In my view degrowth is required, either we do it on our own or climate change will degrow for us. It’s necessary not only to combat climate change but also ecological destruction. Jason Hickel is maybe the most well-known author on the topic, though it’s a much broader field.
To be clear, degrowth is not a form of primitivism, it’s not genocidal or Malthusian. It’s simply the concept that especially/primarily in the global north/imperial core production and consumption must be curbed, we are simply using more resources than can be supported by the planet. Planned obsolescence and unchecked consumption cannot continue. Those living in areas with sufficient productive ability need to shift production towards things that are necessary to allow those in the global south the ability to achieve standards of living available in the global north.
I know it’s controversial among some communists, so I wanted to see what lemmygrad thinks about the concept.
I think it is clear that degrowth can not happen under a capitalist system and when talking about degrowth in it the ideas associated are ofte no more than buzzwords. What exactly does “ethical consumption” mean under capitalism for example.
Also the word degrowth is not proper, a economy can only decrease as long as it can provide necessary goods for citizens, when the popultation grows, the economy has to grow aswell.
I believe, that under communism we won’t define ourselfs by our consumption and thus we can get rid of our artificial desires, that now plague our planet. I therefore think that what you describe as degrowth is not a problem in communism, but rather a consequence of it.
I agree. The goal of capitalistic actors is to increase their capital. It is not important that the people have it better.
I can image little changes in my world that would reduce the economic power, but increase the life of all. But why would this happen under csptalism?