Conceptions of nature and relations with capitalism: analysis of thepost-Covid-19 scenarios in france
DOI :
https://doi.org/10.51359/2179-7501.2020.247821Mots-clés :
COVID, nature, environment, commons, ecological strugglesRésumé
This article points out how the idea of Nature, as formulated by social scientists, has shaped the intellectual formation of environmental movements and struggles. In order to do so, we will examine a selection of French newspaper articles, all related to coronavirus and post-COVID scenarios. Although all political formations and policymakers make use of environment-friendly rhetoric, their theoretical positions still remain fundamentally the same: divided between, on the one side, naturalism, and on the other, a more nuanced study of the various relations between nature and society. Four intellectual ideal-types can therefore be brought out. The first two, either pro-or anticapitalistic, follow a rather symmetrical path, that relegates nature to the background. It is seen only, by some as a resource, offering a potential for growth, and by the others as the mirror of capitalist contradictions. Conversely, the “commons” thinkers emphasize the various ways these sites were institutionalized, rather than giving priority to one or another element of the biosphere. Reflections about the conservation and regeneration of this Nature therefore appear, from an ecological standpoint, as the most ambitious, proposing for example a “general principle of non-interference”.
Références
BERGANDI Donato, BLANDIN Patrick, (2012). « De la protection de la nature au développement durable: genèse d’un oxymores éthique et politique », Revue d’Histoire des sciences, 1, p. 103-142.
CATTON William R., DUNLAP Riley E., (1978). « Environmental Sociology : A New Paradigm », The American Sociologist, Vol. 13, p. 41-49.
CHAKRABARTY Dipesh, (2009). « The Climate of History: Four Theses », Critical Inquiry, Vol. 35, No. 2, The University of Chicago Press, pp. 197-222.
CHAKRABART Dipesh, (2016). « Whose Anthropocene? A Response » in EMMETT Robert et LEKAN Thomas (ed.), “Whose Anthropocene? Revisiting Dipesh Chakrabarty’s ‘Four Theses, RCC Perspectives: Transformations in Environment and Society, no. 2, 103–113.
CHARBONNIER Pierre, (2015). La fin d’un grand partage. Nature et société de Durkheim à Descola, Paris, CNRS Editions.
CUCHE Denys, (1996). La notion de culture dans les sciences sociales, Paris, La Découverte.
DESCOLA, Philippe, (2005). Par-delà nature et culture, Paris, Gallimard.
LARRERE Catherine et LARRERE Raphaël, (2015). « Sauver le sauvage ? L’idée de wilderness », dans LARRERE Catherine LARRERE Raphaël (dir.), Penser et agir avec la nature. Une enquête philosophique, Paris, La Découverte, p. 25-50.
LATOUR Bruno, (1991). Nous n’avons jamais été modernes, Paris, La Découverte.
LATOUR Bruno, (2001). « Réponse aux objections... », Revue du MAUSS, 2001/1 (no 17), p. 137-152.
LORDON Frédéric, (2019). Vivre sans ? Institutions, police, travail, argent…, Paris, La Fabrique.
MALM Andreas, (2017). L’anthropocène contre l’histoire. Le réchauffement climatique à l’ère du capital, Paris, La Fabrique.
MARIS Virginie, (2018). La part sauvage du monde, Paris, Seuil.
MITCHELL Thimothy, (2011). Carbon Democracy. Political Power in the Age of Oil, London, Verso.
RIFKIN Jeremy, (2012). La troisième révolution industrielle. Comment le pouvoir latéral va transformer l’énergie, l’économie et le monde, Paris, Les liens qui libèrent.
SERVIGNE Pablo, STEVENS Raphael, (2015). Comment tout peut s’effondrer, Paris, Seuil.
STEFFEN Will et al., (2015). « Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet », Science, 347.
TSING Anna, (2012). « Empire’s salvage heart. Why diversity matters in the global political economy », Focaal- Jornal of global and historical anthropology, 64, p. 36-50.
TSING Anna, (2018). « Résurgence holocénique contre plantation anthropocénique », Multitudes, 2018/3 (n° 72), p. 77-85.
VIVEIROS DE CASTRO Eduardo, (2014). « Perspectivisme et multinaturalisme en Amérique indigène », Journal des anthropologues, 138-139, 2014, 161-181.
Téléchargements
Publié-e
Numéro
Rubrique
Licence
A revista se reserva o direito de efetuar, nos originais, alterações de ordem normativa, ortográfica e gramatical, com o intuito de manter o padrão culto da língua, respeitando, porém, o estilo dos autores;
As opiniões emitidas pelos autores são de sua exclusiva responsabilidade
Os direitos autores para artigos publicadoss nesta são dos autores, com direitos de primeira publicação para a REALIS. Todos o contéudo da revista, com exceção de caos especificamente declarados, é licenciado sob licença Creative Commons CC Atribuição Não Comercial 4.0 Internacional. Devido à política de acesso aberto da Revista, todos os artigos são gratuitos e livres para uso, com atribuição apropriada, para fins educacionais e não-comerciais.
