Capitalism and Nature

Mr. Hutchinson argues that environmental degradation preceded the advent
of capitalism. This is certainly true. My contention is that the _rate_
of environmental degradation acclerated sharply, beginning in the
European world-economy during the long 16th century. With the emergence
of capitalism, a new division of labor between town and country took
shape, and with it a historically unprecedented form of the "metabolic
rift" -- a rupture in the nutrient cycling between country and city.
Nutrients flowed from rural areas, near and (increasingly) distant, into
the cities, which were under no obligation to return said nutrients.
This is of course an involved argument which can hardly be adequately
fleshed out empirically or theoretically in this forum. (For those who
would like more on this line of inquiry, see John Bellamy Foster's
article in the Sept. 1999 American Journal of Sociology, and my papers
in the June 2000 Organization and Environment, and Review 23(3), 2000.)
        Certainly, comparisons between capitalism and pre/non-capitalist
social
systems is a useful endeavour, as we have learned from Chase-Dunn and
Hall.  I am more skeptical of attempts at a nomothetic explanation of
the relationship between population and social change in general.
        Best, Jason

Jason W. Moore
Sociology, Johns Hopkins

Richard N Hutchinson wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 31 May 2000, Jason Moore wrote:
> 
> >       Forest clearance in the Brazilian rainforest, and elsewhere, by
> > displaced peasant producers today IS a response to overpopulation, but
> > clearly an overpopulation produced by the deepening of capitalist
> > agrarian relations in zones of established settlement. This is whole
> > thrust of the modern history of town-country division of labor.
> > Capitalist transformation of the countryside produces a surplus
> > population which then finds its way to the cities and to new zones of
> > settlement, near or far according to conditions.
> >       This is not a particularly new phenomenon. The history of world
> > capitalist expansion is of course replete with instances of forest
> > clearance -- 17th and 18th century New England, 15th century Madeira,
> > 17th century Ireland, etc. -- few of which seem to be linked to be
> > linked to "overpopulation."
> 
> Jason-
> 
> What you say is true as far as it goes, but fails to note that
> environmental devastation has accompanied human settlement long before the
> rise of capitalist social relations.
> 
> Have you heard of "The Cedars of Lebanon"?  They no longer exist, of
> course, but apparently were quite extensive and magnificent before they
> were all chopped down by the expanding agrarian population over 2000 years
> ago.
> 
> Of course population growth must be considered in the context of social
> relations, but to reduce the problem to one of capitalism is to miss
> deeper underlying factors (addressed by Boserup, Carneiro and others).
> 
> On this point, AGF's recent work is relevant!
> 
> RH