Review of Joerg Rieger, “Theology in the Capitalocene: Ecology, Identity, Class, and Solidarity” (Fortress Press, 2022)

According to “Tomorrow and tomorrow and….” a leader in the July 15, 2023, issue of The Economist, a Dutch Earth scientist made a public plea in 2000 that “the role humankind now plays in shaping the Earth be made explicit; science should recognise the advent of the Anthropocene, ‘the recent age of man’.” A group of well-qualified scientists agreed with that plea, and in July 2023 a particular bit of rock near Toronto was chosen as the marker of the new geological age, which they determined began about 1950.

[Here is a link to the blog article I posted about Rieger’s book on July 27:
https://theviewfromthisseat.blogspot.com/2023/07/livingdying-in-capitalocene.html]

Joerg Rieger, professor of theology at Vanderbilt, is using a new term, however. Rather than Anthropocene, he thinks Capitalocene is a better term and should be used instead. That new term was coined by Jason W. Moore, an environmental historian, in a book published in 2015, although he used the term prior to that.

Rieger is a professor of theology at Vanderbilt University. He was born in Germany on August 3, 1963. An ordained Methodist minister, Rieger had already authored/edited 20 books when he joined the faculty at Vanderbilt in 2016.

As I began working on this review, I asked GPT chat for help. Here is how they described Rieger’s book: Theology in the Capitalocene by Joerg Rieger is an important and thought-provoking book that offers a critical examination of the intersection of theology and capitalism in the context of the Anthropocene era.”

In the Introduction of his book, Rieger refers to the Capitalocene as “the geological age when the maximization of economic profit has made it to the center stage not only in the United States but all over the globe and dominates whatever other ages have been proclaimed, including the Anthropocene.” In the age of the Capitalocene, the economic interests of a small and privileged group of humans rule both people and the planet.” So as a theologian, the author sets out to ferret out the task of theology in the Capitalocene.

Rieger’s first chapter addresses “the life-threatening conditions of climate change.” He quickly asserts, “The role neoliberal capitalism has played in climate change is hard to dispute.” Accordingly, “In order to maximize profits for shareholders…environmental costs are pushed as low as possible.” In this way, “capitalism has transformed the globe: no part of the so-called natural environment is left unaffected.” And, sadly, Western Christianity has also “significantly contributed to the problem of ecological destruction.” Clearly writing from the standpoint of the “progressive Left,” a term he used repeatedly, Rieger is often critical of conservative Christianity. For example, he states that “neoliberal economics and conservative Christianity display certain affinities.” And he correctly notes that “much resistance against climate science is currently supported in the name of religion.”

Rieger explains that his second chapter “engages concerns that ecological destruction is tied to widespread disdain for material reality, as found in certain religious expressions and time-honored theologies that focus on the transcendent at the expense of the immanent.” There is much of importance in this chapter, but it defies brief explanation. So, just consider these words near the end of the chapter. The author asserts that “scholars of theology and religion will need to revisit fundamental questions like immanence and transcendence, religion and capitalist economics, and ecological catastrophes such as climate change that threaten the future of human life on the planet.”

The third chapter offers “an analysis of class from a theological perspective.” After a few introductory paragraphs, Rieger asserts, “The grand claim of this chapter is that the increasingly unequal distribution of power at work for the sake of profit extraction profoundly shapes all of life in the twenty-first century, both human and nonhuman.” So he deals with the basic issue of labor, stating that labor “must be considered a fundamental term in the study of theology and religion,” although that has been far from the case in most traditional theological study and writing. In this connection, Rieger writes of the necessity of recognizing intersectionality: “labor is a primary place of intersectionality where race, class, and gender come together, and it should not be too quickly separated into human and nonhuman. One of the most significant bonds is that what exploits people also exploits the planet.”

Chapter 4 addresses the touchy and seemingly impossible matter of solidarity and ways in which theology in the Capitalocene might reclaim it. Here he calls for action, not merely talk—and shares this pithy statement he once heard: “Those who think that a few courageous voices speaking truth to power are enough may find that at the end of the day, they may well have the truth, but those in power still have the power.” It is here that the author differentiates privilege and power. White, male, cisgender people have considerable privilege in contemporary American society, but little power: they “rarely pose much of a threat to systemic forms of domination and oppression, let alone to the system of neoliberal global capitalism.”

Surprisingly, the conclusion deals primarily with the delicate issue of reparations for the enslavement of African Americans. Rieger notes that “ racism has always been related to matters of the economy and of class” but based on his observations elucidated in this book, he says that “an argument can be made that the common definition of racism as ‘prejudice and power’ needs to be expanded to something like ‘prejudice, power, and capital.’ Thus, as “religion and theology have been part of the problem of slavery, distorted labor relations, and ecological destruction from the very beginning,” religion and theology “also have been part of the struggle against oppression and exploitation from the beginning” and it must do even more in that regard.

There are other emphases interspersed throughout Rieger’s engaging book:

* Emphasis on the importance, and neglect of serious consideration of, “unpaid reproductive labor” that is directly linked to gender discrimination. “Reproductive labor refers to the unpaid work involved in caring for and sustaining individuals and communities, such as child-rearing, housework, caregiving, and emotional support.” Further, “Rieger argues that unpaid reproductive labor, primarily performed by women, is essential for the functioning of society and the sustenance of capitalism. However, this labor is often undervalued and overlooked, both within economic systems and in theological discourses.” So, he contends that “by neglecting to seriously consider the significance of reproductive labor, we perpetuate social and economic inequalities.” [Quotes from Chat GPT]

* Emphasis on the distinction between power and privilege. This has ramifications that are often overlooked. (This topic is discussed most in Rieger’s fourth chapter as mentioned in the paragraph above summarizing that chapter.)

* Emphasis on class as a societal structure rather than “classism,” which is largely based on stereotypes. Rieger explains that class is a matter not of the matrix of difference but of the matrix of domination.” He, like many South American liberation theologians, takes Marx’s understanding of the basic nature of class struggle as an accurate sociological view of reality. Just as race is a social structure, so is class. Accordingly, as a social structure class “entails systemic inequalities that result from economic arrangements and power imbalances. These inequalities determine individuals’ social mobility, life chances, and access to resources such as education, healthcare, and employment.” So, “Rieger argues that addressing class requires analyzing and challenging the underlying structural factors that perpetuate these inequalities.” [These quoted words are also from Chat GPT]

* Emphasis on “deep solidarity.” I have long thought that solidarity is something that we who are privileged, to whatever degree, can choose out of loving concern to be allies of those who are “underprivileged.” And while there may be reason to retain some of that emphasis, Rieger stresses that solidarity is a fact that needs to be accepted and worked with rather than something that is chosen in an over/under relationship. We are all a part of the human race and a part of one physical world. That is the “solidarity” that must be recognized: all human and non-human life are in the same great ship being assailed by the same ecological crisis.

My main criticism of Rieger’s book is his apparent belief that the serious ecological predicament facing the world today is a problem that can be solved. His position contrasts with what I have written over the past eighteen months about overshoot and the collapse of civilization.

Most scholars who are currently university professors and embrace deep ecological concerns hold the same position that Rieger does. Upton Sinclair’s words spoken in the 1930s are still quite relevant and true today: “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”

I can certainly understand why one in Rieger’s position would not want to publicly talk about the possible “end of the world as we know it” in a decade or two. If they believed that to be true, most high school students would likely decide that there would be no use going to college.

Rieger does show considerable compassion for the people who are suffering now because of capitalism as well as for the natural world that is being ravaged by the forces of capitalism, and I appreciate that concern.

Still, there needs to be more awareness that we who are now living in the Capitalocene era will soon be seeing massive numbers of people (and non-human life) dying in this present age because of the ever-expanding predicament produced by capitalism.