The following interview was conducted in preparation for our online conference “Care for global justice. Despite the Corona crisis.” Lina Hansen (she/her) will be holding a workshop on Sunday on the topic “Ecological Concern” She took the time to talk to us about her workshop, the conference, and care during the coronavirus pandemic. Her sociological research interests include socio-ecological transformation and the integral integration of (eco)feminist social theory.
Hello Lina, thank you for taking the time to answer a few questions for me. The online conference is called "Care for Global Justice," and several international speakers will be speaking. Why is it important to think about care work globally?
Thinking about care work globally makes it possible to analyze globally operating mechanisms of exploitation and structures of domination. An intersectional, critical analysis of capitalism highlights feminizing and racializing mechanisms of global care chains that explain why migrant workers work in precarious conditions in the Global North and why (neo)colonial continuities are (re)produced. This Eurocentric world order shapes patriarchal, heteronormative gender relations and the invisibility and devaluation of paid and unpaid care work, or even reproductive work. As an ecofeminist, I would like to add the invisibility of subsistence work to this. All work that serves to maintain the material basis of life takes place in the capitalist outside world and in the non-monetary provision economy. The metabolism of ecological resources is devalued and rendered invisible. For example, the concept of caring for and caring for nature/natures is intended to counteract this invisibility and, especially in light of the ecological crisis, to highlight interwoven relationships with non-human entities. All of this work/work forms the basis of our work and life.
The event also bears the subtitle "Despite Corona." To what extent has the structural exploitation of care work worsened during or as a result of the coronavirus crisis?
The coronavirus crisis has exacerbated the crisis of social and ecological reproduction, as just described, and, in my opinion, made it more visible. The pandemic has not led to a revaluation in the sense of higher pay. It is clear that this work, marked as female, is undertaken in particular by women and marginalized people affected by ableist, homophobic, racist, sexist, and classist structures. This crisis is not the form of shrinkage or a turning away from the growth paradigm that a feminist socio-ecological transformation demands. The opportunity to organize care communally or more communitarily in the crisis has not been seized. An appreciation of care activities is possible by overcoming the separation from reproduction. An economy that is based on precaution, cooperation, and orientation, as called for by the Careful Economy network, can place care at its center. A caring and solidarity-based economy in which solidarity also exists between the global North and South and equitably enables caring relationships between human and non-human entities.
The environmental activist movement, in particular, is increasingly calling for solidarity between the global North and South. This involves reflecting both post-migrant and decolonial perspectives and building alliances. Incorporating decolonial perspectives also raises the question of anthropocentric border demarcation. Why is all this important for the movement's further development?
In relation to the critique of anthropocentrism, decolonial and post-migrant perspectives and alliances are essential for criticizing a Eurocentric, white, and (neo)colonial system, making other realities visible, and imagining utopias. The Western-influenced dichotomy of culture and nature places humans at the center. An interwoven relationship to ecological resources is highlighted, revealing a reality alongside non-provisional capitalist exploitation. Different epistemologies—that is, different bodies of knowledge and realities—become visible in a pluriverse, challenging the Western view of universalism and the idea of development. Different relationships to nature/natures become conceivable. Commoning, for example, as a form of relationship with non-human entities, enables the maintenance and restoration of life, which includes non-humans and even understands them as agents. Examples of this are Buen Vivir and the Rights of Nature. This is especially true in light of climate change and the necessity of the post-extractivist era, in which the ecological reproduction of ecosystems is central. Furthermore, it becomes necessary to examine social conditions, such as ecological racism, from a power-critical perspective and to emphasize that colonial continuities must be understood as the root of climate change and that extreme weather conditions are commonplace in the Global South. There is a drastic gap between responsibility and concern.
Would you say there are already initial attempts within social movements to incorporate other intersections on the topic of care, such as abelism or sanism? How can degrowth be linked to disability justice in addition to anti-patriarchal, decolonial struggles?
Unfortunately, I would say that there is no social movement of concern yet. It is currently a feminist principle that many, but not all, climate activists embrace. I notice that in practice and theory, some embrace this, but that it is primarily those affected who take on this work. Many, including myself, must continue to learn and unlearn in this area, and social and ecological justice movements, for example, must take up the demands of workers in so-called sheltered workshops and form alliances. At this point, thank you for this question, which reveals a gap in the blog post mentioned at the end. Regarding the demands of degrowth, I see discriminatory structures here that require more attention and visibility. When I listen to affected activists whose lives are hindered by social structures, what is needed here is, for example, growth in the sense of integration into the so-called primary labor market and access to infrastructure. Places of non-shrinkage become visible as a counterpoint to the demand to replace the principle of growth. In practice and theory, marginalized voices must be listened to, responsibility taken, and the associated structures and power mechanisms in the capitalist system exposed so that a shared reckoning becomes possible. Activist work must be valued and made visible as work. The same applies to sanism and psychism. This work has a long history and was addressed, for example, in the anti-psychiatry movement. I think degrowth will always have gaps, and I am – mostly – hopeful that transformative justice will uncover these and, through work across differences, ultimately abolish itself.
In feminist circles and movements, there have long been complex discourses surrounding terms like "woman*," "FLINTA*," "female-socialized," etc. This creates a conflict between the desire to make the majority's realities visible and, on the other hand, not to make diversity invisible. What are your thoughts on this?
My interpretation is that two feminist groups or currents are colliding in this discourse: power-critical feminists who demand representation and therefore deal with identity politics, and materialist feminisms that express anti-capitalist critiques and combat misogyny. I also see the conflict you address in your question, but I also see the opportunity and necessity to learn from each other. The question that is needed, in my opinion, is to reflect on which struggle is currently being waged here, what its goal is, and who is leading it. On the one hand, this becomes possible when the historical materialist conditions are analyzed with differences, the research is contextualized, and gaps are reflected upon. If this does not happen, invisibility is implicitly reproduced. Depending on the use of the term, other fields of research or theories become possible. On the other hand, a power-critical intersectional analysis is necessary to depict the interweaving of those affected by different structures and diversity, as well as to achieve representation. This engagement makes it possible to collectively assume responsibility for unlearning -isms. This requires empathy, the will to tackle this task, the questioning of privileges, and an understanding of social hierarchical structures. Acceptance of this, in my opinion, is necessary to improve living realities on a small and large scale. In my opinion, feminist practice requires a solidarity-based struggle for power-critical diversity and access to material resources, or rather, a continuous debate and visualization of both perspectives. Queer feminist and emancipatory discourses and struggles should, in my opinion, be brought together. In relation to non-human entities and ecofeminist concepts, these terminology enable, for example, queer ecologies, concerns about climate change, and the exploration of subsistence work.
You're participating in the conference with the workshop "Ecological Care – What Can Different Types of Care for Nature/en Look Like from a Feminist Perspective?" Could you explain what you understand by ecological care?
I hope my previous answers have already resonated with me. In my opinion, we need a concept of care for things like non-human entities. The concept of care, too, needs constant revision without becoming blurred. A non-anthropocentric concept of care emphasizes the relatedness of different species or the interdependent relationship with non-human entities. Here, too, diverse realities are made visible without making exploitative relationships invisible (Editor's note: see question 3). One possible concept of care is, for example, caring with or for nature/en as an action to maintain and restore life, which I understand as a political-ethical matter. Nature/en needs a voice and rights. I use the notation "nature/en" to draw attention to various entities, such as fungi, bacteria, snails, oceans, and forests. A concept of care must clarify who cares for what, how, and why, and must also identify the power structures between humans, other species, and environments. I hope that relationships of solidarity with nature/nature will become visible and valued in this way. Political struggles, such as anti-colonial land rights struggles in the Global South and the Hambi occupation and Ende Gelände in the German context, practice the struggle for social and ecological justice in the spirit of multi-species resistance.
You can find the blog post mentioned by Lina here:
www.postwachstum.de/pluralising-degrowth-grenz_ziehungen-ueberwinden-20211001
Lina also shared literature with us that she used, among other things, to prepare for our questions:
Collective Mapping Team (2020). Multispecies Resistance.
storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/46d781eb9f3743c49b0f6490100074f7
Escobar, Arturo (2015). Commons in the Pluriverse. In: Helfrich, Silke; Bollier, David; Heinrich Böll Foundation (eds.) The World of the Commons – Patterns of Joint Action.
www.band2.dieweltdercommons.de/essays/commons_im_pluriversum.html
Feminist and Degrowth Alliances (FaDA) (2020). Feminist Degrowth: Collaborative FaDa reflections on the Covid-19 Pandemic and the Politics of Social Reproduction
globaldeepnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/FADA-Statement.pdf
Ituen, Imeh; Kennedy-Asante, Rebecca Abena (2019). 500 years of environmental racism
taz.de/Kolonialismus-und-Klimakrise/!5638661
Puig de la Bellacasa, Maria (2017). Matters of Care – Speculative Ethics in more than human worlds. Minneapolis, London: University of Minnesota Press.
In conversation:
Parwaneh Mirassan
Public Relations and Transformative Education
Lina Hansen
Speaker for the workshop “Ecological Concern”
CARRY US WITH US
At Konzeptwerk, we advocate for a fair and ecological economy that ensures a good life for all.
We have ideas, courage, and need staying power. You can give us that.
Support the concept with a regular donation and help us.