K.Saito Marx in the Anthropocene: Towards the Idea of Degrowth Communism, Cambridge University Press (2023)
I used to teach a course on the philosophy of the social sciences. One of my classes began with Willie Sutton’s famous response to the question of why he robbed banks: because that is where the money is! An orthodox economist might fail to see the joke. For orthodoxy in economics is premised on the distinction between fact and value, the idea that economics should strive to be a value-free science. But for most other social scientists, not to mention normal people, the joke is precisely that Sutton somehow seems to misunderstand the question which is on the morality of robbing wherever the money is. People can think about the ethics of their goals not just the optimum way to reach their goals whatever they may be. It is not only capitalism that is inherently ill-suited to the challenge of saving the climate, but also neo-classical economics, that behind the veneer of value neutrality has offered the greatest possible ideological assistance to the capitalist project, especially in its latest, and most dangerous, neo-liberal phase.
In my book The Values and Value of the Left (εκδόσεις Κριτική) I discuss the role of values in economics and argue in favour of the idea that Marx provided a moral critique of capitalism. While Saito does not engage directly in this long-standing debate within Marxism, his critique of productivism and eurocentrism suggest that he too considers that the critique of the present and the promotion of a viable future entail a moral element. How else are we to build towards a different conception of abundance or community wealth? How else can we address the question of what precisely do we want to develop and for whom?
For Saito degrowth communism incorporates a number of key elements. Firstly, it is based on the regulation of the metabolism between man and nature. Accepting the natural, and man-made, limits of the environment at the very least implies a reduction of the working day, or in terms of Cohen’s analysis turning any increases in productivity into more leisure rather than in the consumption of more goods. It is also an approach that can have a wider appeal. As Giorgos Papanikolaou argued, in a presentation of Saito’s book, in many countries we are seeing new forms of enclosures, so that for instance you may need to be well-off to have access to an attractive beach and need to work hard to have the economic means to have that access, whereas before it was part of the common wealth. Nevertheless, we should not minimize the extent to which such a shift in favour of a serious revaluation of the commons implies real engagement with current ideology to gain support for a different conception of common wealth.
Regulating the metabolism between man and nature would also necessitate the rethinking – for the new challenges faced by humanity – of economic planning, collective choice and economic democracy. Instead of the goal of growth in general this would start with thinking about goals such as stable employment, affordable housing or universal access to public services. This in turn could lead to a collective democratically determined choice to invest more in health, care, education or cultural activities, an approach entirely appropriate for a society with more leisure. This would make different requirements on the direction of technological progress. Instead of surveillance of workers and automation replacing workers’ jobs, technology could be developed which works with the skills and capacities of workers, including their local, tacit or social skills.
What about the production side? Here Saito’s re-reading of Marx points to the potential of expanding social and cooperative forms of production – “the free and cooperative producers”. He also suggests that this could be promoted on a larger scale than in the pre-communist examples Marx studied, and the current cooperative movement currently envisages. The idea is once again to rediscover the link with the older idea that ever-increasing production needs to be replaced with that of production that provides the foundations for reproducing itself and satisfies certain needs. But whether this is a realistic prospect – social cooperative production on a larger scale – is perhaps one of the least developed aspects of the book.
On the other hand, there are a number of trends that are working in favour of Saito’s approach. One is the fact that high growth rates in advanced economies may be in any case a thing of the past. One reason for this can be traced to Baumol’s work on the differential rates of productivity growth between the manufacturing and service sectors. While the potential for productivity growth in the manufacturing sector may seem to be inexhaustible, the same does not apply to services – you will always need time to discuss with your doctor or carer, so that there is so much technology can do to increase “efficiency”. As a result, manufacturing prices fall faster than that of services, so we spend a smaller share of our income on them, and at the same time, we demand more services. As a result, productivity gains are fewer than in the previous manufacturing stage of capitalism. For the supporters of degrowth this should represent an opening and not a problem.
Another source of optimism comes from the literature on happiness. It turns out that after a certain level of income people do not become happier with further increases, and this holds within and between economies – citizens of the US are not happier than those of Portugal which has a far smaller GDP per capita, nor are they happier now than they were 50 years ago when the US GDP per capita was considerably smaller. There are many explanations for these findings which are surprising, especially for economists. But it does seem that stable employment, dependable public services, affordable housing and a safe and clean environment are desired outcomes for a very large number of people. So, the goal of changing the narrative on growth, and promoting different conceptions of abundance and social/communal wealth, may not be as daunting as first appears.
Saito’s book is a major contribution on many levels. I await with interest to read his latest book Slow Down: How Degrowth Communism Can Save the Earth (Greek edition expected in the summer), where I understand he attempts to outline his vision in more detail.