Industrial Capitalism and Anti-Reflexivity – Annotated Bibliography
Industrial Capitalism and Anti-Reflexivity – Annotated Bibliography
Introduction
I wanted to continue the overall theme I was focusing on for my artistic curation, which was industrialization’s effects on climate change and the capitalist mentality that prevents change. While researching, there was surprisingly not very much related and usable material that connected industrialization and capitalism to climate change, more specifically, how our society is perpetuating the effects of climate change by preventing any shift towards more “green” methods of industry. However, there was one idea that came up a few times, which ultimately became the focus. In this annotated bibliography, I take a closer look at how our industrial-capitalist society is protected by this idea of “anti-reflexivity”, how this mentality came to being, and the harm this mentality will cause. Capitalism is the driving reason for a lack of action towards sustainability and there is only so much that can be done when there is such a large divide on whether or not climate change is real.
Industrialization and its Backlash: Focus on Climate Change and its Consequences
Mgbemene, Chigbo A., et al. “Industrialization and Its Backlash: Focus on Climate Change and Its Consequences.” Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, vol. 9, no. 4, June 2016, pp. 301–16. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.3923/jest.2016.301.316.
This article gives a very generous overview of climate change, the possible causes, and the impacts that will affect civilization. The authors admit that industrialization has been a positive movement overall in terms of quality of life, however, it is also a driving force in carbon dioxide emissions and has greatly contributed to climate change. A shift in the climate started around 200 years ago as human activity increased, particularly during the industrial revolution. When looking at graphs of the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and the average temperature from the past two centuries, there is a clear exponential increase. There is also a brief discussion about a positive feedback loop that was generated by the rise of industry. As industrial practices developed and were able to be more efficient/productive, a bigger population could be supported by this system, thus forcing industry to develop even further as the population grew beyond demand. More people require more energy to support them. More energy means more carbon dioxide emissions and a greater impact on the climate.
Towards the end of the article, the authors examine the possible effects of climate change on the population. The overall health of the populace is going to decrease as the number of extreme weather events increase. This is from both the direct diseases and deaths from these incidents as well as indirect effects that could limit access to clean water, decrease the amount of food produced, and conditions that give rise to infectious diseases. Natural resources will also be affected, as the changing temperature and weather conditions will affect agricultural production and wildlife/fish populations. The ability for the earth to support the growing population, the carrying capacity, is already a large problem that needs to be addressed and will only grow worse as the population continues to rise and climate change leads to a depletion of several necessary resources. As these issues become more widespread and grow more frequent and severe, it is possible violence will rise from disputes over resources and militaries will be fighting over these resources rather than current politics.
There isn’t any one work we’ve seen in class that can be tied with this article since it is such a broad discussion; however, it gives a general overview that is beneficial to remember when discussing any number of works about climate change. The implications for the possible war over resources says enough about the political climate and the unwillingness to find a solution together. The positive feedback loop created by industrialization would almost be impossible to stop without completely changing the industrial-capitalist society we live in, but we cannot thrive in the long term with the conditions produced by climate change so something must change, or civilization could collapse by war, disease, or a lack of resources.
Climate change views, energy policy support, and personal action in the intermountain west: the anti-reflexivity effect
Givens, Jennifer E., et al. “Climate Change Views, Energy Policy Support, and Personal Action in the Intermountain West: The Anti-Reflexivity Effect.” Society & Natural Resources, vol. 34, no. 1, Jan. 2021, pp. 99–121. Taylor and Francis+NEJM, https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2020.1769782.
The main theory behind this article is anti-reflexivity. In simple terms, this means that a lack of self-evaluation by the general public prevents them from understanding the effects of their actions. More specifically, in terms of climate change, this creates the rise of climate change deniers who prevent any forward momentum towards changing the system to create a relationship with the earth that will protect it from further harm, while also allowing civilization to thrive. The industrial-capitalist system currently in place has been proven time and time again to be a main cause of climate change, yet the system is protected by anti-reflexive views on the climate. This article investigates the personal beliefs and views of the population in the intermountain west US and determine that they greatly support this hypothesis of the anti-reflexivity effect, meaning that there is a great number of people who do not believe human activity has led to the current consequences, or do not believe there is anything wrong to begin with.
While reading this article, the main thing that came to mind was the idea of reciprocity from Braiding Sweetgrass. The anti-reflexivity effect suggests that people are too selfish or lack the ability to self-evaluate to create an environment that would mutually benefit humanity and the earth. People need to better understand how to engage with the environment in a positive way, but they cannot do so without first realizing that their views are actively causing damage by preventing systemic change. Rather, people are focused on personal salvation or are attempting to disprove or completely ignore the science behind climate change, despite the effects that can already be seen worldwide. In Braiding Sweetgrass there is a chapter titled “Wendigo Footprints” that talks about the consumerist mindset, that humanity has taken away some of the most fundamental parts of being alive through industry and that we now try to fill this void created through consumerism by buying more than we need and creating spaces full of things rather than relationships and experiences. This ties in greatly with this idea of anti-reflexivity, which is, ultimately, being unwilling to change.
Ideology, Capitalism, and Climate: Explaining Public Views about Climate Change in the United States
McCright, Aaron M., et al. “Ideology, Capitalism, and Climate: Explaining Public Views about Climate Change in the United States.” Energy Research & Social Science, vol. 21, Nov. 2016, pp. 180–89. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2016.08.003.
This article also discusses anti-reflexivity but dives further into the political divide on climate change and how anti-reflexivity appears in different groups. “The US conservative movement have mobilized to defend the industrial capitalist system from claims by scientists and environmentalists that the system is causing significant social, economic, health, and ecological problems” is one quote that stood out to me while skimming through the article and gives a good overview of conservatives and their unwillingness to see past the ideas that they have constructed, all in an effort to protect the system they believe is the best, or most profitable to themselves, even though the ones who profit the most from capitalism are those in powerful positions. The authors argue that biased assimilation, elite cues, motivated cognition, disconfirmation bias, and reinforcing spirals prevent climate change deniers from forming new views even if they are presented with undeniable evidence of the anthropogenic effect on the climate.
There is a sort of mob mentality created where the climate change deniers hype each other up in a way that creates a bigger and more problematic mentality. It becomes an us against them argument, with the deniers of climate change/supporters of industrial-capitalism on one end and the activists/scientists on the other. This “othering” effect can only be negative; no movements towards sustainability can be created when everyone is fighting each other rather than focusing on a mutual problem.
While thinking about the effects of biased assimilation and disconfirmation bias (i.e. only looking for/believing information that you want to or that supports your beliefs), it reminded me of The Seed Keeper. The people who live in the town are aware of the war, but most only know enough to keep the view of their ancestors as heroes who “earned” the land they now walk on through war, despite there being so much more to the story than what the townspeople believe to be true. The Dakota people weren’t “savages” that attacked unprovoked, and it is only this biased assimilation and disconfirmation bias that prevents them from researching and learning the truth about the atrocities their ancestors committed and that the land they “earned” was really stolen. Essentially, people believe only what they want to, driven by what is most important to themselves.
Capitalism Clothes it: Toxic Resilience and Undemocratization in the Face of Climate Change
Chinchilla Mora, Leonardo. “Capitalism Clothes It: Toxic Resilience and Undemocratization in the Face of Climate Change.” Ecozon@: European Journal of Literature, Culture and Environment, vol. 13, no. 1, Apr. 2022. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.37536/ECOZONA.2022.13.1.4375.
This article examines two works of fiction that feature an apocalyptic scenario and uses these novels as a lens to discuss the negative impacts of capitalism. The author determines that there are two courses of action that could be taken in a post-climate change world: returning to our current capitalist society or an agrarian lifestyle. The analysis is a very dense article that walks through the events in the novels, carefully examining different parts of them; however, the argument in the conclusion of the article is what I ‘d like to focus on. It suggests that rebuilding and returning to a capitalist society, if we were to find ourselves in these post-climate change worlds, would lead back to a path towards an unsustainable America that would only end in harming ourselves and the world around us. This is clearly supported by the course we are currently on. Remaining in this pro-industrial and capitalist mentality is preventing any change that could limit the effects of climate change; going back to this system in an apocalyptic scenario wouldn’t yield a different course of events.
Despite being a discussion of two works of fiction, this presents a theme that has been discussed in our class multiple times: are stories a worthwhile way to present the climate crises? What benefits are there? In the beginning of the article, the author addresses these questions stating, “fictional worlds that ‘instrumentalize’ futurology and showcase climatic disaster provoked by unchanged ideological systems like capitalism are a suitable means to attempt to solve these inconsistencies in the real world”, meaning examining fictional worlds similar to ours, but more extreme allow us to better understand and examine the issues in our own society. There can be some cognitive dissonance between the fictional post- climate change worlds and our reality, but when coming at the works with an open mind and wanting to examine them closer, forming connections from the fictional to the reality are extremely beneficial.
