泛读第二版第四册Unit5.doc

Unit5Humanity, Society and Ecology: Global Warming and the Ecosocialist AlternativeEcosocialism is much more than a new label, or a revamping of an old perspective: it is a new project for the emancipation of humanity.Humanity produces its own life, through labour as a conscious social activity. This basic characteristic of our species has two important consequences for a discussion of ecology.The first is that humanity doesnt just evolve biologically, as other species do, but also develops itself through history. As it develops, passing through different modes of production, it changes its relationship with the environment and changes the environment itself. That is why our species has such an impact on the environment. The nature of our impact is not fated in advance: more development does not automatically imply more environmental destruction. For example, in some regions agricultural communities probably put less pressure on the environment than hunting communities that used fire as a means of production. The relationship between human development and the environment is dialectical. We have choices. Development does not necessary imply material, quantitative growth. Within certain limits, we can develop while protecting the environment.The second consequence is that knowledge of homo sapienss biological characteristics doesnt help us to understand any particular problem in the relationship between humanity and nature. On the contrary, the decisive role is played by socially and historically conditioned forms of development. To seek an explanation or solutions for modern environmental crises by studying the history of Easter Island, or the Mayan collapse, as Jared Diamond does in his bestseller Collapse, is pure nonsense. The Neolithic civilisation on Easter Island had no nuclear power, didnt use pesticides and didnt burn fossil fuels.Ignoring history and the concrete mode of production in a discussion of humanity and nature can only lead to a seemingly trite but very dangerous conclusion: that, other things being equal, the more human beings there are on Earth, the more ecological problems we create. That in turn leads to just one question: How many people should there be? James Lovelock, author of the Gaa hypothesis, says 500 million, others say 3 billion. Who will decide? Above all: with that diagnosis, how can we democratically address an urgent ecological problem like global warming? According to the IPCC, global GHG emissions should decrease by 50% to 85% by 2050. Faced with such a great challenge, obsessive “Population Bomb” thinking can only pave the way for a new barbarism which is why, while not in the least favoring pro-natalist policies, the left should consider the “overpopulation” debate as an important ideological battlefield.Peculiarities of the capitalist environmental crisisTo address the environmental crisis both realistically and humanely, it is absolutely necessary to understand the specific social and historical characteristics of the capitalist environmental crisis, and to understand the differences between capitalism and previous modes of production.Pre-capitalist modes of production produced use-values, quantitatively limited by human needs. Labour productivity was low, and growth occurred very slowly. Social crises involved shortages of use-values.Capitalism produces exchange-values, not use-values as such. Its only limit, as Marx said, is capital itself. Over-production and over-consumption (the first conditioning the second) are inherent in this highly productive system, which is based on ever more profit and ever more growth to produce profit. Social crises involve overproduction of commodities that is, of exchange-values.These basic differences shape very important distinctions between present and past ecological crises.Previous ecological crises, in so-called primitive societies for instance, mainly involved low production communities looting natural resources as a response to food shortages caused by droughts, flooding, or wars.Capitalism also loots nature, but in a very different way: capitalist looting aims to obtain and sell exchange values, not to satisfy needs, so it causes more environmental degradation than previous societies.But an even more important difference a qualitative one is that capitalist ecological crises mainly proceed from overproduction and the resulting overconsumption. Not only does capitalism use more resources, it does so by developing environmentally dangerous technologies. Each capitalist tries to get surplus profit, also called technological rent, by replacing human labour with machines, chemicals, etc., to improve productivity. Among other problems, this race for more productivity, this permanent revolution in production, leads to the development and use of new technologies like nuclear power, new molecules like DDT or PCB, and even new genetically modified organisms.Climate change must be seen within that framework.Global warming is not a result of human activity in general but of capitalist human activity. Indeed global warming is the purest and more perfect example of a capitalist environmental crisis: it is a direct result of overproduction. Todays atmosphere is saturated with CO2, due to the massive burning of fossil fuels coal, oil, gas in imperialist countries since the Industrial Revolution. Climate Change is the global inheritance of 250 years of capitalist accumulation. In our struggle against climate change, we have to face the major, fundamental fact that the capitalist mode of production has been built on burning fossil fuels, to the exclusion of other energy sources. One major reason not the only one is that fossil fuels reserves can be owned, and that those who own them then have the monopoly on the resource. Because they have that monopoly, they can impose a monopoly price, a rent above the average rate of profit. The higher cost of less productive reserves, not the average cost, determines the market price, so that those who produce at a lower cost get a higher than average profit.Another reason why capitalism depends on fossil fuels is that they enable very centralised and standardised energy systems, a high degree of social control, and a uniform market that favours corporate investment. This trend began very early, as capitalist competition eliminated traditional forms of decentralised and carbon-free energy production such as small water and wind mills. Towards a new capitalist climate policy?According to the IPCC 4th assessment report and the famous footnote in the Bali roadmap, by 2050 emissions in developed countries should decrease by 80-95%, while emissions in developing countries should “deviate substantially from baseline,” compared to 1990 levels. This is necessary to restrict the temperature increase to about 2C above pre-industrial level. It is important to stress that these figures are underestimates, because they dont fully take into account non-linear phenomena such as the disintegration of glaciers in Greenland and Antarctica, one of the major threats we face today. So the IPCC recommendations should be taken as a minimum.The question is: is it possible to meet these objectives in such a short time span? The short answer is: yes, it will be difficult, but it can be done through a plan that combines three measures: structural measures to cut energy waste, improved energy efficiency, and massive shift to a publicly owned decentralised energy system based on renewables.So for now, capitalists are waiting for a time when renewables are more profitable than fossil fuels. In the meantime, they demand that public authorities pay them to develop renewables. They lobby governments to overallocate free emissions allowances that they can sell on the market (as the EU does in the European Emission Trading System, another goose laying golden eggs). They develop nuclear power plants, telling us nuclear is a carbon-free carbon technology, which is totally untrue if the entire nuclear production chain is considered, it produce more emissions than a modern natural gas power production chain. They transform so-called “clean investments” in developing countries into emission credits, rights to pollute golden eggs once again. They appropriate natural ecosystems in the South to compensate for their own emissions: in other words they appropriate the carbon cycle, which amounts to appropriating control of life on Earth.In short, capitalists seek to determine the rhythm and the direction of the struggle against climate change, tying both to their need for profit and the governments go along. In July, the G8 leaders said they were in favour of a 50% global emission reduction by 2050. They didnt mention the specific IPCC recommendation of an 80%-95% reduction in developed countries, nor the 85% global reduction, nor the intermediate goals proposed by the IPCC. Where did the G8 target come from? Well, it was “suggested” to the G8 leaders by the World Economic Forum, in a memo posted a few days before the summit.简易译文人类社会与生态:全球变暖和Ecosocialist选择Ecosocialism不仅仅是一个新的标签,或改革旧的角度来看:它是人类解放的一个新项目。人类自己生产生活,通过劳动作为一种有意识的社会活动。这个我们物种的基本特性有两个讨论生态学的重要后果。首先,人类不只是生物进化,其他物种一样,还通过历史发展本身。随着它的发展,通过不同的生产方式,它改变了其与环境之间的关系和环境变化本身。这就是为什么我们人类对环境的影响。提前我们影响的本质不是命中注定的:更多的发展并不自动意味着更多的环境破坏。例如,在一些地区农业社区可能对环境压力低于狩猎社区生产用火作为一种手段。人类发展和环境之间的关系是辩证的。我们有选择。必要的发展并不意味着材料,数量增长。在一定范围内,我们就可以在发展的同时保护环境。智人的第二个影响是,知识的生物学特性并不能帮助我们理解任何特定问题在人类与自然之间的关系。相反,所起的决定性作用是社会和历史条件形式的发展。寻求一种解释或解决现代环境危机通过研究复活节岛的历史,或玛雅崩溃,像Jared Diamond在他的畅销书崩溃,纯粹是无稽之谈。新石器时代文明复活节岛上没有核能,没有使用农药和不燃烧化石燃料。无视历史和混凝土的生产方式在讨论人类和自然只能导致一个看似老生常谈但非常危险的结论:,在其他条件相同的情况下,地球上的人类越多,我们创造更多的生态问题。这反过来会导致一个问题:应该有多少人?盖亚假说的作者詹姆斯洛夫洛克说,5亿年,有人说30亿年。谁来决定?与诊断,最重要的是:我们如何民主解决一个紧急的生态问题如全球变暖吗?根据政府间气候变化专门委员会,全球温室气体排放减少50%到2050年的85%。面对这样一个巨大的挑战,强迫性的“人口炸弹”思维只能为一个新的野蛮这也是为什么,尽管不支持鼓励生育的政策,左边应该考虑“人口过剩”的争论作为一种重要的意识形态的战场。资本主义环境危机的特点解决环境危机现实和人道,是绝对必要的理解特定的社会和历史资本主义环境危机的特点,理解资本主义之间的差异和以前的生产方式。资本主义生产方式产生了使用价值,定量人类需求的限制。劳动生产率很低,发生和发展非常缓慢。社会危机涉及到使用价值的短缺。资本主义生产交换值,而不是使用价值。它唯一的限制,马克思说过,资本本身。生产过剩和过度消费(第一调节第二)固有的高生产力的系统,基于更多的利润和更多的增长产生利润。社会危机涉及生产过剩的商品也就是说,交换值。这些基本的形状差异非常重要的现在和过去的生态危机之间的区别。以前的生态危机,例如,在所谓的原始社会主要涉及低生产社区掠夺自然资源应对干旱造成的粮食短缺,洪水,或者战争。资本主义也自然掠夺者,但在一个非常不同的方式:资本主义掠夺旨在获得买卖交换价值,不能满足需求,所以它会导致更多比先前的社会环境恶化。但一个更重要的区别一个定性是资本主义生态危机主要从生产过剩和过度消费。资本主义不仅使用更多的资源,它通过开发环境危险的技术。每个资本家试图获得超额利润,也称为技术租金,用机器代替人类劳动,化工、等,以提高生产效率。在众多的问题当中,这个比赛更多的生产力,这永久革命生产,导致新技术的开发和使用核能、新分子像DDT或印刷电路板,甚至新的转基因生物。气候变化必须在这个