"It’s usually the critically enlightened milieu that’s particularly extravagant in ecological terms. & at the same time, the use of resources in poor & even extremely poor households in the Global North is still well over the average level of most of the Global South’ inhabitants. & the land requirement for their lifestyle—which, as has been shown, is mostly outsourced to other parts of the world—continues to grow statistically: the 'great acceleration' continues on its happy way.
It’s the [centuries-old] Western ‘imperial mode of living’, a way of life in which the resources—labour, land, the environment—of others are appropriated & exploited, & which can be maintained only through this unacknowledged appropriation practice.
It’s also a lifestyle that is not, therefore, accessible to all, however part of the inhabitants of the peripheral/neocolonized countries understandably would like to have a share in it…logically, the externalization imperium of one part of the world has to exclude from it the other part. If everyone wished to externalize, then no one would be able to.
Those who are dominated by the Western imperial mode of living, & who make up the vast majority of the world population, must therefore inevitably remain on the outside—for the benefit of the wellbeing of all of the [conformed] subjects inside of it, whose way of life is simply dependent on the enduring success of this exclusion process.
In this reference to the global economic structuration of externalization, its structural conditionality that has evolved through the establishment over an extended historical period of the capitalist [and imperialist & colonialist] world system based on institutionalized power, one thing is clear: this externalization structure cannot be smashed through individual action alone, whatever good intentions are behind it.
I am not trying to give the impression that there is no ‘environmental awareness’ in Western externalization societies, no sense of fairness, no alternative movements to the unequal economic & ecological exchange.
There are indeed many thousands of activists, volunteers & pro-bono workers, groups & initiatives, civil society organizations & even state institutions—environmental & development NGOs, world stores & eco-seals, textile agreements with Bangladesh & alliances against industrial aquaculture.
There is ‘corporate social responsibility’ as the new strategic business trend, & the ambitious Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations, campaigns to prohibit paper cups & glyphosate, information on radio & television & occasional features in glossy magazines.
There is even, believe it or not, the
Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change (IIGCC), a club of 120 pension funds and other major investors, including (joke!) ethically correct companies like the Axa insurance group or the US hedge fund Blackrock, which have united to make sure they have a front seat in saving the planet.
Despite the fact that at least some of this is good and important, let us be in no doubt that it won't fix anything."
—Stephan Lessenich (2019)
Living Well At Others’ Expense: The Hidden Costs of Western Prosperity
They’ve been profiting off exploitation of the global South’ rich natural resources & land, degradation of its environment & workers to sustain greedy living conditions & now want to share the bill. "The Anthropocene was basically an 'Occidentocene' epoch, one shaped by the West. 'Four fifths of the greenhouse gases discharged into the atmosphere between 1750 & 1900 were produced in North America & Western Europe' says Bonneuil.
And their emission is the result of the form of capitalist globalization that predominated in this time: industrial fossilism or fossil industrialism—in other words, the model of industrial production & social consumption based on the burning of lignite & coal, oil & natural gas.
Jason Moore, mentioned earlier, suggests that Capitalocene would be a better word to describe this epoch, one in which the capitalist dynamic has basically changed nature & society, and society's relationship to nature.
The history of this epoch is marked by changing economic hegemonies, in which the respective economic hegemon was, not by chance, also the driving force behind the greenhouse effect.
In the 19th century, the United Kingdom not only controlled half of the world but also produced half of the carbon dioxide emitted worldwide. A quarter of the accumulated carbon dioxide emissions since 1850 have been produced by the United States.
And the European—and German—'economic miracle' following the Second World War was accompanied by a massive increase in energy consumption.
Never has the ecological footprint of the Western nations been as large as it was at the end of the post-war boom, directly before the start of the oil crisis in 1973.
Moreover, in all historically 'leading' nations in the capitalist world system—be it the British Empire, later the USA, after the war also Japan and the EU, and now China as the latest emerging superpower—economic success at a certain stage of economic development, supported by growing geopolitical power, has been linked with easing the ecological burden on their territories.
Although the dynamic economic growth in the Global North was still based at first on the heavy demand placed on the 'local' ecosystems—as graphically illustrated today by the typical consequences of industrialization in China, such as water and air pollution—the further growth dynamic of the early industrialized nations was accompanied by the outsourcing of their domestic ecological burdens.
After the serious chemical accident in the north Italian town of Seveso in 1976, for example, the problem of finding political legitimation for hazardous industrial production, coupled with the possibility of ecological externalization, meant that gradually 'Seveso' was no longer 'everywhere', but usually somewhere outside Europe."
—Stephan Lessenich
Living Well At Others’ Expense: The Hidden Costs of Western Prosperity