Is democracy compatible with de-growth? [View all]

[GliderGuider]

One of my core beliefs is that humanity is in serious ecological overshoot. The degree of overshoot is open to question - it may be anywhere from 50% to 5,000% depending on your definitions and assumptions - but the fact that we are in overshoot is pretty obvious at this point.

If we are in overshoot to any degree, one requirement for the long-term survival of our species is to reduce our demand on the planet's biosphere and the damage we're doing to it. Reducing our impact requires de-growth, whether in our numbers, activity levels or both. In activist circles it's assumed that such a reduction can be accomplished within a democratic system that respects individual rights and freedoms. Is that assumption warranted?

As a preliminary test, I decided to look back in history. After all, many societies in the past have collapsed, so we have plenty of experience with running into environmental or structural problems. Is there evidence that we can foresee and avoid such problems by planning for de-growth before the emergency strikes?

I asked my Facebook community for input regarding any societies that have implemented de-growth plans before being hit over the head by an external limit or internal breakdown. The responses identified only two large societies, the Tokugawa shogunate in Japan (the Edo period) and China with their One Child Policy. The other suggestions were small, usually religious, subcultures like the Mennonites.

Regarding the two large-scale examples, I note that both of those societies were/are strongly authoritarian. This suggests to me that democracy is fundamentally incompatible with de-growth. While authoritarianism on its own doesn't guarantee de-growth either, it seems to be "necessary but not sufficient."

A society with authoritarian governance may not achieve de-growth, but a democratic society can not. The reason is that people in a democracy are free to vote in their own short-term best interests (or in the interests of those who control the media). In an authoritarian society only a few people near the top of the power structure have to understand that de-growth is required. In a democracy, unless a significant majority of the rank and file are convinced, it ain't going to happen.

So long as nations remain democratic, few of them will create preventive plans for de-growth. And as long as the world remains composed of individual nation-states with competing interests, there will be no international, global push for de-growth either.

What are the political community's thoughts on this conclusion?