Steven Vogel
- Published in print:
- 2015
- Published Online:
- January 2016
- ISBN:
- 9780262029100
- eISBN:
- 9780262326988
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- The MIT Press
- DOI:
- 10.7551/mitpress/9780262029100.003.0007
- Subject:
- Environmental Science, Environmental Studies
The collective action problem Hardin named the tragedy of the commons is another version of the phenomenon that Marx called alienation. The aggregated effect of the individual actions of myriad ...
More
The collective action problem Hardin named the tragedy of the commons is another version of the phenomenon that Marx called alienation. The aggregated effect of the individual actions of myriad private individuals engaging in private transactions produces consequences harmful to all that none of them intend. This is the standard form of environmental problems. The “tragedy” does not arise from the selfishness or greed or stupidity of the individuals involved, but rather from their inability to find a way to decide together as a community what to do. This inability is characteristic of a social order based on market relations. The problem can only be solved by moving from the level of the market to the level of politics, in which decisions are made by a community as a whole, acting self-consciously as a community through discursive democratic processes.Less
The collective action problem Hardin named the tragedy of the commons is another version of the phenomenon that Marx called alienation. The aggregated effect of the individual actions of myriad private individuals engaging in private transactions produces consequences harmful to all that none of them intend. This is the standard form of environmental problems. The “tragedy” does not arise from the selfishness or greed or stupidity of the individuals involved, but rather from their inability to find a way to decide together as a community what to do. This inability is characteristic of a social order based on market relations. The problem can only be solved by moving from the level of the market to the level of politics, in which decisions are made by a community as a whole, acting self-consciously as a community through discursive democratic processes.
Steven Vogel
- Published in print:
- 2015
- Published Online:
- January 2016
- ISBN:
- 9780262029100
- eISBN:
- 9780262326988
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- The MIT Press
- DOI:
- 10.7551/mitpress/9780262029100.001.0001
- Subject:
- Environmental Science, Environmental Studies
Environmental theory would be better off if it eschewed the concept of “nature” entirely. The concept is too ambiguous and potentially politically dangerous, while as McKibben and others have argued, ...
More
Environmental theory would be better off if it eschewed the concept of “nature” entirely. The concept is too ambiguous and potentially politically dangerous, while as McKibben and others have argued, if “nature” means a world independent of human action it may no longer exist – and even if it did that’s not where environmental problems arise. The world that actually “environs” us is always a built one, and is “socially constructed” in the sense that humans literally construct it in their practices. We are not alienated from nature but rather from that (built) environment, in that we do not recognize, or take responsibility for, its builtness. “Thinking like a mall” means recognizing that the distinction between the “natural” and the “artificial” is untenable: artifacts are as material, and so as independent of humans, as anything else. Environmental questions are political questions, about what sort of environment we want to build: “nature” can’t answer them, only those beings capable of engaging in democratic political discourse can. But under capitalism such discourse is virtually impossible, and instead individuals can only engage in private market transactions with each other that when aggregated produce harmful “externalities” that no one intends. This is the source of environmental problems. Only by choosing our practices not as individuals but as democratically a community could such problems be overcome.Less
Environmental theory would be better off if it eschewed the concept of “nature” entirely. The concept is too ambiguous and potentially politically dangerous, while as McKibben and others have argued, if “nature” means a world independent of human action it may no longer exist – and even if it did that’s not where environmental problems arise. The world that actually “environs” us is always a built one, and is “socially constructed” in the sense that humans literally construct it in their practices. We are not alienated from nature but rather from that (built) environment, in that we do not recognize, or take responsibility for, its builtness. “Thinking like a mall” means recognizing that the distinction between the “natural” and the “artificial” is untenable: artifacts are as material, and so as independent of humans, as anything else. Environmental questions are political questions, about what sort of environment we want to build: “nature” can’t answer them, only those beings capable of engaging in democratic political discourse can. But under capitalism such discourse is virtually impossible, and instead individuals can only engage in private market transactions with each other that when aggregated produce harmful “externalities” that no one intends. This is the source of environmental problems. Only by choosing our practices not as individuals but as democratically a community could such problems be overcome.
