Zhang Yunfei: The Essence of Climate Capitalism and Its Transcendence
The problem of global warming is the manifestation and representation of the general crisis of capitalism within the climatic sphere; its essence is a climate crisis. In order to overcome the constraints and impacts that the climate crisis imposes on the realization of surplus value, "late capitalism" has, on the one hand, transitioned into "climate capitalism" by employing means such as carbon markets and carbon technologies to reduce its own carbon dependency. On the other hand, it has degenerated into "climate imperialism" by manipulating the global carbon agenda through means such as war and threats. Climate capitalism and climate imperialism are two sides of the same coin, collectively highlighting the "climatic tension" of late capitalism, damaging humanity's climate ambitions, and stalling the global climate agenda. Therefore, for the cause of socialism—and especially for the cause of socialism with Chinese characteristics—it is only by drawing on the experiences of climate capitalism while breaking through the encirclement of climate imperialism, striving to achieve carbon peak and carbon neutrality in the process of building a socialist ecological civilization [1], and vigorously promoting low-carbon development, that we can transcend climate capitalism and promote the realization of harmony between humanity and nature.
I. The Historical Emergence of Climate Capitalism
The problem of global warming has complex causes, including both natural and social factors. From the perspective of social causes, it is primarily caused by "fossil capitalism." To address the climate crisis created by capitalist development, climate capitalism has "emerged" by reducing its own carbon dependency, becoming a vital development trend and a prominent feature of late capitalism.
1. The Energy Basis of Capitalist Operations Human society and human civilization are always built upon a certain energy basis. Pre-capitalist societies were based on firewood, while capitalist society is based on fossil fuels. Although both are carbon-based energy sources, firewood is a renewable energy source, whereas fossil fuels are non-renewable. Since firewood could not provide the continuous and powerful energy required for the steam engines that underpinned industrialization, Western society began to systematically use coal starting in the 17th century. With the invention and application of the coal-fired steam engine, industrialization accelerated. Simultaneously, coal or coke was used in iron smelting, improving the quality of the steel required for industrialization. Consequently, coal consumption climbed sharply. Britain's coal consumption was nearly 11 million tons in 1800, a figure that doubled by 1830. The railway era greatly accelerated coal consumption. By 1870, Britain's annual coal consumption reached 100 million tons, while the world's total coal production in 1860 was only 132 million tons. With the invention and application of the internal combustion engine, cars, tanks, and aircraft were used for the first time in imperialist wars during World War I, thereby establishing the military strategic status of oil. Starting from the 1950s, oil replaced coal as the primary energy choice. Today, despite the trend toward diversification of energy sources and supplies, Western society still maintains its hegemonic position by acquiring and controlling interests related to fossil fuels such as coal and oil. It is evident that capitalism is a mode of production built on the basis of fossil energy; "fossil fuels became the necessary material basis for the production of surplus value." Since fossil energy is carbon-based energy, these new trends in capitalism can be termed "fossil capitalism," "petro-capitalism," or "carbon capitalism." Fossil capitalism refers to the high-carbon nature and high-carbon characteristics of the capitalist mode of production formed by capitalism's reliance on fossil energy; that is, capitalist society is a "high-carbon society."
2. The Climate Crisis Caused by Capitalism Capitalism's large-scale extraction and use of fossil fuels resulted in energy shortages while simultaneously increasing greenhouse gas emissions. According to estimates by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the impact of anthropogenic factors on current climate change is far greater than that of natural factors. Research by meteorologists shows that the main anthropogenic greenhouse gases causing climate warming include carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and tropospheric ozone. Among greenhouse gases, 80% of carbon dioxide, 40% of methane, and 30% of nitrogen oxides are caused by the use of fossil energy—that is, carbon-based energy. Greenhouse gas emissions caused by carbon-based energy were primarily produced during the process of capitalist industrialization. Thus, "on the one hand, capital accumulation rooted in class, competition, and ever-expanding inequality places increasing demands on the environment. On the other hand, the environment’s capacity to withstand this onslaught is increasingly declining. Furthermore, because the system relies heavily on fossil fuel production as a mature engine of global capital accumulation, coupled with vested interests of wealth and power that block the transition to renewable energy, the growing pressure on the climate is currently taking on a particularly acute form." Therefore, rather than saying climate warming is caused by industrial civilization, it is better to say it is caused by fossil civilization; rather than saying it is caused by fossil civilization, it is better to say it is caused by fossil capitalism; and rather than saying it is caused by fossil capitalism, it is better to say it is caused by the logic of capital. Fossil capitalism, dominated by the logic of capital, is the ultimate source of the climate crisis. The climate crisis refers to the destructive consequences caused by climate warming and its threat to human civilization, collectively demonstrating the serious flaws of capitalist accumulation in an unprecedented form. This is also true of the ecological crisis as a whole. The direct goal of ecological civilization is to overcome the ecological crisis, rather than to transcend industrial civilization.
3. The Climate Pressure Faced by Capitalism Because climate warming seriously threatens the continuity of civilization and the existence of the Earth, climate governance has become an important issue in global governance since 1972. First, to stabilize global greenhouse gas concentrations at a steady level, the international community adopted the legally binding United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (hereafter "the Convention") in 1992. Noting that "the largest share of historical and current global emissions of greenhouse gases has originated in developed countries," the Convention required developed countries to fulfill more international obligations while promoting their own emission reductions. Fearing damage to their own interests, developed countries—especially the United States—long held a negative attitude toward the Convention. Second, beginning in 2007, the subprime mortgage crisis started in the U.S. and rapidly swept across the globe. To escape this crisis, in December 2008, the UN Climate Change Conference proposed the initiative to implement a "Green New Deal." Reducing carbon dependency was one of the important goals of the Green New Deal. Against this backdrop, developed countries formulated and introduced Green New Deal strategies and roadmaps with keywords such as "low-carbon transition," "renewable energy," and "green growth." Finally, as the Kyoto Protocol, which implemented the Convention, expired, the international community reached the Paris Agreement (hereafter "the Agreement") in 2015. Its direct goal is to limit the increase in global average temperature to within 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, with a long-term goal of keeping it within 2 degrees Celsius. However, due to the U.S. going back on its word, the Trump administration temporarily withdrew from the Agreement, causing the Agreement to tread water for five years. It is clear that developed countries used various excuses to obstruct and delay the practical implementation of international climate conventions, fully exposing their selfish true colors in climate governance. Capitalism, which practices egoism, has delayed the process of global climate governance.
4. The Climate Policy of Late Capitalism Against the backdrop of pressure from the international community to strengthen climate governance, and in order to further realize surplus value effectively, Western countries, following the completion of their historical task of industrialization, introduced climate policies sequentially after reaching carbon peak, forming "climate capitalism." Climate capitalism is a new system of capitalist organization developed on the basis and within the scope of neoliberal environmentalist policies. Its task is to strive for the unity of "decarbonization" and "green growth," while simultaneously seeking to minimize disruption to models of economic growth and global economic expansion. It is a political attempt to decarbonize the global economy while ensuring continuous economic growth. Based on market mechanisms and using carbon trading and carbon technology as political-economic tools, it hopes to promote necessary technological innovation by pricing the capacity of atmospheric carbon sinks [2], making low-carbon production technologies and energy production costs market-competitive, thereby steering investment away from the production of commodities dependent on fossil fuels. In short, climate capitalism attempts to find new business opportunities within climate governance; it is a system of capital accumulation built on climate-friendly production technologies and improved energy efficiency. Viewed from its essence, "the main goal of climate change policy in past decades has been the ecological modernization of capitalism, but only within limits favorable to capital accumulation." Climate capitalism still must be organized through the structural elements of capitalism—such as market mechanisms, private property, and the working class—and the pursuit of surplus value remains its central law.
In sum, climate capitalism is the green transition formed by late capitalism (the current form of capitalist development) in the process of responding to the climate crisis. It is the expression and representation of "ecological capitalism" (natural capitalism, green capitalism) in the climatic sphere, collectively embodying the inherent tension between climate and capital within late capitalism itself.
II. Climate Capitalism as a Manifestation of Neoliberal Environmentalism
In accordance with neoliberal policies, late capitalism continuously strengthens climate governance, forming climate capitalism. Since neoliberalism is hostile to the working class and the laboring people, climate capitalism suffers from serious social governance failures, exposing a profound duality.
1. Tools of Western Climate Governance Climate capitalism is an ecological capitalist paradigm formed on the basis of the commodification and marketization of nature. First, there are the principles of climate capitalism. There are three main ones: 1) The principle of efficiency priority. All resources must be used as efficiently as possible to "buy time," which is a method to effectively improve cost-benefit ratios; otherwise, the climate crisis cannot be resolved. 2) The principle of circular economy. A circular economy should be developed by mimicking healthy indigenous ecosystems, researching and developing environment-sensitive products, services, and technologies. 3) The principle of natural capital. Ecosystem services support the Earth's capacity to sustain life and the economy; if these cannot be incorporated into balance sheets, the lasting prosperity of capitalism cannot be guaranteed. Second, there are the methods of climate capitalism. In addition to cutting coal-fired power generation to save energy and reduce emissions, and switching to renewable and clean energy to reduce carbon emissions from fossil and biomass energy, climate capitalism primarily uses carbon pricing as its main method of climate governance, attempting to promote climate governance through new technologies. Among these, "just as neoliberalism and climate governance have been parallel and mutually constitutive in historical and contemporary practice, the low-carbon economy has the potential for a large-scale transition toward a 'climate capitalism,' whose successful accumulation strategy can be found in the process of economic decarbonization." In short, climate capitalism attempts to make market mechanisms and technological means serve climate governance through carbon pricing, viewing market mechanisms and technological means as the primary policy instruments of climate governance.
2. The Social Essence of Western Carbon Sink Markets Climate capitalism transforms...
"Market Based Instruments" (MBIs), as the primary tools of climate governance, attempt to price carbon through methods such as carbon trading and carbon taxes to incentivize emitters to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The functions of carbon pricing are: first, as an incentive to reduce pollutant emissions; second, to make agents pay for damages; and third, to provide a means of addressing past damages. This is a method of negative incentive. At the same time, it is necessary to develop "carbon finance" to strengthen investment in climate governance. However, market-based methods present the following problems: First, carbon pricing seeks to allocate a complete set of property rights to the atmosphere so that carbon emissions can gain a monetary price. Since the atmosphere is a public resource that should be enjoyed by all, carbon pricing opens the door to the privatization of public goods. Second, the carbon market creates new commercial opportunities for enterprises and banks, which welcome them, thereby providing new opportunities for capital accumulation. Third, carbon finance may establish the status of financial oligarchs in climate governance; thus, petrochemical oligarchs and financial oligarchs may join forces to manipulate the climate agenda. Therefore, "the carbon market can be understood as a successful strategy for creating a new environmental commodity, introducing a new mechanism for capitalist legitimation, and playing a key role in creating accumulation opportunities, often through new forms of dispossession." In fact, carbon market instruments can only measure the exchange value of energy (carbon), but cannot measure the use value and systemic value of energy and climate as natural wealth. Therefore, a pure carbon market can neither achieve the effect of energy conservation and emission reduction, nor promote the transition to a low-carbon society.
3. The Social Essence of Western Carbon Sink Technologies Climate capitalism does not resort to general carbon technologies but points toward "geoengineering." Geoengineering is a general description of a series of technologies used to resist the anthropogenic factors of global warming, including two categories: "carbon dioxide removal" and "solar radiation management." For example, carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology involves geoengineering projects being developed by corporations with massive state subsidies to absorb carbon from the atmosphere or change the chemical composition of the atmosphere or oceans. Although these can serve as scientific research topics, geoengineering poses many risks. First, geoengineering incorporates the cult of technology into the capitalist system, believing that technology can solve all the problems of capitalism, which possesses a clear color of technological optimism. Second, geoengineering demands the alteration of social life according to market laws without considering the provision of public services or changing the social system, which possesses a clear color of maintaining fossil capitalism. Third, geoengineering may be used by Western countries for military purposes as a weapon of war, reflecting the ambitions of Western states to control the Earth, energy, and climate, which possesses a clear imperialist color. Overall, "as a set of neoliberal technologies, geoengineering aims to restructure capitalism with state support in pursuit of increased capitalist accumulation that is structurally opaque and publicly unaccountable." Thus, geoengineering is a typical program of ecological capitalism and ecological imperialism. Even from a purely technical level, geoengineering fails to see the risk that the application of these "new" technical means may increase carbon leakage and carbon emissions.
4. The Social Failure of Western Climate Governance Although some commentators highlight the "global" and "public" nature of global warming, climate capitalism "successfully" links climate governance with class struggle. In the United Kingdom, although the Thatcher government accepted ecological capitalist schemes and participated in international climate conventions, they used the closure of coal mines as a political means to deal with coal miners' strikes. In the 1980s, to weaken the British workers' movement, the Thatcher government announced the closure of 20 coal mines and the redundancy of 210,000 workers, which triggered the UK miners' strike movement. Although this had nothing to do with the environmental and climate problems caused by coal, "the Conservative Party was determined to liberate the British energy industry from its dependence on coal so as to suppress a labor force rooted in the miners' unions. Mines were closed for reasons of class struggle, but this could be legitimated under the pretext of environmental welfare." Thus, the British government suppressed the miners' strike in the name of moving away from coal dependence, resulting in the unemployment of hundreds of thousands of workers and the serious destruction of mining communities. This was the "UK Miners' Strike of 1984–1985" [3]. This was a "victory" for neoliberalism—with Thatcherism and Reaganomics as its core content—which intensified the privatization of British coal mines, leading to the continuous growth of fossil fuel extraction and consumption, and exacerbating the trend of global warming. In the United States, because industries such as automobile manufacturing, in which "Rust Belt" blue-collar workers are engaged, are highly dependent on carbon, the implementation of the Paris Agreement [4] would heavily hit traditional industries such as the US fossil fuel industry. Therefore, to gain the support of these blue-collar workers, the Trump administration withdrew from the Agreement. Thus, while US withdrawal gained support from worker communities, it protected the vested interests of industrial capitalists; simultaneously, it further strengthened the dominance of fossil capitalism over workers and delayed the global climate governance agenda. All this indicates that climate capitalism is a failure in terms of social governance and is unsustainable.
In short, although climate capitalism has invented climate governance tools such as carbon markets and carbon technologies, these tools are concrete manifestations of neoliberal environmentalist policies and can never become the fundamental solution for climate governance. When Western countries link climate governance with class struggle, they further expose their inherent limitations and class essence.
III. Climate Imperialism is the Essence of Climate Capitalism
Facing the problem of global warming, Western countries handle global climate affairs according to imperialist principles and methods, thereby forming new imperialist development trends such as "energy imperialism," "carbon imperialism," and "climate colonialism," which can be collectively referred to as "climate imperialism." Climate imperialism is the hegemonic status and control formed by Western countries through the manipulation of international climate affairs; it is the climate manifestation and representation of ecological imperialism, a major obstacle to the international climate agenda, and has even become the greatest destructive factor in global climate governance.
1. Savage Imperialist Climate Hegemony After capitalism entered its monopoly stage, although the energy structure has changed, fossil fuels remain its important energy foundation. The United States is a high-consumption nation built on car tires, highly dependent on fossil energy such as gasoline. For a long time, the US has restricted the development and utilization of its domestic fossil energy resources, maintaining its economic operation and energy consumption by importing foreign fossil energy on a large scale. At present, "so long as Americans continue to borrow $1 billion a day to buy fossil energy from remote and unstable regions of the globe," this situation cannot be changed. High dependence on and massive consumption of oil have pushed toward "peak oil." The peak oil crisis indicates that the world is rapidly moving along the path of global warming due to the burning of fossil fuels; the rupture of the solar energy budget allowed by hydrocarbons has created a "biosphere rift," which will threaten civilization and life on Earth in the coming decades. Meanwhile, to maintain its domestic energy consumption, the US must control the world energy market. No matter how world oil prices change, the US resolutely maintains this hegemonic position, even starting world energy wars for this purpose. Since the end of the Cold War, the Gulf War, the Afghan War, and the Iraq War launched by the US have all been oil wars. Clearly, "the new energy imperialism of the United States has already led to expanded warfare. This could become a truly global war as Washington seeks to defend the existing capitalist economy and avoid its own hegemonic decline." All this is the fundamental cause of global warming and fully exposes the essence of the imperialist climate hegemony of late capitalism.
2. Vacillating Imperialist Climate Diplomacy Formally, international climate conventions are the basic norms of global climate governance reached through negotiation, reflecting a global consensus on climate governance. But in essence, climate conventions have developed in a non-linear and historically specific way. Today, climate conventions rely on private financing and market mechanisms. Even so, the United States has not consistently joined international climate conventions but has instead constantly vacillated and reversed its position. Although the Clinton administration signed the Kyoto Protocol, the George W. Bush administration refused to ratify it under the pretexts that "reducing greenhouse gas emissions will affect US economic development" and that "developing countries should also undertake obligations to reduce and limit greenhouse gas emissions." Although the Obama administration promoted the international community to reach the Agreement and deposited the instrument of ratification with the United Nations, the Trump administration announced the US withdrawal from the agreement on the pretext of harming the US economy. Trump harmfully combined climate change denial, racism, and economic nationalism; his internal aim was to exploit the desperation of workers hit by unemployment and poverty to gain their votes, while his external aim was to re-establish US hegemonic control over key international strategic regions such as the Middle East. After Biden was elected US President, he announced the US return to the Agreement. This is conducive to the rapid implementation of the Agreement, but it may also serve as a means for the US to manipulate the climate agenda and international order. On the surface, the US attitude toward international climate conventions is inconsistent; but in essence, the US position is consistent: protecting the interests of the US monopoly bourgeoisie, especially the petrochemical capitalists. This is the greatest uncertainty affecting international climate conventions.
3. Shifting Imperialist Climate Responsibility How to determine the historical climate responsibility of developed countries is a "difficult problem" encountered in the negotiation and implementation of international climate conventions. From its beginning, the large-scale anthropogenic emission of greenhouse gases started with Western industrialization. Therefore, one can assume that part of the atmosphere's greenhouse gas absorption capacity has already been consumed by early emitters. Looking at the duration and "contribution" of emissions, from 1850 to 2002, the emissions of developed countries were more than three times those of developing countries. From the perspective of the current reality, developed countries have lowered their own emissions by transferring them elsewhere. For example, in 2012, when fossil fuels were exported from Norway, the CO2 emissions of Norwegian oil companies were approximately 500 million tons, more than 11 times the emissions within Norway's borders. Accordingly, Western countries must not only bear historical climate responsibility but should also bear the primary responsibility for global greenhouse gas emissions. However, they refuse to take historical responsibility. Their justifications are: first, early emitters knew nothing about greenhouse gases and the greenhouse effect—thus forming an argument against historical responsibility based on ignorance; second, the subjects responsible for historical climate responsibility are unclear—the institutions paying for CO2 emissions today are not always entities like states, and they cannot be responsible for most past emissions. This attitude of refusing to bear historical climate responsibility is a distinct posture of climate imperialism. Although the Glasgow Climate Change Conference (COP26) reached the Glasgow Climate Pact relatively smoothly on November 13, 2021, developed countries did not adequately respond to the core concerns of developing countries regarding adaptation, funding, and technical support. Therefore, the outcomes of COP26 were unsatisfactory.
4. Tough Imperialist Climate Encirclement Just as they have launched economic—
Just as with the "trade wars," the United States has launched a "climate encirclement" against China. In colloquial terms, this is an attempt to "pass the buck" to China regarding the issue of global warming. Whether viewed from a historical or contemporary perspective, this claim is difficult to sustain. Historically, Western industrialization has lasted for over 270 years, while China's industrialization has, at most, a history of 70-plus years. China only formally began its industrialization process in 1953 with the proposal of the general line for the transition period, characterized as "one industrialization and three transformations" [5]. From 1751 to 2016, the United States, with 4.2% of the world's population, accounted for 29% of cumulative emissions; the United Kingdom, with 0.8% of the world's population, accounted for 5%; and China, with 18% of the world's population, accounted for 13%. Clearly, Western countries should bear the primary historical responsibility for global warming, not China.
From a contemporary perspective, although China's Gross National Product (GNP) has reached second place in the world and both its total carbon dioxide emissions and per capita emission levels have climbed to high global positions, the 2020 GDP figures show the United States at approximately $20.93 trillion and China at $15.7 trillion. In terms of 2020 per capita GDP, the U.S. stood at $63,415, while China was approximately $10,503.20. A significant gap remains between the two in both emission and development levels. Since 1978, developed countries have transferred manufacturing to China, leading to a sharp rise in China's greenhouse gas emissions. That is to say, the emissions of developed countries like the U.S. are "export-oriented emissions," while the emissions of developing countries like China are "input-oriented emissions." Clearly, Western countries should bear the primary contemporary responsibility for global warming, not China. The act of climate encirclement is "related to the decline of American hegemony, the rise of China, and the attempt to maintain imperial rule through the triad of the U.S., Europe, and Japan." In short, China, as a developing country, cannot be required to bear the same climate responsibilities as the United States, a developed country.
It is evident that the "spatial displacements of these ecological and social costs, generated by market liberalization and growth, imply a potential global collapse of the Earth system"—this is the essence of global warming. Climate imperialism manifests the imperialist nature of global climate governance and constitutes the greatest resistance affecting such governance.
IV. The Revolutionary Transcendence of Climate Capitalism
Climate capitalism and climate imperialism not only fail to resolve the climate crisis but actually exacerbate it. Only by replacing capitalism with socialism, shifting from a high-carbon capitalist society to a low-carbon socialist society, and moving toward a communist "zero-carbon society," can we ultimately eliminate the climate crisis and achieve harmony between humanity and the climate.
1. Extinguishing the high-carbon capitalist society
Free-competition capitalism and monopoly capitalism, ecological capitalism and ecological imperialism, are all built upon the foundation of fossil capitalism; all belong to the category of high-carbon societies. Regarding their causes, the climate crisis appears to be a manifestation of market externalities, but in essence, it is the bitter fruit of capitalist "externality." Capitalism detaches the climate costs and climate responsibilities of its own economic activities from its financial accounts, maximizing its own benefits—that is, the maximization of surplus value—through carbon emissions and the transfer of carbon emissions. Simultaneously, capitalism privatizes the climate realm, which is a public good, making it the private domain of capitalists. Capitalists enjoy the benefits of "climate goods," while domestic workers and the poor, as well as the people of the Third World, become victims of "climate bads." Clearly, the climate crisis is a product of capitalist "failure."
Regarding governance methods, climate capitalism merely uses operational means such as carbon markets and carbon technologies as tools. In fact, "without a higher carbon price that reflects the actual cost of carbon dioxide (including its environmental costs), given the nature of the current social/economic system, disaster is unavoidable. Without an approach that considers class and power inequalities as well as fundamental issues of justice, it is impossible to formulate an effective carbon price." Therefore, climate capitalism can only treat the symptoms but not the root cause. Furthermore, through the means of climate imperialism, these commodification processes exacerbate the dispossession of the Third World, global uneven development, and imperialist dominance over the Third World. In terms of climate governance, Western countries fundamentally lack normative and institutional countermeasures and initiatives. Consequently, without extinguishing the high-carbon capitalist society, it is fundamentally impossible to eliminate the climate crisis.
The climate issue must become an important direction for social movements opposing and extinguishing capitalism. Today, the struggle against the capitalist climate crisis has become a major focus of anti-neoliberal social movements. These movements argue that the development of carbon markets is inherently linked to a broader neoliberalism dominated by finance capital and a blind obsession with the market; therefore, one must oppose carbon emissions trading, the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), and voluntary carbon markets. In a broad sense, these movements often link the opposition to unjust North-South relations, anti-globalization, and anti-poverty efforts with environmental justice movements that oppose the unfortunate environmental conditions faced by communities of color. Furthermore, we must unify climate justice, environmental justice, ecological justice, and social justice, and introduce them into the class struggle of the proletariat against the bourgeoisie.
"Today, class struggle is both an environmental struggle and an economic struggle, and has already shown signs of an emerging environmental working class"; "a large segment of the working class recognizes that, due to their own existential crisis, an inseparable link exists between economic conditions and ecological conditions." From the standpoint of scientific socialism, the climate crisis caused by high-carbon capitalist society can only be eliminated by incorporating the climate agenda into the class agenda and climate struggle into class struggle. At the same time, only by striving to raise the energy consciousness and climate consciousness of the working class alongside their class and scientific consciousness, and by insisting on the use of Marxism—as the totalizing consciousness of the working class—to command energy and climate consciousness, can the working class, led by its vanguard, become the conscious advance guard and main force of the climate revolution.
2. Building a low-carbon socialist society
From a technological standpoint, escaping the climate crisis caused by high-carbon capitalist society requires, first and foremost, prioritizing "carbon conservation," realizing low-carbon development, and moving toward a "low-carbon society." Low-carbon development is a form of scientific development that seeks new advancement through energy conservation and emission reduction. A low-carbon society is a social form that promotes high-quality development by reducing carbon dependency, ultimately achieving the unification of development and carbon reduction and harmony between development and climate. In short, it is the social form that realizes and promotes low-carbon development. The low-carbon society stands on the same level as the "resource-conserving society" and "environment-friendly society," collectively constituting the foundational fields of ecological civilization. "By reducing emissions and building a low-carbon society, we will be better able to ensure that the interests of future generations are protected to a greater extent than under business-as-usual conditions." This necessitates placing low-carbon principles and requirements above simple profit-driven principles and requirements, and establishing a low-carbon socialist society. Socialism is currently the only social system suited to the requirements of building a low-carbon society.
In socialist China, the Communist Party of China has creatively proposed the scientific concept of "ecological civilization," incorporating the energy revolution and climate governance into the construction of ecological civilization and into national planning for economic and social development. On September 22, 2020, during the general debate of the 75th Session of the UN General Assembly, President Xi Jinping, representing China, proactively announced that China aims to have carbon dioxide emissions peak before 2030 and strive to achieve carbon neutrality before 2060. He required that the peaking of carbon emissions and carbon neutrality be incorporated into the overall layout of economic and social development and the construction of ecological civilization. On September 22, 2021, the Opinions of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council on Completing, Accurately and Comprehensively Implementing the New Development Philosophy and Doing a Good Job in Carbon Peaking and Carbon Neutrality was released. On October 24, 2021, the State Council issued the Action Plan for Carbon Peaking Before 2030. Currently, China is vigorously strengthening research and development in green and low-carbon technologies and pushing forward green and low-carbon development, regarding these as vital components and practical means for adapting to and leading the "New Normal" [6]. At the same time, China is vigorously pushing for an energy revolution and currently holds a world-leading position in investment in non-carbon-based energy such as nuclear, wind, and solar power. Finally, within the framework of the socialist market economy, China utilizes market instruments as an important means of internalizing external costs, focusing on using market mechanisms to promote carbon and climate governance. Thus, China has formed and perfected its national strategy and actions for carbon peaking and carbon neutrality.
Since the 18th CPC National Congress, and in accordance with the concept of a community with a shared future for humanity, China has actively participated in and vigorously promoted global climate governance. On December 12, 2020, at the Climate Ambition Summit, President Xi Jinping put forward constructive initiatives to "create a new situation in climate governance characterized by win-win cooperation," "form a new system of climate governance where everyone does their best," and "adhere to a new approach to climate governance centered on green recovery." On April 22, 2021, at the Leaders Summit on Climate, he proposed adhering to a people-centered approach, multilateralism, and the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, providing support for developing countries in terms of capital, technology, and capacity building. Currently, China has stopped building new coal-fired power projects overseas. Most notably, China played a constructive role in the negotiations of the Paris Agreement. "The value of the Paris Agreement lies in its provision of a clear matrix framework for climate action involving all countries. This was achieved at least in part through the increasing coordination between China’s economic and environmental policy agendas. Although considerable uncertainty exists regarding future emission trajectories, China's shift toward low-carbon development—and its adoption of a more proactive stance in climate negotiations—appears to be both structural and long-term." Following its efforts and dedication at the Katowice Climate Change Conference in Poland, in November 2021, the Chinese delegation used Chinese wisdom and Chinese solutions to effectively safeguard the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and the common concerns and rights of developing countries, playing a constructive role in the successful reach of the Glasgow Climate Pact.
China consistently insists on handling climate issues in accordance with the essence, principles, and methods of socialism. First, China consistently focuses on leveraging the advantages of the socialist system, insisting on viewing a sound ecological environment as a public good and climate governance as public governance for providing public goods, while emphasizing the anti-corruption struggle in the energy sector and climate governance to safeguard the interests of the people. Second, China consistently focuses on the role of the new type of whole-nation system [7], insisting on developing energy and climate technology as vital components of the green and low-carbon technological revolution; it treats the development of this revolution as a major national strategy for scientific and technological development and insists on promoting it through the organic combination of a promising government and an effective market. Third, China consistently adheres to the people-centered development philosophy, insisting on taking the satisfaction of the people’s needs for a better life as the value pivot for the energy revolution and climate governance; it has created valuable experiences in ecological sharing, such as "photovoltaic poverty alleviation" and "wind power poverty alleviation," and insists that all people share the fruits of the energy revolution and climate governance. Fourth, China consistently participates in global climate governance in accordance with the socialist spirit of internationalism, advocating and practicing the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, the principle of equity, and the principle of respective capabilities; it insists on promoting the construction of a climate community with a shared future and an energy community with a shared future based on the concept of a community with a shared future for humanity, vigorously helping people in Third World countries escape energy poverty and achieve green, low-carbon development. Consequently, some climate scientists have shifted their gaze from the United States to China, viewing China as the "main hope for leading the response to climate change." In substance, this signifies that socialism represents the hope for a low-carbon society.
3. Moving toward a communist "zero-carbon society"
Having achieved the goals of carbon peaking and carbon neutrality, humanity must also realize—
The objective of “zero carbon” is to construct a “zero carbon society.” In a strict scientific sense, it is impossible for humanity to achieve absolute zero carbon, let alone negative carbon. Absolute zero carbon and negative carbon would mean the Earth entering a glacial period, and humanity would encounter alternative catastrophes. However, from the perspective of an ideal future vision, we can define the “zero carbon society” as the goal of our pursuit. Viewed from its energy base, a zero carbon society is a social form established upon the foundation of solar energy. Solar energy is a clean, renewable energy source and a non-carbon-based energy source. Currently, not only have environmentalism and ecologism proposed technological visions for a solar age, but Marxists and socialists have also proposed social visions for a solar revolution. In fact, Marx and Engels long ago viewed the problem of the rift in the metabolic interaction [8] from the perspective of open-system thermodynamics. As Engels observed in 1882: “What man does by means of labor is conscious, whereas what the plant does is unconscious. It has long been common knowledge that plants are huge absorbers and storers of solar heat in a transformed form. Since labor can fix solar heat (which is by no means always possible in industry and other sectors), man, through his own labor, is able to combine the natural functions of animal energy consumption and plant energy storage.” Therefore, humanity must not “waste” the fossil fuels associated with “past solar energy,” and should make excellent use of present solar energy.
The solar revolution requires not only new technologies but also new “social forms beyond capitalism,” realizing a fundamental transformation in production and consumption, life and work, gender relations, and the spatial-temporal organization [9] of social life. First, public ownership must be established and perfected. In the climate gambit, a high degree of consensus has been reached on privatization based on “market-based” and technological methods in order to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions. In fact, setting aside various prejudices, protecting commodified knowledge through private property rights leads to an inability to fully utilize knowledge, reduces the operating efficiency of the system, and slows the pace of innovation. In particular, “the atmosphere itself does not belong to the emitters, but belongs to all of humanity.” Solar energy, even more so, belongs to all of humanity. Marx pointed out that no one has the right to monopolize or enjoy the land exclusively. The same applies to the atmosphere and solar energy. Only on the basis of public ownership can the public-sphere nature of the atmosphere be guaranteed, and solar energy be ensured as the common wealth of all humanity. Clearly, advancing the solar revolution inherently requires the abolition of private property, the realization of public ownership, and the movement toward communism.
Second, we must adhere to a people-centered [10] value orientation. In current Western societies, carbon policies lead to unemployment for workers in carbon-intensive industries, and the Green New Deal has not yet provided precise details on how to transition justly to jobs with equal remuneration. At the same time, there is no necessary link between carbon pricing and energy; there is a need to shift from “emission rights” to “energy rights” to protect the people's energy rights and interests. Only by insisting on the unity of acting both for the people and by relying on the people can we end the rule of imperialism, establish a system in which everyone enjoys substantive equality, create a classless society, protect the Earth, and benefit future generations. Of course, only under the leadership of the Communist Party, and by giving play to the historical subject role of the proletariat—which possesses a high degree of scientific class consciousness and ecological civilization consciousness—can we achieve this goal. Marx pointed out in the third volume of Capital that the associated producers will rationally regulate their metabolic interaction with nature. This should include the rational regulation of the relationship between humans and energy, and humans and climate. Therefore, only by combining communism with solar energy and building a communist “zero-carbon society” can humanity achieve harmony between humans and the climate. Of course, what is discussed here is the question of the principles of social revolution in the move toward a “zero-carbon society,” rather than a question of technological pathways.
In short, only through a revolutionary transformation of social forms to establish a socialist low-carbon society and move toward a communist “zero-carbon society” can we eliminate the climate crisis and move toward climate harmony. We cannot rely solely on tools such as carbon markets and carbon technology, and still less can we pin our hopes on climate capitalism and climate imperialism. Today, the carbon peak and carbon neutrality [11] proposed by socialist China serve as a bridge connecting reality and ideals.
(Notes and references omitted)
(Author’s affiliation: School of Marxism, Renmin University of China)
Network Editor: Zhang Jian Source: Marxism Studies (Mǎkèsīzhǔyì Yánjiū), Issue 1, 2022