Dear Patrick and Yoshie,
There is a debate over real differences. David Harvey wants to uncouple questions of ecoscarcity, sustainable development, etc. from environmental justice issues. Monthly Review and Capitalism, Nature and Socialism have already put this debate on the front burner and I expect it to rage for months to come. I leave the LM tendency pretty much out of the picture, because they no longer describe themselves as Marxist. James has over a decade of residual Marxist erudition that he deploys in the debate here, but his magazine does not quote Marx on any of these questions.
But within Marxism, there are plenty of differences that have to be aired out. What I find regrettable is that there was a tendency to keep this discussion bottled up over the past 3 years. Whenever Harvey spoke at the Brecht Forum, he tended to mute his differences with Foster, O'Connor, et al.
It is not just Harvey that we are talking about by the way. I have heard from reliable sources that Cronon's book "Nature's Metropolis: Chicago and the Great West" has set off sharp debates at CNS. Cronon, like Harvey, argues that Chicago is an "ecosystem", with stockyards and all. Last night I was reading Harvey's claim that NYC is an "ecosystem," which he said would startle most greens. It certainly startled me. If NYC is "ecological," then the term has no meaning. NYC is in an advanced state of ecological crisis involving waste disposal, water treatment, communicable diseases, automobile traffic. To call it an "ecosystem" is practically Orwellian. The whole meaning of ecology is to sustain a balance between nature and society. The whole point of Marx's discussion of agriculture in V.3 of Capital is that such a balance does not exist.
Yes, David Harvey is one of the "good guys." His work on the spatial dimensions of capital are first-rate. The problem is that the red-green synthesis must be achieved or else socialism is a doomed project. If we can not address and resolve on at least a theoretical basis questions of global warming, etc., we are irrelevant. Harvey's answer is to say that global warming is practically a non-issue for Marxists. Let's work on environmental justice issues exclusively. If the bourgeoisie is preoccupied with global warming, we don't want to end up in their camp. This is a sectarian mistake and has to be fought.
Louis Proyect
(http://www.panix.com/~lnp3/marxism.html)