Global Journal of Human Social Science, E: Economics, Volume 21 Issue 5

II. C ritical P erspectives on D e- G rowth As stated above, the conception of de-growth is criticized in several aspects. The first type of criticism to be highlighted is the one that calls into question the internal foundations and the structuring of the very concept of de-growth. On the inconsistencies and limits of this formulation, the work of Schwartzman (2012) is first evidenced. For this author, even though the works on the theme of de-growth present an important discussion about the social and environmental limits of economic growth, the arguments presented are not capable of offering a political agenda capable of confronting the economic and ecological crisis in a forceful way. The main problems of this approach would be, therefore, the failure to analyze the qualitative aspects of economic growth and the material requirements to provide high levels of quality of life. Furthermore, another problem that derives from this view is the emphasis on the local economy without recognizing the urgency of developing a transnational concept and solution. With regard to the consideration of qualitative and quantitative aspects of growth, Schwartzman (2012) states that proponents of de-growth fail to treat output growth as something homogeneous. For him, the fundamental question must be raised about what type of growth is being talked about and what types of impacts each type of growth would have on ecological and health aspects. In his words, it is necessary to question, for example, what type of growth would be sustainable in terms of the preservation of biodiversity and what type of production would be most useful for increasing the well-being of humanity. On the other hand, the author emphasizes that the de-growth program would be available only to a small minority of the world population, namely, the countries of the North. At best, the de-growth program would be useful to spur the emergence of local energy and food cooperatives, which would represent the resurgence of the bankrupt hippy community of the 1960s. What there should be, in this author's view, is a transnational ecosocialist movement capable of facing the agents that prevent the fight against the elements that threaten the ecosystem balance. (Schwartzman, 2012). Another criticism made by this author is that the formulators of the degrowth concept point out the failures and limits of the capitalist mode of production without, however, presenting anything that could replace it. The most that is done is to point out the need to create other forms of economic and social organization more suited to the new conditions. (Schwartzman, 2012). Foster (2011) points out that even more problematic is the view of de-growth in underdeveloped countries. This author explains Latouche's (2006) argument that the degrowth program should be applied to both advanced and underdeveloped countries, so that the latter cease to pursue the strict objective of economic growth in time. According to Latouche himself, “southern countries need to escape their economic and cultural dependence on the North and rediscover their own histories—interrupted by colonialism, development and globalization—to establish distinct indigenous cultural identities.” (LATOUCHE, 2006 apud FOSTER, 2011). Also according to Foster (2011), for Herman Daly it would be a waste of time and a moral delay to advocate steady state (and also de-growth) economic programs for underdeveloped countries before the overdeveloped nations have at least started to decrease their growth rate population and consumption growth rate. The starting point for this type of procedure should therefore be the developed countries. Finally, Bergh and Kallis (2012) highlight that another criticism of the de-growth view would be that related to the fact that there would not be a single and consistent measurement to measure the scale of the economy, making the idea of resizing become very vague. Thus, when talking about de-growth, one can be talking about product, consumption or hours worked. The exponents of this view, however, do not believe that the inexistence of a single parameter would be a fundamental obstacle. Having presented the criticisms about the foundations and the concept of de-growth, we begin to explain the questions about the compatibility between de-growth and the capitalist mode of production. In other words, would it be possible to implement a program of this nature and still preserve the structuring pillars of a market economy? Marx, in his book The Capital , exposes the essence of a capitalist economy through the sphere of circulation of capital: D-M-D’, where the final amount of money is greater than the initial amount. The implication of this concept is that capital to be capital it will always seek its accumulation, that is, it will always increase its volume. Thus, the capitalist will reinvest part of his profits to produce new products and obtain new profits. The process is endless. In order for this process of constant reinversion of profits to occur and, consequently, of constant increase in the volume of global capital, it is necessary that consumption also increase, as this is what will enable the transformation of the commodity into capital plus profit. Therefore, there are the following relationships: consumption growth is a fundamental part of maintaining capital accumulation; capital accumulation is the basis of the capitalist economic system; therefore, the continuous increase in consumption is fundamental for the maintenance of capitalism; finally, as the systematic increase in consumption (on a world level) means an increase in Volume XXI Issue V Version I 52 ( E ) Global Journal of Human Social Science - Year 2021 © 2021 Global Journals Economic De-Growth: A Theoretical and Critical Review