On the
cover of his book Catton defined overshoot as ‘growth beyond an area’s carrying
capacity.’ The area now is the whole world.
Arguably,
we have so vastly outgrown global carrying capacity that we can no longer
prevent collapse. However, that is no reason for despair or surrender.
The
Degrowth movement is one of the few movements that has not given up, nor lapsed
into despair. But it faces three psycho-emotional impediments towards getting
its message widely accepted and acted on. All three are inter-related, however,
I will outline them separately.
I have no panacea
for overcoming these impediments. I do know that there will be no
one-size-fits-all solution. The three impediments are: Going Back, Progress,
and Positivity.
Going
Back
This is
perhaps the greatest barrier because it is fuelled by one of our strongest
emotions - fear. Degrowth is often thought to mean we must go back; back to a
previous age, an age in which our modern comforts and conveniences no longer
exist. For decades we have been told that previous ages were worse (sometimes a
lot worse) than those of today. We get shown pictures of darkened streets, cold
houses without electricity, inferior medical interventions, and poor working
conditions. Going back to such times is a scary thought. We would rather shun
such a move.
Yet, were
we able to travel back in time to those earlier periods and talk with our
great-grandparents we might be surprised to find that we are no happier now
than they were. We might also find that rates of depression, anxiety, and
addiction were less prevalent.
Yet, the
idea that going back entails a worsening of the current situation persists.
Degrowth is not synonymous with ‘going back’ but the two notions have become
entwined within the minds of many leaders and other people. It will be an emotional
obstacle that the Degrowth movement will have to overcome.
Progress
If fear
drives the impediment of Going Back, then desire drives the impediment of the
myth of Progress. The idea of progress energises our desire for a better life,
a life of greater comfort and more convenience (as well as conveniences). The
idea that we must progress has been with us for a long time, and gained
momentum following WW1, WW2 and the Great Depression with what Catton terms the
Age of Exuberance. This Age resulted in consumption on a grand scale,
with the American Dream being beamed into the living rooms of not only
Americans but also the residents of westernised nations throughout the world.
Progress
became associated with betterment, improvement, comfort, and convenience. It
told us to look forward, to see tomorrow (or at least next year) as being
better than today. Yet again, paradoxically, although we have greater
“comforts” in our lives than our grandparents did, and even more than we did in
our youth (for those of us of advanced years) our lives are no better. Mental
health issues are worse, depression, self-harm, and suicide (especially amongst
young men) are at similar, if not worse, levels than they were half a century
ago.
Progress
also comes at a huge planetary cost. The air we breathe is smog-bound in many
cities. The water we drink is polluted and, in some places, highly toxic. The
ground in which our crops are grown is being leached away and contaminated with
pesticides, fungicides, and insecticides.
Advocates
of progress cannot abide the Degrowth movement, because for them progress is
growth. And growth, for those advocates, is the means by which all those future
improvements are supposed to come about. Advocates of growth will fill our
screens, radios, and billboards with adverts promising a better life in the
future if you buy this product. Millions of dollars each year are spent
on these advertising campaigns, and millions of people buy into the advert, and
buy the product.
Progress
as a myth is a means that has become an end, yet without an end
in sight.
The
Degrowth movement will have to address the myth of progress.
Positivity
How many
exhortations every day to be positive do we get bombarded with?
Positivity
when it becomes toxic is an unhealthy state. Toxic positivity ignores and
negates emotions such as sadness, sorrow, anger, disappointment, and such. Positivity
tells us to ignore the perils, dangers, and cruelty of the world.
For the
Degrowth movement, positivity is an impediment, because it so easily leads to
the belief that there is no need to change. Positivity maintains and promotes
the Business-As-Usual economic model.
Positivity
is also a strong feedback loop stimulating the Going Back myth. Going Back is suggestive
of negativity and so becomes a powerful disincentive to considering Degrowth as
an option, let alone an imperative.
It is important
to recognise that positivity is not the same thing as contentment. Contentment
is able to hold both positive and negative states of mind. A contented person
could be happy one day and sad the next, and be fully accepting of both states.
Similarly, a contented person is able to appreciate the beautiful aspects of
life at the same time as recognising the ugly aspects. A contented person is
able to understand that we have overshot our carrying capacity and is able to
know that we must change course.
How is the
Degrowth movement to address these three impediments? I have only answers for
myself. What I do know, however, is that these three psychological-emotional
impediments must be addressed.
I would
appreciate any thoughts, ideas, or possibilities.
Notes:
1. William
R.Catton, Jr., Overshoot, University of Illinois Press, Urbana &
Chicago, 1982
