Seizing the means of innovation: On the relationship between Marxism and ecomodernism

IF 4.9 1区 社会学 Q1 GEOGRAPHY
Govand Khalid Azeez, Jonathan Symons
{"title":"Seizing the means of innovation: On the relationship between Marxism and ecomodernism","authors":"Govand Khalid Azeez,&nbsp;Jonathan Symons","doi":"10.1016/j.polgeo.2025.103388","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Recent efforts to articulate a “socialist ecomodernist” politics have spurred debate over the relationship between Marxism and ecomodernism. Degrowth-aligned socialists critique ecomodernism for its productivism and naive techno-optimism; ecomodernist socialists respond that ecomodernism's grounding of ecological politics in human material needs and focus on production's technological metabolism broadly aligns with historical materialism. This paper first outlines the homologies and contradictions between Marxism and ecomodernism and then turns to one area of potential dialectical synthesis: addressing capitalism's ecological crises requires a systematic account of technological innovation. To this end we put forward eleven axioms distilling Marx's philosophico-anthropological account of technology. These axioms reflect Marx's understanding of technological innovation as both a source of tension, since productive forces consistently outpace the social world and the relations of production, and crucial to transcending class societies. We argue that a Marxist response to climate breakdown must address how a communist movement will manage the unintended, indirect ecological impacts of production. Marxists have always understood that the proletariat must control the means of production in order to address class-based inequality. In the era of climate breakdown, Marxists must be equally explicit about technological innovation. If we are to protect nature while progressing toward Marx's “realm of freedom”, the task now is also to seize and reconfigure the means of innovation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48262,"journal":{"name":"Political Geography","volume":"122 ","pages":"Article 103388"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Geography","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0962629825001209","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recent efforts to articulate a “socialist ecomodernist” politics have spurred debate over the relationship between Marxism and ecomodernism. Degrowth-aligned socialists critique ecomodernism for its productivism and naive techno-optimism; ecomodernist socialists respond that ecomodernism's grounding of ecological politics in human material needs and focus on production's technological metabolism broadly aligns with historical materialism. This paper first outlines the homologies and contradictions between Marxism and ecomodernism and then turns to one area of potential dialectical synthesis: addressing capitalism's ecological crises requires a systematic account of technological innovation. To this end we put forward eleven axioms distilling Marx's philosophico-anthropological account of technology. These axioms reflect Marx's understanding of technological innovation as both a source of tension, since productive forces consistently outpace the social world and the relations of production, and crucial to transcending class societies. We argue that a Marxist response to climate breakdown must address how a communist movement will manage the unintended, indirect ecological impacts of production. Marxists have always understood that the proletariat must control the means of production in order to address class-based inequality. In the era of climate breakdown, Marxists must be equally explicit about technological innovation. If we are to protect nature while progressing toward Marx's “realm of freedom”, the task now is also to seize and reconfigure the means of innovation.
把握创新手段:论马克思主义与经济现代主义的关系
最近对“社会主义经济现代主义”政治的阐述引发了关于马克思主义和经济现代主义之间关系的争论。支持去增长的社会主义者批评生态现代主义的生产主义和天真的技术乐观主义;生态现代主义社会主义者回应说,生态现代主义将生态政治建立在人类物质需求的基础上,并将重点放在生产的技术代谢上,这与历史唯物主义大体一致。本文首先概述了马克思主义和生态现代主义之间的同源性和矛盾,然后转向一个潜在的辩证综合领域:解决资本主义的生态危机需要对技术创新进行系统的描述。为此,我们提出了11条公理,提炼了马克思对技术的哲学人类学解释。这些公理反映了马克思对技术创新的理解,即技术创新既是紧张的根源,因为生产力始终超过社会世界和生产关系,也是超越阶级社会的关键。我们认为,马克思主义对气候崩溃的回应必须解决共产主义运动将如何管理生产的意外的、间接的生态影响。马克思主义者一直认为,无产阶级必须控制生产资料,以解决基于阶级的不平等问题。在气候崩溃的时代,马克思主义者必须对技术创新同样明确。如果我们要在向马克思的“自由王国”前进的同时保护自然,那么现在的任务就是抓住并重新配置创新的手段。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
14.60%
发文量
210
期刊介绍: Political Geography is the flagship journal of political geography and research on the spatial dimensions of politics. The journal brings together leading contributions in its field, promoting international and interdisciplinary communication. Research emphases cover all scales of inquiry and diverse theories, methods, and methodologies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信