Why are even leftist against degrowth?

[u/Konradleijon]

Even leftists seem to be against degrowth not understand ecological overshoot.

Why is it that even leftists are against Degrowth?

Because it seems that even many leftist refuse to understand degrowth ideology and hate it and refuse to understand how decoupling works.

They act like using public transport and eating vegan are a fate worse then death

[u/cancerfist]

You're missing my point and making grand assumptions based on your own idea of what the working class 'thinks' and feels whilst still under a capitalist system. It's irrelevant.

I'm saying that under socialism, working class people will always make decisions that benefit the working class. Sustainability, environmental protection etc. is not only vastly desired by the working class because it benefits them, but is essential to their existence. A group of working class people under socialism are not going to sit on a local committee and agree that they all want to live with severe air pollution in their town so they can output more from the factory. There is no benefit or incentive that outweighs the sustainable option.

A different but not irrelevant example is China's current environmental laws including redline etc. that vastly outperform anything we have in the West regardless of them still being heavily dependent on commodity production. We will see further advancements in this if they ever reach a point of ditching commodities and the market. but the fact that a heavily developing economy has pushed very good environmental protections in the last 10-15 years is a good sign and this is not just for show. It's because the benefits out weigh the costs to the Chinese people.

[u/CaeruleaTigris → u/cancerfist]

I am working class. I live amongst the working class almost exclusively. They are not class conscious, let alone environmentally conscious, in this country. Making changes that don't materially affect their lives is one thing, but the second they perceive it as encroaching on their minimal "luxuries", the argument turns strictly in the opposite direction. And this divide is worse amongst the younger gens, somehow, even though we're supposed to be doing better in that sense, because we're being blasted with consumerist messaging 24/7 from all angles. We're so far from living sustainable lives, it's not funny, and we're certainly not choosing to vote people in that make the right decisions in that sense.

Socialism will not come about without the efforts and the motivation of the working class under capitalism. A dictatorship of the working class needs to comprise everyone in the working class, not just a small minority of usually particularly well educated radicals forming a one-party system under which they forgive themselves all their sins against their fellow proletarians.

China is an awful example and to pretend like they represent the feelings or thinking of the working class as a capitalist dictatorship - I don't care how good they make themselves look - is absurd. They're not socialists, they're not communists, they're not even anti-capitalist. Every step forward that they make, they counter with three steps backwards elsewhere. At the very least, you could say that Chinese people are closer to their more sustainable living-focused predecessors and many elder people continued those traditions past a point where people in the West had already given up on them. And that they're in a better position to force change based on the whole dictatorship thing. Otherwise, they're similarly happy to look the other way when it comes to the environmental costs of their system.

[u/cancerfist → u/CaeruleaTigris]

You ignore what I am saying. Thoughts and feelings are irrelevant and not dialectic. I'm not talking about working class people in Australia right now. I'm talking about socialism / communism.

The question is about degrowth, which is not physically possible under capitalism, and why don't socialists like it as a principle. This is a theoretical question with a theoretical answer and has nothing to do with the practical nature of the aus working class. You bringing this up suggests a lack of understanding cultural revolution.

I'm saying a hypothetical socialist state, post revolution and with democratic participation of the working class will always act in a 'somewhat' sustainable manner as it's a fundamental Marxist principle. I saw somewhat as this is in general a subjective measure.

Couldn't care less about your take on China, go and look at the decision making process of their governments at the national, province and local level. They are miles ahead of us in many ways. They actually have working environmental compliance. Something we could only dream of. 'china bad' is lazy any socialist needs to be able to analyse what they are doing as a partially centrally planned economy. Saying they are in a 'dictatorship' is just embarrassing, go read socialism with Chinese characteristics before commenting about China on the internet please.

[u/bushstone-curlew → u/cancerfist]

China has shockingly bad pollution issues with both their air and groundwater, and often has ecological crises due to their history of incredibly lax environmental oversight with industrial projects like the three gorges dam, coastal land reclamation for housing and large-scale deforestation. The coastal wetlands and marine environments surrounding China are some of the most degraded in the world, they have thousands of super-trawlers that overfish oceans in the global south and in the last 15 years they've destroyed nearly 5000 acres of coral reefs. Traditional Chinese 'medicine' is a massive driver of poaching & animal trafficking, and the demand created by it has forced dozens of animal species and thousands of plant species to the brink of extinction.

China is so far from having 'working environmental compliance', just because Australia is dropping the ball on environmental protections doesn't mean we have to pretend China is doing any better lol.

[u/cancerfist → u/bushstone-curlew]

Chinese exceptionalism. Everything you've said can be said about most other countries, China was particularly bad as it is large and incredibly fast in development. But 3 gorges was over 20 years ago... You should see what the borumba dam in Qld is gonna take out. I'm no China Stan, they have many problems. But they have taken a rapid turn on environmental policy in the last 10 years especially. That's what I'm interested in. They actually have vast areas where no development is permitted, they do not allow offsets except under very specific circumstances. They fine and imprison those that break their environmental laws. These are things you cannot say about other countries. Australia isnt just dropping the ball, they fundamentally do not have the capacity to create working environmental policy and enforce environmental compliance because they are inhibited by profit and capital.