is also addressed in the book).
Dawson makes a convincing case for an anti-capitalist, public approach being an absolute requirement for us to have any chance of avoiding climate catastrophe. The book can be a bit of a downer at times because of the seemingly monumental task ahead of us, but hopefully this will spur us into action more than the naive “green capitalism will magically save us and we don’t have to worry” idiocy (which is also addressed in the book).
August 5, 2020
My disagreements with the author's use of Nicholas Poulantzas to frame his discussion of the state aside, this was an interesting discussion of the way that challenging for democratic control of the means of energy production (and everything else) is the essential part of fighting to stop capitalist destruction of the environment.
December 28, 2020
wow this book was really good. For a chapter in the middle it was getting hard to get through but it was worth sticking it out- the first couple and last couple chapters were powerful
July 12, 2024
An excellent and thorough analysis of what it will take for us to overcome the existential challenges of the climate crisis, including once and for all confronting the reality that we must move past the unsustainable and destructive systems of capitalism itself.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews