What do you think?
Rate this book
Natural Causes: Essays in Ecological Marxism
Economic growth since the Industrial Revolution has been achieved at great cost both to the natural environment and to the autonomy of communities. What can a Marxist perspective contribute to understanding this disturbing legacy, and mitigating its impact on future generations? Renowned social theorist James O'Connor shows how the policies and imperatives of business and government influence--and are influenced by--environmental and social change. Probing the relationship between economy, nature, and society, O'Connor argues that environmental and social crises pose a growing threat to capitalism itself. These illuminating essays and case studies demonstrate the power of ecological Marxist analysis for understanding our diverse environmental and social history, for grounding economic behavior in the real world, and for formulating and evaluating new political strategies.
350 pages, Paperback
First published December 19, 1997
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
December 9, 2017
Worth a second read. Heavy academic text drawing from the prominent theory and discourse relative to economics - capital, nature, and social - and ecology.
Anyone interested in the why or why not of our current economic system, and or those who wish to gain insight to an alternative way of living as a society, based on equality and interdependence rather than exploitation and depletion.
O'Connor's arguments would be well applied today, except, technology and activist struggles have progressed in a way he could not have for-seen when writing the essays in this book, first published almost 20 years ago. Re-evaluating and perhaps re-envisioning a Preservation First! type movement, hinged upon the specific nature of the ecology- social and economically- of each micro-culture, could provide a stepping stone for change, beginning at the local democratic level.
I would urge readers of this book to read The Subsistence Perspective by Veronika Bennholdt-Thomasen & Maria Mies as well as articles in the CNS (Capitalism, Nature, Socialism) Journal , begun by O'Connor . If you're not sure about the book, or you would like to read more ecosocialist writing, the CNS Journal is worth checking out- many articles are on their website, free to read.
Anyone interested in the why or why not of our current economic system, and or those who wish to gain insight to an alternative way of living as a society, based on equality and interdependence rather than exploitation and depletion.
O'Connor's arguments would be well applied today, except, technology and activist struggles have progressed in a way he could not have for-seen when writing the essays in this book, first published almost 20 years ago. Re-evaluating and perhaps re-envisioning a Preservation First! type movement, hinged upon the specific nature of the ecology- social and economically- of each micro-culture, could provide a stepping stone for change, beginning at the local democratic level.
I would urge readers of this book to read The Subsistence Perspective by Veronika Bennholdt-Thomasen & Maria Mies as well as articles in the CNS (Capitalism, Nature, Socialism) Journal , begun by O'Connor . If you're not sure about the book, or you would like to read more ecosocialist writing, the CNS Journal is worth checking out- many articles are on their website, free to read.
August 13, 2025
"Natural Causes" is what happens when Marxism decides to take a gap year in the rainforest, read some Rachel Carson, and then come back convinced it can save the planet and the proletariat at the same time.
James O’Connor looked at Das Kapital and thought, “Not enough. Marx really needed a few more chapters on topsoil erosion.”
The result is a work that tries to hybridize ecological theory with Marxist economics—basically a crossbreed between The Communist Manifesto and Silent Spring, but with all the charm and digestibility of a concrete smoothie.
First off, the jargon. This isn’t just academic; it’s weaponized academic. Entire paragraphs read like someone swallowed a thesaurus, three sociology textbooks, and a Greenpeace newsletter, and then coughed them up in MLA format.
O’Connor doesn’t merely explain the relationship between capitalism and ecological crisis—he performs it through sentences that are themselves overproduced, unsustainable linguistic ecosystems. I half expected the book to come with a machete so I could hack my way through the terminology.
The footnotes, meanwhile, deserve their own anthology. They’re longer than some entire environmental essays I’ve read, sprawling down the page like kudzu.
It’s as if O’Connor wanted to make sure no one could ever accuse him of insufficient citation, even if it meant occasionally citing works that may or may not exist in this dimension. I reached one particularly long note and forgot what point the main text was making by the time I returned. I wouldn’t be surprised if some of the footnotes are just Marx’s ghost sighing.
And then there’s the central thesis: capitalism is fundamentally incompatible with ecological sustainability. Okay, fine. That’s not exactly a hot take anymore—it’s practically eco-leftist boilerplate—but O’Connor builds it into such an elaborate Rube Goldberg machine of dialectical reasoning that by the time you get to the “big reveal,” you’re exhausted and possibly dehydrated.
The book is structured like a mystery novel where you already know who the killer is (spoiler: capitalism), but you still have to sit through 300 pages of suspects describing their alibis in Marxist-economic code.
To his credit, O’Connor does occasionally land on passages of real insight—moments where you can see the kernel of a strong, clear argument before it’s smothered under another layer of theory mulch.
He understands, in a way that’s rare for economists, that ecosystems and economies aren’t parallel worlds—they’re tangled together like headphone wires in a pocket. But just when you think he’s about to roll out a lucid, reader-friendly argument, he swerves back into dense conceptual thickets.
Stylistically, it’s also a bit of a mood killer. Ecology as a subject lends itself to vivid imagery—lush forests, teeming coral reefs, the delicate balance of interdependent species—but O’Connor writes like he’s afraid of adjectives.
The prose is so dry it could be used as kindling in one of the forests he’s trying to save. Reading it feels like attending a political economy lecture that’s been going on for three hours with no coffee break.
And then there’s the audience problem. Who exactly is this book for? The average environmentalist will get lost in the Marxist economic labyrinth before they even hit chapter two. The average Marxist will be suspicious of all the botanical metaphors.
The average layperson will open it, see a sentence with six clauses, and decide to go watch a documentary instead. The only true audience is that rare academic unicorn who is equally obsessed with dialectical materialism and biodiversity—and who also enjoys the mental equivalent of running uphill in heavy boots.
In the end, Natural Causes is a book that wants to be both a rallying cry and a seminar syllabus, but somehow ends up as a really long homework assignment.
If you want to understand the link between capitalism and environmental collapse, there are clearer and more engaging routes—routes that won’t require a glossary, a background in Marxist theory, and possibly a GPS. But if you enjoy watching ideas get tangled like vines in a jungle, this book is your overgrown garden.
It’s the perfect gift for that friend who quotes Capital at parties, lectures you about carbon footprints, and still has three Amazon Prime boxes on their doorstep.
James O’Connor looked at Das Kapital and thought, “Not enough. Marx really needed a few more chapters on topsoil erosion.”
The result is a work that tries to hybridize ecological theory with Marxist economics—basically a crossbreed between The Communist Manifesto and Silent Spring, but with all the charm and digestibility of a concrete smoothie.
First off, the jargon. This isn’t just academic; it’s weaponized academic. Entire paragraphs read like someone swallowed a thesaurus, three sociology textbooks, and a Greenpeace newsletter, and then coughed them up in MLA format.
O’Connor doesn’t merely explain the relationship between capitalism and ecological crisis—he performs it through sentences that are themselves overproduced, unsustainable linguistic ecosystems. I half expected the book to come with a machete so I could hack my way through the terminology.
The footnotes, meanwhile, deserve their own anthology. They’re longer than some entire environmental essays I’ve read, sprawling down the page like kudzu.
It’s as if O’Connor wanted to make sure no one could ever accuse him of insufficient citation, even if it meant occasionally citing works that may or may not exist in this dimension. I reached one particularly long note and forgot what point the main text was making by the time I returned. I wouldn’t be surprised if some of the footnotes are just Marx’s ghost sighing.
And then there’s the central thesis: capitalism is fundamentally incompatible with ecological sustainability. Okay, fine. That’s not exactly a hot take anymore—it’s practically eco-leftist boilerplate—but O’Connor builds it into such an elaborate Rube Goldberg machine of dialectical reasoning that by the time you get to the “big reveal,” you’re exhausted and possibly dehydrated.
The book is structured like a mystery novel where you already know who the killer is (spoiler: capitalism), but you still have to sit through 300 pages of suspects describing their alibis in Marxist-economic code.
To his credit, O’Connor does occasionally land on passages of real insight—moments where you can see the kernel of a strong, clear argument before it’s smothered under another layer of theory mulch.
He understands, in a way that’s rare for economists, that ecosystems and economies aren’t parallel worlds—they’re tangled together like headphone wires in a pocket. But just when you think he’s about to roll out a lucid, reader-friendly argument, he swerves back into dense conceptual thickets.
Stylistically, it’s also a bit of a mood killer. Ecology as a subject lends itself to vivid imagery—lush forests, teeming coral reefs, the delicate balance of interdependent species—but O’Connor writes like he’s afraid of adjectives.
The prose is so dry it could be used as kindling in one of the forests he’s trying to save. Reading it feels like attending a political economy lecture that’s been going on for three hours with no coffee break.
And then there’s the audience problem. Who exactly is this book for? The average environmentalist will get lost in the Marxist economic labyrinth before they even hit chapter two. The average Marxist will be suspicious of all the botanical metaphors.
The average layperson will open it, see a sentence with six clauses, and decide to go watch a documentary instead. The only true audience is that rare academic unicorn who is equally obsessed with dialectical materialism and biodiversity—and who also enjoys the mental equivalent of running uphill in heavy boots.
In the end, Natural Causes is a book that wants to be both a rallying cry and a seminar syllabus, but somehow ends up as a really long homework assignment.
If you want to understand the link between capitalism and environmental collapse, there are clearer and more engaging routes—routes that won’t require a glossary, a background in Marxist theory, and possibly a GPS. But if you enjoy watching ideas get tangled like vines in a jungle, this book is your overgrown garden.
It’s the perfect gift for that friend who quotes Capital at parties, lectures you about carbon footprints, and still has three Amazon Prime boxes on their doorstep.
July 4, 2008
my first attempt to read anything about ecologist marxism, red/green politics. It was very dense but very imformative and well thought out. the author even adress many of the problems inherant in marzism itelf and offers solutions to these isuues. He even recognizes that social movements are just as important as economic ones, which is a suprise for a Marxist.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews