Gao Ze and Huan Qingzhi: New Progress in Foreign Ecosocialist Research Since the 2008 Financial Crisis
Since the outbreak of the 2008 financial crisis, social contradictions in global capitalist countries have continued to intensify, further exposing the inherent flaws of the neoliberal theory and politics that have long held a hegemonic position. In particular, the various environmental crisis response strategies of the realistically dominant "green capitalism" have increasingly demonstrated limited practical efficacy. This has provided new developmental opportunities for eco-socialist theory, which is dedicated to critiquing contemporary capitalism and seeking alternative strategies to "green capitalism." Moreover, as new and old ecological environmental problems intensify or become more prominent—including the increase in catastrophic weather caused by global climate change, the deterioration of the food security situation, the destruction of biodiversity, and the damage wrought by commodified agriculture on indigenous agricultural systems—eco-socialist research has needed to provide corresponding theoretical responses. This has led to an innovation and expansion of its theoretical horizons and many of its viewpoints. Based on this, this article provides a preliminary systematization and summary of the new trends, viewpoints, and theories that have emerged in foreign eco-socialist research over the past decade, with the aim of drawing more attention and discussion from the domestic Marxist ecological academic community.
I. New Explorations and Interpretations of Ecological Thought in the Classical Works of Marx and Engels
The research and interpretation of ecological thought in the classical works of Marx and Engels is an important academic tradition in eco-socialist theoretical research. Since the 2008 financial crisis, foreign eco-socialist circles have continued this tradition and achieved new results in areas such as the ecological implications of Marx’s relevant writings, the interpretation of the alienation of the relationship between humanity and nature and its transcendence, and the study of Engels’s thought on the dialectics of nature. These efforts have promoted the deepening and expansion of the foundational research of eco-socialist theory.
(i) Re-examination and Interpretation of Marx’s Ecological Thought
Foreign eco-socialist circles have not only continued to search for solutions to overcome capitalist economic crises within classical works like Capital, but have also attempted to explore ways to address the contemporary capitalist ecological crisis by discovering and interpreting ecological thought in Marx’s other important works. Following the systematic interpretations of Marx’s works by American scholars such as John Bellamy Foster and Paul Burkett at the end of the 20th century, and the debates surrounding the ecocentric and anthropocentric tendencies in Marx’s thought among British ecological Marxists like Ted Benton and Reiner Grundmann, a group of eco-socialist scholars—represented in recent years by the Japanese scholar Kohei Saito—has conducted more in-depth textual investigations and theoretical interpretations of ecological thought in Marx’s classical works. Saito believes that a deep investigation of classical texts can clarify long-standing theoretical misunderstandings of Marx’s ecological thought in Western academia, such as the claims that "Marx advocated for the absolute dominion of society over nature" or "Marx denied any natural limits." Furthermore, by combining the documentary materials provided by the Marx-Engels-Gesamtausgabe (MEGA2) [1] with the relevant sections of Marx’s notebooks on the natural sciences, Saito portrays a Marx with the visage of an eco-socialist. Following this line of thought, Saito argues that in his later years, Marx attempted to make ecological critique an essential component of his critique of capitalism. By focusing on the core concept of the "metabolic rift," Saito proposes that the Marxist ecological critique of capitalism will help lead a radical transformation that transcends the current capitalist system. In his representative work, Karl Marx’s Ecosocialism, Saito again emphasizes his effort to build upon the previous textual investigations of American ecological Marxists like Burkett to clarify the common academic misunderstanding that long viewed Marx as a "Promethean" [2]. He further points out that reflections on the capitalist ecological crisis had already appeared in the thought of the late Marx. Saito’s research on Marx’s classical writings from an eco-socialist perspective contributes to a more comprehensive and profound understanding of Marx’s theory of the critique of capitalism.
(ii) Re-examination and Interpretation of Engels’s Dialectics of Nature and its Ecological Implications
Engels’s works contain very rich ecological thought. In recent years, a group of ecological Marxist scholars has further analyzed the ecological thought contained in Engels’s theory of the dialectics of nature and its enlightening significance for overcoming the contemporary ecological environment crisis, based on the discovery and organization of literature. Camilla Royle, from the Department of Geography and Environment at the London School of Economics and Political Science, has conducted a comprehensive and in-depth systematization of Engels's ecological thought. In her article "Dialectics, Nature, and the Dialectics of Nature," she systematically analyzes Engels’s thought on the dialectics of nature from the perspective of Engels’s relationship with 19th-century natural science, "dialectical biologists" from the perspective of the dialectics of nature, and the similarities and differences between Lukács’s social dialectics and Engels’s dialectics of nature. She argues that from a dialectical standpoint, the current metabolic rift between humanity and nature is precisely an inherent malady exposed by class society. Therefore, just as Marxists believe that class society can be transformed, from the viewpoint of the dialectics of nature, the "metabolic rift" between humanity and nature in class society can likewise be changed.
Regarding the heuristic value of Engels’s thought on the dialectics of nature for solving the current ecological crisis, the British scholar Paul Blackledge argues that Engels’s dialectics of nature provides an effective horizon for exploring the causes of the contemporary ecological crisis. He suggests that the contemporary ecological crisis can be understood as rooted in the "alienated nature of capitalist social relations, because economic production itself is a process of interactive metabolism with nature, and the alienated relations of production under the capitalist system inevitably lead to the alienation of the relationship between humanity and nature." Similarly, Foster has analyzed Engels’s thought on the dialectics of nature and the great practical value it contains for solving the contemporary ecological crisis. He argues that Engels’s thought is rooted in a deep reflection on the universal metabolic processes of nature and a comprehensive understanding of the dialectics of nature and society. Foster particularly emphasizes that if Marx’s theory of the metabolic rift constitutes the intellectual core of historical materialist ecology, then Engels’s deep investigation into the universal metabolism of nature undoubtedly further strengthens and expands Marx’s theoretical analysis. On this basis, Foster clearly points out that Engels’s thought on the dialectics of nature helps to profoundly elucidate the connotations of the concept of the "Anthropocene" and the major epochal challenges that the ecological crisis brings to humanity.
II. Expanded Analysis of Theoretical Issues such as the Ecological Critique of the Capitalist System and its Economic and Political Alternatives
Another important aspect of the progress in foreign eco-socialist research is the new expansion of existing theoretical schools or viewpoints. This analytical expansion can be summarized into the following three levels: first, traditional left-wing theories are increasingly demonstrating concern for ecological environmental issues, represented by the significant increase in the discussion of ecological issues within "World-Systems Marxism"; second, a reflective critique of the inherent limitations of "green capitalism," thereby focusing on the theoretical construction of a "red-green" political philosophy or "transformative politics," and proposing representative viewpoints such as radical socio-ecological transformation theory, "beyond development" theory, and democratic eco-socialism; third, the expansion and innovation of methodology and analytical frameworks in eco-socialist research, such as a Gramscian approach to political ecology analysis. Although some of these theoretical schools or viewpoints and their integrated development may not necessarily be ecological Marxist or eco-socialist in nature—such as the emerging research branches in schools like ecological ethics, liberation ecology, and ecofeminism that have appeared in recent years—this article contends that focusing on the following five mainstream theoretical schools across the three levels mentioned above (namely, World-Systems Marxism, radical socio-ecological transformation theory, "beyond development" theory, democratic eco-socialism, and Gramscian political ecology) can roughly represent the expanded analysis of theoretical issues such as the ecological critique of the capitalist system and its economic and political alternatives in recent foreign eco-socialist research.
(i) World-Systems Marxism and Eco-socialist Research
In this regard, "World-Systems Marxism" very clearly demonstrates this evolutionary trend. World-Systems Marxism is a school of Neo-Marxist theory that rose in the United States in the 1970s, with representative figures including Immanuel Wallerstein, Giovanni Arrighi, and Terence Hopkins. It should be noted that Wallerstein, as the founder of this school, had already noticed global ecological problems from a world-system perspective and explored and reflected on the ecological crisis of the contemporary capitalist world through the analytical method of world-systems theory. As world-systems research has continued to advance, the school's attention to global ecological issues has gradually increased. This is prominently reflected in the numerous columns and papers on the contemporary environmental crisis published in the journal Review (sponsored by this school) and the emergence of a group of leading scholars represented by the American scholar Jason Moore. As a current representative figure of this school, Moore—starting from a perspective that combines world-systems theory, environmental history, and global ecological issues—has proposed new concepts such as the capitalist "world-ecology" and the "Oikeios" which transcends the binary opposition between humanity and nature. He has identified "four cheaps" plundered by capitalist development, including cheap labor, cheap food, cheap energy, and cheap raw materials. He argues that a post-Descartes view of nature, characterized by the dialectical unity of humanity and nature, is the correct way to interpret Marx’s political-economic thought. It can be said that World-Systems Marxism, represented by Moore, centrally embodies the theoretical developmental path of traditional Western Marxist schools cutting into the academic horizon of contemporary eco-socialism by continuously expanding their concern for ecological issues; these research results have also preliminarily shaped a version of world-systems theory within an eco-socialist horizon.
(ii) Three Theoretical Constructions of "Transformative Politics" as Alternative Strategies to "Green Capitalism"
This area mainly refers to the three representative schools formed on the basis of a critical reflection on the inherent limitations of "green capitalism": radical socio-ecological transformation theory, "beyond development" theory, and democratic eco-socialism. The first representative school is the radical socio-ecological transformation theory or "critical political ecology" proposed primarily by Ulrich Brand of the University of Vienna, Austria. As a "red-green" political philosophy or "transformative politics" theory that contends with "green capitalism," Brand—based on a "Green Left" political stance—has proposed a theoretical framework of "critical political ecology" by analyzing and reconstructing concepts such as "green economy," "green capitalism," "imperial mode of living," and "socio-ecological transformation." This framework mainly includes the following three aspects: first, a critical analysis of "green capitalism"; second, an elucidation of the basic ideas and propositions of radical socio-ecological transformation; and third, the promotion of the construction of a "global Green Left" within a transformative horizon. It is worth noting that although Brand himself has never explicitly identified as an eco-socialist, he has particularly emphasized the methodological role that the materialist conception of history plays in the construction of his radical socio-ecological transformation theory and has stated that he has absorbed relevant theories from Gramsci. Thus, although Brand's theoretical construction has its limitations—especially an insufficient analysis of the fundamental contradictions of capitalism—the critical political ecology analysis he has opened up still possesses important value. It can be considered that this theory constitutes a frontier exploration of "transformative politics" as the antithesis of "green capitalism" in the contemporary Euro-American context.
The second representative school in the theoretical construction of "transformative politics" is the Latin American "Beyond-Development Theory" (trans-developmentalism). This school differs from Brand’s attempts to construct a theory of "transformative politics" within the Euro-American context; rather, it represents an attempt to build such a theory within the context of developing nations, dedicated to resisting (green) capitalism and the unequal international political and economic order resulting from its global expansion. The background for the emergence of "Beyond-Development Theory" was the "Permanent Working Group on Alternatives to Development," established in 2010 with the support of the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation. This working group brought together scholars from Latin America and Europe to seek a more just and harmonious social-nature relationship based on a synthesis of diverse intellectual schools, and to explore alternative choices to the current hegemonic developmental models and paths. Although there is still no clear definition of the conceptual elements that "Beyond-Development" should encompass, concepts such as ecology, decolonization, socialism, multiculturalism, feminism, anti-capitalist economics, indigenous thought, and "Buen Vivir" (the good life) [3] are undoubtedly essential components, as these ideas all question the concept of "development" itself at a value level. Notably, this school affirms the unique value of natural ecology and critiques various modernist development projects accordingly—exhibiting an ecological radicalism or "deep green" hue—while also critiquing the capitalist modernization policies upheld by even progressive left-wing governments and the exploitative nature of contemporary capitalism, thereby reflecting its "pan-red" political character. One could say that Beyond-Development Theory fuses these "deep green" and "pan-red" characteristics. Although Beyond-Development Theory, as a "red-green" transformative strategy or "transformative politics," still faces many foundational challenges, it embodies the unique construction of "transformative politics" by developing countries based on an alternative imagination of contemporary "green capitalism."
The third representative school of "transformative politics" is "democratic eco-socialism," which has garnered widespread attention in foreign academia in recent years. The "transformative politics" embodied by this school differs both from the radical socio-ecological transformation theory in the Euro-American context (conceived as an alternative strategy to "green capitalism") and from Latin American Beyond-Development Theory in the context of the Global South. Instead, it stems from a dual reflection on the capitalist system and certain historical limitations within Soviet socialist practice. The uniqueness of this school lies in its view that, given the serious flaws in 20th-century socialist practices centered on the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, left-wing progressives who retain faith in socialism must face the gap between ideals and reality. They should attempt to combine the advantages of socialism—such as collective ownership, social equality, and representative and participatory democracy—with terms like radical democracy, global democracy, or planetary democracy. This is intended to thoroughly overcome the historical limitations brought about by the Sovietized bureaucratic system and realize a fusion of democratic socialism and eco-socialism in a highly democratic sense, thereby constructing a global "transformative politics" toward a strategic socialist transition built on the foundations of democracy and ecological sustainability. It should be noted that this school emphasizes the democratic elements within eco-socialism, placing particular importance on a political architecture tending toward representative and participatory democracy grounded in the public ownership of the means of production. Specifically, theoretical exploration of democratic eco-socialism in recent years has focused on its basic principles and social institutional arrangements. For example, Michael Löwy, while adopting the basic eco-socialist principles of ecological rationality, democratic control, social equality, and equity proposed by James O'Connor, added three supplementary principles for realizing democratic eco-socialism: collective ownership of the means of production, democratic planning of investment and production goals, and a new technological structure of productive forces. Hans Baer has also conducted frontier theoretical explorations. He argues that the global tension over natural resources urgently demands an alternative transformation of the capitalist system, and democratic eco-socialism is precisely such an ideal alternative, as it highlights the superiority of socialism in maintaining social equality while recognizing environmental sustainability as a priority principle of the social system. Furthermore, Baer points out that the construction of social institutions for democratic eco-socialism must fully consider the fragility of the Earth and the finiteness of resources; its distribution mechanisms must follow two basic principles: public ownership of the means of production and participatory democracy.
(iii) Expansion and Innovation in Methodology and Analytical Frameworks The most representative development in this area is so-called "Gramscian political ecology." Political ecology adopts a political analysis perspective on ecological and environmental issues—or rather, a cross-synthesis of "ecology" and "political science." Since the 1980s and 90s, political ecology has increasingly become a frontier field in contemporary Western environmental humanities and social sciences. Simultaneously, some foreign scholars holding Marxist positions have observed this new academic trend and sought to combine political ecology research (within the horizon of Western environmental sociology) with Marxist standpoints, viewpoints, and methods. Theoretical progress in this area is prominently reflected in the special issue of Geoforum titled "Gramscian Political Ecology." This special issue proposed and deepened the concept of "Gramscian political ecology," attempting to integrate key concepts from Gramsci’s thought with contemporary political ecology. Currently, academic discussions in foreign circles regarding Gramscian political ecology focus on two aspects: first, methodological construction in the sense of a theoretical framework; and second, empirical research conducted under the guidance of this methodology. Regarding the former, from the perspective of methodological construction, some scholars believe that the proposal of Gramscian political ecology reflects the theoretical reference value of historical materialism for political ecology research. It should be said that this methodological innovation draws extensively on concepts from Gramscian theory such as praxis, ideology, and hegemony, thereby opening up a micro-field for analyzing power struggles and opposition to cultural hegemony regarding contemporary natural resources and environmental protection. It has introduced a series of new concepts, including the "political ecology of praxis," providing new analytical tools in a methodological sense for studying environmental politics. Regarding the latter, some scholars have used these new methodological tools to carry out empirical research on power struggles in the practice of natural resource and environmental protection—for example, political ecological analyses of Canadian forest management, counter-hegemonic movements for land rights in Brazil, and struggles surrounding genetically modified agriculture in Mexico. These studies generally hold that Gramsci’s concept of "cultural hegemony" is highly relevant for analyzing real-world environmental power struggles. They emphasize that Gramsci’s theory provides an effective analytical framework for analyzing how socially disadvantaged groups mobilize indigenous resources and cultural symbolic power when facing material struggles against hegemony.
III. A "Red-Green" Theoretical Examination of Prominent Realistic Environmental Issues such as Global Climate Change As new types of ecological and environmental challenges or crises, exemplified by global climate change, have become increasingly prominent, a new characteristic has emerged in foreign eco-socialist research since the 2008 financial crisis: a gradual move beyond the traditional academic approach biased toward theoretical speculation toward a new research pattern that emphasizes both theory and reality. This is particularly reflected in the "red-green" theoretical examination of prominent realistic environmental issues such as global climate change. This can be summarized in the following three levels or scenarios: first, the theoretical analysis of actual social movements, especially environmental social movements, represented by research on labor-environmental movements or "labor environmentalism"; second, the theoretical analysis of new types of ecological and environmental challenges, mainly including issues such as global climate change, food security, and opposition to the erosion of biodiversity; and third, grasping the ecological challenges and epochal characteristics facing human society or civilization from a broader perspective, primarily manifested in the discussion of concepts such as the "Anthropocene."
(i) Theoretical Analysis of Real-world Environmental Social Movements In this regard, a theme or domain of discourse receiving special attention is the political alliance or fusion of contemporary labor movements and popular environmental movements, as it embodies the realistic possibility and actual state of "red-green" socio-political mobilization. Continuing the academic tradition of research on green unionism established in the late 20th century by figures such as Jeff Shantz and Dan Jakopovich, many scholars after the financial crisis further explored the possibility of combining the labor movement with environmental struggle and the specific implications of this combination. In short, these studies can be roughly divided into two research paths: historical analysis and realistic analysis. Regarding the former, from a retrospective historical perspective, eco-socialist or eco-Marxist scholars including Stefania Barca have conducted case studies under an ecological dimension of the labor and worker-autonomist movements prevalent in Western and Southern Europe in the 1960s. They explored the specific organizational forms of the combination of labor and environmental movements in the mid-to-late 20th century and proposed new concepts such as "class ecology" and "labor environmentalism." Regarding the latter, from the perspective of realistic analysis, some scholars focus on new phenomena and practices resulting from the combination of labor and environmental movements in capitalist societies since the beginning of the 21st century, especially research on socio-political movements in Latin America. For instance, American scholars Aviva Chomsky and Steve Striffler focused on the Colombian coal mining industry against the background of destructive plunder by multinational corporations. They argue that these multinationals damaged the interests of local indigenous communities and caused severe ecological destruction in the process of extracting natural resources from the Global South. It is against this backdrop that local radical labor unions raised anti-imperialist environmental critiques and struggles against these corporations. Thus, it can be seen that based on a critical stance toward the imperialist hegemonic position of transnational extractive companies and developed countries in the North within the world system, eco-socialist activists represented by local radical unions have dedicated themselves to closely linking indigenous rights, labor issues, and environmental issues. These cases and their research indicate that the actual practice of labor environmentalism plays a driving role in promoting distributive justice and alternative development in Latin America, highlighting the practical dimension of eco-socialist politics.
(ii) Theoretical Analysis of New Types of Ecological and Environmental Challenges
The most representative of these issues is undoubtedly global climate change and the response to it. It is not difficult to discern that the Green Left academia has carried out a vast amount of related research work centered on the multiple crises at the level of the world governance system brought about by global climate change. Correspondingly, new concepts or theories such as "fossil capitalism," "climate capitalism," and "energy democracy" continue to emerge. Focusing on the climate crisis and its solutions, many scholars have explicitly proposed that climate capitalism or climate imperialism has become a new signifier or trend of late capitalism; therefore, in-depth research in this area should become a new critical horizon [4] from the perspective of eco-socialism. Specifically, discussions on this topic can be summarized into the following three aspects.
First, the theoretical analysis of various international climate conventions. From the perspective of political economy, these scholars have discussed the forms of hegemony, climate policy mechanisms and diplomatic negotiations, and technical cybernetics involved in the regulation of and response to the climate crisis within international climate conventions. They also examine the impact of these mechanisms on vulnerable groups within power relations, particularly workers, indigenous communities, and developing countries. Second, some scholars have explored climate change and its response from the perspective of climate politics, specifically how various factions across the Western political spectrum address environmental issues. For example, Nancy Fraser, writing in New Left Review, pointed out that climate politics has become a key issue spanning the political spectrum; political actors in the contemporary Western world must respond to this and demonstrate differentiated paths of integration and points of entry. Third, other scholars focus on the relevance of climate change research to new trends in contemporary international political economy. For instance, Matthew Paterson argues that the development of global climate politics over the past decade has brought fundamental challenges to political economy, and the practical issues of interest involved in climate politics have become increasingly acute. Paterson proposes that responding to these real-world changes urgently requires a theoretical innovation, which will inevitably affect our understanding of state-market-corporate relations, globalized capitalism, imperialism, and international political economy.
Furthermore, in response to the food security and biodiversity crises caused by the global capitalization of nature and the commodification of biological resources, many eco-socialist scholars have explored issues such as biodiversity conservation, the resistance of local agro-ecosystems against the erosion of global capital commodification, and the defiance against the commodified theft of local species resources by transnational corporations. This ecological critique of contemporary capitalism, conducted from the perspective of the commodification of nature, roughly contains two different paths of entry: one from the perspective of environmental justice and environmental democracy, and the other from a critical perspective on the discourse of capitalist development. Regarding the former, the representative scholar is the Indian leftist environmental theorist Vandana Shiva. As an eco-feminist, Shiva has in recent years used the perspectives of environmental justice and environmental democracy to publish several works exploring food security and opposing the commodification of biodiversity. Her research is built upon the concept of environmental justice, emphasizing the value of biodiversity conservation and anti-capitalization in the agricultural field, stressing the protection of local agricultural systems, and opposing the monopoly of seed resources by large capitalist biological firms as well as the erosion of indigenous agricultural systems by capitalized agriculture. In doing so, she has expanded the political and policy connotations of environmental justice within the context of the commodification of nature. Regarding the latter path, some scholars have launched an ecological critique of the commodification of nature by questioning the "development discourse" promoted globally by capitalist states. For example, also focusing on global agriculture and food security, Philip McMichael of Cornell University explicitly questions the development discourse under the capitalist system, arguing that while a series of development discourses—including world development and agricultural development—are attractive, one must realize the capitalist ideological expression latent within them.
(3) Grasping the ecological and environmental challenges of human society or civilization and their epochal characteristics from a broader perspective.
The most representative theoretical issue in this area is the concept of the "Anthropocene." Although controversy remains, the mainstream view surrounding the "Anthropocene" is that the "Holocene" on the geological time scale—as designated by geologists—has ended, and the 1950s marked the beginning of the new "Anthropocene." The main characteristic of this new period is that human activity has become a primary geological force sufficient to influence the evolution of the entire Earth. Currently, discussions in the eco-socialist academic community regarding the concept or issue of the "Anthropocene" mainly focus on the following three aspects. First, focusing on the relationship between the "Anthropocene" and the causes and countermeasures of the ecological crisis, arguing that discussions on the "Anthropocene" provide enlightening value for solving contemporary ecological crises. For example, Carles Soriano believes that most current research methods for ecological and environmental problems are "based on a non-dialectical and non-materialist understanding of social reproduction modes," which makes our understanding of the global ecological crisis not only incomplete but largely idealistic. As humanity enters the planetary crisis era of the "Anthropocene," a correct understanding of Marx's theory of value will help us solve the ecological crisis on a global scale. Second, elucidating the relationship between the "Anthropocene" and the reality of the "metabolic rift." For instance, Kohei Saito emphasizes the radical critical value that Marx's theory of value, the metabolic rift, and a non-Cartesian dualist view of nature hold for understanding the contemporary ecological crisis. He explicitly emphasizes using Marx's thought to launch an ecological critique of capitalism in the "Anthropocene" era, thereby moving toward a post-capitalist society based on "degrowth." Third, expanding the discussion on the "Anthropocene" by further proposing and elaborating on related concepts such as the "Capitalocene" and the "Chthulucene." These extended concepts are considered to have broadened or revised the theoretical implications of the "Anthropocene" in certain respects.
IV. Conclusion
Overall, since the 2008 financial crisis, foreign eco-socialist research has made significant progress in the interpretation of the classic works of Marx and Engels, the expansion of theoretical issues and viewpoints, and the critical analysis of practical problems. It can even be said that it is entering or has already entered a new node or stage of development. These new developments are mainly reflected in two aspects. First, there is a clear inheritance of the research themes and methods of the late 20th century. For example, the North American school—represented by John Bellamy Foster and Paul Burkett—and their deep reading and active interpretation of the classics of Marx and Engels have had a significant impact on the choice of research topics and methods for a new generation of scholars like Kohei Saito. Second, because more theoretical schools have joined or more theoretical issues have been incorporated, the domain covered by eco-socialist research has significantly expanded—for example, the discussions of ecological Marxism in the "Anthropocene" era based on different theoretical schools.
Regarding this, on the one hand, the positive implications are self-evident. Corresponding to the non-ecological (or anti-ecological) qualitative cultural theoretical deconstruction and alternative transformative practices of the increasingly complex contemporary capitalist world, there can only be a global eco-socialist trend and movement that is increasingly cross-issue, interdisciplinary, and cross-regional. Any theoretical expression obsessed with simplistic slogans or localized experiences will be unhelpful in advancing a "Red-Green" reconstructive change aimed at the common goal of replacing the capitalist system. On the other hand, facing increasingly complex world eco-socialist theories and practices, we must maintain sufficient theoretical and ideological openness. we should better absorb and learn from the beneficial experiences of people and cultures across the world in resisting or replacing the capitalist system and their supporting politics and policies. At the same time, we must more firmly adhere to and promote the construction of a socialist modernized country characterized by the harmonious coexistence of man and nature, and the construction of socialist ecological civilization with Chinese characteristics [5]. It must be noted that the research results of many contemporary foreign eco-socialist scholars or "Green Left" theorists not only lack a Marxist theoretical foundation and methodology but are also more or less confined by their own economic and social institutional environments or inherent ways of thinking. Therefore, we need to maintain a prudent attitude toward some of their specific views or analytical methods. (Notes omitted)
(Author's affiliation: School of Marxism, Peking University) Online Editor: Zhang Jian Source: Foreign Theoretical Trends (Guowai Lilun Dongtai), Issue 1, 2023.