Henri Lefebvre's conception of nature-society in the revolutionary project of autogestion

Abstract

Henri Lefebvre's intricate material-dialectical approach to the nature-society problematic, taken together with his advocacy of a praxis oriented to total transformation from the ground up through autogestion, offers a unified, critical, and dialectical approach to political ecology. Unfortunately, his work in these areas has too often been interpreted as divided and fragmentary, splitting his radical analysis of the production of space-time from his critical praxis related to autogestion. We offer a corrective to this by elaborating briefly on his use of Marx's material-dialectical approach, outlining how Lefebvre brings this method to bear on the nature-society problematic, and how his theorization of autogestion points to a radical praxis aimed at overcoming the social-ecological contradictions of capital. His engagement with Marx's theory of metabolic rift, and his advocacy of a radical project of autogestion as part of the critique of everyday life, serve to place the underlying issue of alienation in spatial terms, offering geography a transformative perspective that avoids positing closed systems and attempting to exhaust the various meanings assigned to nature. In this, Lefebvre demonstrates how the nature-society problematic overflows issues of ontological framing and language, calling for a unity of radical theory and practice to overcome the separations.

Autogestion and ecological politics in the work of Henri Lefebvre

“…But one area where there has been insufficient investigation is the potential that lies in Lefebvre's contribution to theorising the relationship between society and nature. Napoletano et al (2023) have expanded the debate over the ways in which Lefebvre's 'dialectical approach to nature-society' can be brought together with his radically democratic conceptualisation of a politics of autogestion in order to confront the social and ecological crises of twenty-first century capitalism. Their article forms part of a broader project in which the authors have argued that Lefebvre's thought can deepen our understanding of the nature-society dialectic and provide crucial methodological tools for critical geography and environmental sociology (Foster et al, 2020;Napoletano et al, 2020Napoletano et al, , 2022aNapoletano et al, , 2022b.…”

“…Despite the breadth of Lefebvre's understanding of autogestion, much of the literature on this aspect of his thinking focuses on its relevance for forms of human emancipation such as radical democracy and urban citizenship, particularly through the generalised spatial demands of the 'right to the city' and the 'right to difference' (Butler, 2012;Purcell, 2013). Napoletano et al are to be commended for turning their focus to the crucial connection between autogestion and strategies which resist the technological 'domination of nature' by the state and capital (Lefebvre, 1991: 343; also, see Lefebvre, 2014), and which provide a template for the 'reappropriation of nature, space, and the body' (Napoletano et al, 2023). One question which is obviously beyond the scope of the article, but is of immediate strategic interest, is the extent to which existing institutional structures, such as the legal system, can play a role in mediating the autonomous agency of inhabitants in the praxis of autogestion (Butler, 2009;Huchzermeyer, 2018).…”

Autogestion, revolutionary spontaneity, and the trichotomy of body-mind-spirit

“…An example of challenging the domination of the distant order can be found in the Green Belt Movement in Kenya, which was a form of revolutionary spontaneity for managing the lack of firewood, clean drinking water, balanced diets, shelter, and income, which led its founder, Wangari Maathai, in the name of rural women in Kenya, to receive the Nobel Peace Prize in 2004. This remarkable initiative to reappropriate space by caring for their territory and their families through planting trees and sustaining their traditional ways of living can be understood as a form of what Lefebvre calls 'autogestion', which, according to Napoletano et al (2023), is 'placed in the context of sustainable human development … based on the reassertion of human needs and the use-value of nature over capital accumulation'. Lefebvre originally theorized 'autogestion' in relation to the self-management of labour in urban settings against capitalist domination over the means of production.…”

“…To effectively reconceptualize autogestion as 'the foundation for a radical notion of social-ecological sustainability that goes beyond the self-evident diametrical opposition between capital and sustainability' (Napoletano et al, 2023), the revolutionary spontaneity which characterizes autogestion must reorient itself from socio-political engagement to the aesthetic engagement with everyday life. This involves not just the capacity of self-management but the ability to experience astonishment and compassion with and for nature and our relationship with it as well as basing this self-management on the learnings coming from such experiences.…”

“…[and] situates nature-society within a mediated, open totality' (Napoletano et al, 2023). The debt of this clever proposal is also the integration of body, mind, and spirit, because if society continues to function from the material dialectical realm without spirituality, revolutionary spontaneity will continue to fail.…”