Huang Yinlin: The Conceptual Origin, Theoretical Framework, and Theoretical Review of "Fossil Capitalism"
"Fossil Capitalism" is a theoretical concept gradually developed by Western left-wing scholars in the process of exploring the relationship between capitalism, fossil fuel use, climate change, and ecological destruction. Its theoretical core is a critique of the capitalist mode of production’s reliance on fossil fuels. As a highly relevant contemporary issue, "fossil capitalism" serves as a continuation of studies by contemporary foreign left-wing scholars regarding the critique of fossil capital. In Fossil Capital: The Rise of Steam Power and the Roots of Global Warming, Andreas Malm emphasizes that fossil fuels are the necessary material foundation for the production of surplus value. Ian Angus, in his work Facing the Anthropocene: Fossil Capitalism and the Crisis of the Earth System, points out the causes of the formation of fossil capitalism, the solutions for dismantling it, and its relationship with the Anthropocene. John Bellamy Foster, writing the foreword to Angus’s book, notes that if "fossil capitalism" is not halted, it will become a runaway train leading to global environmental apartheid and a historical stage that the British Marxist historian E.P. Thompson termed "exterminism" [1]. In this stage, the survival conditions of hundreds of millions or even billions of people will be upended, and the very foundations of life as we know it will be threatened. Naomi Klein, in This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. The Climate, emphasizes that the capitalist mode of production and the measures needed to address the climate crisis are incompatible opposites. Faced with a global climate crisis, fossil capitalism continues to put up a desperate struggle. As John Szabo points out in "Fossil Capitalism’s Lock-ins: The Natural Gas-Hydrogen Nexus," power relations within the fossil-fuel-based capitalist system allow the natural gas industry to co-opt the concept of a hydrogen energy utopia, replacing renewable energy visions with ones based on natural gas. Tetet Lauron, a scholar at the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation, argues that global climate problems are caused by the excessive extraction of fossil fuels under capitalist expansion. British left-wing writer Camilla Royal, in A People’s Guide to Capitalism: Nature, Exploitation and Class Struggle, points out that capitalism plunders natural resources by exploiting labor, and the use of fossil fuels is a direct result of this exploitation.
Theoretical analysis originates from the realm of reality: 80% of carbon dioxide, 40% of methane, and 30% of nitrogen oxides in the Earth's greenhouse gases are caused by the use of fossil energy—that is, carbon-based energy. "Fossil capitalism" has caused climate issues to become increasingly severe, leading to rising global temperatures (in both the atmosphere and oceans) while triggering chain reactions such as rising sea levels, frequent natural disasters, and the melting of glaciers. Ian Angus points out that radical fossil capitalism spreads in an orderly yet global fashion to satisfy its demand for capital accumulation, achieved through the burning of even more fossil fuels. Faced with the Anthropocene—a new geological stage of the Earth—how to eliminate the negative effects brought by "fossil capitalism" has become a practical challenge that all humanity must face together. Returning to the level of scholarly research, current domestic [Chinese] academic study of "fossil capitalism" remains relatively thin, leaving academic space for further exploration. Therefore, to push the research on this issue toward a deeper dimension, the author will categorize and summarize the conceptual genesis and core issues of "fossil capitalism" and develop a theoretical critique on this basis, aiming to propose future directions and key areas for deepening the study of "fossil capitalism."
I. The Conceptual Origins of "Fossil Capitalism"
From a scholarly perspective, the author believes that clarifying the core meaning of "fossil capitalism" requires first tracing the origins and development of the concept. Therefore, this study analyzes the concept from three levels—historical origins, theoretical threads, and practical logic—to understand its conceptual aims and better grasp the core narrative of "fossil capitalism."
(1) The Historical Origins of "Fossil Capitalism"
The integrated fusion of capitalism and the fossil economy began with capitalist industrialization. It underwent a complete process in which steam power, dominated by fossil fuels, replaced water power, which was dominated by nature, until fossil fuels became the energy pillar of the capitalist mode of production. Alf Hornborg, in "Nature, Society, and Justice in the Anthropocene," criticizes capitalism as a "fetishistic system" built on fossil fuels and money, which has resulted in the negative phenomenon of a "planetary wildfire" in the Anthropocene. Large-scale global greenhouse gas emissions also originated from capitalist industrialization—the capitalist mode of production based on fossil fuels. Taking a broad view of the industrial revolutions in Western countries, "capitalism" equals "fossil capitalism"; the core of the Industrial Revolution was, in fact, a revolution in energy transition. Taking Britain as an example, before the Industrial Revolution, Britain had 5,000 wind-driven mills; inventions such as Hargreaves’s Spinning Jenny and Arkwright’s water frame were driven by water and animal power, and steam power had not yet become the primary source of power. However, the historical turning point that changed this situation was the First Industrial Revolution, during which mechanization was promoted on a large scale, and the steam engine, based on fossil fuels, was widely applied. In this sense, comparing the energy demands of British society before and after industrialization, the shift is reflected in a move from plant-based power, hydropower, wind power, and limited amounts of coal to massive quantities of coal (fossil fuels) to meet producers' energy demands, allowing capital accumulation to accelerate without interruption. Within the context of capitalist expansion, economic growth, industrialization, and fossil fuel consumption became integrated, structurally establishing the relations of fossil capitalism. Within these relations, these three elements exhibit a synchronized evolutionary trend: economic growth or industrialization inevitably leads to massive fossil fuel consumption, while fossil fuel consumption serves as the power support for that growth or industrialization. The massive consumption of fossil fuels has also caused a surge in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations. For instance, by 1950, the global atmospheric CO2 concentration had risen by about 35 parts per million above pre-industrial levels, 65% of which was caused by emissions from just two countries: the United States and the United Kingdom.
Focusing on the present, approximately 80% of the world's energy comes from fossil fuels. If current and future plans for fossil fuel expansion are not halted, the use of fossil fuels will not decrease, even if the overall share of renewable energy increases. In particular, the contemporary increase in global energy demand is still largely met through fossil fuels, allowing the forces of "fossil capitalism" to continue growing and accelerating the expansion of monopoly capitalism dominated by fossil capital. For example, according to Fortune (2019) statistics on the Global 500, six of the ten companies with the largest consolidated revenues are oil and gas companies. To this day, the intervention of fossil capital into the socio-political, economic, and cultural dimensions has reached the "marrow" of capitalist society, forming the core manifestation of fossil capitalism’s expansion: maintaining the social structure and operational modes "locked in" by fossil capitalism. However, the power relations dominated by fossil capital have not become more stable following industrialization; on the contrary, the excessive consumption of fossil fuels has caused a global climate crisis, which to some extent affects the capitalist power relations governed by fossil capital.
(2) The Theoretical Origins of "Fossil Capitalism"
"Fossil capitalism" is a composite concept based on the capitalist mode of production and a comprehensive reflection on its characteristics. To explore the logic of its emergence, it is necessary to clarify the theoretical threads of "fossil capitalism" and deconstruct its component elements from a theoretical dimension. The author believes that the categorization of textual theory lies in grasping the thoughts of the concept’s interpreters. As a specialized term, its primary users include scholars such as Andreas Malm, Ian Angus, Naomi Klein, and John Szabo. Thus, organizing the theoretical threads of "fossil capitalism" is also an analysis of these scholars' views. Within this analytical framework, the author identifies two theoretical threads: the theoretical absorption of Marxist thought and the theoretical borrowing from ecosocialism.
First is the theoretical absorption of Marxist thought.
- Historical materialism provides a scientific horizon for understanding "fossil capitalism." In Fossil Capital: The Rise of Steam Power and the Roots of Global Warming, Andreas Malm analyzes the hazards of fossil capital centered on energy transitions. He describes the entire process of the capitalist mode of production shifting from water power to steam power, analyzes the origins and causes of global warming from a historical perspective, and reveals the relationship between fossil capital and the bourgeoisie—namely, that fossil capital and the bourgeoisie are collusively linked. He suggests that to maintain class rule, "advanced capitalism will necessarily hesitate on the issue of climate change." The logic of this critique is that scholars like Malm explore the evolution of "fossil capitalism" from the perspective of historical materialism, using the energy transition of the capitalist mode of production as an entry point to critique fossil capitalism, pointing directly at its inherent fundamental contradictions.
- Using "metabolic rift" theory to reveal the hazards of "fossil capitalism." Scholars such as Ian Angus and Naomi Klein have introduced "metabolic rift" theory into the analytical framework of "fossil capitalism," pointing out that its disastrous destruction of the climate and environment causes a rupture in the cycles of nature. As Marx noted, "Civilization and the industry in general have always proved themselves so active in the destruction of forests that everything done by them for their conservation and production is completely insignificant in comparison."
- The proletariat is the subject force in opposing fossil capitalism. Ian Angus points out: "A hallmark of fossil capitalism is inequality, which is also a general feature of class society; the incomparable wealth of society is always concentrated in the hands of a few." Fossil capitalism inherits the class characteristics of capitalism, with the bourgeoisie remaining the dominant class. Faced with these class traits, scholars like Ian Angus and Susanne Jeffrey view the "proletariat" as the revolutionary subject in the struggle against fossil capitalism; only through a proletarian movement can the "lock-in" of fossil capitalist rule be broken.
Second is the theoretical borrowing from ecosocialism.
With the support of Foster, Ian Angus authored Facing the Anthropocene: Fossil Capitalism and the Crisis of the Earth System, in the third part of which he emphasizes "ecosocialism" as the "alternative" to "fossil capitalism." As an ecological liberation vision of ecosocialist theory—itself a branch of ecological Marxism—it critiques the capitalist system by constructing a blueprint for a better future ecological society. Consequently, Angus positions "ecosocialism" in the text as the programmatic path to combatting global warming. Both Foster and Angus identify with the "ecosocialist movement," praising ecosocialism as an "economic transformation based on non-monetary values of social justice and ecological balance," and hoping that the ecosocialist movement can bridge the real-world crises caused by fossil capitalism. Judging from the advocacy of scholars like Foster and Angus, ecosocialism defends the "fundamental human and natural rights" of humanity, achieves a functional transcendence of "clean capitalism," and constitutes an environmental program that struggles directly against the capitalist system.
(3) The Practical Logic of "Fossil Capitalism"
The logic behind the emergence of fossil capitalism is examined based on feedback from its practical dimension. As Marx said, "All social life is essentially practical." The author believes that the practical logic of fossil capitalism comprises three threads: the scramble for fossil energy by capitalist states, the man-made global climate crisis, and the inability of the capitalist system to effectively resolve climate issues.
First, the scramble for fossil energy by capitalist states. The rise, persistence, and expansion of capitalist states are all predicated upon the use and appropriation of "cheap" fossil energy. From the Netherlands as the "Master of the Seas" to the British "Empire on which the sun never sets," and on to the contemporary United States, none of their capitalist hegemonies were not built upon the foundation of absolute control over fossil energy. Since the 20th century, Western nations have engaged in fierce competition over fossil fuel energy. During the height of the stalemate in World War I, Britain quietly extended its influence into oil-producing regions—the Eastern Mediterranean and the Middle East—intending to control oil transport routes and secure oil extraction rights in the Gulf after the war. However, the decline of Britain's overall strength prevented it from achieving total control over Gulf extraction rights. From the United States forcing its way into the "Red Line Agreement" to the establishment of the Middle East oil order, the region has continually echoed with the struggle between Britain and America over monopolistic dominance of Middle Eastern oil. To this day, the resource scramble among Western nations for fossil fuels remains in the "present continuous" tense, even showing a trend of increasing intensity. Resorting to force has become a norm. The underlying logic of this change is that fossil fuel energy can satisfy a state's pursuit of strategic resources and space.
Second, the man-made global climate crisis. The surge in fossil fuel combustion led to an increase in greenhouse gas emissions, ushering in an era of anthropogenic climate change. Examined through the logic of capital, fossil fuel combustion provides the "motive power" for capital expansion, maintains the state where "capital never sleeps," expands the global space for capitalist production, and creates the practical possibility for the "free circulation" of capital. However, this process has also exacerbated the global climate crisis for several reasons. First, unrestrained energy consumption. The rise of Western capitalist countries was built on massive energy consumption. For instance, in 1870, Britain used "100 million tons of coal, a figure 'equivalent to 800 trillion calories of heat, enough to supply 850 million adult males for one year (the actual population at the time was about 31 million).'" To this day, capitalist countries have not changed this century-old high consumption; they maintain massive fossil energy consumption, causing the global climate crisis to become increasingly severe. Second, the bottomless evasion of responsibility. Developed capitalist countries shift the blame for global climate issues onto developing countries, arguing that the development of the latter is the root cause of the crisis, completely ignoring the greenhouse gases they released and the environmental pollution they caused during their own industrialization—blindly "passing the buck" [2] to other nations. Third, unrestrained climate governance. Nations have repeatedly reached agreements regarding global climate issues, but the results achieved are not significant; the global climate crisis continues to deepen, expand, and spread. The root cause is that large-scale industrialization dominated by fossil capital has allowed capital accumulation to break through multidimensional limits of nature, time, and space, providing an essential "engine" for the economic development of capitalist states. Driven by immense interests, capital is incapable of "self-limitation."
Third, the capitalist system cannot effectively solve climate problems. The capitalist system cannot eliminate the climate disasters brought about by fossil capitalism; instead, it expands the spatial scope of the global climate crisis to a certain extent. The most typical example is the United States' handling of the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement. The Kyoto Protocol, formulated by the international community in 1997, aimed to implement the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, using the form of a convention to implement the ecological framework responsibilities of signatory states to curb global ecological destruction and environmental pollution. As the largest greenhouse gas emitter at the time, accounting for one-fourth of global annual emissions, U.S. participation in the Kyoto Protocol was vital for its leading role in global ecological protection. However, the U.S. refused to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, which directly exacerbated the global greenhouse effect. According to UN data, U.S. greenhouse gas emissions grew startlingly between 1990 and 2004, increasing by approximately 16%, placing a massive burden on the Earth's environment. Subsequently, the Paris Agreement served as an international accord for nations to jointly address global climate challenges. The vacillation of the U.S. regarding the Paris Agreement reflects the true attitude of capitalist states toward ecological governance: that the sustainability of capitalism takes precedence over ecological and environmental protection. From the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement to its re-entry, the core decision-making logic hidden behind it is "climate governance" dominated by the logic of capital. As Edwardo Lao Rhodes pointed out, in the United States, "the environment is not a concern of the poor and the few." Within the system of capital operation, the logic of capital has locked the defined scope of climate governance; that is, climate governance must be subordinate to the logic of capital rather than the actual state of climate problems.
II. The Theoretical Framework of "Fossil Capitalism"
The theory of "fossil capitalism" distills new changes in contemporary capitalism: namely, that capitalist economic growth "depends on the large-scale exploitation and consumption of fossil fuels." To grasp these changes, one must return to the theoretical narrative of fossil capitalism to better explain them. Therefore, we explore the specific narrative of fossil capitalism through the following aspects.
(1) Defining the Connotations of Fossil Capitalism
It must be emphasized that this study takes the expositions of fossil capitalism by scholars such as Ian Angus as a starting point, using them as important references for our understanding of the term's connotations, and summarizing the core of the fossil capitalism narrative.
First, the economic level: fossil capitalism is the lifeline of the capitalist economy. Global industrialization depends on the large-scale exploitation and consumption of fossil fuels. Since the first Industrial Revolution, the status of fossil fuel energy in the global industrialization process has become increasingly important, to the point where fossil fuel production determines, to an extent, the rate of capital expansion. As Foster stated, "the coming of peak oil hits the lifeline of the existing capitalist economy." The lifeline of the capitalist economy lies in its attribute of infinite growth; failure to maintain growth will intensify the internal contradictions of capitalism and paralyze the operation of the capitalist system. In the context of the logic of capital, "growth" is the external manifestation of capital expansion. "Corporate executives, economists, experts, bureaucrats, and politicians all believe growth is beneficial and non-growth is useless." Capitalist economic growth brings substantial interests to the bourgeoisie, which explains why "governments and corporations have been shoveling coal for the runaway growth train." Returning to specific factual levels: for instance, even as governments and environmental organizations advocate for replacing fossil fuels with renewable energy to establish a sustainable society in response to pollution risks, they still cannot unlock the "lock-in" brought about by the long-term investment commitments already made by vested interest groups in fossil fuel assets. This is because the crux of the matter is that new clean energy would threaten the structural elements of fossil capitalism and destroy the valorization [3] mode constructed by fossil capital. To prevent this, fossil capital penetrates the interests of major organizations (such as large green environmental groups) that advocate for the use of new clean energy. For example, the exchange of interests between fossil fuel companies and large green environmental groups: Conservation International has maintained partnerships with Walmart, Monsanto, BHP Billiton (a major coal miner), Shell, Chevron, ExxonMobil, Toyota, McDonald's, and BP.
Second, the political level: fossil capitalism is the power valve for the bourgeoisie to maintain the continuity of its rule. The power relations constructed by fossil capitalism aim to safeguard the class will of the bourgeoisie and ensure its interests are not harmed. Within the context of fossil capitalism, fossil energy has become a constituent element of the capitalist hegemony system. This both expands the reach of capitalist hegemony and endows fossil energy with the attributes of a political tool, further strengthening the stability of the bourgeois ruling structure and thereby suppressing or stifling "challengers" to the order in the energy dimension. John Szabo likens the political dominance of fossil capitalism to "shaping the actions of the state." The fossil energy industry is a "powerful" political interest group whose "interest group power" is deep-seated and capable, to a large extent, of influencing or even determining government policy and controlling social order. In the political life of capitalist states, political groups dominated by the fossil energy industry attempt to seize control of government policy through political lobbying, political donations, and supporting proxies. If they lose control over government policy, these groups exert influence through domestic labor union movements (by providing jobs) and international monopolies (by manipulating energy prices) to protect the overall interests of the fossil energy industry. In short, the power structure constructed by fossil capitalism uses the will of the bourgeoisie as its "foundation," ensuring the continuation of capitalist rule through a stable and seamless political architecture.
Third, the natural level: the exponential growth of fossil capitalism is the basis for driving the Earth system into the Anthropocene.
The move toward the "Anthropocene" [4] is the ultimate destination of the exponential growth of fossil capitalism. As a cutting-edge concept in geology, the "Anthropocene" has no precise starting year; it refers to the period in which human activity has exerted a profound influence on the climate and ecosystems. In 2002, Paul Jozef Crutzen, the Dutch atmospheric chemist and Nobel laureate, published "Geology of Mankind" in Nature, noting: "It seems appropriate to assign the term 'Anthropocene' to the present, in many ways human-dominated, geological epoch, supplementing the Holocene—the warm period of the past 10–12 millennia." The Anthropocene is a geological epoch characterized by a severe ecological crisis. Even the renowned scientist Frank Fenner, a hero in the eradication of smallpox, predicted that humanity might face extinction within a century, which would bring the Anthropocene to its ultimate end. Facing this geological turn of the Anthropocene, Ian Angus points out: "Capitalism has pushed the Earth system to a crisis point in the relationship between humanity and the rest of nature. If business as usual continues, the first full century of the Anthropocene will be marked by the rapid deterioration of our physical, social, and economic environments. The decay of the biosphere will trigger global warming and extreme weather, but we can also expect rising sea levels leading to widespread flooding, the collapse of fisheries, toxic rivers, and so on." Indeed, since the Industrial Revolution, human activity has become a potent "geological force" and the most active factor in the Earth system. Fossil capitalism, dominated by the logic of capital, has further amplified the negative effects of human activity, becoming the "hidden hand" behind the continuous worsening of the global climate crisis.
(2) How to identify the primary characteristics of fossil capitalism The external manifestations of fossil capitalism are a continuation of its internal essence, reflected in four aspects: the anti-ecological "nature" of the logic of capital, the evolutionary expansion from fossil capitalism to fossil imperialism, the emergence of a rift in the global metabolism, and the output of war by capitalist states.
First, the core definition: the anti-ecological "nature" of the logic of capital. The infinite expansionism of the logic of capital and the finite endowment of the natural environment are diametrically opposed. Fossil fuel companies, as the morphological carriers of fossil capitalism, pursue their interest in capital accumulation through the extraction, production, sale, and transport of fossil fuels. Facing the external pressure of the climate crisis, fossil fuel companies promote capital accumulation through more "covert" means—namely, supporting natural gas companies to ostensibly address the climate crisis. In the view of John Szabo and Naomi Klein, natural gas cannot change the trend of large-scale climate change because natural gas itself is a type of fossil fuel; the methane produced during its combustion still has a severe impact on the climate. Under the dominion of the logic of capital, the carriers of fossil fuel have extended from coal to oil and natural gas, but they remain energy vehicles dominated by fossil capitalism. Fossil capitalism has proven to be a highly flexible system; it reveals a mechanism of capital operation based on a fossil fuel foundation that can maintain the relations of fossil fuel production and consumption regardless of their sustainability.
Second, the structural advancement: fossil imperialism. When the production and consumption of fossil fuels become essential forms of capital accumulation, the evolutionary transition from fossil capitalism to fossil imperialism represents a re-expansion of the logic of capital. From the perspective of its formation, fossil capitalism originated in the energy shift during the First Industrial Revolution, while fossil imperialism stems from the changes in the economic structures of developed capitalist countries that necessitated vast amounts of fossil fuel energy. Fossil imperialism is a morphological upgrade of fossil capitalism, characterized by greater expansiveness, aggression, and destructiveness. For example, the United States employs "fossil imperialism" to address its own crises (Crisis 1: U.S. oil imports exceeding the 50% threshold; Crisis 2: the disappearance of global spare oil capacity; Crisis 3: the concentration of massive oil resources in the Persian Gulf; Crisis 4: responding to the emergence of "peak oil"). Examining the entire process of capital accumulation, fossil fuels are the necessary material basis for the production of surplus value; ensuring fossil fuel supply and market monopolies is the mission of fossil capitalism or fossil imperialism. Therefore, on the basis of ensuring energy supply and the realization of interests, fossil imperialism uses fossil fuels as a tool to maintain capital hegemony, utilizing fossil fuel energy to suppress and contain the development of other nations. All of this is consistent with the history of capitalist development and is a response by a declining hegemon to global forces beyond its control.
Third, the emergence of an anomaly: the rift in the global ecological metabolism. Both Liebig and Marx provided profound expositions of the metabolic process and pointed out that different chain effects would appear within it. Influenced by the release of fossil fuel energy, a severe fracture has occurred in the global metabolism; chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) destroy the Earth's ozone layer and disrupt the rhythm of the planet's operation. Analyzing its mechanism, economic and social activities dominated by the logic of capital exert pressure on the Earth's biosphere, altering the benign metabolic cycles of land, forest, water, and air. This leads to the formation of coastal dead zones, fish kills, loss of biodiversity, pollution of rivers and groundwater, and frequent respiratory diseases. "Nature took hundreds of millions of years to create, but capital can destroy it in a few hundred years." The entrapment of nature by capital is the root cause of the metabolic rift; for instance, the excessive use of nitrogen fertilizers in agricultural production reduces soil fertility, yet agricultural production requires ever more nitrogen fertilizer to sustain itself.
Fourth, the logic of output: the output of war. The output of war caused by fossil capitalism represents the unprincipled dependence of developed capitalist countries on the logic of capital expansion. Former U.S. Secretary of War Henry Stimson once remarked: "In a war fought by a capitalist country, you have to let business make money out of the process or business won't work." During World War II, American fossil fuel companies saw "after-tax profits of $52 billion, accumulated about $85 billion in capital reserves, and increased their production capacity by more than 50%." War created immense profits for fossil fuel companies and accelerated the rate of capital expansion. To explain this phenomenon, one must return to the longitudinal progression of history. From World War I to World War II, the role of oil in warfare became increasingly important, even decisive. This is because oil-powered weapons—tanks, aircraft, submarines, aircraft carriers, and armored personnel carriers—have an enormous demand for oil. For example, in World War II, "a typical armored battalion required [X] gallons of oil just to travel [Y] miles." [5]
(3) How to resolve "fossil capitalism" "If fossil capitalism remains dominant, the Anthropocene will be a new dark age of barbaric rule, and most people will suffer inhuman misery." Therefore, finding a strategy to counter fossil capitalism is particularly important. Scholars hold varying views on how to deal with fossil capitalism. Scholars represented by John Szabo believe that "it is easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of fossil capitalism," while scholars like Ian Angus believe that an "ecosocialist movement" can effectively counter it. This study focuses on the "ecosocialist movement" perspective of Ian Angus and other scholars, summarizing and synthesizing the relevant content.
First, inclusiveness: absorbing the propositions of the "Green-Left." Ian Angus and others advocate for awakening the ecosocialist consciousness of the majority to launch an ecosocialist movement against fossil capitalism. In the transition toward ecosocialism, Angus advocates for absorbing the perspectives and methods of the "Green-Left," because the ecosocialist movement is a movement of the majority, characterized by a pluralistic core. Angus points out that "a single socialist group will not become a mass movement"; rather, it should "'unite' different participants around these goals of common interest," forming a "united" subjective force of ecological revolution to drive the ecosocialist movement in a deeper direction. For instance, well-known "Green-Left" organizations include: "Climate Action Network," "Climate Justice Now!", and "Climate Justice Action." Although they follow different operational philosophies, all aim to provide strength for solving the climate crisis. Faced with global climate issues, Angus calls for uniting all forces that can be united and gathering all parties involved in climate governance to jointly respond to the climate crisis.
Second, advancing with the times: improving the applicability of ecological protection programs. Ecological protection programs are not one-dimensional plans adhering to a fixed "standard answer," but rather action guides that must be continuously adjusted according to objective reality. Angus calls for expanding our analysis and procedures based on changing political environments and scientific knowledge, because "there is not, and never will be, a perfect, immutable ecosocialist plan." On one hand, we must continuously enrich our scientific knowledge of environmental governance. Angus points out that we must, on the basis of Marxist methodology, continuously learn and absorb scientific knowledge and experience in environmental governance to better deal with environmental problems under different circumstances. On the other hand, we must continuously innovate the methodology of environmental governance to adapt to dynamic environmental changes. Angus notes that formulating environmental protection plans "requires us to think and respond creatively, rather than just repeating yesterday’s slogans," ensuring that environmental governance schemes can fit contemporary socio-economic and environmental dynamics and exert maximum efficacy.
Third, taking a clear-cut stand: being firm internationalists and anti-imperialists. Ecosystems have no national borders; ecological changes in any part of the world affect every country in that region. John Bellamy Foster and other scholars believe that ecological issues are highly complex and must be solved at a global level. Ian Angus points out that the peoples of the South (developing countries) are the primary victims of climate change and other forms of environmental destruction, while the primary environmental criminals are the capitalists of the North (developed countries). Therefore, to solve the global climate crisis, international communication and collaboration must be strengthened to contribute collective wisdom and strength to the "struggle for environmental justice." As Foster says, ecological degradation at the world level is related to the divisions of the capitalist system. Because the world economy is wantonly controlled by developed capitalist countries, the tangible benefits remain in those nations, while destruction and pollution are offloaded onto developing countries. Angus calls on citizens of all countries to be firm internationalists and anti-imperialists, together resisting the unrestricted erosion, destruction, and manipulation of fossil capitalism, thereby safeguarding global climate justice and protecting the world's ecosystems.
Fourth, ecological practice: encouraging various groups to actively participate in ecological construction. Ian Angus believes that the ecosocialist movement cannot remain at the level of condemnation and complaint, but must actively participate in the struggle for environmental construction (the struggle against fossil capitalism). It must bring together everyone—socialists, liberals, deep greens, trade unionists, feminists, indigenists, and all who are willing to act to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Particularly when facing the unscrupulous destruction wrought by fossil capitalism, Angus appeals to the public that only by jointly fighting for interests and environmental reforms, promoting the ecosocialist movement, and actively participating in various types of ecological construction can they truly protect their own interests and avoid the harm and domination of fossil capitalism.
III. Theoretical Critique of "Fossil Capitalism" The theory of "fossil capitalism" provides us with theoretical resources and practical guidance for revealing new characteristics of contemporary capitalism and exploring ways to transcend it. However, "fossil capitalism" is not a flawless critical theory; its theoretical exposition contains obvious cognitive limitations and perspectival biases.
(1) Insights from the theory of "fossil capitalism"
The theory of "fossil capitalism" represents a theoretical critique launched by Ian Angus and other Western left-wing scholars against the capitalist system within the context of the global climate crisis. It provides us with valuable theoretical resources for understanding the new changes in contemporary capitalism, the destruction of nature by the capitalist mode of production, and the construction of our country's socialist ecological civilization.
First, it elaborates on new changes in contemporary capitalism from a dynamic perspective, profoundly critiquing how fossil capital, in its pursuit of valorization, does not hesitate to destroy the Earth’s ecosystems. Furthermore, it reveals the mutually reinforcing relationship between contemporary capitalism and fossil energy. This is particularly evident in how developed capitalist countries, in their struggle to compete for and monopolize fossil fuel energy, have caused the widening gap between rich and poor, wars and instability in oil-producing countries or regions, global warming, and the destruction of biodiversity. Therefore, through the lens of "fossil capitalism," we can see that the characteristic of "capital seeking profit" remains the unchanging nature of capitalism.
Second, it highlights the destruction of nature by the capitalist mode of production. The theory of "fossil capitalism" enlightens us to the fact that fossil capitalism is a major driving force pushing human society toward the "Anthropocene" [6], and the "main culprit" behind fossil capitalism is the capitalist mode of production. Ian Angus and other Western left-wing scholars reveal how fossil capital causes ecosystem destruction to achieve valorization. On one hand, fossil capitalism results in massive greenhouse gas emissions, leading to frequent extreme weather events, rising sea levels, and the pollution of air and water. On the other hand, the resource-consuming lifestyle promoted by fossil capitalism further exacerbates resource depletion and environmental degradation. To respond to the challenges brought by fossil capitalism, we must adhere to the system of socialism with Chinese characteristics, utilize sustainable socialist modes of production to promote development, and realize the harmonious coexistence of man and nature.
Third, it provides valuable theoretical resources for the construction of our country's socialist ecological civilization. Primarily, the theory of "fossil capitalism" profoundly reveals the environmental problems and climate change triggered by the capitalist mode of production's high degree of dependence on fossil fuel energy. This provides important theoretical reference for the construction of socialist ecological civilization and strengthens the determination to protect the ecological environment and achieve sustainable development. Additionally, the theory of "fossil capitalism" critiques the malady wherein capitalist countries ignore environmental protection in the pursuit of economic development. This provides valuable experience for the construction of socialist ecological civilization, allowing us to use the concept of green development to promote effective synergy between economic and social development and natural environmental protection. Finally, the theory of "fossil capitalism" highlights the importance of global cooperation in responding to climate protection. The construction of socialist ecological civilization similarly emphasizes that all countries should coordinately participate in global ecological governance, jointly address climate change challenges, and promote the building of a community with a shared future for humanity.
(2) Limitations of the theory of "fossil capitalism" While the theory of "fossil capitalism" provides us with a new perspective on grasping the new changes in contemporary capitalism, the theory contains certain limitations. First, it has not formed a connection between theoretical discourse and practice, exhibiting a utopian tendency. As an emerging theoretical discourse, "fossil capitalism" lacks an accurate, unified, and clear concept. Different scholars understand it differently based on their own research focus or orientation; such blurred conceptual understanding causes difficulties in theoretical application. On one hand, the critical theory of "fossil capitalism" simplifies the complex capitalist system into a dependence on fossil fuels, thereby ignoring the essence of the basic contradictions of capitalism. On the other hand, "fossil capitalism" has not transformed its critical theory into concrete, feasible policy recommendations and practical actions, remaining instead at the level of abstract theory and failing to exert actual influence on the real world. The utopian tendency of "fossil capitalism" is also reflected in the idealized climate governance schemes proposed by its advocates and followers—such as a total transition to renewable energy or a radical change in consumption patterns—without considering real-world resistance at political, economic, and social levels. As Ben Agger [7] pointed out, "Marxism, as a methodology of transformation, requires both theory and practice."
Second, its observation perspective is centered on the West, resulting in one-sidedness. The critical theory of "fossil capitalism" views issues through a Western-centric lens and lacks a dialectical, holistic vision. It tends to overlook differences in factors such as the levels of economic and social development, environmental policies, and energy usage in various countries and regions, leading to proposed solutions that lack universality. For the "diagnosis and treatment" of capitalism, if one departs from a dialectical analytical perspective, one is destined to be unable to achieve the final victory over capitalism.
Third, the overall theory fails to implement the basic principles of scientific socialism. The critical theory of "fossil capitalism" inherits the tradition of Western Marxist theory and recognizes that the capitalist mode of production's dependence on fossil fuels leads to the destruction of the global ecological environment. However, it fails to implement the basic principles of scientific socialism and fails to recognize that the basic contradictions of capitalism are an irreconcilable essential existence.
Fourth, it ignores the specific responsibilities of individual citizens. "Fossil capitalism" places its hopes for improving the global ecological environment on the transformation of capitalism, while ignoring the objective fact that everyone in modern society (including the advocates of "fossil capitalism") participates in greenhouse gas emissions. From the perspective of historical materialism, the masses are the subjective creators of social history. Improving the global ecological environment is a long-term, complex systemic project that requires the joint efforts of the whole of society. Although "fossil capitalism" proposes encouraging various groups to actively participate in ecological construction, the truly effective solution lies in clarifying the responsibility of every citizen, extensively mobilizing the masses, and forming a societal consensus and action for the construction of ecological civilization.
In summary, the critical theory of "fossil capitalism" provides us with a new perspective for discerning new changes in contemporary capitalism, new ideas for exploring the path to transcending capitalism, and theoretical reference for advancing the development of contemporary China. However, "fossil capitalism" also has certain theoretical limitations. We need to examine the critical theory of "fossil capitalism" with a dialectical eye, so as to "absorb the essence and discard the dross" [8].
(The author is a doctoral student at the School of Marxism, Harbin Normal University) Web Editor: Zhang Jian Source: Journal of Nanjing Forestry University (Humanities and Social Sciences Edition), Issue 2, 2024