The climate crisis and capitalism: what are they related to?  The answer is in a collection of articles: human history and natural history are inseparable.

Depesh Chakrabarti grow for Calcutta Between the 1950s and 1960s, he graduated in Physics, earning a master’s degree in management training and then a doctorate in history in Canberra, Australia. His first reflections on the relationship between open spaces, megacities, nature and man date back to that time. Chakrabarti is primarily known to the public with a book, Europe Regional (The last translated edition of Meltmy, 2016 and first publication in the original language of Princeton University Press, 2000), a historical reading of globalization. stresses the importance ofDecolonizationViewpoint: to look, then, at the many different historical paths of different geopolitical realities, without settling everything into a single vision and direction dictated by the first white and northwestern world and the capitalist mode of production. The author also, in his monumental production, often returned to the topic of the relationship between man and nature, or rather the relationship between human history and natural history. It was his two most important articles The Climate of History: Four Theses, in Critical InvestigationVolume 35, 2009 and Climate and capital: in interrelated histories, in critical inquiryVolume 41, 2014. Matteo De Giuli And the Niccolo Purcelluzzi – Both editors de pocket and contributors to several electronic and print magazines, together they sponsor the Medusa newsletter, on climate and cultural changes, from which the book, Medusa, was published for NOT Nero editions in 2021. Stories from the Apocalypse (as we know it) – they recently edited an edition of the article series by night time (2021) titled Climate, history and capitalpreceded by a long introduction discussing the selection and presentation of these two articles together, subtitled here with the titles: The climate of history: four theses And the Climate and Capital: Shared Stories. These two articles represent essential steps for trying to get critical thinking also regarding the current climate crisis, its historical responsibilities, and our relative margins of maneuver.

See also  “The leaflet that brought down the Berlin Wall” is the subject of a dispute between the Bonn Museum and Bild -

In the articles we first talk about Anthropocene, a term that now frequently recurs in common discourse, and which refers to the current geological age, in which the terrestrial environment, with all its physical, chemical and biological properties, is strongly conditioned on both local and global scales by the influences of human action. According to Chakrabarti, I weather changes caused by human activities put in crisis The our coordinates From historical understanding. what does that mean? Basically, this passage has caused a deep-rooted distinction between human history And the natural history. In fact, the “two stories” have long been interpreted as separate: one Before, human, faster, more explicable, more usable; a secondly, natural, with such long and independent times that it was thought that we would never be able to see the connections and the ways and to what extent each could affect the other. Our era, the Anthropocene, has clearly refuted this idea.

However, things should not be simplified: other authors have suggested another designation, namely capitalocin, and put the responsibility for these transformations in the capitalist system. Chakrabarti does not deny, but rather emphasizes the enormous responsibilities capitalismwhich has played and continues to play a leading role in defining the climate crisis and its diverse social and geographic impacts. Climate change, in fact, raises broad and diverse questions of equity, linked to the functioning of the current economic system: “the influence of different generations, between small island states and polluting countries, between developed and industrialized nations (historically responsible for most emissions) and those of modern industrialization.” The populations that will suffer the most in the future (and thus in general the younger generations of today) will be the poorest in developing countries. This is clearly a matter of class and “race”. It is not surprising that the period of the “Great Acceleration” of the climate crisis between 1945 and 2015, when global numbers of population, real GDP, direct investment abroad, water use, fertilizer consumption, urban population, transport by telephone and international tourism coincided With the great decolonization period.

See also  Microsoft no longer exists, LinkedIn leaves China

However, Chakrabarti also points out something else: it is important to understand that The influence of the human race on this planet Long and deep roots which precedes and will exceed the stability of capitalism, although the latter remains an element to be compared also on the issue of the climate crisis. This crisis, at the same time, forces us to think more, on multiple time scales, trying to analyze both direct human influence and the deep history of the Earth, which plays the role of co-representative and must also be taken into account. An account of imagining a sustainable future, within the limits of human potential. human history and history naturalSo, They can’t be separated. At the same time, it is not human history that exclusively affects natural history. The effect is mutual, and whatever we must start from man and politics, we must not abandon a very long-term thought. It’s all within what we can imagine, trying to prevent as well as treat.

For example: i paleoclimatologists They know that in the past the Earth went through several moments of warming that marked the points of no return, which are unpredictable, and which are beyond the capacity of human analysis. On the other hand, we know that carbon-related emissions have a strong impact on climate today; On the other hand, we know that we cannot know when we will reach the point of no return. On the basis of this, the notion of those who develop policies cannot rest on a cost-benefit analysis related only to a human viewpoint: we cannot know the ownership of the planet; Therefore, we need a precautionary principle and if we want to solve the climate problem, at least in part, we must eliminate carbon-related emissions, gradually, but as quickly as possible. It is not only human history that dictates the rules, but also natural history, in a continuous balancewhich certainly can not be in the interest of capital.

See also  The first transfer of migrants from the UK to Rwanda fails


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here