Pierre Charbonnier – författare

In this pathbreaking book, Pierre Charbonnier opens up a new intellectual terrain: an environmental history of political ideas. His aim is not to locate the seeds of ecological thought in the history of political ideas as others have done, but rather to show that all political ideas, whether or not they endorse ecological ideals, are informed by a certain conception of our relationship to the Earth and to our environment.The fundamental political categories of modernity were founded on the idea that we could improve on nature, that we could exert a decisive victory over its excesses and claim unlimited access to earthly resources. In this way, modern thinkers imagined a political society of free individuals, equal and prosperous, alongside the development of industry geared towards progress and liberated from the Earth’s shackles. Yet this pact between democracy and growth has now been called into question by climate change and the environmental crisis. It is therefore our duty today to rethink political emancipation, bearing in mind that this can no longer draw on the prospect of infinite growth promised by industrial capitalism. Ecology must draw on the power harnessed by nineteenth-century socialism to respond to the massive impact of industrialization, but it must also rethink the imperative to offer protection to society by taking account of the solidarity of social groups and their conditions in a world transformed by climate change.This timely and original work of social and political theory will be of interest to a wide readership in politics, sociology, environmental studies and the social sciences and humanities generally.

In this pathbreaking book, Pierre Charbonnier opens up a new intellectual terrain: an environmental history of political ideas. His aim is not to locate the seeds of ecological thought in the history of political ideas as others have done, but rather to show that all political ideas, whether or not they endorse ecological ideals, are informed by a certain conception of our relationship to the Earth and to our environment.The fundamental political categories of modernity were founded on the idea that we could improve on nature, that we could exert a decisive victory over its excesses and claim unlimited access to earthly resources. In this way, modern thinkers imagined a political society of free individuals, equal and prosperous, alongside the development of industry geared towards progress and liberated from the Earth’s shackles. Yet this pact between democracy and growth has now been called into question by climate change and the environmental crisis. It is therefore our duty today to rethink political emancipation, bearing in mind that this can no longer draw on the prospect of infinite growth promised by industrial capitalism. Ecology must draw on the power harnessed by nineteenth-century socialism to respond to the massive impact of industrialization, but it must also rethink the imperative to offer protection to society by taking account of the solidarity of social groups and their conditions in a world transformed by climate change.This timely and original work of social and political theory will be of interest to a wide readership in politics, sociology, environmental studies and the social sciences and humanities generally.

For nature and the climate, the only thing more dangerous than war is peace – this is the startling claim made by the French philosopher Pierre Charbonnier in his new book War Ecology. Charbonnier shows that we are the heirs of an intellectual and political history which maintained that creating the conditions for peace between human beings requires exploiting nature, exchanging resources and providing sufficient prosperity for all.This idea, which can be traced back to the eighteenth century, found striking expression in the mid-twentieth century. In the aftermath of the Second World War, the development of fossil fuel infrastructures was combined with a pacifist and universalist discourse that sought to undermine the causes of war by liberating productivity. So peace, or the balance of great powers established by the United States, is largely a gift of fossil fuels, particularly oil. The fact that the climate crisis continues to gather pace today, with little effective intervention, is due not simply to a lack of political will: it also stems from the fact that the modern system of state legitimacy is rooted in the ability of each state to guarantee prosperity for its citizens, a guarantee backed up by a regime of cheap energy.In the twenty-first century, argues Charbonnier, this paradigm has become obsolete, since we must both guarantee peace and security and respect planetary limits – in other words, learn to make peace without destroying the planet. It is in this context that the possibility of a war ecology is emerging, according to which sustainability and security no longer appear as contradictory injunctions but converge in the need to move towards a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.This highly original work will be of interest to a wide readership in social and political theory, philosophy, politics, environmental studies, war and peace studies and the social sciences and humanities generally, as well as anyone concerned about war, conflict and the climate crisis.

For nature and the climate, the only thing more dangerous than war is peace – this is the startling claim made by the French philosopher Pierre Charbonnier in his new book War Ecology. Charbonnier shows that we are the heirs of an intellectual and political history which maintained that creating the conditions for peace between human beings requires exploiting nature, exchanging resources and providing sufficient prosperity for all.This idea, which can be traced back to the eighteenth century, found striking expression in the mid-twentieth century. In the aftermath of the Second World War, the development of fossil fuel infrastructures was combined with a pacifist and universalist discourse that sought to undermine the causes of war by liberating productivity. So peace, or the balance of great powers established by the United States, is largely a gift of fossil fuels, particularly oil. The fact that the climate crisis continues to gather pace today, with little effective intervention, is due not simply to a lack of political will: it also stems from the fact that the modern system of state legitimacy is rooted in the ability of each state to guarantee prosperity for its citizens, a guarantee backed up by a regime of cheap energy.In the twenty-first century, argues Charbonnier, this paradigm has become obsolete, since we must both guarantee peace and security and respect planetary limits – in other words, learn to make peace without destroying the planet. It is in this context that the possibility of a war ecology is emerging, according to which sustainability and security no longer appear as contradictory injunctions but converge in the need to move towards a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.This highly original work will be of interest to a wide readership in social and political theory, philosophy, politics, environmental studies, war and peace studies and the social sciences and humanities generally, as well as anyone concerned about war, conflict and the climate crisis.

How does the ontological turn in anthropology redefine what modern, Western ontology is in practice, and offer the beginnings of a new ontological pluralism? On a planet that is increasingly becoming a single, metaphysically homogeneous world, anthropology remains one of the few disciplines that recognizes that being has been thought with very different concepts and can still be rendered in terms quite different than those placed on it today. Yet despite its critical acuity, even the most philosophically oriented anthropology often remains segregated from philosophical discussions aimed at rethinking such terms. What would come of an anthropology more fully committed to being a source of (post-) philosophical concepts? What would happen to philosophy if it began to think with and through these concepts? How, finally, does comparison condition these two projects ? This book addresses these questions from a variety of perspectives, all of which nonetheless hold in common the view that “philosophy” has been displaced and altered by the modes of thought of other collectives. An international group of authors, including Eduardo Viveiros de Castro, Marilyn Strathern, Philippe Descola, and Bruno Latour, explore how the new anthropology/philosophy conjuncture opens new horizons of critique.

How does the ontological turn in anthropology redefine what modern, Western ontology is in practice, and offer the beginnings of a new ontological pluralism? On a planet that is increasingly becoming a single, metaphysically homogeneous world, anthropology remains one of the few disciplines that recognizes that being has been thought with very different concepts and can still be rendered in terms quite different than those placed on it today. Yet despite its critical acuity, even the most philosophically oriented anthropology often remains segregated from philosophical discussions aimed at rethinking such terms. What would come of an anthropology more fully committed to being a source of (post-) philosophical concepts? What would happen to philosophy if it began to think with and through these concepts? How, finally, does comparison condition these two projects ? This book addresses these questions from a variety of perspectives, all of which nonetheless hold in common the view that “philosophy” has been displaced and altered by the modes of thought of other collectives. An international group of authors, including Eduardo Viveiros de Castro, Marilyn Strathern, Philippe Descola, and Bruno Latour, explore how the new anthropology/philosophy conjuncture opens new horizons of critique.