10 ESSENCE
Finding an Alternative to Capitalism
A Review of Joel Kovel’s “Enemy of Nature:
The End of Capitalism or the End of the World?”
LINDEN SHERMAN
In Enemy of Nature: The End of Capi-
talism or the End of the World? (2002),
Joel Kovel, distinguished Professor of
Social Studies at Bard College, pro-
vides an unrelenting and insightful
indictment of capitalism as the causa
efficiens, or “efficient cause,” of the
current ecological crisis.
For Kovel, ecological crises stem
from capitalism’s inherent attachment
to the principles of profit maximiza-
tion. Under free-market capitalism,
firms must adopt the “sink or swim”
mentality of profit maximization in
order to stay ahead of their competi-
tors. To do so, a firm must render the
fundamental use-value of natural re-
sources, including human beings, into
quantifiable commodities available for
sale on the market.
By fracturing the interconnectedness
and intrinsic value of our communities
and environment, this causes the over-
exploitation of our natural and human
resource base and triggers the disinte-
gration of the ecological “whole.”
Thus, Kovel believes that any form
of political transformation aimed at
attaining an ecologically just society
must ultimately overthrow capitalism.
To prove his point, Kovel spends an
entire chapter systematically disprov-
ing all existing forms of “eco-politics,”
from green economics and coopera-
tives to bioregionalism and anarchism.
For Kovel, all of these solutions act
as convenient masks for the continua-
tion of capitalist forms of exploitation,
risk sliding back into capitalist forms
of exploitation, or are incapable of
producing the necessary society-wide
transformation.
Kovel’s solution, entitled “ecosocial-
ism,” is an alternative socialist vision
that abandons socialism’s industrialist
roots and adopts an ecocentric posi-
tion that liberates both labour and
nature. For production to become
“ecological,” we must emphasize the
use-value exchange of goods. Socialist
transformation must remain democrat-
ic with labour organized into a self-
governing system of “free associations
of producers,” as opposed to either the
traditional communist party-state or
the capitalist bourgeoisie state.
In sum, his goal is to create the “pre-
figurative ensembles” – or prototypes
– for social, economic, and political
mechanisms that will organize around
ecological production, with no con-
tradiction between or exploitation of
labour and nature.
One such “pre-figurative ensemble”
put forth by Kovel is the Bruderhof
Hutterite colonies, which pursue so-
phisticated forms of industrial produc-
tion while maintaining anti-capitalist
forms of ownership and distribution.
Though the Bruderhof ’s consump-
tion habits and relative ecological
footprints are significantly lower than
the majority of their American con-
temporaries, these communal societies
remain highly homogenous, authori-
tarian, and patriarchal (ie. non-demo-
cratic), providing very little inspira-
tion as a model of widespread social
transformation.
Ot h e r s u c h “p re - f i g u r a t i ve e n -
sembles” include vague references to
March 17, 2010
CAPITALISM AT ITS FINEST
ECOSOCIALISM FOCUSSES ON THE INTRINSIC VALUE OF ECOSYSTEMS
“autonomous zones of ecological pro-
duction,” educational reforms, active
resistance, and co-operatives. Accord-
ingly, Kovel emphasizes that “there is
no royal road to ecosocialism, nor any
privileged agent. It follows that humil-
ity and flexibility should guide present
politics”.
This approach is novel in conception
but difficult in practice. Considering
that most of the world’s labour exists
(perhaps ambivalently so) under some
form of institutionalized capitalism,
Kovel provides little critical reflection
on labour’s possible role in the active
maintenance or displacement of an
ecologically unjust society.
Why, for example, have organized la-
bour groups such as the Woodworkers
of America (IWA) quarreled with en-
PHOTO BY JULIA BENNET
PHOTO BY NICOLE FONG
vironmental groups in the past? Why
does job creation remain so critical to
government re-election? Why, by re-
investing the surplus profit of my own
productive labour into things such as
education, healthcare, and finances,
am I acting in exactly the same way as
a profit maximizing firm?
This is not to single out individu-
als or groups in their responsibility
for the ecological crisis, but rather to
look more deeply at our collective role
in the continuation of the capitalist
system.
As capitalism shatters traditional
relationships and ways of being, con-
sumption is forced to pick up the piec-
es. Increasingly, we not only consume
individual products, but individual
identities, too. Thus, for many, con-
sumption has become intricately tied
to the very formulation and expression
of being.
However, it remains unclear to me
whether capitalism is simply the his-
torical result of some original attack
on the commons. Indeed, we must
also ask ourselves, what is the causa
efficiens of capitalism? I am convinced
that there is something more deeply
compelling about capitalism: the in-
stant capitalism enslaves us, it also
liberates us. While capitalism does
exploit human and natural “ecologies,”
the resulting material abundance and
perceived choice is often liberating.
Perhaps the propensities for self-im-
provement and perfectibility, whether
in tangible material conditions or
intangible forms of wellness, are the
products of the creativity, imagination
and drive that originally allowed hu-
mans to survive as a species.
Perhaps the same human propensities
that drive profit maximization – com-
petitiveness and individualism – are
the same ones that drove our ances-
tors from the Fertile Crescent and into
every inhabitable part of the globe.
Indeed, Kovel suggests that capi-
talism’s “regime of ego” is the “latest
version of the purified male principle,
emerging eons after the initial gen-
dered domination became socially ab-
sorbed and rationalized as profitability
and self-maximization”. This indicates
that Kovel really argues for a complete
re-assessment of the “capitalist” parts
of our own psyches.
This hints at the enormity of the
post-capitalist project. Capitalism is
not simply a set of economic arrange-
ments, but a complex web of political,
social, and cultural institutions. Over-
coming ecologically exploitative forms
of production will not only require an
economic recalibration, but an entire
shift in political, social, and cultural
thinking towards some sort of post-
capitalist ecological ethic.
Following Kovel’s commitment to
democratic ideals, this type of change
can only occur through extensive pub-
lic deliberation, not legislated from
above, making the challenges of avert-
ing crisis all the more difficult.
Thus, Kovel’s critique is insightful
and compelling, but fails to provide
specific solutions that do not lack the
same contradictions, inconsistencies
and holes of the other “transformative
guides” he critiques. He offers little to
put your hands on besides that which
is already being pursued by these other
groups.
In overcoming the ecological crisis,
we must go beyond Kovel’s analysis
and tackle the more serious question
of why capitalism is so ecologically
incompatible yet seemingly infectious
and persistent today.