The ocean is on fire and 100 companies are responsible for 70+% of greenhouse gas emissions. If wanting those companies to be destroyed by any means necessary makes me an eco-socialist, then yes.
In the sense that I think environmental crises will be the main driving force behind the fall of capitalism (one way or another), sure.
I don't call myself an eco-socialist though, because the theorists tend to be pretty idealistic. For example, they seem to dogmatically believe in non-violence.
Socialism and an ecologically sustainable human civilization are eachother's preconditions.
If you want to stop climate change, pollution and lots of biodiversity you need a socialist political-economic system to do it.
If you want to build an egalitarian democratic society that provides material safety and well-being to all you need to do it on a planet capable of supporting human civilization.
Of course you should. Don't ever let them make you feel like the shitshow around us, the systems of oppression which constrain and blight your life, are somehow a you problem. Besides, we need our comrades cause we're stronger together. :left-unity-3:
I feel like ecosocialism is one of those things like socialist feminism where you would have to be a ridiculously dogmatic socialist, to the point of absurdity, to reject it. There might be specific theorists or tendencies within the label that are disagreeable, but the basic maintenance of the earth's ecology and climate is a precondition of the advancement of the proletariat. Just like socialist feminism (with respect to feminist circles), the term is much more usefully applied in environmentalist circles where socialism is not neccessarily the underlying ideology and liberalism runs rampant. The only answer you'll get here or from any socialist is "of course I am."
Yes because revolution is necessary to solve our existential environmental problems. Don't let libs define what ecosocialism is for you, either.
Yes, it seems pretty clear that communism isnt possible without a livable home for the workers of the world
How could you not be? Pretty hard to build communism if everybody but the billionaires dies to climate collapse.
You pretty much have to be at this point. I'm a communist because I want what's best for the proletariat, hard to imagine dying in "the climate wars" is a good thing. Just wish there was more the working folk could do to have an impact. Unless you're donating boatloads to politicians, you're kept away form having an impact on the system
I don't know what it is, but I don't want to die of homelessness or from climate change so it sounds pretty neat
if communism is the advancement of society past capitalism, and a negation of the flaws of capitalism, it's quite obvious that sustainability and ecology are a core part of modern communist theory where the single largest crisis facing humanity right now is climate collapse
At the moment, probably the most pressing need is simply to slow down the engines of productivity. This might seem a strange thing to say—our knee-jerk reaction to every crisis is to assume the solution is for everyone to work even more, though of course, this kind of reaction is really precisely the problem—but if you consider the overall state of the world, the conclusion becomes obvious. We seem to be facing two insoluble problems. On the one hand, we have witnessed an endless series of global debt crises, which have grown only more and more severe since the seventies, to the point where the overall burden of debt—sovereign, municipal, corporate, personal—is obviously unsustainable. On the other, we have an ecological crisis, a galloping process of climate change that is threatening to throw the entire planet into drought, floods, chaos, starvation, and war. The two might seem unrelated. But ultimately they are the same. What is debt, after all, but the promise of future productivity? Saying that global debt levels keep rising is simply another way of saying that, as a collectivity, human beings are promising each other to produce an even greater volume of goods and services in the future than they are creating now. But even current levels are clearly unsustainable. They are precisely what’s destroying the planet, at an ever-increasing pace.
Even those running the system are reluctantly beginning to conclude that some kind of mass debt cancellation—some kind of jubilee—is inevitable. The real political struggle is going to be over the form that it takes. Well, isn’t the obvious thing to address both problems simultaneously? Why not a planetary debt cancellation, as broad as practically possible, followed by a mass reduction in working hours: a four-hour day, perhaps, or a guaranteed five-month vacation? This might not only save the planet but also (since it’s not like everyone would just be sitting around in their newfound hours of freedom) begin to change our basic conceptions of what value-creating labor might actually be.
better question is if people are the orthodox growthist marxists or degrowther type
