https://timotheeparrique.com/a-response-to-hannah-ritchie-how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love-economic-growth/
I’m somewhat new to the degrowth space, how does it interface with earlier theories like post scarcity economics and similar? My immediate reaction after reading this article (but not being familiar with Richie’s work) is that she’s completely ignoring the historical impact of globalization on exploited geographies and the underlying growth incentives that continue to drive it. Not to mention the moral frameworks (manifest destiny, civilized vs uncivilized people groups, etc) that make this behavior permissible… I’m trying to imagine what infinite non-destructive accumulation would look like
Degrowth argues that due to resource constraints, we need to cut some production as to stay within the resource constraints of the planet, while using the resources we have to provide a good quality of life for everybody. So post-scarcity economics is seen as impossible. However cutting production does mean less work time and systemsclike UBI are seen as key to make sure cutting production does not cause unnecessary harm.
Ritchie wants to solve the global Souths problems, by growing the global economy using green technology with resource constraints not being a problem due to technology. So keeping steady to move to a post scarcity world. She does this, by looking at very real trends and believes they moszly just continue