I have written before on this blog, of George Monbiot’s political
philosophy as being liberal essentially, a kind of green neo-Keynesianism, and the
limits that this puts on his radicalism. I justified this by reference to his
2003 book, ‘The Age of Consent’ where this is exactly what he advocates. The
marketing blurb for the book contains this quote:
“Our task is
not to overthrow globalisation, but to capture it, and to use it as a vehicle
for humanity’s first global democratic revolution.”
This sounds
quite radical but the book goes onto suggest a neo-Keynesian approach, and
rather condescendingly dismisses socialism in a page and a half. This is a
quote from my previous blog on the subject:
‘It is not a
revolution Monbiot wants, he is happy enough with the current capitalist system
that he wants it to continue, but be tweaked around a bit. In short, he is a
liberal, so this is all to be expected. He either thinks that anything more
radical is doomed to failure or he is deluding himself liberal economics can
help to solve the very ecological crisis it has set going.’
If you have read
the book then this is the only conclusion to draw. But he has been edging away
from this type of thinking. In December last year he wrote in his column in The Guardian
that Corbyn’s Labour were pursuing a Keynesian approach to policy when they need to advocate a move to
‘commons based’ solutions,
that is, abandoning Keynesianism and indeed capitalism as useless in the face
of the ecological crisis.
In his column on Tuesday this week he went further with his new
thinking. He mentions a commons based ownership of production and stewardship
of the land, and participatory democracy. The example he gives is of the
Brazilian city of Porto Alegre who have pioneered this participatory democracy in
local spending decisions and much else.
The commons
is an extremely important concept in ecosocialism, and extends beyond the
physical land based commons of old (and some that still exist), into areas like
peer to peer data sharing and things like the Firefox web browser. Monbiot does
say that commons are a ‘non-capitalist system’ but omits terming this as
ecosocialism, which it is. Or to be exact, it is only a prefiguration of
ecosocialism, and thus sadly open to abuse whilst the capitalist system
survives.
Participatory
budget setting and other forms of lowest level democratic decision making, what
Monbiot refers to as ‘subsidiarity,’ is also close to ecosocialist theory, and we
would extend this to most areas of political engagement and governance.
He advocates
a land value tax and a citizen’s income, which is not strictly speaking
ecosocialist, but is promoted by the English Green Party, and whilst they are
good transitional policies pointing towards ecosocialism, they would be
unnecessary under full blown ecosocialism. There would be no private ownership
of land and there would probably be no need for money.
Monbiot
thinks this is all possible under a UK Corbyn led Labour government, who have
been making moves to update their 1970’s Keynesian ideology, to some extent at
least. I think this is possible, but Labour doesn’t seem to be there yet, which
Monbiot does acknowledge. There is still a centralising instinct in the Labour
party, and faith in things like nuclear power (which Monbiot now supports too)
is a good example.
I also think
beyond a transitional stage, which we need to have, that bourgeois democracy is
unlikely to be the vehicle for achieving ecosocialism, because there are too
many powerful vested interests in capitalism to accept full blown ecosocialism.
It would mean the end for the capitalist class, and they will not allow that to
happen without a fight. Too many of their class do very well out of the system,
although most people get ripped off by it. Why should the elites throw away
their lives of luxury on the backs of the mass of the people?
So, yes
Monbiot’s change of emphasis is to be welcomed, but only as a transitional phase,
and I hope Monbiot can follow through the logic of his new thinking, abandon
his attachment to capitalism, and fully embrace the only system that will give
us a chance of avoiding a massive ecological and social crisis. Ecosocialism,
that is.
No comments:
Post a Comment