[Reader-list] Feminism, Ecology And Socialism: Need For Convergence

[Asit Das]

posted below is a short note feminism ecology and sociais the need for
convergence
this note was presented to the delgates of saarc countries at peoples saarc
confence held at schoolof social sciences auditoriom in summer 2010
 a day earlier this was presented at a workshop on peoples saarc organised
by south asian dialogue n ecolgical democracySADED a project of csds at isi
lodi road
 iam mailing it again in the context of climate scpectics like donald trump
assuming the presidendency of usa and the rise of far right all over the
world including the rise of hindu fascist forces in india
 in this note iam aruguing against viewing feminism,ecology,left politics
and socialism as mutually exclusive separate water tigt compartment,my
position is they intersect and there is a need for an intrdiscipilnary
approach to the womens question left politics and socialism
asit
blogs    www.stormingthewintrpalace.blogspot.com, and
www.revolutionarynucleus.blogspot.com

 note this has been published in countercurrents in june 2010

Feminism, Ecology And Socialism: Need For Convergence

*By Asit Das*

29 June, 2010

Feminism, which is known as gender studies in academia, is a very large
area of study. What I refer to feminism here, is women’s struggle against
male domination. There are various types of feminism - liberal, radical,
socialist, etc. The basic difference between radical feminism and socialist
feminism is that radical feminism says the fight is basically between woman
versus man, while socialist feminism says capitalism is the common enemy
and women’s liberation is intertwined with the struggles of working class
against capitalists. Likewise, socialism is a loaded term and it indicates
various streams. The concept of socialism predates Marx, people like
Fourier, Saint-Simon, etc., propagated socialism, which meant to provide a
humane social order. Engels rejected it as utopian and advocated scientific
socialism. Today we have numerous strands of socialists and communists.

With the whole discourse on ‘climate change’, ‘peak oil’, ‘food crisis’
etc., ecology has become the core issue facing mankind. The seriousness of
the matter can be seen in John Bellamy Foster’s “Ecology, Moment of Truth”
where he says – it is impossible to exaggerate the environmental problem
facing humanity. Nearly fifteen years ago one observed (John Bellamy
Foster’s “The Vulnerable Planet” in 1994) that we have only four decades
left in which to gain control over our major environmental problems if we
are to avoid irreversible ecological decline. Today, with a quarter century
still remaining in this projected timeline, it appears to have been too
optimistic. Available evidence now strongly suggests that under a regime of
business as usual we could be facing an irrevocable tipping point with
respect to climate change within a mere decade. Other crises such as
species extinction (percentage of bird, mammal, and fish species vulnerable
or in immediate danger of extinction), air pollution, water pollution and
shortages, rapid depletion of oceans’ bounties, desertification, soil
degradation, the imminent peaking of world oil production, creation of new
ecological and geopolitical tensions, and chronic world food crisis, all
point to the fact that the planet, as we know it, and its ecosystems are
stretched to the “breaking point”. The “moment of truth” for the earth and
civilization has arrived.

Rulers across the world have responded to this crisis by seeking mere
administrative and technological measures to the ecological crisis.
Mainstream environmentalists seek to solve the ecological problems almost
exclusively through three mechanical strategies: (1) technological
solutions, (2) extending the market to all aspects of nature, and (3)
creating what are intended as mere islands of preservation in a world of
almost universal exploitation and destruction of natural habitats.

The ecological crisis is a complex mix of dangerous trends. Capitalist
ideology characteristically views the components of the crisis piecemeal
thereby obscuring its systemic nature. In contrast to the official thinking
on ecology, a minority of critical human ecologists have come to understand
the need to change our fundamental social relations. Human beings depend on
functioning ecosystems to sustain themselves, and their actions affect
those same ecosystems. As a result, there is a necessary “metabolic”
interaction between humans and earth which influences both natural and
social history. Increasingly, the state of nature is being defined by the
operations of the capitalist system, as anthropogenic forces are altering
the global environment on a scale that is unprecedented. The global climate
is rapidly changing due to burning of fossil fuels and deforestation. None
of the areas of the world’s oceans are unaffected by human influence, as
the accumulation of carbon, fertilizer runoff and over-fishing undermine
biodiversity and the natural services it provides.

The dominant economic forces are attempting to seize the moment by assuring
us that capital, technology and the market can be employed so as to ward
off any threats without a major transformation of society. For example,
numerous technological solutions are proposed to remedy global climate
crisis. The market will ensure that new avenues of capital accumulation are
created in the very process of dealing with environmental challenges. Yet
this line of thought ignores the root causes of the ecological crisis. The
social metabolic order of capitalism is inherently antiecological, since it
systematically subordinates nature in its pursuit of endless accumulation
and production on an even larger scale.

It is here that a socialist response to global ecological crisis assumes
importance. A socialist social order, that is a society of associated
producers, can serve as a basis for potentially bringing social metabolism
in line with the natural metabolism, in order to sustain the inalienable
conditions for the existence and reproduction of the chain of human
generation. Given that human society must always interact with nature,
concerns regarding social metabolism are constant, regardless of the
society. But a mode of production in which associated producers can
regulate their exchange with nature in accordance with natural limits and
know, while retaining the regenerative properties of natural processes and
cycles, is fundamental to an environmentally sustainable social order.

The above clearly shows that to solve the world ecological crisis we should
struggle for the creation of a socialist social order. This line of thought
is known as ecosocialism.

Authors like Vandana Shiva and Maria Mies have come out with a powerful
concept called ecofeminism, which entails that the forces who oppress women
and degrade nature are the same; therefore there is a commonality in the
struggle against patriarchy and ecological degradation.

After sixty years of independence, our society has reached a crisis stage
where the entire country is sold to the corporate interests by our rulers;
therefore it is imperative that feminists, socialists, communists and
ecologists should unite together resisting the corporate interests and to
struggle for an egalitarian, sustainable and democratic India.