Are capitalism and ecology incompatible?

“Ecoanxiety”. Among many young people, this word reflects fear of climate change and the future. Their desire for action is mixed with a feeling of powerlessness and revolt. And they are not alone. In the EESC report (Economic, Social and Environmental Council) of 2023, eight out of ten French people express a strong feeling of anxiety in the face of climate change, at the highest level ever measured in France. So, what response can we find to improve the situation? Is there really one? Should we question our economic model?

A subject discussed during the 3^e festival edition Our futures, organized from March 21 to 24 in Rennes. Under the leadership of Emmanuel Davidenkoff, editor-in-chief at World, a collective of students questioned observers of our society about capitalism and possible solutions to global warming. Discover the summary of this debate, recorded in the presence of:

Gilles MitteauYouTuber (Uh?reka) and author of Everything about the economy, or almost – To really understand what is wrong with the system (Payot),
Thomas Wagnerfounder of media Bon Mate and author of Understand everything (or almost) about the climate (CNRS editions),
Genevieve Feroneco-founder of Prophil and vice-president of the Shift Project,
Hélène Tordjmaneconomist, author of Green growth against nature, criticism of commercial ecology (Discovery),
Feris Barkatco-founder of Suburbs Climate.

How to define capitalism?

Gilles Mitteau – If we take the Marxist point of view, it is private ownership of the means of production, that is to say that workers or non-shareholder employees are not owners of the tool which is used to produce . Another, more current definition could be that capitalism is the search for profit through competition.

And in this system, what is the share of individual responsibility in the face of climate change?

Thomas Wagner – On this point, I will paraphrase the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change): the responsibility for global warming is common but differentiated. Everyone is responsible, but some, the biggest consumers, are more responsible than others. Bernard Arnault has a carbon footprint at least 4,500 times greater than what it would take to meet our climate commitments and he plays a role in maintaining a croissantist and consumerist system.

Doesn’t collective responsibility fall first and foremost to politicians? And can we expect anything from them?

GM From the current government, I would say no! But if we start from the principle that politics is nourished by what happens in society, then by questioning capitalism we can hope that this will have effects on the policies that are carried out.

T.W. We can take the example of the “de-sellers” affair. [une campagne publicitaire de l’Agence de l’environnement et de la maîtrise de l’énergie (Ademe) incitant à la sobriété en amont du dernier Black Friday]. Bruno Le Maire, the Minister of the Economy, made it known that he did not approve of this approach at all, unlike Christophe Béchu, Minister of Ecological Transition, who approved the video. We must continue to push the topics, because sometimes certain politicians are our allies. We must keep hope.

Companies are accused of greenwashing, but isn’t it better than nothing?

T.W. No, because it only leads to climate inactivity. In terms of housing and health, for example, in France, during the summer of 2022 there were between 7,000 and 10,000 deaths linked to the heatwave. And we know their precise number in Europe: 61,000.

Geneviève Ferone – When a body is attacked, it is in your interest to strengthen its immune defenses. Greenwashing is this answer. Initially, CSR [responsabilité sociale et environnementale] and sustainable development have had this virtue, according to a generous idea. But ultimately it allowed capitalism to adapt.

Hélène Tordjman – The CSR standards set for companies are very low, and it is very easy to deviate from them. This is what allows TotalEnergies, one of the world’s leading polluters, to communicate that it is at the forefront of renewable energies. This is a vast hypocrisy.

One way to save the environment is degrowth, but how credible is it? Can people accept it?

GM How do we measure decline? By the drop in GDP: there is less money, less income. For this to be tenable, it necessarily implies a redistribution of wealth with one objective: to increase the well-being of as many people as possible.

T.W. A Medef survey (not Greenpeace, but Medef) affirms that 68% of French people are ready for degrowth. If we explain clearly to everyone what it is about, we can think that, yes, more than half of the population will be in favor of it.

Can green growth work?

excluding tax It’s a dead end. It is presented to us as a solution to get out of the problem even though it is a new headlong rush for capitalism. We are suffering today from a deepening of a system that developed more than two centuries ago, that is to say industrial capitalism. It is based, in my opinion, on two pillars: markets and the extension of the domain of markets, on the one hand; and technology, on the other hand. We see today that two centuries of this system have resulted in a major ecological catastrophe. And what solutions are proposed today? Even more markets, even more techniques.

GF Green growth is magical thinking. Initially, it was the idea that we would be able to continue to “decouple”, that is to say, to produce effortlessly with carbon-free energies. But that is impossible.

We see that it is mainly the wealthy classes who have purchasing power, who take up ecological issues. How can we ensure that all categories of the population feel concerned, particularly in working-class neighborhoods?

Feris Barkat – Ecology isn’t just about decarbonization and polar bears. We also need to talk about air quality, heatwaves, etc. We must broaden the definition of ecology to reach everyone. My association, Banlieues Climat, suggests looking at another form of emergency: that of health, linked to ecology. Because each time we see that the working classes are the most affected in their bodies by the problems linked to global warming.

So, faced with the climate emergency, should we put an end to capitalism?

T.W. In an ideal world, yes, because we won’t be able to save the climate quickly enough without it.

GF In fact, we will come out of this: with a trajectory of +4°C, there is no more capitalism! But we must not turn our back on progress either. We must reintroduce progress within planetary limits, and this is exciting, because it implies reconnecting with complicity, sobriety, temperance, solidarity…