2 Responses

  1. Jeff White September 5, 2013 at 1:56 pm |

    I disagree strongly with the “stagist” approach to climate change and socialism posed by Steven Nadel. The ecosocialist approach is to continually raise issues of social justice and power to the dispossessed as part of the struggle against climate change. We know that “climate justice” is not possible under modern capitalism, and we must constantly pose the necessity of radical social change.

    The same issue of Monthly Review that contains Ian’s article has an excellent piece by John Bellamy Foster called The Fossil Fuels War. In it he points out that short-term “green” eco-fixes under capitalism will not solve the problem. Nothing less than an ecological revolution lasting several decades can do that. And it will not take place without in the meantime replacing capitalist social relations with socialist ones.

  2. Steven Nadel September 5, 2013 at 12:28 pm |

    There is one element of “climate catastrophism” I was hoping would be addressed in this debate. This starts from the superficial & obvious position that the timeline to address climate change by largely eliminating fossil fuel use is clearly shorter than any conceivable transition to a socialist society. Therefor it will need to occur under a capitalist economy. This in itself does not determine a movement building strategy. But often, the next step is that since the timeline is short & the urgency is so high, all other radical agendas of social or environmental justice, opposition to militarism and war, etc. must be subsumed or discarded to building the broadest possible support for addressing climate change. I believe this is the real issue of “climate catastrophism” for progressives and radicals within the current climate movements in the US

Comments are closed.