Let’s put some life into this sub. I don’t think degrowth is possible under capitalism because the imperative to degrow contradicts the capitalist drive for the creation of value (valorization) which must always grow under capitalism’

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
4 points

Wow. First, degrowth isn’t austerity or recession, it’s about focusing on improving human welfare instead of profits. This innately challenges the asymmetry of the workers and owners. Degrowth is also about decreasing work, something inherently challenging to the capitalist mode of production.

Finally, of course capitalism is the problem. Consumerism is a symptom of capitalism, not the root cause of the ecological crisis.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Then it is the worst possible word chosen for this philosophy. You don’t need degrowth to decrease work. And the lack of growth always meant and still means for most people that life is getting shitty, so you will never convince anyone that degrowth is good thing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

“De” in Latin and similar languages means away rather then against, that would be anti. Like in delivery, deliberate, deescaltion and so forth.

I know a few people who choose to work less hours and get paid less, as they value their free time more or took jobs with lower pay, which are more fun to them. It happens all the time in the real world, but intresstingly our political and economic system has a lot of problems with that. Obviously that is a very different situation then having a lot of free time due to being fired. That is basicly the difference between degrowth and a recession. One is exchanging GDP for something of value, the other is a problem in the system.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Well, maybe it’s an English thing. In French décroissance is the opposite of croissance. But I’m not sure it’s well perceived either in English countries.

That’s the problem I’m talking about: only privileged people can see degrowth as a good thing, because they’re already swimming in more than they can live with. Most people, even in rich countries, are poor. They don’t want to hear about decreasing their way of life because they’re already on the floor and on the verge of poverty, if they’re not outright into it.

The very concept of degrowth needs to die and be replaced by a new one. Because it’s a concept that’s only useful for the bourgeoisie right now. It’s a concept for privileged people who want to feel better about it and do something. It is very much part of the liberal mindset of the privigeled people of these countries. The very idea that the change comes from the people behaviours rather than the system itself.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Degrowth

!degrowth@slrpnk.net

Create post

Discussions about degrowth and all sorts of related topics. This includes UBI, economic democracy, the economics of green technologies, enviromental legislation and many more intressting economic topics.

Community stats

  • 545

    Monthly active users

  • 201

    Posts

  • 852

    Comments

Community moderators