Abstract
Daniel Cunha misreads us as suggesting that climate change has been a conscious and deliberate strategy of a global elite. This was very clearly not our suggestion. He proposes that the Marxian concept of fetishism is applicable to anthropogenic climate change, apparently unaware of our recurrent use of precisely this concept in a number of publications over the past decades. We thus fundamentally agree with his position, but find his critique of our own interpretation of the Anthropocene unfair and misdirected.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 205-207 |
| Number of pages | 3 |
| Journal | The Anthropocene Review |
| Volume | 3 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs |
|
| Publication status | Published - 2016 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 13 Climate Action
Subject classification (UKÄ)
- Other Social Sciences
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Yes, it is all about fetishism: A response to Daniel Cunha'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver