A Three-dimensional Study Of Foster's Critique Of Ecological Imperialism

The progress of industrial civilization and the rapid development of world economy have greatly enriched people's material life.Environmental issues have gradually become a focus topic.The unlimited expansion of capital will inevitably lead to exhaustion of our natural resources and the destruction of the environment.It is the unrestrained expansion of capital that leads to the destruction of environment and shortage of resources and energy,leading to the emergence of ecological crisis of capitalism.Due to the deterioration of the environment,people gradually realize the seriousness of the environmental problems and begin to study the ways to solve the environmental issues.Marxist ecological thoughts provide a theoretical basis for solving the current ecological crisis problems,and gradually attract people's attention.As an important follower of Marx,John Bellamy Forster criticizes ecological imperialism with his unique perspective.This paper focuses on the following five aspects of the three dimensions of Forster's criticism of ecological imperialism.In the first part,this paper discusses the connotation and harmfulness of ecological imperialism.On the one hand,this paper discusses the historical background and theoretical background of ecological imperialism and points out that ecological imperialism belongs to imperialism,and that capitalism gradually develops to monopoly stage is imperialism.The emergence of ecological imperialism is not accidental.This paper discusses the concept of Metabolic Rift of Libby and Marx's related discussion on Ecological imperialism of the influence of the theory.On the other hand,it discusses the harmfulness of ecological imperialism,and points out that the detriment mainly includes exporting high pollution enterprises,exporting ecological garbage and chemical and biological warfare.In the second part,this paper expounds natural capital.On the one hand,it criticizes the capitalization of nature makes value-in-use is subordinate to value-in-exchange and criticizes the capitalism regarding nature as the tool unilaterally,and criticizes only seeing the use value,pointing out that nature is only regarded as the accessory of profit under the capital pursuit,and criticizes that value-in-exchange circularly dominates value-in-use.On the other hand,he criticizes that metabolic rift is caused by the capitalization of nature,regarding nature as a garbage disposal field and commodity storehouse without cost.The root of the metabolic rift is the capitalist system and its mode of production.We can see that Forster took the dimension of natural capital as the premise when criticizing ecological imperialism.In the third part,this paper expounds the dimension of technology and accumulation.On the one hand,it analyzes the connotation of‘‘Jevons paradox'' and the reasons why‘‘Jevons paradox''has become increasingly prominent.It points out that as technology serves capital,ecological justice is covered by technological hegemony.On the other hand,it criticizes the western orthodox economists' view of technology.We can see that Forster criticized ecological imperialism with technology and accumulation as a link.In the fourth part,this paper discusses the core characteristic of ecological hegemony is ecological debt,and analyzes that the characteristics,connotation and specific forms of ecological political hegemony is resources plunder and ecological crisis transfer.We can see that the key factor in Forster's criticism of ecological imperialism is emphasizing that imperialist countries use the way of ecological hegemony to transfer pollution and plunder resources.In the fifth part,this paper reflects on three dimensions of Forster's criticism of ecological imperialism,and explains its progressiveness and defects respectively.On the one hand,it points out that it is progressive and promotes the construction of Marx's ecological status,which expands the scope of contemporary ecological imperialism criticism.On the other hand,it points out that it overemphasizes the negative energy of capital and excessively focuses on ecological revolution.