A new contemporary fascism is on the march in the world, different from twentieth-century: the term “eco-fascism” has been introduced to describe a new wave of ecological extremism that risk becoming a reality as we get closer to the climate collapse. New generations are pushing for a radical change, pressuring governments to take actions, but because of their inability to respond with concrete action, international concerns have been directed to whether citizens might overthrow the government to install a green dictatorship, ending democracy.
From a Marxist perspective, the main problem is not climate disasters or lack of resilience against them, but a major structural feature of the world’s political economy: eco-Marxist scholars believe in the possibility that capitalism is generating an ecological crisis because of its tendency to “undermine the conditions of its own exploitation” (Cassegard, 2017). As such, they promote a future in which revolutionary global political change will be needed to counter the ecological crisis, discussing also the risk of green dictatorships as the sole response to solve the 21st century biggest challenge.
Climate change will eventually exacerbate resource pressures and scarcities, and will increase resource competition, and economic and social vulnerability: global governments have already started militarizing the environmental security sphere, being ready for potential conflicts that may derive from its degradation and lack of resources. But instead of spending national capital on arms, why aren’t they focusing on short and long-term plans to recover the environment and avoid an ecological and civil collapse?
Within this context, the idea of green dictatorships, or eco-authoritarianism emerged, justified with the shared belief of the inevitability and necessity of a strong central government to preserve the environment, criticising modern democracies for their inefficiency in protecting citizens and for ignoring their voices. On the contrary, the election of a green dictator will ensure a centralized government, not lost in debates or in oppositions, that will enact environmental policies and strategies with immediate effect.
In relation to green dictators, the term eco-fascism has started to spread: its political manifesto is the believe that environmental protection requires authoritarian rule, strict social hierarchy, and sometimes even violence to remove those they see as threats to the environment. However, critiques have pointed out the contradictions, arguing that the rise of eco-fascists are not possible: for example, fascism’s practices cultural homogenization are inconsistent with an ecological approach in which diversity is central.
Eco-fascism is still fringe, but it could become more influential as climate change worsens. Potential risks include extremist attacks justified by environmental concerns, as peaceful protests have not worked, climate rebels might opt for violent actions. Or moreover, governments might use the climate crisis to justify authoritarian measures: China, for example, have enforced strict environmental policies that target specific ethnic groups, like the restrictions on Uyghur farming practices.
The real challenge is therefore ensuring that climate action remains democratic, inclusive, and just, rather than being co-opted by authoritarian and extremist ideologies: democracies need to show their willingness to listen to citizens, their strength in taking decisions, and their power in shifting this crisis. But in case democracies will continue failing, the risk of green dictatorships are very high.
By The European Institute for International Relations
