In this opinion piece, Trinity Morphy explores our relationship, and obsession, with extractive capitalism and the inequality it perpetuates, then questions whether it's even possible to give it up in favour of something else.


Throughout human history, the coexistence of extraction and regeneration has paralleled the Yin and Yang concept. Unfortunately, our early ancestors first encountered the Yin (extraction), and the world has continued to suffer because of it.

The detrimental effects of extraction became apparent rather quickly. In their quest for for survival, early humans cut down trees and hunted animals to depletion, only to be forced to relocate due to lack of resources. This cycle foreshadowed the long-term consequences of unsustainable practices at scale.

Centuries later, a barter economy emerged, driving people to aggressively extract as a means to acquire value. Forests were depleted to craft furniture, boats, weapons, and homes, while hunters pursued game. As humanity grew obsessed with the pursuit of luxury, a new extractive darkness crept in: the abhorrent practice of slavery. Settlements waged wars and captured their adversaries to trade for commodities like gin and mirrors or sell on the open market. Slaves were yet another resource to extract, forced into backbreaking labour on plantations, while their masters reaped the spoils.

Capitalism, a system built on exploitation and inequality, ultimately derived from these extractive practices. Despite our awareness of its detrimental effects, it remains entrenched as the global economic order. This should be alarming, especially given the pace of climate change, rampant deforestation for urbanisation, and rate of species extinction. Instead, the prevailing attitude is complacency.

This led me to wonder: How have we become so comfortable with a system that promotes social inequality and ecological degradation? My research revealed a troubling truth: we're stuck with extractive capitalism, and there's very little we can do about it.

Why is it so hard to replace our extractive system?

In short, because we collectively stand to lose a lot. A deeper look, however, reveals a degree of nuance that made me realise that it isn't just about loss. There are a litany of other reasons why we're going to have a hard time kicking the extraction habit.

Economic disruption

Replacing our extractice system will temporarily cripple those dependent on it. Workers, in particular, have much to lose and would likely have trouble adapting to a new economic system, leading to higher unemployment, lower incomes, and even social unrest. Governments would likely find it too expensive to help the newly unemployed with job training or financial aid. Without this safety net, resistance to change will remain strong.

In the United States, the need to address climate change has seen the phasing out of coal plants. In 2012, there were close to 90,000 jobs in the coal industry, compared to the 41,940 jobs that existed as of 2023. This situation has led to economic hardship and a decline in the overall well-being of the regions affected. Places like Boone County went from surplus to budget deficits due to mine closures and job losses, disrupting county services with cuts to teachers, jobs, and benefits, even leading people to leave the area with frustration and resentment. Governments have tried to help by providing retraining programs and financial assistance, but these efforts haven't always been sufficient.

Prioritisation of profit

Investors and corporations have poured massive financial resources into extractive industries like fossil fuels and precious metals. Reallocating this capital to new, sustainable ventures would result in massive financial loss, not just on the assets themselves but the resulting decrease in revenue. It's the kind of loss that keeps a vast majority of investment exactly where it is.

Since the 1950s, multinational corporations in Nigeria's Niger Delta region have focused on maximising oil revenue. This has led to oil spills and pipeline leaks that have polluted water sources, destroyed ecosystems, and contributed to health problems. Local communities, in turn, have not seen a proportional increase in infrastructure development or economic opportunities. They have long protested against the environmental damage and economic marginalisation. However, these efforts are often met with repressive tactics because of the Nigerian government's dependence on oil revenue.

Lack of political will

Industries that rely on extractive practices channel a percentage of profits towards influential lobbying efforts that protect their interests and slow the pace of change. Furthermore, financial contributions from organisations with high stakes in these industries influence elections and shape legislative agendas. Some industry players even go as far as financing political campaigns to downplay the environmental and social cost of their activities. These factors combine to effectively eliminate the political will to make fundamental changes to the system.

In 2019, the election of Jair Bolsonaro as Brazil's president led to the increased influence of the "ruralistas," or the politicians in the pockets of agribusiness. During his term, the Amazon rainforest faced aggressive deforestation due to policies implemented by these ruralistas. Additionally, the Bolsonaro administration weakened environmental protections and dismantled agencies tasked with protecting the Amazon. One such agency, the Brazilian Institute of Environment and Renewable Natural Resources (IBAMA), recorded its worst performance in 2019.

Engrained culture of consumption

Our desire for individual wealth and status overshadows our collective responsibility for the environment. Fast fashion, planned obsolescence, and the constant barrage of advertising have trapped us in a cycle of consumption. The true ecological cost of these habits are simply not apparent enough to drive behavioural change.

The Great Pacific Garbage Patch is a massive swathe of ocean debris, primarily composed of plastic, located between California and Hawaii. The Patch tells a tale of plastic waste travelling vast distances, harming marine life, entering the food chain, and polluting beaches. It exemplifies how extractive practices fueled by consumerism lead to ecological problems with global consequences. The problem is we don't see it. As the maxim says: out of sight, out of mind.

Resource demand and competition

Our economic system relies on the continuous extraction of resources. As with our ancestors, when a particlar area is depleted of its resources, corporations have to find new sources in order to sustain progress and outduel the competition. Any subsequent ecological and social costs are often downplayed or externalised, meaning that communities and ecosystems bear the brunt of pollution and depletion while corporations reap the profits. This is most prevalant when a high-demand resource is involved.

The Democratic Republic of Congo holds the world's largest reserves of cobalt, a crucial, finite resource facing growing demand for electric vehicles and electronics. Predictably, the rush to extract cobalt often leads to unregulated mining, which causes deforestation, water pollution, and land degradation. Cobalt mining has also raised the question of human rights. Disturbing reports have revealed the prevalence of unsafe working conditions, child labour, and forced evictions of local communities to make way for mines. In an effort to meet demand, there has been little regard for the environmental and social impact of the mining activities.

Poor global cooperation

There's an understandable lack of trust between countries and social groups. This makes it difficult to agree on a new economic system that is fair and equitable for all. For example, developing countries might fear being exploited by wealthier nations in a new economic order. Additionally, many existing international organisations, laws, and agreements are designed to support extractive capitalism. Changing these them would require a level of global cooperation we haven't seen.

An excellent example is the Doha Round Trade Negotiations. Launched in 2001, these talks aimed to liberalise global trade by lowering tariffs and other barriers. However, they've been stalled for nearly two decades due to disagreements between developing and developed economies. Among other things, the former feared that an agreement with disproportinately benefit the latter, while the latter wanted greater access to the former's markets. This chasm ultimately led to the collapse of the Doha Round in 2008 and highlights the challenges of achieving international cooperation on economic issues.

Path dependency

Existing infrastructure creates a path dependency, meaning we're stuck with what we've already built. For instance, our dependence on machines that use fossil fuel makes switching to alternative transportation systems challenging. Furthermore, infrastructure projects are frequently planned with short-term benefits in mind, not long-term sustainability. This can lead to decisions that lock us into extractive practices for decades. It can also be challenging to envision and plan for entirely new systems fundamentally different from the current extractive model.

An example of path dependency in this context is the dominance of car-centric cities. Built in the 20th century, these cities were designed to create a dependence on the personal vehicle. Whil there are some economic benefits, there are a host of long-term costs, including include traffic congestion, air pollution, and social isolation. And the legacy infrastructure – sprawling suburbs, wide roads, and limited public transportation – is nearly impossible to change, so we continue expanding our cities according to a car-centric methodology.

Marginalisation

Marginalised communities typically bear the costs of extractive capitalism because they lack the resources and political power needed to protect their interests. With governments often complicit in this marginalistation, there are virtually no checks and balances on extractive practices.

Case in point, the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. A marginalised indigenous community, it faced the threat of the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) running directly through its reservation. While the pipeline would create some short-term jobs, it violated ancestral lands and threatened to contaminate drinking water. Sadly, the Tribe lacked the resources and influence to lobby against the pipeline or pursue a lengthy legal battle.

Inertia

Our subconscious resistance to fundamental change doesn't always stem from our satisfaction with the world economy. Instead, it's driven by fear regarding the potential repercussions of the change and their impact. We have structured our lives so that our intrinsic values (happiness, fulfilment, peace of mind), relationships, and dreams depend almost entirely on extractive capitalism. We have no choice but to cling to a flawed system because of the perceived cost of the change.

Since 1959, COBOL has been one of the oldest programming languages still in use. Remarkably, COBOL is widely used in the critical financial and government sectors. Despite the advent of newer and more secure programming languages, companies invest millions in maintaining and modernising COBOL rather than transitioning to newer frameworks. The reluctance stems from the immense risks associated with migrating a COBOL system, where any mistake during the migration could lead to substantial financial losses or threaten national security.

Is there anything we can do?

Not a lot, but that shouldn't stop us from trying. Dismantling a global economic system is daunting, but inaction has more significant consequences. Global temperatures are rising and extreme weather events are increasing. We must move beyond the fear of change and embrace a new path.

The most effective strategy is to leverage capitalism's methods against its staunchest allies: corporations and governments. We, the consumers, have the power to collectively disrupt the system through our everyday choices. By intentionally making ecologically and socially conscious purchasing decisions in our daily lives, we shift market demand away from extractive practices. Over time, actors within our economic system will have no choice but to adapt to the new reality.

Some of these decisions include:

Embrace the "reduce" principle

Break the cycle of impulse buying. Plan purchases, prioritise experiences over material possessions, and avoid falling prey to marketing tactics. Always ask: "Do I truly need this?" Avoid plastic bags and excessive packaging. Invest in reusable alternatives and high-quality, well-made items built to last.

Rethink, reuse, and repair

Instead of buying new clothes, furniture, or electronics, take advantage of second-hand stores, online marketplaces, or community swap meets. It saves money and gives pre-loved items a new lease on life. Many things don't need replacing; they need fixing. Consider repairing first. Avail yourself of refurbished electronics, furniture, and appliances at a fraction of the original cost.

Champion sustainable materials

Opt for products made from recycled materials, organic cotton, bamboo, cork, or other eco-friendly alternatives. They are often more durable than synthetic alternatives. Look for wood product certifications like FSC (Forest Stewardship Council).

Support sustainable businesses

Support local businesses that prioritise sustainable practices. This strengthens the local economy and reduces your carbon footprint from transportation. Consider investing in companies developing renewable energy sources or sustainable products and services.

Practice energy efficiency at home

Turn off lights, electronics, and appliances when not in use. Unplug chargers and consider intelligent power strips that automatically shut off inactive devices. Invest in LED light bulbs, Energy Star-certified appliances, and programmable thermostats to regulate your home's temperature efficiently. Skip the dryer whenever possible and utilise the sun's power for natural drying. It saves energy and extends the life of your clothes.

Make sustainable transportation choices

Choose to walk, bike, or use public transport whenever possible rather than driving a car. Not only is it good for the environment, but it also promotes healthier living. If you must drive, carpool with colleagues or use ride-sharing services. This reduces the number of cars on the road and lowers emissions. If buying a new car, consider electric vehicles (EVs).

Every decision we make adds up. By collectively embracing these practices, we can send a powerful message to corporations that can expedite a transtion away from extraction.

Conclusion

Extractive capitalism's dominance poses a significant hurdle, but dismantling it unlocks a path toward a more sustainable future. While the challenges are undeniable, the transition would creates fertile ground for new economic opportunities. Renewable energy, resource conservation, and sustainable infrastructure will flourish, generating jobs and revitalising economies.

As consumers, our choices hold a tremendous amount of power. The rising demand for ecologically and socially friendly products and services can serve as a catalyst, compelling businesses to adopt sustainable practices and advocate for policies that champion environmental and social responsibility. This shift has the potential to usher in stricter environmental regulations and a more conscientious approach to resource utilisation.

Our current consumerist culture must transition toward valuing quality over quantity and durability over disposability. It won't be easy, but any fear and resistance can morph into a collective action for a better tomorrow. By embracing innovation and collaboration, we can cultivate optimism for a future where economic well-being and environmental protection are not at odds but work hand-in-hand.


More by Trinity Morphy

Hypothesising a retail investment instrument with public goods funding integration
Trinity Morphy lays out his idea for a solution to the funding shortfall for ecological and social impact projects relying on public goods funding.
What the Lagos State Plastic Ban Tells Us About Waste in Nigeria
Trinity Morphy questions the effectiveness of the ban and proposes some socioeconomic alternatives.

This article represents the opinion of the author and does not necessarily reflect the editorial stance of CARBON Copy.