You are here

No shortcuts to an ecosocialist future

By Fred Fuentes - Green Left, October 16, 2020

Faced with a global triple crisis ‒ health, economic and climate ‒ it is no wonder most people believe the world is heading in the wrong direction. But who people blame for this situation and their responses have varied.

Socialists believe the capitalist system is at the heart of these crises and that the solution lies in replacing it with a democratic socialist society.

The challenge we face

Under capitalism, corporations will always seek to defend their narrow interests. They do so by, among other things, funding political parties, opposition movements, media outlets and institutions that serve their agenda.

But, while the capitalist class is united in its defence of capitalism ‒ even at the cost of the Earth ‒ different sections of the capitalist class have varying interests and views on how to best protect them.

United States Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump would appear to be the candidate par excellence for corporations. Yet more billionaires are backing his opponent, Democratic candidate Joe Biden.

Unsurprisingly, CEOs in the energy/natural resource sector are overwhelmingly behind Trump’s climate denialism.

But when it comes to finance (Wall Street), technology (Silicon Valley) and the media, Biden is the preferred candidate. Many of these same sectors have also been involved in promoting climate institutes, campaign groups and even protests, such as last year's Climate Strike.

This does not make these capitalists allies in the fight against climate change, racism and sexism. They just sense that taking such a stance is the best way to protect, and in some cases even raise, their profit margins.

Why does this matter then? Because to achieve our aims, we need to know exactly who we are up against.

History shows capitalists have been willing to turn to fascist movements when faced with a serious challenge to their rule. But that is not what is happening today. Trump may be many things, but he is not a fascist.

And while the danger that figures like Trump pose should not be understated, it is not the only, or even main, threat we face.

A much more present danger is the attempts by sections of the capitalist class to transfer masses of public wealth to “green” corporations, further commodify nature, take away political and civil rights and entrench global inequality, all under the guise of fighting climate change.

Parallels can be seen in the way many governments responded to COVID-19 through, among other things, the privatisation of the state’s health response, curfews and restrictions on civil liberties, and leaving essential workers and migrants with no protection.

Concerningly, many on the left did little more than justify these responses, arguing it was “at least better than Trump” or that “something is better than nothing”. Their criticisms were limited solely to how certain measures were implemented.

The risk of repeating this same mistake when it comes to the climate crisis is high (and the cost even higher) if we ignore the realities of the challenges we face.

The Green New Deal we want

In the process of thinking about how to build the movement we need, some on the left have raised the idea of a green new deal (GND). But what kind of GND do we need?

The GND is not a blueprint for an ecosocialist society, nor a program for socialist revolution.

The aim of any GND project should be to put forward a profoundly democratic plan that responds to the existing needs and demands of workers, sets out clear measures for beginning to tackle the triple crisis we face, and explains why such measures are possible and necessary.

The aim should not be to call on existing movements to adopt a GND program nor build a separate, specific campaign or movement around such a plan.

Given the different views that exist within and between movements, the only vague chance we could have of uniting them all behind a GND would be if the program was premised on watered-down and abstract slogans. (This is already a problem with climate campaign groups focusing on demands such as “declare a climate emergency” or “climate action now”.)

Even then, any attempt to do this would lead to the fracturing of existing movements over disagreements regarding aspects of the program.

On the other hand, any movement around a program for solving the climate emergency today would be inherently removed from the realities of existing workers’ struggles, given such struggles are nowhere near raising even a partial program of measures for averting climate catastrophe.

At best, such a campaign would represent a poor attempt to substitute for the real struggles we need to build.

Understanding that the concrete measures in the GND plan can only be won through serious organisation and mobilisation, where possible socialists would agitate for and throw themselves into campaigns and struggles around aspects of the plan.

We would seek to win concrete demands, even if only at the local level, to show in practice what a GND could look like and what it would take to win it.

Meanwhile, we would continue to outline our arguments for why only a radically different plan to those proposed by all sections of the capitalist class, can, at least, begin to put us on the path towards averting climate catastrophe. 

Agitating for demands that intersect with peoples’ deepest needs, opening spaces for workers to come together to discuss the way forward, building movements that can win concrete demands, and obtaining broad support for a radical plan for challenging the triple crisis we face will all require a lot of patient work.

But it is the only viable road to start along if our goal is an ecosocialist future and not a shortcut to defeat.

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are not the official position of the IWW (or even the IWW’s EUC) and do not necessarily represent the views of anyone but the author.

The Fine Print I:

Disclaimer: The views expressed on this site are not the official position of the IWW (or even the IWW’s EUC) unless otherwise indicated and do not necessarily represent the views of anyone but the author’s, nor should it be assumed that any of these authors automatically support the IWW or endorse any of its positions.

Further: the inclusion of a link on our site (other than the link to the main IWW site) does not imply endorsement by or an alliance with the IWW. These sites have been chosen by our members due to their perceived relevance to the IWW EUC and are included here for informational purposes only. If you have any suggestions or comments on any of the links included (or not included) above, please contact us.

The Fine Print II:

Fair Use Notice: The material on this site is provided for educational and informational purposes. It may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. It is being made available in an effort to advance the understanding of scientific, environmental, economic, social justice and human rights issues etc.

It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have an interest in using the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. The information on this site does not constitute legal or technical advice.