John Bellamy Foster

Tag: First Author

  • Marx and the Dialectic of Orgainc/Inorganic Relations

    “Marx and the Dialectic of Orgainc/Inorganic Relations: A Rejoinder to Salleh and Clark” [PDF] (coauthored with Paul Burkett, Foster listed first), Organization and Environment, vol. 14, no. 4 (December 2001), pp. 451-62. DOI: 10.1177/1086026601144006

    Our article “The Dialectic of Organic/Inorganic Relations: Marx and the Hegelian Philosophy of Nature” (Foster & Burkett, 2000) appeared in Oraganization & Environment exactly a 1 year ago. Our purpose in that article was a very specific one made very clear from the beginning. We were concerned with addressing one of the most persistent and seemingly peretrating criticisms of Marx for his supposed insensitivity to ecological issues, namely, the claim that in referring to nature as “the inorganic body of a man” in his Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1884, a work otherwise known for its ecological values, thus, sinning irredeemable against ecology and no less so against dialectics (Marx, 1974, p. 328).

  • The Dialectic of Organic/Inorganic Relations

    “The Dialectic of Organic/Inorganic Relations: Marx and the Hegelian Philosophy of Nature,” [PDF], (coauthored with Paul Burkett, Foster listed first), Organization and Environment, vol. 13, no. 4 (December 2000), pp. 403-25. DOI: 10.1177/1086026600134002

    Ecological thinkers have suggested that in applying an “organic/inorganic” distinction to humanity-nature, Marx embraced a dualistic and antagonistic conception of the human-nature relationship. The authors confront this view by considering how Marx’s various applications of the concepts organic and inorganic were shaped not only by standard scientific usage but also by Marx’s engagement with Hegel’s natural philosophy and the historical struggle between materialism and teleology. They find that Marx’s usage was based on an explicit disavowal of all mechanistic and dualistic views of the human-nature relationship. In Marx’s mature works, all fixed oppositions between organic and inorganic gave way to a fully dialectical understanding of ecological processes. Marx’s growing concern with the “metabolic rift” between humanity and nature generated by capitalist production led him to link the question of communism with that of ecological sustainability. Their analysis thus sheds light on the opposition between idealist and materialist visions of ecology.

  • Liebig, Marx and the Depletion of the Natural Fertility of the Soil

    “Liebig, Marx and the Depletion of the Natural Fertility of the Soil: Implications for Sustainable Agriculture,” (co-authored with Fred Magdoff, Foster listed first), Monthly Review vol. 50, no. 3 (July 1998), pp. 32-45. DOI: 10.14452/MR-050-03-1998-07_3

    During the period 1830-1870 the depletion of the natural fertility of the soil through the loss of soil nutrients was the central ecological concern of capitalist society in both Europe and North America (only comparable to concerns over the loss of forests, the growing pollution of the cities, and the Malthusian specter of overpopulation). This period saw the growth of “guano imperialism” as nations scoured the globe for natural fertilizers; the emergence of modem soil science; the gradual introduction of synthetic fertilizers; and the formation of radical proposal for the development of a sustainable agriculture, aimed ultimately at the elimination of the antagonism between town and country.

     

  • Introduction to the Archives of Organizational and Environmental Literature

    “Introduction to Archives of Organizational and Environmental Literature” [PDF], (co-authored with John M. Jermier, Foster listed first), Organization and Environment, vol. 11, no. 1 (March 1998), pp. 80-81. DOI: 10.1177/0921810698111004

    With this issue, we are introducing and new feature section of O&E entitled Archives of Organizational and Environmental Literature. Consciousness of environmental degradation stretches back over millennia; concern about ecological imperialism associated with the growth of the capitalist world economy dates back five centuries; and alarm arising from the environmental effects of machine capitalism can be traced back to the industrial revolution in England two centuries ago. Over the course of history, many inportant insights into organization and environment, often of a theoretical nature, have emerged—only to be forgotten later on. Once forgotten, these important contributions have also become in many cases inaccessible— so that it is difficult to rediscover what has been lost.

  • The Faltering Economy

    The Faltering Economy

    Buy at Monthly Review Press

    “The Economy: The Problem of Accumulation Under Monopoly Capitalism,” (co-edited with Henryk Szlajfer (Foster listed first) (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1984), 357 pp. (Contains three essays authored and one co-authored by Foster.)

    The essays in this volume, by veteran economists as well as younger scholars, are part of a radical attempt to grapple with the problems of advanced capitalist development without discarding the real theoretical breakthroughs made by Keynes. The contributors argue that Keynes was correct in pointing to the economic contradictions stemming from unemployment, incoming inequality, and speculative finance, but failed to consider the class composition of social output, the macroeconomic effects of the modern firm, and the atrophy of investment under conditions of capitalist maturity. They thus seek to uncover the sources of stagnation under monopoly capitalism by building on the work of three of the great economists of modern times: Marx, Keynes, and Kalecki.