Degrowth is a noble ideal to strive for, and it would certainly mitigate a lot of our current problems if implemented. However, I fear that it is an ideal that can be adopted by the few but not the many. Growth, progress and personal ambition are inherent human traits - it may not be the case for all people, but it is certainly evident in today’s society and many societies that have come before. In my opinion, we need solutions and frameworks that most (if not all) personalities can exist within. I worry degrowth is wishful thinking, and would love to hear your thoughts.

All of that said - I believe it is a very worthwhile thought exercise and even if all degrowth principles cannot be implemented, some can and that is what matters.

  • solo@slrpnk.netEnglish
    1·
    18 days ago

    I read the article you linked but I don’t see how it backs your argument that degrowth could be compatible with some form of capitalism (as you mention in your first sentence). It seems to me this article does the opposite.

    Personally, I can’t think of any kind of capitalism that is compatible with policies / goals / objectives related to:

    Tax justice for social ecological justice

    or

    Redistribute land, labour, capital and resources within and between countries

    or

    Direct activism and sabotage For example - anti-capitalism malware program

    or

    Restrict platform capitalism (e.g. AirBnB); Promote decentralised platform cooperative models

    etc

    (found in the Appendix A. Thematic synthesis of degrowth policy proposals)

    For me degrowth is potentially one way to get rid of capitalism.

    • pot_belly_mole@slrpnk.netEnglish
      1·
      3 days ago

      I’m not sure whether we have the same idea of what it means for capitalism to be compatible with something. Maybe setting aside direct action for now, major reforms in all of the areas you mentioned could be implemented in a society with a predominantly capitalist mode of production, with enough political power. It would be a move away from capitalism, strengthening socialist and statist modes of production. But it would not mean the end of capitalism as a mode of production. It doesn’t mean those reforms could be implemented only or even preferably by completely terminating capitalism, i.e. private capital and production, at once through total revolution.

      There are always multiple modes of production active in a society. For an example case, compare the USA and any nordic country. Both are predominantly capitalist states, but in a nordic country, there is far more production following a socialist and statist mode than in the US. Of course, major transformations are also needed in the nordic countries to get on the path of degrowth, that’s for sure.

      For reference, André Gorz, who is one of the most influential degrowth scholars, developed the concept of “non-reformist reforms” which are anti-capitalist reforms in a capitalist system. Another good read is this piece, “How to think about (and win) socialism”. Erik Olin Wright writes about the complexities of production relations and strategic logics of transformation.

      • solo@slrpnk.netEnglish
        1·
        3 days ago

        I did take a quick look at your links and I think I understand a bit better your approach now. I’ll take a closer look at them, as soon as I I find the time, because I am looking for new inputs.