The construction of ecological socialism under the concept of liberating nature: William Rice’s critique of the concept of controlling natureAbstract:
Ecological crisis is a serious obstacle to human survival and development in the future, and solving the problem of ecological crisis requires starting from the construction of new social systems and the development of subjective thinking. Based on William Rice’s theory and ecological ideas, this study analyzes William Rice’s inheritance of Marxist ecological socialism and his strong criticism of science and technology under the domination of the concept of “controlling nature” and capitalist alienated consumption behavior. On the basis of William Rice’s theory, the ethical and moral construction, scientific rationality construction and economic system construction of the concept of “liberating nature” were analyzed. The concept of “liberating nature”, proposed by William Rice, not only provides a correct development path for living harmony with nature in the future, but also provides valuable reference significance for China’s ecological civilization construction.
Keywords:
Control Nature; Liberate Nature; Science; Technology; Marxist Ecological View
Resumo:
A crise ecológica constitui um sério obstáculo à sobrevivência e ao desenvolvimento futuro da humanidade. O estudioso marxista ecológico canadense William Rice combina as ideias ecológicas marxistas com questões ecológicas contemporâneas. Afirma que a causa fundamental da crise ecológica reside no conceito de “ controle humano sobre a natureza”, oculto no sistema social capitalista. E critica fortemente a tecnologia científica e o comportamento de consumo alienado capitalista sob o domínio do conceito de “ natureza controladora”. Salienta que a forma mais eficaz de resolver as crises ecológicas é mudar o conceito de “ natureza controladora” da humanidade e restabelecer o conceito de “libertação da natureza”. O conceito de “libertação da natureza”, proposto por William Rice, não só fornece um caminho de desenvolvimento correto para viver em harmonia com a natureza no futuro, como também propicia um valioso significado de referência para a construção da civilização ecológica da China.
Palavras-chave:
Controlar a natureza; Libertar a natureza; Ciência; Tecnologia; Consumo alienado
Introduction
The development of contemporary material civilization is accompanied by the emergence of ecological problems, which have prompted thinkers to re-examine the relationship between humans and nature. William Rice is a renowned ecological Marxist scholar in Canada, who published The Control of Nature and The Limits of Satisfaction in the 1970s, which deeply reflect William Rice’s understanding and interpretation of Marxist ecology. He interpreted the root causes of ecological crises from the ideological perspective of human “control of nature”, providing a broader research perspective for later ecological Marxist scholars. In the criticism of “controlling nature”, William Rice proposed a social ecological system centered on “liberating nature”, and proposed the construction of “liberating nature” from the aspects of ethics, scientific rationality and economic system. The transition from “controlling nature” to “liberating nature” is conducive to achieving coordinated handling of natural environmental crises and social system ones, expanding the construction of ecological civilization to various social systems, and thus unleashing the masses’ power and establishing public awareness of ecological responsibility.
The arrival of the capitalist era has enabled humans to quickly grasp effective ways to “deal with” nature (Zuboff, 2019). In just over 300 years, nature has transformed from a threat to humanity to a slave to humanity. Although the development of capitalism during this period was not smooth sailing, it was still filled with various contradictions, such as among countries, among classes and within classes. However, with the end of the two world wars in the 20th century, the world entered a period of relative peace. Under the guidance of industrial civilization, various countries have achieved unprecedented rapid development. However, during the development, various environmental matters, such as the pollution of air, water, forest and geology, have also begun to occur frequently (Crary; Gruen, 2022). Under the guidance of Marxist ecological concepts, China is actively promoting strategic adjustments in the face of ecological environment challenges. China’s measures include improving the quality of urbanization, urban-rural integration, public participation in environmental governance, green economic development and ecological legislation, in order to address challenges and seize opportunities, thereby promoting the construction of ecological civilization (Zhou, 2021). William Laiss played a bridging role in the construction of ecological theory in China, bridging the gap between Frankfurt Critical Theory and ecological Marxism. The extensive ecological movements in China have been continuously influenced by William Laiss’ theory (Chen, 2017). In addition, tools for green modernization and sustainable development have emerged in China’s local ecological practices. China attaches great importance to the role of state interventionism, moral progress in urbanization and the reshaping of the farmers’ role in the ecological environment, emphasizing that ecological significance depends on historical and political conditions (Rodenbiker, 2021).
1 Tracing the origin of William Rice’s ecological Marxist thought
William Rice believes that, although in Marx and Engels’ era, ecological issues could not exist as the main contradiction in society. Moreover, in Marx’s and Engels’ relevant works, there is no specialized theory to systematically describe and analyze the ecological problems at that time. However, this does not mean that Marx and Engels did not delve into issues, such as the natural environment and the relationship between humans and nature (R-H&N). Ecological Marxism is a new school of Marxism, which applies Marxist historical analysis method and class analysis one to criticize contemporary Western capitalist system and mode of production from the perspective of ecology, based on Marxist theory of the relationship between man and nature (Wang, 2019). William Rice extracts and summarizes ideas about nature and ecology from Marx’s classic works. And he discusses three aspects: the analytical method of Marxist historical materialism, Marx’s and Engels’ views on nature, and social critical theory.
Firstly, it is the analytical method of Marxist historical materialism. Social existence determines social consciousness, and nature is the practical foundation and material source of social existence. Human beings are both a product and a nature’s part, and the nature’s material is not subject to human will. The humans’ survival and development require material support from nature, and the social consciousness, generated by humans in the process of production and labor, reacts on nature (Prasad, 2019). Production activities should be useful to society, and people’s aspirations and values can be actualized in the process. Ecological Marxists stress the harmony between man and nature, and the consistency of the way of production and life, and principle of ecology (Li, 2021). This process strengthens the R-H&N and links natural issues with social issues. So, the nature’s existence determines the society’s existence. Any social system or development model that only focuses on its own development and ignores the nature’s carrying capacity is not advisable. Especially under the capitalist system, the mode of production is no longer a force of production, but a force of destruction.
Secondly, there is Marx’s and Engels’ view of nature. In ancient Greece’s early philosophy, humans and nature existed in a “binary thinking” manner, regarded as opposing individuals and as obstacles to human development. This erroneous “view of nature” held a dominant position in the academic community until the formation of Marxism. Marx also provided a systematic explanation of the theory of material metabolism in Das Kapital. He believed that nature, humans and the R-H&N are the three fundamental levels of material metabolism - nature nurtures humans, humans produce and live through the resources provided by nature, and ultimately return to nature with these produced goods. In this way, the interaction among the three should have formed a closed loop. But the capitalist mode of production precisely breaks this closed loop - capitalists waste a large amount of production materials and discharge a large amount of production waste in order to maximize profits (Chéron et al., 2021). These products that have been processed multiple times are difficult to return to nature after use. This causes waste of natural resources and irreparable damage to the relationship between nature and humans, as well as between humans and nature (Lavuri et al., 2023). Therefore, changing the capitalist mode of production is the only way to solve this problem.
Finally, there is Marx’s theory of social criticism. What Marx criticized was the way of production and life under the capitalist social system. Maximizing profits is the capitalists’ ultimate pursuit. So, driven by interests, capitalists will earn surplus value by exploiting and squeezing workers. Although the people’s living standards in developed capitalist countries have significantly improved since entering the 21st century, the essence of capitalism will not change as a result. Capitalists have concealed their exploitative methods. On the one hand, they continue to cleverly earn surplus value and, on the other hand, they continuously earn profits by stimulating consumption (Liu, 2021). The result of excessive consumption is the over-development and overuse of product raw materials. This behavior is extremely terrifying, as people often inadvertently cause serious resource waste and environmental degradation, ultimately evolving into a contradiction between humans and nature. So, only when capitalism develops to communism and human attitudes towards nature change, such problems can be fundamentally solved.
These viewpoints had a significant impact on William Rice’s ecological thinking, and he systematically analyzed that the fundamental cause of global environmental degradation was the concept of human control over nature (Dong, 2023). He also emphasized that, only when humans abandon the concept of controlling nature, ecological crises can be improved and resolved, and the establishment of the concept of liberating nature is the only way.
2 William Rice’s ecological Marxist thought and his criticism of the concept of “controlling nature”
Controlling and liberating nature is the core idea of William Rice’s ecological Marxism. William Rice believes that the fundamental cause of the ecological crisis is determined by the concept of human control over nature. William Rice interpreted the concept of “controlling nature” from four “periods” and believed that it was an inevitable experience in human development and a “history of struggle” between humans and nature. Moreover “the concept of controlling nature is self-contradictory, as it is both a progressive and a regressive source. Studying its historical origin and subsequent evolution can reveal the inherent contradictions of this concept.”
The first is the natural period of human fear. In the humanity’s early primitive society, due to the lack of intelligence and low levels of productivity, humans maintained a fearful and awe attitude when facing various phenomena in nature. During this period, in order for humans to survive, they must completely rely on the nature’s gifts, and humans had no choice.
The second is human resistance to natural periods. In the late primitive and early slave societies, humans began to have the capital to resist nature through continuous upgrading and improvement of production tools, and could transform nature to meet some of their own needs. Nature was no longer mysterious and terrifying to humans. However, there were still some humans who choose to maintain reverence in their attitude towards nature. In response, William Rice mentioned the the African Zulu people’s myth in the second chapter of the main text of The Control of Nature, titled “The Roots of Mythology, Religion, and Philosophy” - a person’s story who continuously enslaved other humans through the use of metal tools and was ultimately punished and killed by the Nature’s God.
The third is that humans control the natural period. With the continuous improvement of productivity and the accumulation of civilization, humanity was going further and further on the path of transforming nature. After winning the battle against nature, humans began to seek ways and means to control nature. In terms of ideology, religion occupied the mainstream, weakening nature and strengthening people. In terms of behavior, human control over nature had continued from the feudal society to the capitalist one. Especially after the Industrial Revolution, the rapid progress of science and technology had made humans feel confident in controlling nature.
Finally, there is a period of uncontrolled human treatment of nature. It took place during the Renaissance in the 17th century, making Europe the world’s center. The vigorous development of science and technology (S&T-D) had led to a hundred schools of thought contending throughout the entire European continent. The emergence of disciplines, such as astronomy, geography, chemistry and physics, had brought humanity into a new field of knowledge (László; Adam, 2021). The improvement of the capitalist system and the development of the industrial era were constantly promoting the deterioration of the R-H&N. Human beings were gradually losing control of nature. Descartes believed that, when science and philosophy merge, it is the time when humanity overcomes nature. William Rice also discussed Marx’s interpretation of Descartes’ viewpoint in The Control of Nature: “Descartes’ ‘Discourse on the Method’ indicates that, like Bacon, he also saw the changes in the ways in which people produce and actually control nature caused by changes in the methods of thought...”
The relationship between people, who are out of control, and nature is what William Rice is most concerned about. So, William Rice proposed a unique perspective on this issue from Marx’s view of nature. For people, one’s happiness lies in effective combination of self-realization at work and consumption (Wang, 2021). All human activities are within the natural world, but if humans detach their labor ability from the nature’s realm for the sake of desire, they will change with the changes in nature. Secondly, the humanity’s historical process can undergo fundamental changes with the development of modern industry in the exploitation of external nature:
With the help of technology, the business development in the modern world has become more rapid, resulting in changes and evolution in the demand for work and the types of work involved during this period. Employment is increasingly dependent on technology and information and communication technology, and the division of labor is presenting a new face. Work is now more globalized and outsourced. (Sasan et al., 2022, p. 231).
William Rice believed that Marx provided an abstract explanation of the relationship between humans and nature. The form of human labor evolved continuously with the advancement of civilization, so the behavior of human “controlling nature” also emerged after the arrival of industrial civilization. It is manifested as a combination of science and technology with industrial production methods (Soper, 2020). However, science and technology cannot conceal the exploitation of the proletariat by the bourgeoisie under the capitalist system, so “controlling nature” cannot be used as a scapegoat for social problems. During this period, the proletariat, through the accumulation of labor experience, gradually developed a general social consciousness. The two ideologies will eventually form opposition and trigger struggles between classes and individuals. Finally, in response to the ecological problems that emerged in socialist countries in the late 20th century, William Rice believes that this is not to say that Marx’s theory is flawed, nor is it to say that the socialist system is not suitable for humanity, but rather that the accelerated S&T-D has made the unification of globalization more advanced. Marx was unable to predict the international community’s current institutional framework at that time. In the current global society, dominated by capitalist countries, socialist ones are inevitably subjected to “encirclement” and “sanctions” from political, economic, cultural and social development forms.
In addition, William Rice also criticized the capitalist countries’ capital logic. The term “capital logic” was first proposed by the famous Japanese ecological Marxist scholar Izuo Izuma: “The so-called capital logic refers to the logic of capitalism using the means of life as a commodity in order to obtain more profits.” William Rice believed that, driven by this logic, capitalist countries would inevitably not prioritize the protection of ecology in their development. Although developed capitalist countries boast of labels, such as “freedom and democracy” and “advanced civilization”, in essence, they still prioritize indulgence in the negative R-H&N. However, this form of expression can be packaged relatively aesthetically. After gaining primitive capital accumulation during the Industrial Revolution, developed capitalist countries continuously attracted talents and vigorously developed science and technology through these talents. Then, developed countries can reuse these scientific and technological resources in exchange for natural resources in developing and underdeveloped regions. This exchange method may seem fair and just, but it is actually a despicable and rogue behavior. Because in the capitalists’ view, ecology also has a price. As long as the price is reasonable, ecology can be transformed into goods (Martin et al., 2020). Developed capitalist countries will relocate polluting factories and production lines to developing countries in order to make their living environment more suitable. Because compared to developed capitalist countries, developing countries are more inclined to pursue economic progress. So, in order for developing countries to continuously produce goods for developed countries, these ones will firmly hold the leading position in science and technology. This is actually a disguised colonization of developing countries.
Overall, William Rice mainly criticized the idea of “controlling nature” into two arguments. One is the criticism of the relationship between humans and nature in “controlling nature”, believing that “controlling nature” in the social environment is the control of “human nature”. The second is a criticism of the capitalist social relations in “controlling nature”, believing that the logic of capital is the source of natural destruction. William Rice believed that the concept of “controlling nature” had two adverse effects. On the society’s individual level, it has brought people a blurred idea of world control, believing that the world can be controlled beyond the past through machinery and technology; However, in society as a whole, it has brought about the alienation of consumerism, and the essence of the harmonious relationship between individuals and nature has been misinterpreted as irrational application of resources and technology.
3 William Rice’s ecological construction of the concept of “Liberating Nature”
Through understanding, analyzing and criticizing the concept of “controlling nature”, William Rice believes that, driven by the psychological drive of “controlling nature”, humans can cause more serious environmental problems, which in turn can lead to serious social ones. Therefore, to fundamentally solve these problems, it is needed to construct an ecological socialist system, based on the concept of “liberating nature”.
The first is to change human irrational desires through the joint progress of ethics, morality, and science and technology. Ethics and morality are important symbols of human civilization and will go on to evolve with the development of it (Habermas, 2019). Although some people attribute the formation of ecological crises to the misuse of science and technology by humans, and believe that, only by using ethics and morality to limit the S&T-D, the current situation can be reversed.
The progress of ethics and morality requires the assistance of science and technology, and the S&T-D requires the guidance of ethics and morality. Therefore, both ethics and science and technology should complement and rely on each other. The joint progress of ethics, morality, and science and technology will make the social system more perfect and more beneficial to the ecological environment. This virtuous cycle of social development model will gradually free people from the desire to “control nature”.
Secondly, it is to achieve a transformation from “technological rationality” to “ecological rationality”. Technological rationality was born after the three industrial revolutions in modern times. After achieving a leapfrog development in science and technology, humans began to use themselves as the standard for measuring all things in the world. The emergence of this “anthropocentrism” thinking places all matter in the universe “exclusively for human use”. “The goal is to pursue humanism as the inner spirit, the infinite theory of (natural resources and human desires) as the value orientation, and the infinite happiness theory of human material well-being.”
The exquisite and egoistic way of thinking makes technological rationality more practical. Given this, technological rationality is one of the reasons for the ecological crisis, although it is packaged relatively “harmless” under the shell of industrial civilization. Compared to technological rationality, ecological ones appears more “gentle” when facing the ecological environment. This is also the reason why William Rice has always advocated for humanity to shift from “technological rationality” to “ecological rationality”. Ecological rationality is to restrain the harm of technological one to the ecological environment through the continuous improvement of social systems.
Create steady-state economic model is to decrease the production capacity of capitalism and emphasize the role of nation. In democratic and decentralized production, workmen have opportunities to directly participate in management, to show their intelligence and wisdom, in this way, the realization of self-value, and the growth of sustainable and stable economic are unified. (Li, 2021, p. 15).
Compared to the impact of ethics and morality on science and technology, ecological rationality has a certain degree of coercion on technological one (Crist, 2019).
Once again, it is to implement a “stable and normal” economic model. The “steady-state economy” model was first proposed by British philosophy and economist Muller. It is a conclusion drawn from the summary and calculation of population, total economic output, and productivity level based on their era, that “current human society does not need to continue to develop”. Although implementing this economic model may artificially cause social injustice, it will bring about significant improvements in the R-H&N. Because Muller lived in an era where the pace of industrialization was too fast and the population grew too quickly. This industrialization development model, which aims to meet the requirements of population size, has already brought an undeniable negative impact on the natural environment (Dahbour, 2022). Muller believed that this way of production and life was no longer suitable for the human society’s development at that time. But William Rice pointed out that Muller’s theory can only solve urgent problems and is not a long-term solution. At the same time, William Rice found that in early Toskin’s, Fourier’s, Marx’s theories, as well as later Marcuse’s, Fromm’s and others’ ones, there was a great interest in the utilization of human labor time in the “steady-state economy”. William Rice conducted a detailed study of these theories, believing that the production of goods should not be solely aimed at satisfying human consumption, but rather at satisfying normal human production and life. The “stable normal” economic model, proposed by William Rice, is more scientific for the human society’s sustainable development, compared to Muller’s “steady-state economy” model.
Finally, it is to establish an alternative architecture for human needs. As early as the 1960s, some people pointed out that, if calculated according to American living standards, natural resources would soon be unable to meet the humanity’s future development needs. When natural resources were scarce, the probability of war greatly increases (Tassell; Aurisicchio, 2023). The tense R-H&N directly affects the relationship among humans. William Rice believed that developed capitalist countries would interfere with interpersonal relationships from multiple aspects, such as politics, economy and culture. At present, the developed capitalist countries’ social status is more desirable, so it is more important to break through this limitation and seek alternative structures for human needs. In capitalist society, human needs are usually understood as the demand for goods. So, if the problem of using commodity demand, as a single measure, cannot be solved, then natural resources will inevitably not be able to meet the humanity’s endless desires. William Rice suggests strengthening research on the human individuals’ true needs and advocating for a sense of value belonging to different needs. This condition often exists under socialist systems, especially ecological socialism.
In addition, natural needs and other satisfaction beyond humans are also worth considering. The purpose to establish ecological socialism is to use resources in reason, avoid resource depletion, and realize the man and nature’s common development. This production mode can overcome capitalist alienation, overproduction and over-consumption (Li, 2021). If all thinking and discussions are only measured and considered based on human needs, then the concept of “liberating nature” may seem somewhat narrow. Although humans can only develop through the nature’s giving, they also have a “role” in nature during the process of development. The human species will constantly adapt to nature and reflect on itself in order to develop. Over time, this behavior and ability formed the human species’ unique “feedback system”, and the continuous improvement of the feedback system gradually formed the humanity’s “social mechanism”. This social mechanism has both positive and negative effects. The positive effect is that human beings have achieved better development, while the negative effect is that the R-H&N is getting worse and worse. Human understanding of nature is not yet complete, and it is not clear whether there is a “final bottom line” in nature. Especially people living in capitalist countries, under the influence of capital logic, will inevitably try to break through this bottom line. However, some people, who grew up under the education of the capitalist system, have questioned the logic of capital. These people propose that human needs can be met by nature, and whether natural needs also need to be met. If all humanity is moving towards common interests, the developed capitalist countries should play a leading role instead of acting more irresponsibly. Rice’s view of liberating nature also has affinity and practicality for China. China’s local people’s ecological and natural thinking has similarities with Rice’s idea of liberating nature.
4 Interpretation of William Rice’s ecological Marxist thought from China’s perspective
China, as one of the most populous countries around world, accounts for about one-fifth of the world’s total population. In the process of building ecological civilization, social subjects play an indelible role. The flow of the value of labor is created by social subjects and, therefore, social subjects are an important part of sustainable development. They are an important part in environmental information disclosure and participate in the game between natural values and their own values in the ecological environment (Lu; Yue, 2022,). However, every country’s people have the right to pursue a happy life, and the process of industrialization is a human behavior that cannot require which country can or cannot develop. And developed capitalist countries have accumulated a large amount of primitive capital long before the concentration of global environmental problems emerged, occupying their development advantages. Therefore, industrialization in developing countries is understandable. In the process of industrialization, developing countries should prevent developed ones from using science and technology as a bargaining chip for natural environment replacement, in order to “colonize technology” against developing countries (Bhambra, 2021). As the developing country with the largest population in the world, China needs to explore the following aspects.
Firstly, it is necessary to consolidate the important position of the theory that “science and technology are productive forces”. Marx also profoundly pointed out that “social labor productivity is first and foremost the power of science”. Science and technology are not only important ways to balance the R-H&N, but also important ways to balance the relationship among humans. If all countries in the world are divided into two camps - developed countries and developing ones, then developed countries will inevitably maintain their existing superior living environment by using advanced scientific and technological knowledge, while developing ones want to catch up with the living environment, based on developed countries through rapid S&T-D. In a situation where global natural resources are insufficient to support all human needs, science and technology are important means for developed countries to curb the development of developing ones. China’s level of technological innovation is backward. Overcapacity, the low utilization of resources and other issues cause total factor productivity to be too low to support the quality development of the economy. The high-quality economic growth and the environmental protection level are closely related. Considering environmental and ecological protection, comprehensive promotion of green development is the only way to achieve high-quality economic growth and sustainable development (Shi; Li, 2022). At the same time, developing science and technology is also a necessary way for China to achieve “liberating nature”. Because science and technology itself will not have adverse effects on natural ecology, the key lies in the people who use science and technology. By utilizing science and technology reasonably, not only can China gradually break away from dependence on developed countries, but it can also achieve independent production in terms of core technologies. On the other hand, it can also improve the utilization rate of natural resources in industrial production and gradually maximize the use of them (Xue, 2022).
Secondly, it is required to prevent the obstruction of ecological construction, caused by the large wealth gap and uneven regional development (Yan; Sun, 2023). Since China entered the reform and opening up, the speed of economic development has been evident, with GDP increasing year by year. In 2010, it surpassed Japan and became the 2nd largest economy. On the one hand, it benefits from the leadership of the CPC and the whole country’s people’s indefatigable efforts. Moreover, it benefits from China’s huge land area and relatively rich natural resources. However, exchanging resources for development is not a long-term solution. Moreover, in terms of per capita GDP, China has never taken the lead. In addition, the imbalanced economic development in China’s eastern and western regions, as well as the imbalance between urban and rural developments, has always been a serious problem in China’s ecological and natural protection work (Yeh, 2022). How to enable 1.4 billion Chinese to jointly enjoy the dividends of the socialist system is a top priority for China’s future economic development. The worldwide humans should take part in the idea of ‘‘liberating nature’’. If the problem of the large wealth gap cannot be solved properly, and the people cannot achieve the same standard of living, then this idea cannot be realized (Nan; Chen, 2022).
Once again, it is necessary to guide the people’s correct pursuit of spiritual and material culture, and to prevent extreme problems, such as alienated consumption from occurring. The one-sided and unrestrained pursuit of material life can easily lead to alienated consumption. The definition of human happiness should not be measured by the quantity of goods owned. In a reasonable and moderate economic state, the concepts of “simple life”, “interruption, abandonment, separation”, and “new economy” are advocated, which helps to achieve a virtuous cycle of economic construction and ecological civilization construction. Marx proposed that labor has both material and spiritual satisfactions in achieving human freedom. A correct consumption perspective can play a more positive role in the society’s operation.
With a large population in China, natural resources have already carried enormous pressure to meet the basic security of people’s lives. If there is no correct and effective guidance in alienated consumption, the ecological crisis will arrive ahead of schedule. The construction of spiritual culture is the most powerful diversion for the phenomenon of alienated consumption. When an ecological crisis approaches, humans will passively challenge their consumption patterns. Instead, it is better to proactively change consumption patterns earlier to improve the ecological environment and prevent the occurrence of ecological crises. Whether it is communication between humans and nature or among humans, consumer activities should not occupy the main position. Only by breaking free from the constraints of “commodity consumption only” and reducing their dependence on commodity production and consumption mechanisms, people can truly achieve ecological socialism.
Finally, it is necessary to properly handle the dual impact of China’s ecological civilization construction on both the international and domestic levels (Tang et al., 2023). William Rice’s ecological Marxist ideology has certain reference significance for China’s ecological civilization construction. The concept of “liberating nature”, advocated by him, is very close to the concept of “Beautiful China” being built in China. China’s ecological civilization construction not only affects the domestic market, but also is the main force driving the progress of the world’s “community with a shared future for mankind”. Compared to developed capitalist countries in the West, China’s ecological civilization construction provides more possibilities for other developing countries (Li et al., 2023). Developed capitalist countries in the West seek a balance between consumer desire and ecological protection, while developing countries seek a balance between survival, development and ecological protection. Although the two requirements may seem similar, they are fundamentally different (Wang et al., 2022). China has a huge population, a vast land area and a relatively short period of modernization. Therefore, in constructing the eco-conservation perspective, more efforts are often required. However, the theory of socialism with Chinese characteristics in the new era determines the correctness of China’s path in the construction of promoting ecological progress (Xie et al., 2023). To build a beautiful China, achieve the Chinese nation’s great rejuvenation and promote a community’s development with a shared future for mankind, China brings the positive significance to all humanity’s future development.
Conclusion
In the postindustrial era of the 21st century, humanity has begun to examine the “bitter fruits” brought about by industrialization and rethink the path and direction of future social development. William Rice’s ecological Marxist ideology starts with the concept of human “controlling nature” and, through systematic research and interpretation, it is ultimately concluded that humans need to establish the concept of “liberating nature” in order to fundamentally alleviate the malignant development of ecological crises. Rice believes that it is necessary to transform “controlling nature” into “liberating nature” from four aspects: ethics, natural relations, technological rationality and economic systems. As a populous country, China has enormous development potential, but during the industrialization and modernization, it is bound to encounter obstacles from ecological crises. Through the reflection and interpretation of William Rice’s ecological Marxist ideology, China can combine it with the construction of ecological civilization. Because, in essence, protecting the environment is equivalent to protecting productivity. Firstly, ‘liberating nature’ can be integrated with China’s technological development strategy, by developing core technologies to enhance the nature’s utilization by industrial civilization. Secondly, ‘liberating nature’ should be combined with China’s cultural propaganda work, promoting the concept of harmonious coexistence between humans and nature to the people through multiple media and diverse propaganda tools. Finally, ‘liberating nature’ should be combined with China’s international strategy. China is striving for international rights through strategies, such as the “the Belt and Road”. At the international level, by exporting its own cultural interpretation of “liberating nature”, it can be conducive to cooperation among multiple countries and achieve international synergy in ecological civilization construction. In future research, it is necessary to compare Rice’s ecological and natural thinking with China’s local ecological thinking, analyze the differences between the two, and explore their guidance and inspiration for modernization.
Acknowledgement
The research is supported by: Youth program of National Social Science Foundation of China “Research on the concept of ecological justice” (19CKS033); Marxism Theory research and Talent Training Project of Chongqing University (2021CDSKXYMY010); Study on Xi Jinping’s idea of ecological rule by law (No.2022CDJSKZX04) supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities.
References
- BHAMBRA, G.K. Decolonizing Critical Theory? Epistemological Justice, Progress, Reparations. Critical Times, v. 4, n. 1, p. 73-89, 2021.
- CHEN, X. William Leiss: A Marxist Approach to Green Theory. The Ecological Crisis and the Logic of Capital. Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 2017.
- CHÉRON, E.; SUDBURY, R. L.; KOHLBACHER, F. In Pursuit of Happiness: Disentangling Sustainable Consumption, Consumer Alienation, and Social Desirability. Journal of Consumer Policy, v. 45, n. 2, p. 149-173, 2021.
- CRARY, A.; GRUEN, L. Animal crisis: A new critical theory. Cambridge, UK: Polity, 2022.
- CRIST, E. Abundant earth: Toward an ecological civilization. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2019.
- DAHBOUR, O. Social Freedom and Ecological Rationality in The Pandemic Age. Ethics and the Environment, v. 27, p. 39-66, 2022.
- DONG, P. Z. Analysis of Marcuse’s Theory of Dissimilated Consumption. Advances in Higher Education, v. 7, n. 20, p. 1-9, 2023.
- HABERMAS, J. Auch Eine Geschichte der Philosophie. Berlin, Germany: Suhrkamp, 2019.
- LÁSZLÓ, K.; ADAM, T.T. The Liberation of Nature and Knowledge: A Case Study on Hans Reichenbach’s Naturalism. Synthese, v. 199, n. 3, p. 9751-9784, 2021.
- LAVURI, R.; ROUBAUD, D.; GREBINEVYCH, O. Sustainable Consumption Behaviour: Mediating Role of Pro-Environment Self-Identity, Attitude, And Moderation Role of Environmental Protection Emotion. Journal of Environmental Management, v. 347, p. 119106, 2023.
- LI, W. L. Reflections on the Marxist Theory of Western Ecology. Chinese Journal of Social Science, n. 5, p. 1, 2021.
- LI, X.Y.; HUANG, S.W.; SHI, W. et al Efficiency Calculation and Evaluation of Environmental Governance Using the Theory of Production, Life, and Ecology Based on Panel Data from 27 Provinces in China from 2003 to 2020. Systems, v. 11, n. 4, p. 174, 2023.
- LI, Z. Some thoughts on ecological marxism. Open Journal of Social Sciences, v.9, n.12, p. 212-219, 2021.
- LIU, Q. Z. A Study of Consumption Alienation in Updike’s Works. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, v. 11, n. 3, p. 319-325, 2021.
- LU, B.W.; YUE, S. Z. A Study on the Mechanism of Environmental Information Disclosure Oriented to the Construction of Ecological Civilization in China. Sustainability, v. 14, n. 10, p. 6378, 2022.
- MARTIN, A.; ARMIJOS, M. T.; COOLSAET, B.; DAWSON, N.; AS EDWARDS, G.; FEW, R.; WHITE, C.S. Environmental Justice and Transformations to Sustainability, Environment. Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, v. 62, n. 6, p. 19-30, 2020.
- NAN, M. Y.; CHEN, J. Research Progress, Hotspots and Trends of Land Use under the Background of Ecological Civilization in China: Visual Analysis Based on the CNKI Database. Sustainability, v. 15, n. 1, p. 249, 2022.
- PRASAD, A. Towards a Conception of Socially Useful Nature. Economic & Political Weekly, v. 54, n. 37, p. 41, 2019.
- RODENBIKER, J. Making Ecology Developmental: China’s Environmental Sciences and Green Modernization in Global Context. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, v. 111, n. 7, p. 1931-1948, 2021.
- SASAN, J. M.; BARQUIN, A. M. E.; ALESTRE, N. A.; LIBREA, A.; ZAMORA, R. M. Karl Marx on technology and alienation. Science and Education, v. 3, n. 9, p. 228-233, 2022.
- SHI, Y.; LI, Y. An Evolutionary Game Analysis on Green Technological Innovation of New Energy Enterprises under the Heterogeneous Environmental Regulation Perspective. Sustainability, v. 14, n. 10, p. 6340, 2022.
- SOPER, K. Post-growth Living: For an Alternative Hedonism. London, UK: Verso, 2020.
- TANG, H.; ZULFIQAR, K.; CHANG, Y.C. et al.. Ecological Civilization Building and the Law of the Sea: Conference Report. Marine Policy, v. 157, p. 105871, 2023.
- TASSELL, C.; AURISICCHIO, M. Refill at Home for Fast-Moving Consumer Goods: Uncovering Compliant and Divergent Consumer Behaviour. Sustainable Production and Consumption, v. 39, p. 63-78, 2023.
- WANG, Y. C. On the Course and Implication of the Study of Ecological Marxism in China. Jianghan Tribune, n. 10, 2019.
- WANG, Y. C. The Problem Logic of Western Marxism and Its Contemporary Value. Marxism & Reality, n. 4, 2021.
- WANG, Y. X.; REN, J. L.; ZHANG, L. et al Research on Resilience Evaluation of Green Building Supply Chain Based on ANP-Fuzzy Model. Sustainability, v. 15, n. 1, p. 285, 2022.
- XIE, H. J.; YANG, C. M.; LIU, Y. P. Urban Ecological Culture Construction and the Formation of Residents’ Green Living: Evidence from National Forest City Construction in China. Sustainability, v. 15, n. 18, p. 1-9, 2023.
- XUE, Y.Z. Evaluation Analysis on Industrial Green Total Factor Productivity and Energy Transition Policy in Resource-Based Region. Energy & Environment, v. 33, n. 3, p. 419-434, 2022.
- YAN, X. H.; SUN, Q. How to Evaluate Ecological Civilization Construction and Its Regional Differences: Evidence from China. Sustainability, v. 15, n. 16, p. 1-13, 2023.
- YEH, E. T. The Making of Natural Infrastructure in China’s Era of Ecological Civilization. The China Quarterly, v. 255, n. 7, p. 611-627, 2022.
- ZHOU, X. Ecological Civilization in China: Challenges and Strategies. Capitalism Nature Socialism, v. 32, n. 3, p. 84-99, 2021.
- ZUBOFF, S. The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. New York, USA: Public Affairs, 2019.
