4
EMANCIPATING
TRANSFORMATIONS
From controlling ‘the transition’ to
culturing plural radical progress
1
Andy Stirling
Introduction
Are green transformations too urgent, deep and pervasive to be reliably achieved
by democratic means? As suggested by the iconically influential environmentalist
James Lovelock, perhaps ‘it may be necessary to put democracy on hold for a while’
(Hickman, 2010). Indeed, the main European Commission news website recently
queried whether democracy is actually an ‘enemy of nature?’ (Euractive, 2010).
As formally structured procedure, ‘democracy’ is often caricatured as an obstructive
or dispensable ‘luxury’ (Haan and Sierman, 1996). However, perhaps history
teaches instead that the only sure way to achieve any kind of progressive social
transformation is through unruly democratic struggle. These are the questions on
which this chapter will focus.
In short, the argument here will lead to a general heuristic distinction between
two ideal-typical forms of radical social change. On one hand, are ‘transitions’:
managed under orderly control, through incumbent structures according to
tightly disciplined knowledges, often emphasizing technological innovation, towards
some particular known (presumptively shared) end. On the other hand, are ‘transformations’, involving more diverse, emergent and unruly political alignments,
more about social innovations, challenging incumbent structures, subject to incom -
mensurable knowledges and pursuing contending (even unknown) ends. By
reference to emancipatory struggles by excluded classes, ethnicities, slaves, workers,
colonies, women, young people and diverse sexualities, the chapter will argue that
it is repeatedly the latter that achieves the most profound (often rapid) radically
progressive social changes.
So, apparent contention between different meanings and practices of sustain -
ability and ‘democracy’ are not so much problems, but crucial parts of solutions.
Ecological viability and social justice are not competing ends to be traded off, nor
DOI: 10.4324/9781315747378-4
EMANCIPATING
TRANSFORMATIONS
From controlling ‘the transition’ to
culturing plural radical progress
1
Andy Stirling
Introduction
Are green transformations too urgent, deep and pervasive to be reliably achieved
by democratic means? As suggested by the iconically influential environmentalist
James Lovelock, perhaps ‘it may be necessary to put democracy on hold for a while’
(Hickman, 2010). Indeed, the main European Commission news website recently
queried whether democracy is actually an ‘enemy of nature?’ (Euractive, 2010).
As formally structured procedure, ‘democracy’ is often caricatured as an obstructive
or dispensable ‘luxury’ (Haan and Sierman, 1996). However, perhaps history
teaches instead that the only sure way to achieve any kind of progressive social
transformation is through unruly democratic struggle. These are the questions on
which this chapter will focus.
In short, the argument here will lead to a general heuristic distinction between
two ideal-typical forms of radical social change. On one hand, are ‘transitions’:
managed under orderly control, through incumbent structures according to
tightly disciplined knowledges, often emphasizing technological innovation, towards
some particular known (presumptively shared) end. On the other hand, are ‘transformations’, involving more diverse, emergent and unruly political alignments,
more about social innovations, challenging incumbent structures, subject to incom -
mensurable knowledges and pursuing contending (even unknown) ends. By
reference to emancipatory struggles by excluded classes, ethnicities, slaves, workers,
colonies, women, young people and diverse sexualities, the chapter will argue that
it is repeatedly the latter that achieves the most profound (often rapid) radically
progressive social changes.
So, apparent contention between different meanings and practices of sustain -
ability and ‘democracy’ are not so much problems, but crucial parts of solutions.
Ecological viability and social justice are not competing ends to be traded off, nor
DOI: 10.4324/9781315747378-4