Whose Universalism? Dipesh Chakrabarty and the Anthropocene

Bibliographic Data

ID4755404
AuthorsDan Boscov-Ellen (0000-0002-8898-3480, Pratt Institute, Brooklyn, New York, NY, USA, corresponding author)
Year2020
Volume31
Issue1
Pages70-83
Publication date2020-01-02
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueCapitalism Nature Socialism (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1045-5752 • E-ISSN: 1548-3290
PublisherInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/10455752.2018.1514060
OpenAlexW2888642273
LanguageEN
Citations received10
References cited13

Dipesh Chakrabarty has drawn criticism from leftist thinkers for his insistence that humanity as a whole is responsible for climate change, and thus that humanity as a whole has a shared responsibility to confront it. While it has been repeatedly pointed out that this highly abstract universalism covers over massive and analytically crucial disparities in responsibility for and vulnerability to climate change, few critics have closely examined Chakrabarty's pivot from a staunchly anti-universalist stance to this strong universalist humanism. I argue that reconstructing and critiquing the intellectual-historical arc that lead Chakrabarty to this surprising shift can help to soften antagonisms between Marxism and postcolonial thought that currently stand in the way of an adequate understanding of the climate problem

Anthropocene · Criticism · Environmental ethics · Epistemology · Humanism · Humanity · Political science · Sociology · Universalism · Vulnerability (computing · Ecocriticism and Environmental Literature · Indian History and Philosophy · Law · Philosophy · Political Economy and Marxism

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub