Theorizing the Climate Proletariat: Towards a Praxis of Resistance

As social scientists, we occupy a unique vantage point in studying the intersections of class, climate, and power. The climate crisis has created a new proletariat, a demographic at the frontline of climate disasters— the middle, suburban, and service workers. This climate proletariat finds itself at the fulcrum of Marx’s class struggle, the neoliberalism critique of Foucault, and the culture industry of Adorno. Our task is to theorize this phenomenon and guide a praxis of resistance against impending extinction.

Marx’s Proletariat and Climate Class Consciousness

Marx and Engels (1848) presciently declared in The Communist Manifesto, “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.” The climate proletariat embodies this struggle in the face of our climate crisis. Their collective experience of vulnerability against climate disasters can form the basis of ‘climate class consciousness.’ This recognition of shared struggle can galvanize them into collective action, as Marx suggested in his classic theory of the proletariat. The climate proletariat can become an actor of revolutionary change in our climate crisis.

Foucault’s Critique of Neoliberalism: A Power-Knowledge Discourse

Foucault’s examination of power dynamics under neoliberalism illuminates the ideological backdrop against which the climate proletariat must resist. He illustrated the interplay between power and knowledge, arguing that power produces regimes of truth (Foucault, 1977). Neoliberalism, as a discourse of power, shapes our understanding of climate change. It constructs a narrative of individual responsibility, deflecting attention from systemic causes. Consequently, the climate proletariat’s collective struggles are obscured and depoliticized, reinforcing the status quo.

The climate proletariat’s resistance, then, must involve challenging this neoliberal discourse. Their shared struggle foregrounds the systemic nature of climate change, proposing a counter-narrative that emphasizes collective responsibility and action. This is a political awakening, a subversion of the power-knowledge discourse, marking the emergence of a new praxis of resistance.

Adorno, the Culture Industry, and the Neoliberal Climate Discourse

The climate proletariat’s resistance is further complicated by cultural factors. Adorno and Horkheimer’s critique of the ‘culture industry’ (1944) offers a critical perspective. They argued that cultural goods are produced to serve capitalist interests, manipulating societal perceptions to reinforce existing power structures.

This manipulation is evident in the polarization of climate discourse and skepticism towards scientific knowledge. The climate proletariat must negotiate these cultural barriers, transcending political divides and fostering trust in scientific knowledge. Their struggle is not merely against climate change but against a culture industry, media, and a belief in consumerist individualism, as identity expression, that only sustains neoliberal power structures.

Charting the Course of Resistance: A Theoretical Praxis

Synthesizing these theoretical insights, I would propose a praxis for the climate proletariat’s resistance against impending extinction:

1. Cultivating Climate Class Consciousness: Drawing on Marx’s theory, the climate proletariat must recognize their shared struggle, fostering intraclass solidarity and galvanizing collective action. This must be based in material realities of disasters and disparity as a counter narrative resisting the alienating logic by which capitalism incentivizes it’s social discipline.
2. Subverting Neoliberal Discourse: Inspired by Foucault’s power-knowledge relationship, the climate proletariat must challenge the neoliberal narrative of individual responsibility, the propaganda of the so called ‘free market,’ while foregrounding the systemic nature of climate change and the need for collective action. This must span the bridge between psychopolitical/biopolitical theory and material realities in ways significant to intraclass interest of the multitude.
3. Challenging the Culture Industry: Building on Adorno’s critique, the climate proletariat must transcend political polarization and foster trust in scientific knowledge, challenging the culture industry’s reinforcement of neoliberal power structures. The green washing of capitalist culture must be confronted. Addressing climate in meaningful ways will not be cheap nor profitable. Our cultural capitalist discourse tries to suggest ‘the market’ can solve this problem, it cannot. Exploitation of nature to generate surplus value is the default settings of capital. Capitalism cannot survive without it. The idea that responding to climate can also open new markets is a cultural belief, rather than a material reality and must be resisted as such.
4. Demanding Structural Reforms: The climate proletariat must demand systemic changes, including legal reforms that challenge neoliberal power structures and prioritize public interests and participation in climate governance. This will be heavily resisted by the current corporate and governing forces, perhaps even brutally so.

The climate proletariat’s resistance against climate change

calls for a reconfigured praxis, one that challenges neoliberal discourses, transcends cultural barriers, and demands structural reforms. But the consideration should not be about whether it will take a populist uprising to do so. It is a precarious endeavor, it may involve violence against those who resist, but it is an urgent necessity. The question instead then is whether US society and our cultural ties hinders the solidarity needed to withstand reprisal and ultimately endure. I do not think Americans are there yet. But once they are, a roadmap for the climate proletariat is neither difficult to create nor theorize. Our future prospects will only dim if we are not honest about the need for such a revolutionary shift.

References:

• Adorno, T. & Horkheimer, M. (1944). The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception. Dialectic of Enlightenment.
• Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Pantheon.
• Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1848). The Communist Manifesto. Workers’ Educational Association.