"Where ‘mitigation’/‘convergence’ aligns with a symptom-treatment approach brought about by the management of distinct spheres, ‘adaptation’/‘polycrisis’ moves towards a holistic, ecological perspective that emphasizes how those spheres interact."
This is a very attractive idea, but how do we prevent the terminology from being co-opted as other terminologies have before?
We need to think of terms like 'polycrisis' as having a similar semantics to the medical conception of a 'crisis' - it *may* end badly, but it can also be the turning point, after which it is possible that things will get better. And the logic of a particular polycrisis should thus be analysed for suitable levers.
Of course. the answer is 'capitalism'. The driver of the polycrisis, that is, not the level that will fix it.
"Where ‘mitigation’/‘convergence’ aligns with a symptom-treatment approach brought about by the management of distinct spheres, ‘adaptation’/‘polycrisis’ moves towards a holistic, ecological perspective that emphasizes how those spheres interact."
This is a very attractive idea, but how do we prevent the terminology from being co-opted as other terminologies have before?
We need to think of terms like 'polycrisis' as having a similar semantics to the medical conception of a 'crisis' - it *may* end badly, but it can also be the turning point, after which it is possible that things will get better. And the logic of a particular polycrisis should thus be analysed for suitable levers.
Of course. the answer is 'capitalism'. The driver of the polycrisis, that is, not the level that will fix it.