Luiz Fernando Rossetti Borges[1]
Translation: Ligia Paão Chizolini
1 Introduction
In light of the notable response to the previous article published by Ruptura, titled "Latin America and Dependency Theory: Discussions from Green Criminology," on November 16, 2023, I decided to present further reflections on issues that were not addressed previously.
The impact of the previous publication can be explained by the coherence and relevance of the following ideas: (a) capitalism is structurally unsustainable from an ecological and climatic standpoint; (b) dominant groups economically benefit from the exploitation of natural resources, while dominated groups are victimized by the exploitation of primary products; and (c) as a result of the relationship between political power (the State) and economic power (corporations), dominant groups, despite causing socio-environmental harm, become immune and are not held accountable.
The goal of this article, much like Tombs and Whyte (2020), is to explore how elites and corporate interests can be effectively held accountable for their crimes and, perhaps, identify the weaknesses of corporate and financial capitalism.
Capitalism and Socio-Ecological Damage
Capitalism has stood out for its intensive and cheap exploitation of natural resources, as argued by the concept of the Capitalocene. This term, popularized by Moore, seeks to understand the current ecological and climate crisis by highlighting the role of European empires and the use of science to map and exploit nature. In this context, the State plays a central role in managing resources for capital accumulation, which is essential for capitalist development and, consequently, for the socio-ecological damage associated with it.
Moore (2016, p. 90/91) popularized the term Capitalocene to describe the current geological era as a way of understanding the ecological and climate crises. For him, since the global expansions that began in 1492, capitalism has treated natural resources as a "free gift," and European empires have since then used science extensively, mapping territories, organizing biogeographical knowledge, and developing administrative technologies to exploit nature cheaply (Moore, 2016, p. 90/91).
The State's role in the Capitalocene is central, including in the climate crisis, as it is responsible for managing natural resources for capital accumulation (Parenti, 2018, p. 181/183). Historically, capitalist development has been driven by the State, and to reform or overcome capitalism, especially in relation to the climate issue, State involvement in strategies is indispensable, highlighting its fundamental role in both the capitalist structure and the ecological crisis (Parenti, 2018, p. 181/183).
David Harvey (2017) presents capitalism as an unsustainable system from an ecological standpoint, based on the predatory exploitation of nature and the production of negative externalities. As long as there is pressure for continuous exponential growth, there will be an increase in the frequency of extreme climatic events, many of which are absorbed by "disaster capitalism," where multiple business opportunities are created (Harvey, 2017, p. 255), which will be felt with increasing intensity:
"The unequal benefits and losses almost always benefit the rich and powerful, leaving the poor and vulnerable in an even worse situation. In the end, this is what extractive imperialism has always consisted of" (Harvey, 2017, p. 264).
Kohei Saito (2021) demonstrates that the critique of capitalism intertwines with the critique of imperialism, revealing the roots of nature and colonized peoples' exploitation within the logic of capital. It is no mere "coincidence that ecological problems manifest more clearly in the periphery of capitalism, the source of ever-growing exports of agricultural products and raw materials to the capitalist core" (Saito, 2021, p. 302). According to Marx, as Saito states (2021, p. 303), this system is characterized by theft in agriculture, where products are exported without replenishing the soil's nutrients, leading to land exhaustion and the need to find new areas for production (Saito, 2017, p. 328-332). This theft system was particularly observed by Marx in the dynamics of England's exploitation of India, where inequality deepened due to the grain trade, and in relations with Ireland, which met the demands for cattle in the English market despite the famine that plagued its territory (Saito, 2017, p. 328/329).
The critique of capitalism is deeply intertwined with the critique of imperialism, highlighting that ecological problems manifest more severely in the system's peripheries, where the predatory exploitation of land and people fuels the capitalist centers. This accumulation model, marked by the theft of agricultural nutrients and resource depletion, exacerbates global inequalities and deepens the climate crisis, primarily benefiting the rich and powerful, while the poorest suffer the most from ecological and economic disasters.
O’Connor (2000) explores the two main contradictions inherent to capitalism that result in environmental and social degradation: (a) the prioritization of profit maximization, which leads to the exploitation of labor and overproduction, often causing demand crises; (b) capitalism depends on the conditions of production (labor, natural resources, and infrastructure) but treats them as costs to be minimized, which ultimately degrades these very conditions. The crisis of production conditions is particularly acute in the Global South (or the periphery of capitalism), where the promise of sustainable development becomes a facade for the continuous exploitation of resources and labor.
The crisis of production conditions is particularly severe in the South: hence the origin of the discourse on "sustainable development," which has become an increasingly important field of ideological and political struggle. As we have seen, practically everyone uses this expression with different intentions and meanings. For environmentalists and ecologists, "sustainability" is the exclusive use of renewable resources, as well as low levels or the total absence of pollution. Indeed, the South may be closer than the North to "sustainability" in this sense, but the North has more capital and technology resources than the South to achieve this goal. Capital, of course, uses the term to refer to sustained profits, which presupposes long-term planning for the exploitation and use of renewable and non-renewable resources and "global commons." Ecologists define "sustainability" in terms of the preservation of natural systems, wetlands, protection of wilderness areas, air quality, and so on. However, these definitions have little or nothing to do with sustainable profitability. In fact, there is an inverse correlation between ecological sustainability and short-term profitability. The "sustainability" of rural and urban existence, the worlds of indigenous peoples, women's living conditions, and job security are also inversely correlated with short-term profitability, if the history of the 20th century has anything to teach us. Regardless of whether or not it is desirable for the South to follow the industrial and consumerist path of the North, there is the possibility that this will happen. In India, Brazil, and Mexico (to mention just three cases), industrial capitalism is developing based on great poverty and misery and the erosion of ecological stability, whatever the definition (O’Connor, 2000, free translation).
Capitalism, by treating nature as an inexhaustible and free resource, promotes intensive exploitation that results in severe socio-ecological damage. The State, by playing a central role in managing these resources, contributes to the perpetuation of this unsustainable model. This dynamic is even more severe in the peripheries of the capitalist system, where the exploitation of resources and labor exacerbates the ecological crisis and deepens inequalities. In the next chapter, we will address how this peripheral exploitation is intrinsically linked to dependency theory and the so-called Crimes of the Powerful, revealing the relationship with economic power.
Dependency, Peripheral Exploitation, and Crimes of the Powerful
Dependency theory is based on the analysis of economic relations as a foundation for understanding social reality. Although it is not a deterministic view, it recognizes that economic factors condition reality, being influenced, dialectically, by legal, political, and ideological institutions. Globalized capitalism, originating in the great navigations and consolidated with the Industrial Revolution, expanded through the exploitation of peripheral nations, generating a system in which metropolises extract wealth from satellites without offering fair compensation. This dynamic of exploitation is reinforced by the relationship between the State and corporations, normalizing corporate crimes and the impunity of the powerful. Neoliberalism, by deregulating and privatizing the economy, intensified this symbiosis, allowing the damage caused by large corporations to be routinely tolerated. This reality disproportionately affects poorer countries, whose populations suffer from the crimes of globalization, benefiting corporations and States of wealthier nations.
Dependency theory is based on certain assumptions, beginning with the idea that the analysis of economic relations is the foundation for understanding reality. It is not about the dominance or subjugation of the economy over other areas in a deterministic understanding. It should be understood as a conditioning of reality, not as a "fatalistic determinism," either because of the importance of human action and class struggle or because legal, political, and ideological institutions, understood as superstructural, also have the potential to influence, dialectically, the structural bases of society.
In this sense, Andre Gunder Frank explains that history is better understood when established—substantially—on its economic aspects, as in the example of the Crusades:
The Crusades, of course, are often interpreted as religious events driven by the desire of Christians to conquer the Holy Land for Christ. If we look a little closer, we will discover that, in fact, at least in part, the Crusades were commercial enterprises related to the commercial expansion of Western Europe in the Middle East... part of the expansion period in the 12th and 13th centuries, which led to a severe crisis in the 14th century (Frank, 1984. p. 79)
The second assumption is the existence of a globalized capitalist system, which has its origins in the Portuguese and Spanish navigations of the 14th and 15th centuries, becoming dominant during the Industrial Revolution of the 18th century and encompassing all nations of the world by the 20th century (Hout, 1992, p. 55). The third assumption—deriving from the second—is the idea that the dominant groups within this global system (notably the bourgeoisie of the respective metropolises) extract part of the economic fruits produced by other groups within the system without offering these latter groups adequate compensation (Hout, 1992, p. 55).
Andre Gunder Frank (1984; 1971, p. 17) explains that underdevelopment is not a primitive or backward stage of development, but the direct result of the development of global capitalism, which was a consequence of the structuring of the metropolis-satellite system, in which developed countries (metropolises) benefit from the exploitation of underdeveloped countries (satellites), as illustrated by three theses:
I) The Conquest placed all of Latin America in a situation of increasing subordination and colonial and neocolonial economic dependence vis-à-vis the expanding single world system of commercial capitalism.
II) This colonial or neocolonial relationship with the capitalist metropolis shaped and transformed the economic class structure, and even the culture, within Latin American society, causing this national structure to change as a consequence of the periodic alterations in the forms of colonial dependence.
III) This colonial and class structure determines very direct class interests for the dominant sector of the bourgeoisie, which, often using government offices and other state instruments, develops policies of underdevelopment in the economic, social, cultural, and political spheres for the 'Nation' and the Latin American people. Thus, when a change in the forms of dependence modifies the economic and class structure, it simultaneously determines changes in the policy of the dominant bourgeoisie that, [...], end up further strengthening the same economic dependency ties that fostered these policies, and therefore contributed to further aggravating the development of underdevelopment in Latin America (Frank, 1971, p. 17).
Indeed, capitalism expanded globally through imperialism and colonialism. Today, globalization and oligopolies, alongside smaller-scale neocolonialism, shape capital production and drive the expansion of consumer markets (Barak, 2017, p. 33). The accumulation and reproduction of capital depend on expansion into non-capitalist regions and societies, for without this continuous expansion into new markets and territories, capitalism would not survive, although this global process often causes conflicts with pre-capitalist forms of social organization, leading to violence, wars, and revolutions (Barak, 2017, p. 33).
Bernat (2018, p. 226-228) argues that it is essential to understand the perpetration of crimes by the powerful through the relationship between the state and corporations within the broader social structure, where these crimes are shaped and gain momentum. This occurs primarily through neoliberalism, with its emphasis on deregulation, privatization, and the financialization of the economy (Bernat, 2018, p. 226-228), which has obscured the public-private dichotomy (Tombs; Whyte, 2015). Instead of curbing criminal practices, the close relationship (more akin to symbiosis) between the state and corporations is normalized, and laws cease to regulate private activity, allowing corporate harms to be tolerated and increasingly routine (Tombs; Whyte, 2020).
The consequence of the interdependent relationship between the state and corporate crime is the normalization and institutionalization of corporate harm. In this sense, capitalism influences the definition and control of crime through this state-corporation interdependence. Barak, Leighton, and Cotton (2018, p. 65, translation) highlight the influence of corporations over lawmakers to ensure that their harmful behaviors are minimally criminalized:
Large corporations and wealthy individuals lobby legislators to ensure that the harmful behavior of the powerful is minimally criminalized, so that when criminologists focus on street crimes and the crimes of the poor, this is seen as the "natural order of things" rather than an expression of inequality and privilege. Criminology develops theories about the criminality of the poor instead of examining the harms caused by the rich. In turn, the criminal law's control over the crimes of the poor, rather than the crimes of the rich, seems to reflect the legitimacy of a consensual definition of "dangerous" crime and typical criminals.
Zaffaroni (2006) argues that the state—like juvenile delinquents, as observed in the classic research conducted by Sykes and Matza—does not reject dominant values but uses neutralization techniques to justify its actions. While juvenile delinquents may (a) deny responsibility, the victim, or the existence of harm itself, as well as (b) condemn those who condemn them; (c) or appeal to higher loyalties, which refers to the process in which an individual justifies the violation of legal or social norms in favor of obligations perceived as more important for the dominant social order; the state as a criminal often crafts more sophisticated justifications, supported by criminal ideologies and disseminated by intellectuals and the media (Zaffaroni, 2006).
Corporate harms disproportionately affect poor countries, which benefit and are perpetrated by states, corporations, and other international institutions (Tombs; Whyte, 2020). Due to this dynamic, the authors mention the concept of globalization crimes, which refers to crimes and harms that disproportionately affect poorer countries and benefit institutions located in or dominated by wealthier countries, namely states, corporations, and international institutions (Tombs; Whyte, 2020).
The analysis of dependency reveals how capitalist expansion and the close relationship between the state and corporations structure a global exploitation system. By concentrating penal control on the crimes of the poor and minimizing the crimes of the elites, capitalism maintains a dynamic of inequality, benefiting developed nations while perpetuating the exploitation of the poorer ones.
Final Considerations
This article sought to deepen the discussion on the relationship between dependency theory and Green Criminology in the context of Latin America, highlighting the fundamental role of capitalism and the state in the exploitation of natural resources and global inequalities. The critique of capitalism and imperialism, alongside the analysis of Crimes of the Powerful, reveals how peripheral nations are disproportionately affected by the socio-environmental harms caused by the global capitalist dynamic.
A brief analysis of our penal system highlights the criminalization of the poorest and the immunity (from harm) of the most powerful, exacerbating the ecological crisis and social inequalities. Thus, it is essential to rethink the ways of holding corporations and states accountable to create a fairer and more effective response to the environmental and social challenges faced by the periphery of capitalism.
References
BARAK, Gregg; LEIGHTON, Paul; COTTON, Allison. Class, race, gender, and crime: the social realities of justice in America. 5ª ed. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2018.
BARAK, Gregg. Unchecked corporate power: why the crimes of multinational corporations are routinized away and what we can do about it. London: Routledge, 2017.
BERNAT, Ignasi. The crimes of the powerful and the Spanish crisis. In: Revisiting Crimes of the Powerful. Routledge, 2018. p. 217-230.
FRANK, Andre Gunder. The unequal and uneven historical development of the world economy. Contemporary Marxism, n. 9, p. 71-95, 1984.
FRANK, Andre Gunder. Lumpen-burguesia: lumpen-desenvolvimento. Porto: Portucalense Editora, 1971.
HARVEY, David. 17 contradições e o fim do capitalismo. Boitempo Editorial, 2017.
HOUT, Wil. National Development, Dependence and the World System: Dependency Theory and the Study of International Relations. 1992.
MOORE, Jason W. The rise of cheap nature. In: Anthropocene or Capitalocene? Nature, history, and the crisis of capitalism. Oakland: PM Press, 2016.
PARENTI, Christian. Environment-making in the capitalocene. In: Anthropocene or Capitalocene? Nature, history, and the crisis of capitalism. Oakland: PM Press, 2016, p. 166-83.
SAITO, Kohei. O ecossocialismo de Karl Marx: capitalismo, natureza e a crítica inacabada à economia política. Boitempo Editorial, 2021.
TOMBS, Steve; WHYTE, David. The shifting imaginaries of corporate crime. Journal of white collar and corporate crime, v. 1, n. 1, p. 16-23, 2020.
ZAFFARONI, Eugenio Raúl. El crimen de Estado como objeto de la criminología. In: GARCÍA RAMÍREZ, Sergio; ISLAS DE GONZÁLEZ MARISCAL, Olga. Panorama internacional sobre justicia penal: Política criminal, derecho penal y criminología. Culturas y sistemas jurídicos comparados. Séptimas Jornadas sobre Justicia Penal. México D.F.: UNAM, 2007.
[1] PhD candidate and Master's graduate (2021) in Law from the Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC). Specialist in Criminal Law and Procedure from UNIVALI (2014) and ABDCONST (2019). Bachelor of Law from UFSC (2012). Researcher at the Research Group on Environmental Law and Political Ecology in Risk Society/GPDA (2017-present) and the Research Group on Power, Control, and Harm/GPPCDS (2020-present). Collaborator at Ruptura. Author of various legal articles in the fields of Environmental Law and Criminology. Lawyer. E-mail: luizrossettiborges@gmail.com
Comments