Critically Reflecting on Three Models of Contemporary Foreign Marxist Ecological Critique

With the changes and development of Western society, contemporary foreign Marxism has formed several important critical paths in its critique of capitalism. Focusing on issues such as the state, consumption, ecology, ideology, technology, globalization, and modernity in real capitalist societies, contemporary foreign Marxism has developed critical paths including state capitalism critique, consumer society critique, late capitalism critique, global capitalism critique, ideology critique, techno-capitalism critique, and ecological critique. It should be said that since the 1960s, with the outbreak of global ecological crises, contemporary foreign Marxism has undergone an ecological turn. Many scholars have taken ecological and environmental issues as their research objects, attempting to explore paths and solutions to resolve the global ecological crisis, thereby forming a distinctive ecological critique path, which is represented by three critical models: ecological Marxism, ecological socialism, and historical-geographical materialism.

随着西方社会的变迁与发展，当代国外马克思主义对资本主义的批判形成了几个重要的批判路径。围绕现实资本主义社会的国家、消费、生态、意识形态、技术、全球化、现代性等议题，当代国外马克思主义形成了国家资本主义批判、消费社会批判、晚期资本主义批判、全球资本主义批判、意识形态批判、技术资本主义批判、生态批判等几个批判路径。应该说，从20世纪60年代以来，随着全球性生态危机的爆发，当代国外马克思主义发生了生态学转向，很多学者将生态环境问题作为研究对象，试图探寻解决全球生态危机的道路与方案，形成了颇具特色的生态批判路径，而又以生态学马克思主义、生态社会主义、历史—地理唯物主义的三种批判模式为代表。

The Ecological Critique of Ecological Marxism

生态学马克思主义的生态批判

Ecological Marxism is an influential academic school within contemporary foreign Marxism, formed and developed in the mid-to-late 20th century, emerging amid the vigorous development of Western ecological movements. It attempts to combine ecology with Marxism, exploring the roots of the ecological crisis through theoretical analysis of Marxism, thereby seeking new paths for humanity to eliminate the ecological crisis and rebuild socialism. The main representatives of ecological Marxism include James O’Connor and John Bellamy Foster from the United States, Joel Kovel from the United States, William Leiss and Ben Agger from Canada, André Gorz from France, David Pepper from the United Kingdom, and Reiner Grundmann from Germany. Based on the contemporary Western ecological crisis, ecological Marxism integrates Marxist ecological thought with contemporary Western ecological thought, forming a theoretical system that unifies ecological philosophy, ecological economics, and ecological socialism.

生态学马克思主义是当代国外马克思主义中具有重要影响的学术流派，形成和发展于20世纪中后期，是在西方生态运动蓬勃发展中产生的。它试图将生态学同马克思主义结合起来，通过对马克思主义的理论分析探寻生态危机的根源，从而为人类消除生态危机，重建社会主义探索新的道路。生态学马克思主义的主要代表人物包括美国的詹姆斯·奥康纳（James O’Connor）、约翰·贝拉米·福斯特（John Bellamy Foster）、乔尔·克沃尔（Joel Kovel），加拿大的威廉·莱斯（William Leiss）与本·阿格尔（Ben Agger），法国的安德烈·高兹（André Gorz），英国的大卫·佩珀（David Pepper），德国的瑞尼尔·格伦德曼（Reiner Grundmann）等。生态学马克思主义立足于当代西方的生态危机，将马克思主义的生态思想同当代西方的生态学思想结合起来，形成了生态哲学、生态经济学和生态社会主义三位一体的理论体系。

Ecological Marxism deeply excavates the ecological thought of Marx and Engels, launching critiques of contemporary capitalism from multiple aspects including capital critique, technology critique, institutional critique, and cultural values critique, attempting to provide new theoretical resources and paths for resolving the global ecological crisis and achieving human freedom and liberation. The critique of the capitalist ecological crisis by ecological Marxism is most unique and valuable. They explore the roots of the ecological crisis within the overall capitalist system, proposing important innovative theories such as the “dialectic of shattered expectations” (the theory of shattered expectations), the dual crisis theory, the theory of ecological socialist revolution and construction, and the “metabolism” theory, greatly advancing research on the contemporary ecological crisis.

生态学马克思主义深入挖掘了马克思恩格斯的生态思想，从资本批判、技术批判、制度批判、文化价值观批判等多个方面展开了对当代资本主义的批判，试图为解决全球生态危机、实现人的自由解放提供新的理论资源和路径。生态学马克思主义对资本主义生态危机的批判最为独特和最有价值，他们从资本主义总体体系中探寻生态危机产生的根源，提出了“期望破灭的辩证法”（期望破灭理论）、双重危机理论、生态社会主义革命和建设理论、“新陈代谢”理论等重要的创新理论，极大地推进了对当代生态危机的研究。

The Ecological Critique of Ecological Socialism

生态社会主义的生态批判

Ecological socialism is closely linked to ecological Marxism. Many Western left-wing Marxist scholars studying the ecological crisis are both ecological Marxist scholars and ecological socialist scholars. Ecological Marxism provides the basic theoretical foundation for ecological socialism, and ecological socialism is the natural result of the theoretical logic of ecological Marxism.

生态社会主义同生态学马克思主义具有紧密的联系，很多研究生态危机的西方左翼马克思主义学者既是生态马克思主义学者，也是生态社会主义学者。生态学马克思主义为生态社会主义提供基本的理论基础，生态社会主义是生态学马克思主义理论逻辑的自然结果。

The main representative of the first generation of ecological socialism includes Adam Schaff from Poland, who advocated combining socialism with the ecological movement to achieve a union of “green” and “red” and build an ideal socialist society. Representatives of the second generation include William Leiss, Ben Agger, and André Gorz. The theoretical characteristic of this generation is the “fusion of red and green.” They argue that the current crisis of capitalism has shifted from an economic crisis to an ecological crisis. To resolve the ecological crisis, it is necessary to oppose the concept of controlling nature, eliminate alienated consumption, change people’s lifestyles, limit human needs within a reasonable range, implement economic structural adjustments, adopt a “steady-state economy,” use decentralized technologies and renewable energy, and construct a completely new development concept of harmonious coexistence between humanity and nature. Representatives of the third generation include Georges Labica from France, Reiner Grundmann from Germany, and David Pepper from the United Kingdom. The main characteristic of this generation is the “greening of the red.” They advocate deepening the understanding of the relationship between the ecological crisis, ecologism, and ecological socialism, and have constructed the principles of ecological socialism.

生态社会主义的第一代的主要代表人物包括波兰的亚当·沙夫（Adam Schaff），他提倡将社会主义同生态运动结合起来，实现“绿色”和“红色”的联合，建立一个理想的社会主义社会。第二代的代表人物包括威廉·莱斯、本·阿格尔和安德列·高兹等，这一代的理论特征是“红绿交融”，他们认为当前资本主义的危机已经由经济危机转变为生态危机，要解决生态危机，必须反对控制自然的观念，消除异化消费，改变人们的生活方式，要将人的需求限定在合理范围内，必须实行经济结构的调整，实行“稳态经济”，使用分散化的技术和可再生的能源，构建全新的人与自然和谐发展的发展观。第三代的代表人物包括法国的乔治·拉比卡（Georges Labica）、德国的瑞尼尔·格伦德曼、英国的大卫·佩珀等。他们这一代的主要特点是“绿色红化”，主张深化对生态危机、生态主义同生态社会主义之间关系的认识，构建了生态社会主义的原则。

In summary, ecological socialism attempts to use Marx’s historical materialism to point out that it is the capitalist system that leads to the global ecological crisis, and it critiques ecological colonialism, militarism, and hegemonism. Ecological socialism advocates basing itself on grassroots democracy, taking a non-violent, gradualist reform path, and also advocates fully utilizing social forces such as the ecological movement, the feminist movement, and the anti-nuclear movement, while combining them with the workers’ movement, to establish a “steady-state” socialist economic model.

总之，生态社会主义尝试运用马克思的历史唯物主义方法，指出是资本主义制度导致全球生态危机，批判了生态殖民主义、军国主义和霸权主义。生态社会主义主张立足于基层民主，走非暴力的渐进性改良道路，还主张充分运用生态运动、女权运动、反核运动等社会力量，同时要同工人运动结合起来，建立“稳态”的社会主义经济模式。

The Ecological Critique of Historical-Geographical Materialism

历史—地理唯物主义的生态批判

Historical-geographical materialism is an academic school that emerged in the mid-to-late 20th century and still holds strong influence today. It combines reflection on the ecological crisis with the embedding of geographical space. Its main representatives include Henri Lefebvre from France, and David Harvey and Edward W. Soja from the United States.

历史—地理唯物主义是20世纪中晚期兴起，在目前仍然具有强大影响力的学术流派，其将对生态危机的反思同地理空间的嵌入结合起来，主要代表人物包括法国的亨利·列斐伏尔，美国的大卫·哈维、爱德华·索亚（Edward W. Soje）等。

The ecological critique of historical-geographical materialism emphasizes combining ecological issues with space. They argue that due to the expansion of the logic of capital, space has become a site for capital accumulation and valorization. Capital has penetrated all spatial domains, including natural space and social space, private space and public space. Moreover, the spatial penetration of capital has gradually transformed into the spatial production of capital, because under capitalist conditions, space is not only a condition for capital to create value and surplus profit, but has itself become capitalized and commodified. The spatial production of capitalism both manifests the domination of power and, through means such as spatial transfer and spatial fix, turns nature into a “tap” and a “sink” for capital accumulation.

历史—地理唯物主义的生态批判注重将生态问题同空间结合起来，他们认为，由于资本逻辑的扩张，空间成为资本积累和增殖的场所，资本已经渗透到包括自然空间和社会空间、私人空间和公共空间的所用空间领域，而且资本的空间渗透逐渐变成了资本的空间生产，因为在资本主义的条件下，空间不仅是资本创造价值和超额利润的条件，而且其自身已经资本化和商品化。资本主义的空间生产既彰显着对权力的支配，又通过空间的转移和修复等手段使自然界成为资本积累的“水龙头”和“污水池”。

At the global level, the uneven spatial development brought about by capital expansion manifests as ecological imperialism in developed countries. Ecological imperialism, on the one hand, obscures the ecological colonization of developed countries, and on the other hand, forces developing countries to bear the destruction of the natural environment caused by economic development, thereby leading to the destruction of global ecological justice. The ecological disasters in developing countries further exacerbate the global ecological crisis. By means of the global spatial expansion of capital, ecological imperialism plunders global resources, shifts pollution, monopolizes global ecological discourse, and constructs trade barriers related to the environment, attempting to realize its ecological hegemony. Therefore, the ecological critique of historical-geographical materialism expands our understanding of the global spatial reshaping brought about by the capitalist ecological crisis and deepens the analysis of the essence of the global ecological crisis and the dissolution of imperial space from the perspective of ecological imperialism (spatial imperialism).

从全球层面看，资本扩张带来的空间发展不平衡体现为发达国家的生态帝国主义。生态帝国主义一方面遮蔽了发达国家的生态殖民，另一方面又迫使发展中国家必须承受由于发展经济所带来的自然环境的破坏，从而导致全球生态正义的破坏，发展中国家的生态灾难进一步导致全球的生态危机。生态帝国主义借助资本的全球空间扩张，掠夺全球资源、转嫁污染、垄断全球生态话语权、构筑与环境相关的贸易壁垒，试图实现其生态霸权。因此，历史—地理唯物主义的生态批判拓展了我们对资本主义生态危机带来的全球空间重塑的认识，深化了对在生态帝国主义（空间帝国主义）视域下理解全球生态危机的本质和消解帝国空间的分析。

Theoretical Dilemmas and Deficiencies of Contemporary Foreign Marxist Ecological Critique

当代国外马克思主义生态批判的理论困境与不足

The three models of contemporary foreign Marxist ecological critique, from different yet interrelated angles, have profoundly analyzed the ecological problems of contemporary capitalist society and even the world. They offer certain insights for understanding the essence, logic, and effects of contemporary capitalism and for highlighting the contemporary value of Marx’s historical materialism. However, it is undeniable that all three models suffer from several theoretical dilemmas and deficiencies.

当代国外马克思主义生态批判的三种模式，从不同角度又相互关联地对当代资本主义社会乃至世界的生态问题进行了深刻的分析，对于我们认识当代资本主义的本质、逻辑和效应，彰显马克思历史唯物主义的当代价值都有着一定的启示，但不可否认的是，以上三种模式都存在几个理论方面的困境和不足。

First, they overemphasize theoretical interpretation while neglecting integration with complex and diverse revolutionary practice. The current capitalist society exhibits characteristics such as political polarization, social fragmentation, and the prevalence of racism and populism, with society showing a trend of multiple contradictions erupting simultaneously and overall alienation. Although the three models of ecological critique mentioned above focus on the ecological problems faced by Western societies and combine Marxism with ecological theory, broadening the horizon of capitalist critique, they fail to recognize that without combining with actually existing anti-capitalist political struggles, the ecological plans and visions of a new future society they propose will become pure utopias, lacking a real foundation and the possibility of realization.

一是过于重视理论阐释，忽视了同复杂多样的革命实践相结合。当前的资本主义社会呈现出政治极化、社会分裂、种族主义、民粹主义盛行等特点，社会呈现矛盾多点爆发、总体异化的趋势。虽然以上三种生态批判模式关注到了西方社会面临的生态问题，将马克思主义与生态理论结合起来，拓宽了资本主义批判的视域，但是没有认识到如果不同现实存在的反资本主义的政治斗争结合起来，其所提出的生态规划和未来新社会愿景只会成为纯粹的乌托邦，不具有现实的根基和实现的可能。

Second, they still confine ecological critique within the ruling system of capitalism. The three models of contemporary foreign Marxist ecological critique neither propose effective paths to transcend the actual power structure and overall system of capitalism from the perspective of the developmental forms of human society, nor do they pay much attention to the world significance of the construction of socialist ecological civilization with Chinese characteristics, thereby obscuring their theoretical horizon and weakening the pertinence and effectiveness of their theories. We know that if ecological critique is conducted only within the ruling system determined by the existing capitalist system and its mode of production, constructing some ecological theory and proposing some reformist measures, without fundamentally touching the capitalist system and eliminating the logic of capital, then the goal of transcending capitalism cannot be truly achieved. If the practice of socialist ecological civilization with Chinese characteristics is not taken seriously, the direction of human ecological civilization construction cannot be understood, and the theory loses its sense of the times and falls into Western-centrism.

二是仍然限定于资本主义的统治体系内部进行生态批判。当代国外马克思主义生态批判的三种模式既没有从人类社会发展形态的角度提出超越现实资本主义权力结构和总体体系的有效路径，也很少关注中国特色社会主义生态文明建设的世界意义，从而遮蔽了其理论的视域，弱化了其理论的针对性和实效性。我们知道，如果只是在既有的资本主义制度及其生产方式决定的统治体系内进行生态批判，构建某种生态理论，提出某种改良措施，而不从根本上触动资本主义制度，消除资本逻辑，就无法真正实现超越资本主义的目标。如果不重视中国特色社会主义生态文明的实践，就无法了解人类生态文明建设的方向，也就使其理论失去了时代感，并陷入了西方中心主义之中。

Third, they all reconstruct Marxist ecological thought to varying degrees, and there exist problems of exaggerating and even distorting Marxist ecological thought. The three models of ecological critique all involve understanding and constructing Marxist, especially Marx and Engels', ecological thought. Whether it is ecological Marxism and ecological socialism attempting to "green" Marxism, or historical-geographical materialism attempting to combine Marxist ecological thought with space and organic philosophy, they all attempt to construct a theoretical system that conforms to their own theoretical interests. This constitutes, to varying degrees, a "reconstruction" of Marxist ecological thought, with many problems. Moreover, these theoretical systems also have internal disputes and cannot truly guide the practice of real ecological civilization.

三是都不同程度对马克思主义生态思想进行了重建，且存在着夸大甚至曲解马克思主义生态思想的问题。以上三种生态批评模式都涉及对马克思主义特别是马克思恩格斯生态思想的理解和构建，而无论是生态学马克思主义还是生态社会主义试图将马克思主义“绿化”，还是历史—地理唯物主义试图将马克思主义的生态思想同空间和有机哲学结合起来，都是试图构建一种符合自身理论旨趣的理论体系，这在不同程度上都是对马克思主义生态思想的“重建”，存在着诸多问题。此外，这些理论体系还存在着内部的争议，无法真正指导现实生态文明的实践。

Through the analysis of foreign Marxist scholars' ecological critique, we deeply realize that we must comprehensively and accurately understand the roots of the current ecological crisis, dialectically view the logic of capital, deeply grasp the direct impact of the capitalist system and its mode of production on the ecological crisis, be vigilant against ecological traps, and ensure ecological justice. We must take Xi Jinping Thought on Ecological Civilization as a guide and continuously advance the construction of socialist ecological civilization with Chinese characteristics. Xi Jinping Thought on Ecological Civilization proposes that solving ecological problems should be treated as an important livelihood undertaking, and that from the aspects of institutional construction, talent development, and policy support, the urgent needs of the people in material, spiritual, and especially ecological and environmental aspects should be effectively met, and a beautiful China should be built through continuous advancement. On this basis, transform the mode of economic development, moving from traditional development paths and models to a development path and model guided by the Five Concepts for Development [1]1 The Five Concepts for Development (五大发展理念) refer to innovation, coordination, green development, openness, and sharing, proposed by the CPC as guiding principles for China's development during the 13th Five-Year Plan period (2016-2020)., transforming one-sided development into comprehensive development with green development as the goal, and achieving coordinated economic, social, and ecological development.

通过对国外马克思主义学者关于生态批判的分析，使我们深刻认识到要全面准确认识目前生态危机产生的根源，要辩证看待资本逻辑，深刻把握资本主义制度及其生产方式对生态危机的直接影响，要警惕生态陷阱，保障生态正义。我们要以习近平生态文明思想为指引，不断推进中国特色社会主义生态文明建设。习近平生态文明思想提出要把解决生态问题作为一项重要的民生事业对待，要从制度建设、人才建设、政策支持等方面，切实满足人民群众的物质、精神特别是生态环境方面的迫切需求，并在持续推进中建设美丽中国。在此基础上，转变经济发展方式，从传统的发展道路和模式走向以五大发展理念为牵引的发展道路和模式，将片面的发展转变为以绿色发展为目标的全面发展，实现经济社会生态的协调发展。

Online editor: Paul

网络编辑：保罗