Capital Logic and Ecological Crisis

Capital Logic and Ecological Crisis Chen Xueming must thoroughly study the relationship between ecology and capital. Capital, because of its "utility principle", must view and understand nature in the sense of usefulness and make it a tool; capital because of its "proliferation principle" determines that its use and destruction of nature is endless. Capital is anti-ecological according to its nature. The ecological problems that have arisen in the end are still a matter of social system. Of course, while fully understanding the relationship between capital and ecology is the opposite, it is also necessary to analyze the complexity of the relationship between the two. Maintain a reasonable tension between limiting and capitalizing the logic, and minimize the damage to the natural environment in the process of maximizing profits.

More than half a century ago, a group of philosophers, natural scientists and social scientists gathered in Rome and set up a period of more than half a century. Throughout the world today, human beings have not taken the predicament of environmental pollution and ecological destruction. Come out, and this pollution and destruction is still intensifying in some areas. The harsh reality forces people to think: What is the reason for human beings to become more and more in an ecological crisis and unable to extricate themselves? In Marx's writings, we can find the correct answer. Marx wants us to fight against capitalism, simply because it seems to him that this is a system that encourages some people to brutally exploit others and cause inequality between people. This is not entirely true. In Marx's view, there is another major reason for opposing capitalism. This is what he believes to be a system that encourages some people to exploit nature endlessly and to create confrontation between man and nature. The real world we face also ruthlessly tells people that as long as capital logic occupies a dominant position, as long as it is produced for maximum profit, it is impossible to fundamentally eliminate the ecological crisis. To truly understand the root causes of the ecological crisis and find a way out of this crisis, we must thoroughly study the ecology and this article is a major project of the National Social Science Fund, "Study on the Socialist Road with Chinese Characteristics and the Development of Human Civilization" (Project Approval Number) 11ZD065), the phased achievement of the major project of the Ministry of Education's Key Research Base of Philosophy and Social Sciences, "Study on the Ways of Man's Existence by Western Marxist Theorists" (Project Approval No. 11JJD710001).

The relationship between capital logic and ecological crisis capital. This paper mainly discusses the relevant theories of Marx and also uses some research results of Western ecological Marxism to explore this issue.

I. Principles of Utility of Capital and Ecology Opposition Marx once made a clear statement about "capital": "Capital is not a thing, but a fixed, social, and production relationship of a certain historical social form." , but a social being, emphasizing that capital has the social nature, that is, it is the social relationship and social existence in a particular historical era. Since capital came to the world, especially when it became modern. After the basic establishment of the modern society of the kernel, it has played a decisive role in human society, including the natural world. The nature of this role is precisely its social nature, that is, its basic property as a social being. Therefore, what kind of relationship does capital have with the ecological environment? To study the role of capital in the ecological environment, we must start by analyzing the basic attributes of capital as a social being.

A passage in Marx's "Economic Manuscripts of 1857 - 1858" reveals a major attribute of capital and analyzes the impact of this attribute on nature and the ecological environment: "If capital-based production, On the one hand, it creates universal industrial labor, that is, surplus labor, labor that creates value. On the other hand, it also creates a system that generally uses natural attributes and human attributes to create a system of universal usefulness, even science. The same material is the same as the spiritual attribute, and it is manifested as the embodiment of this universal useful system. In addition to the scope of production and exchange in this society, there is nothing more to behave as a higher self. Reasonable things. Therefore, only capital creates bourgeois society and creates the universal possession of members of society and nature. This creates a great civilized role of capital; it creates such a social stage. Compared with this social stage, all previous social stages are only manifested as human endemic Exhibition and worship of nature. Only in the capitalist system, nature is truly the object of man, truly useful; it is no longer considered to be a self-contained force; and the theoretical understanding of the law of independence in nature is manifested itself as Oh, the purpose is to make the natural world (whether as a consumer goods or as a means of production) subordinate to human needs. Capital according to this trend of its own, it must overcome the phenomenon of deifying the nature, overcoming the within a certain limit. Responsible to meet existing needs and repeat the old lifestyle, but also to overcome national boundaries and national prejudice. Capital destroys all this and makes it revolutionize, destroying all obstacles to the development of productive forces, expanding needs, diversifying production, and utilizing And the exchange of natural forces and spiritual power restrictions." 2 Marx's passage is extremely rich, limited to the subject of this article, here are two points to point out: First, the most important attribute of capital is to turn everything into A useful system, as long as capital is the basic principle of the times, then everything in the world is It is now the “informator” of this universal useful system. That is to say, all beings must be attached to capital, and they can only defend their existence in front of the capital court. In this regard, we can call it the “utility principle” of capital. Second, the influence of the basic attributes of capital on the natural world is to make it a tool. Since capital always treats and understands all beings in the sense of usefulness, of course, it must also view and understand nature in the sense of usefulness. Nature can only express its existence in the abstract form of capital. Thus, nature It has lost the "sense of sensibility." It is only a concrete manifestation of usefulness. To be precise, it is only a link on the universal utility relationship network consisting of capital as the core. If human beings have a cult of the natural world before capital comes to the world, then since then, nature has become "the object of being truly human" and "the real useful thing". It is no longer considered to be a kind of "self." For the power." Although after the principle that capital has become the era, people are constantly exploring the theoretical understanding of the law of the independence of nature, but its purpose is nothing more than to make it better to "subject to the needs of human beings", that is, to better perform the functions of the tools.

On another occasion, Marx expressed this role of the “principle of utility” of nature as a “naturally obeying the field of production”. 1 Capital is driven by its inherent utility principle to put “pure nature” "It is increasingly becoming a humanized nature." Indeed, as Marx said, under the impetus of capital, human beings are keen on the development of nature, and the essence of this development is to "use new squares to process natural objects so that Give them a new use value of "2" to explore the earth from all aspects, in order to discover new useful objects and new use properties of the original objects. "3 Marx said the capital's "utility principle" also in the sense The utility of the "money principle", which can be said to be capital, is to make money in the eyes of capital. Capital connects everything in the world with money, turning the world's cuts into machines that can make money. If so, understand capital. The principle of utility, then its relationship with nature is to try to turn it into a commodity, into a machine to make money, or more precisely, to transform nature

Marx pointed out that the deprivation of the value of the whole world by the money determined by the principle of the utility of capital is not only the deprivation of the value of the human world, but also the deprivation of the value of the natural world. We not only see a naked cash transaction between people, "human dignity becomes exchange value", but also sees that between man and nature has also become a relationship between money and utilization, nature Dignity has also become an exchange value. Under the rule of capital, with the deprivation of value in the world of commodity materialization, that is, as the exchange value of goods itself has gained a position of transcendence, the world of transcendental value will also decline. In fact, this The process is not only achieved through the deprivation of the value of the human world, but also from the deprivation of the value of nature. That is to say, not only the human capital logic and the ecological crisis, the value of life is forced to be placed on the capital market to consider And the value of nature has also been tested in the capital market. The transcendence of value is not only killed by the questioning of "how much is your worth", but also regrettably, we have previously discussed the principle of utility of capital. When the influence of the principle of money is concerned, it is more important to criticize the capitalist society. As long as you read this book carefully, it is not difficult to see that the horse When thinking about the alienation of labor, it is always closely related to the concept of natural alienation. The basic idea of ​​Marx is that capital causes serious alienation of human beings, and the alienation of human beings is directly linked not only to the alienation of labor, but also There is also natural alienation. In Marx's view, land alienation is a typical manifestation of natural alienation. Marx pointed out: "Land is also like a human being, and it must fall to the level of buying and selling value. ''1 This shows that natural alienation is caused by man, specifically by the rule of capital and money. “As humans increasingly control nature, individuals seem to be increasingly slaves to others or to slaves of their own despicable behavior.” 2 Marx is not here in an abstract sense to say that these people are driven by the principles of utility and money. Constantly creating "human alienation" and "natural alienation", and "natural alienation" has intensified "human alienation." The influence of capital on human alienation determined by the principle of capital utility and the principle of money is directly carried out on the one hand, that is, directly on people; on the other hand, it is indirectly, that is, realized by natural alienation.

Second, the principle of the proliferation of capital and ecological opposition The principle of the utility of capital makes the loss of its own value of nature become a simple tool, and the principle of utility is linked to the principle of the proliferation of capital, and this tool of nature It has become more and more serious. Capital pursues infinite proliferation, so its use of nature is endless. To study the opposition between capital and ecology, we must not only explore the impact of the principle of the utility of capital on the natural world, but also the consequences of the principle of the proliferation of capital on the natural world.

Capital and proliferation are almost synonymous. It can be said that capital is proliferation. The owners of capital all take the acquisition of more profits and surplus value as the fundamental starting point of production, which determines the capital-centered production, that is, the trend of capitalist production has an infinite expansion. Engels believes that pursuing the greatest degree of profit is the sole driving force and purpose of capitalist production. “As long as production is not limited by the most needy life of the oppressed, the interests of the ruling class will become the driving force of production. This is most fully demonstrated in the capitalist producers that are now dominant in Western Europe. The capitalists who produce and exchange can only care about the most direct benefits of their actions. Not only that, but even the benefits are completely relegated to the secondary role of the products manufactured or exchanged. The profit that can be obtained at the time of sale becomes the only motivation." The contradiction mentioned in the thinking is the infinite and limited contradiction. The expansion of capital is always hindered by the inherent restrictions, but we can not understand this as a certain degree of capital expansion will be "appropriate" and no longer expand, but that capital expansion to a certain point to self-destruction due to balance destruction. Rosa Luxemburg wrote a very influential book at the beginning of the 20th century, entitled "Capital Accumulation", criticizing the recognition and appreciation of the second international revisionists for the infinite accumulation of capitalism. She emphasized the capital of capital at the time. It is impossible to accumulate infinitely in a social society. Here, we cannot misunderstand Rosa Luxemburg's view that capital can change its infinite accumulation of nature. She wants to show that in the capitalist society of the time, although capital pursues infinite accumulation according to its nature, it is not like Second, the international revisionism believes that capital can truly achieve unlimited accumulation, so that it can maintain a strong vitality forever, but this accumulation is limited by various conditions, leading to the inevitable decline of capitalism.

It must be pointed out that this constant pursuit of proliferation of capital and the infinite expansion of people's consumption are mutually adaptive. In order for the capitalists to proliferate their own capital, they must produce a large number of commodities. Only when such large quantities of goods are sold for consumption, can the capital of the capitalists proliferate and the capitalists can acquire profit. Operators of capitalist production use various means to induce consumers to consume consumer goods that they actually do not really need, and the more they consume, the better. Consumers in this state are not spending to satisfy their real needs, but just act as a consumer machine to consume for consumption. Mass production is a departure from people's real needs, and mass consumption is also a departure from people's real needs. Marx once made a profound disclosure of the actions of capital to achieve the purpose of self-proliferation through the comprehensive material desires of people. He summarized this behavior mainly as: "The first is to expand the existing consumption; the second is to extend the existing consumption to a larger scope in order to create new needs; and third, to require the production of new Need, discover and create new use value.”3 In Marx’s view, the infinite expansion of capitalist production brought about by the principle of the proliferation of capital is bound to be the infinite expansion of consumption, mass production and mass consumption. Closely connected.

The proliferation of capital is based on the endless use of natural resources and the endless dumping of waste into nature. Many resources in nature are non-renewable, and the space in which nature can accept waste and garbage is limited. It will inevitably bring about sharp contradictions between capital logic and ecological crisis between the infinite expansion of capitalist production and consumption and the carrying capacity of nature. In the face of some people in the process of economic activities, so disregarding the ecological environment, the people’s voices of protecting the ecological environment are ignored. Innocent and kind people are always puzzling, but in fact, just think about it. Capital is the embodiment of greed and fear, and we all understand it. If the main body of economic operation is capital, then how does this form of economic operation take into account the protection of the ecological environment? The capitalists are that they can only be driven by one principle. This is to maximize the benefits of capital. In this case, how? They can be expected to protect the ecological environment. As long as this social commodity fetishism, currency fetishism, and capital fetishism prevail, it is impossible to achieve environmental protection.

The first report of the Rome Club dedicated to the "human dilemma" in the 1970s to the international community was called "The Limits of Growth". The report clearly stated that because "the earth is limited, the closer human activity is to the support of the earth. The limit of the ability of an activity, the trade-off of factors that cannot be considered at the same time, requires that it become more obvious and impossible to solve. 1 Therefore, growth has a "limit." The limited nature of the carrying capacity of nature listed in the report, in addition to the fact that “the number of people the earth can support is limited” is “the natural resources on the earth are limited” and “the ability of the earth ecosystem to maintain its own balance” It is limited." In particular, the report points out that as capital continues to pursue proliferation, the parameters of “non-renewable resource consumption” and “environmental pollution” that determine human destiny are growing exponentially. This fully shows that the mass production, mass consumption and mass abandonment of capitalism are leading to a global ecological crisis. It can be seen that for profit and continuous proliferation, capital is unscrupulous and daring.

Capitalism is a self-expansion system of economic development. Capitalism must continue to expand, and nature cannot expand itself accordingly. There is bound to be a contradiction between this "required expansion" and "restricted expansion", which is actually the opposition between capital and ecology. In the past, people often paid more attention to the analysis of the contradiction between the "first contradiction" of capitalism, that is, the infinite expansion of capitalist production and the relative shrinkage of the demanding ability of the working people. In fact, Marx still has capital. The "second contradiction" ofism is the discussion of the contradiction between the infinite expansion of capitalist production and the limited carrying capacity of nature. People often value "exchange value", but if we also value "use value" and let "use value" and "exchange value" sit on the same level, then what we present is not only "the first contradiction of capitalism", but also There is "the second contradiction of capitalism"

Today, when we explore the root causes of the ecological crisis, we must firmly hold on to the principle of capital proliferation. The capitalists are arrogant about profits. Although this is not always good for some people, it is really dissatisfied. This is the way to reveal the essence of the problem. We cannot avoid the essence of the problem. This is what Marx said about the accumulation of capital without any restrictions. As long as we do not deliberately evade, the facts are clearly placed before us: under the "fatal" impact of the infinite accumulation of capital, "the natural world is only seen as a 1 Dennis Midos, etc.: "Growth The Limit Roman Club Report on Human Dilemma, translated by Li Baoheng, Changchun: Jilin People's Publishing House, 1997, p. 56.

The tool of social rule "the natural accumulation of capital will inevitably lead to its enforcement of the strategy of destroying the earth.

As long as capitalism exists for one day, there is always the danger that its “destructive impulse” will turn into “destructive out of control”, which is “the ultimate fate of capitalism”. People are deeply impressed by Hobbes’s description of capitalism as “a war against all people”. The question is whether we further realize that this kind of war against all people "will inevitably bring about an all-out war against nature." As capital expands, there will always be some people who rise up against this expansion. Set obstacles. But whenever this happens, capital's answer is always more intensive to develop natural resources in a new way. This is the "logistics of profit." From this point of view, if it is determined to "capital Logic "interprets, then it should be included not only in the exploitation of human beings, but also in the destruction of nature.

3. The two attributes of the utility principle and the principle of proliferation of ecological crisis capital derived from the capitalist system are actually the basic attributes of capitalist society. The current ecological problems are, in the final analysis, a social system problem, that is, a capitalist system that pursues capital logic. The roots of ecological problems in today's capitalist society must be traced back to the capitalist social system.

Whether the process of human civilization and life on earth is sustainable depends not on whether these terrible developments can slow down, but on whether this trend can be reversed. The problem is that observing the historical process of the development of capitalism, we can’t find any power in itself to take up this responsibility. On the contrary, all we can see is that if this system is allowed to develop naturally, then it will Going to the point where a World Bank’s chief economist has clearly stated “to let them (referring to the people in the developing world) to eat pollution”. 1 This means that the capitalist system creates ecological damage and environmental pollution. It cannot reverse this trend of destruction and pollution. What it can do is to transfer such damage and pollution to the developing countries as much as possible.

Ecological crisis is the inherent crisis of capitalist society, and ecological contradiction is the inherent contradiction of capitalist society.

Ecological crisis and ecological contradiction are themselves evidence of the alienation nature of capitalist society. Whether it is an economic crisis or an ecological crisis, Marx regards it as a capitalist society. That is to say, Marx regards these crises as many people will oppose it, but many people are suspicious about whether the ecological crisis is also linked to the capitalist system. .

In fact, the "ecological contradiction" is the inherent contradiction of capitalism not only revealed by Marx in the same year, but also confirmed by the reality of today's society.

Today, we must be clear that it is not the people themselves, but the social system and production methods in which people are located constitute the enemy of capital logic and ecological crisis environment. “It is the way in which the humans intervene in nature under the capitalist system is the cause of the massive land degradation and the resulting horrific consequences.” 'The capitalist mode of production brings poverty, and poverty leads to the environment. Degeneration. Marx's research on nature and the environment makes us realize that environmental degradation is the dynamic mechanism of material production, and at the same time, we realize that people's wrong attitude towards the environment is specifically formed in the development of capitalism. It is precisely the objectification of capitalism that enables the natural environment and its products to be realized through commodification, which has caused people to breed an attitude far from nature. Many people today are doing "dreams of green capitalism", and Marxism is about nature and The study of the environment, the study of the ecological contradiction of capitalism, and the study of the externalization of costs in capitalist society show that this can only be a kind of "nightmare". Capitalism is simply impossible to become "green capitalism". of.

Despite all sorts of crises in today’s capitalist society, all of these crises involve ecological issues. If we leave the ecological factor, we cannot truly grasp the various crises of capitalist society. Although some ecological Marxists believe that “the crisis of capitalism is essentially an ecological crisis”, 2 but it is somewhat certain that the various crises of capitalist society are “intensified by the ecological crisis.” The relationship between over-accumulation crisis, reproduction crisis and ecological crisis in capitalist society is clear. It is well known that there is a crisis of excessive accumulation in capitalist society, and whether this crisis can be curbed depends on whether it can effectively organize reproduction. So, is it possible that capitalist society can effectively organize reproduction? The reason is that, in terms of the re-production of capitalism, the first problem is how to avoid excessive accumulation of crisis, and it often becomes wasteful by making reproduction more and more On the other hand, capitalist reproduction is increasingly trapped in such a "vicious circle": in order to solve the problem of increasingly exhausted resources, it takes various extreme measures in an attempt to overcome it by further expanding production. This problem, and the products formed by the expansion of production It has been consumed by the industry itself, and in fact, nothing has been added in terms of final consumption. The French ecological Marxist Gaoz once summed up the relationship between these three kinds of crises: "What we are facing is typical. The over-accumulated crisis, which was exacerbated by the re-production crisis, is ultimately rooted in the scarcity of natural resources. 3 Of course, in the various crises of today's capitalist society, the most direct relationship with ecological factors is the economic crisis. The inseparable internal connection between the two shows that the economic crisis will inevitably lead to an ecological crisis, and on the other hand, the ecological crisis will definitely trigger an economic crisis. The so-called economic crisis, accompanied by excessive competition, efficiency obsessiveness and cost reduction, will inevitably strengthen the economic and physical oppression of workers, increase the intensity of externalization of costs, and increase the degree of environmental degradation. Accompanied by the ecological crisis is the increasing number of ecological Marxists who can hold this view, including the French scholar Goz, the British scholar Pepper, the American scholar Lewes, Foster, O'Connor and so on.

Source costs, congestion costs, and high rents all contribute to the shortage of raw materials, which in turn can cause a sharp drop in inflation and profits. Since there is an ecological crisis, there will be an environmental protection movement, that is, a struggle to protect production conditions, and the environmental protection movement will bring many unintended consequences, such as limiting the flexibility and freedom of capital, and rising costs. Of course, it will endanger the accumulation of capitalism.

Since the ecological crisis is an intrinsic and fundamental crisis in capitalist society, and this crisis is closely related to the system itself, then do not expect to rely on Western capitalist politicians to lead the global people out of this crisis. Some ecological Marxists are convincing by analyzing the Bush administration’s attitude toward the Kyoto Protocol and by observing the twists and turns of several “global summits” aimed at solving environmental problems.

As Foster pointed out, although the "Kyoto Protocol" is only a small step in curbing global warming, and "this small step" is "very gentle", "more only has a symbol "The meaning", but that is "this small step" has also been ruthlessly defeated. Of course, it was the opposition and obstruction of the Bush administration of the United States that led to failure. Foster examined in detail the development of the Kyoto Protocol and the Bush administration's opposition to the Kyoto Protocol, and his conclusions are irrefutable. Let us take a look at the world today. Greenhouse gases are constantly being discharged into the atmosphere every day. Undoubtedly, this has and will continue to pose a serious threat to the survival of all life on Earth. To survive, mankind must address the issue of greenhouse gas emissions as its most urgent task. Large amounts of greenhouse gases are emitted by large companies in industries such as automobiles that consume fossil fuels. As long as these enterprises governed by the principle of profit exist, they must accumulate capital quickly, and they must do so. Behind these large enterprises are “protective umbrellas”. This is the capitalist system that represents the interests of these enterprise groups. The nature of the capitalist system determines that it is impossible to change the development structure of capital accumulation in order to protect the environment, and it is impossible to make its own original development. The road has reversed. In order to maintain the interests of these enterprises, the capitalist system “indulges” these enterprises to destroy the environment and is executed by their agents.

Then, who is the general agent of the capitalist system? That is the Bush administration. As the general representative and chief executive of the capitalist system, the Bush administration is opposed to the Kyoto Protocol, which aims to protect the ecological environment.

As long as today's capitalist world is dominated by bourgeois politicians like the Bush administration, even if a provision similar to the "Kyoto Protocol" is enacted, it will not be implemented. This is why the Bush administration is doing everything possible to stop the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol. Good people can't see this, so they have hopes for the Bush administration again and again. Foster said well: "Washington's refusal to approve the Kyoto Protocol, which controls emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that affect global warming, is a sign of the country's ecological imperialism in the capitalist world economic center. '1 People, especially some environments The protection organization once had high hopes for the "Rio de Janeiro Summit", but the factual table of capital logic and ecological crisis, the high hopes for this meeting, how blind it is to generate optimism. The reason is that these environmental protection organizations "to a large extent I did not seriously consider how powerful the economic forces opposed to them are, nor how much the capitalist economic system has had an impact on the acceleration of environmental degradation.” 1 Let’s listen to George Bush’s appointment as President of the United States. In the speech at the meeting, in fact, when most of the participants hoped that the meeting would be successful with a positive attitude, he sang a counter-tune at the meeting, and his voice was so uncoordinated with the tone of the whole meeting. Don't think that George Bush made such a speech at this meeting, just for his re-election. Slightly, the most fundamental thing is to realize that his speech does show the basic attitude of the United States on environmental costs and environmental control issues. His speech has clearly told people that any environmental protection measures that are not conducive to the interests of US capital will be ignored. It has been implemented. Compared with the first "Earth Summit", the "Rio de Janeiro Summit", the mood of the representative of the "Earth Summit" held in Johannesburg, South Africa has changed a lot," Rio de Janeiro's hope gave way. The frustration in Johannesburg. It is understandable that the people attending the meeting entered the venue with frustration. At that time, people actually felt that human beings actually retreat on environmental issues and want to achieve any environmental protection. The agreement was extremely difficult. I still look at the attitude of the then US President George W. Bush to the Johannesburg Conference. George Bush refused to attend the meeting and dismissed the meeting. Some representatives attending the meeting are fierce for the ecological future of the world. When the debate was over, the George Bush administration was busy with what was in full swing. Preparing to launch the Iraq war. The real purpose of this war is to control oil, and "eliminating weapons of mass destruction" is just an excuse. It should be said that we can make predictions like these ecological Marxists, and the ecological environment is getting worse. After all, it is the fact that every "Earth person" can feel, so people will hold the 3rd and 4th "Earth Summit". "The topic of environmental justice will become a frequent topic." However, even this The meetings have been held again and again, and it is impossible to produce ideal results. The reason is very simple: people can't make fundamental restrictions on the accumulation of capitalism today, capital is still so lawless, or it is so arbitrary to carry out the index. Expansion

4. Eliminating the ecological fantasy based on morality is clearly the ecological crisis brought by capital logic. It is impossible to fundamentally eliminate the ecological crisis without touching the capitalist system. However, people still always hope to maintain the logic of capital. Under the premise of hurting the capitalist system, we will find a way out of the ecological crisis. As a result, there have been various fantasies to eliminate the ecological crisis. Without eliminating such illusions, it is impossible to focus people's attention on the struggle with capital logic and the capitalist system. Of course, it is impossible to realize the good wishes of eliminating ecological crisis and building ecological civilization.

We often see that in the environmental protection movement, some people have issued a strong appeal to launch a “moral revolution that integrates ecological values ​​and culture”. They pin their hopes for solving the ecological crisis on moral reform and establishing some kind of ecological ethics. The essence of the so-called "green thinking" that is widely popular in the West is this demand for a new ecological morality. This kind of appeal to people's ecological ideology of the world's ideological concepts and moral literacy, ignoring the ecological crisis is the current capitalist core system, the objective existence of unimpeded capital logic in the current society. As Foster pointed out, on the surface, the destruction of the environment is directly related to the immoral notion of the ordinary people to the environment. However, the immorality of ordinary people is actually "higher immorality". That is, the Western bourgeois values ​​that "make money a sign of success" are not dominated by their natural emphasis on money, but that "higher immorality" causes them to care too little about the environment, not that they themselves become more Greed, but "higher immorality" urges them to have no other life ideals to control their greed desires. In this case, if we want to carry out a moral revolution in order to protect the environment, then we should point the revolutionary spearhead to the "higher immorality." Since hidden behind this "higher immorality" is capital logic and capitalist mode of production, the point of the revolutionary spearhead to the "higher immorality" is to point to capital logic and capitalist mode of production. “从环境的角度来看，我们除了抵制这种生产方式之外别无选择。”①另一需要消除的生态幻想是企图单纯通过将经济“非物质化”（dematenaUzation）来解决环境问题。目前西方生态理论中出现频率非常高的“非物质化”概念，实际上指的就是提高能源的使用效率，减少向环境倾倒废料的数量，减少“每单位货币GDP增长对环境的影响”。力主经济“非物质化”的环境保护主义者向我们展示了一幅使经济发展与那种建立在利用能源和倾倒废料基础之上的经济增长“脱钩”的美好图画。经济“非物质化”当然求之不得，问题在于如何实现这些经济“非物质化”的倡导者是在不触动资本逻辑的前提下来谈论所谓的经济“非物质化”的，从而他们的主张同样成了一种天真的幻想。我们同样可以这样提出问题：不改变资本主义以利润为中心的生产方式，能不断地减少每单位GDP增长对环境的影响吗能把资本主义经济变为低碳经济吗其答案当然是不言而喻的。一些人所说的当今的资本主义经济正与那种“高能源投入、高废料产出”的经济模式逐步“脱钩”，与事实不相符合。他们把目光仅仅停留在资本主义世界GDP与“物质外流”的比率有所下降这表面现象上。他们为什么不正视TGDP与“物质外流”的比率有所下降的同时，人均排放废料却大大增加这一更能反映问题本质的生态现状事实无情地摆在我们面前，从绝对量来看，能源的投入，即耗费量和排入环境的废料产出都在持续增加，资本主义世界的经济根本没有实现“非物质化”。原因何在昵其道理也不言而喻：实现“非物质化”是要有支撑的，而资本主义制度是不足以提供这样的支撑的。如前所述，资本主义制度是一种以利润为出发点的制度，而在崇拜利润的前提下怎么可能使经济的发展真正向“非物质化”方向发展昵退步说，即使资本逻辑与生态危机实现了资源利用率的某种提高，但是在利润至上原则的支配下，一当资源利用率提高，资本所有者必然想方设法促使经济规模不断扩大，而经济规模的不断扩大岂不又意味着对能源的耗费量和废料的产出量的大量增加吗这就是说，资本主义的利润至上原则使资源利用率的提高所带来的对能源的耗费量和废料的产出量的减少，非但不能“填补”经济规模的不断扩大所带来的对能源的耗费量和废料的产出量的增加，而且由于“增多减少”从总量看对能源的耗费量和废料的产出量又增加了许多。

再次要消除的生态幻想是企图单纯通过发展科学技术来解决环境问题。把解决环境问题的希望寄托于将经济“非物质化”，说到底是寄希望于科学技术的发展，因为经济的“非物质化”最终有赖于技术的创新和发展。面对当今人们依靠科学技术来解决环境问题的强烈呼声，我们有理由提出疑问：在现行的资本主义体制下，依靠新技术就能在实现经济扩张的同时又可防止环境的恶化吗英国经济学家WS杰文斯在一百多年前曾经写过一部题为《煤炭问题》的著作，他在书中论证说，提高自然资源的利用率，例如煤炭，只会增加而不会减少对这种资源的需求，这是由于效率的改进会导致生产规模的扩大。这就是所谓“杰文斯悖论”。一些生态马克思主义者常常用“杰文斯悖论”来说明在当今资本主义社会中，尽管由于技术的创新自然资源的利用率提高了，可对自然资源的需求量反而增加了这一现象。问题在于，为什么会出现这种现象昵杰文斯是不可能对此做出正确的回答的。让我们正视下述杰文斯不可能面对而我们必须面对的一个事实，这一事实涉及到资本主义制度对技术的基本态度：在追求财富和追求人类需求的满足之间，资本主义制度显然追求的是前者而不是后者，或者说它往往用对前者的追求来超越和消解对后者的追求。

这就意味着，资本主义不可能把满足人类基本需求，为人类提供必需的服务设施和生活资料，而是把创造越来越多的利润作为其进行商品生产的目的。资本主义必然在这一大前提下处置技术与积累的关系。也就是说，它必然是使技术服从积累，积累主宰技术。在这种情况下，也就是说，在技术受资本主义积累所支配的情况下，即使出现了有利于提高自然资源利用率的新技术，也不可能使这种技术得以实际运用，也不可能达到减少对自然资源使用量的效果。我们承认技术的改进有可能创造出更有效率的生产方式，但在资本主义条件下，这则成为1种“创造性的毁灭”。我们不是经常能看到资本主义积累的“残酷过程”，往往把新技术所蕴含的减少对自然的盘剥的可能性都作为障碍加以消解这样一种情景吗最后要消除的生态幻想是企图单纯通过把自然市场化、资本化来解决环境问题。

比起上述种种方法来，这一种方法确实更受资本主义统治者的欢迎。我们注意到最近几十年些经济学家不断地鼓吹要赋予自然以经济价值，更加充分地把环境纳入市场体系之中，据他们看来，这是解决所有的环境问题的一条有效途径。这些经济学家为解决环境问题所开出的药方简单地说就是：把自然市场化、资本化，“其整个逻辑就是将地球纳入资产负债表”①还是看看福斯特是如何看待这种企图通过将自然市场化、资本化来解决环境问题的思路的，他把此称为“建立在环境能够并应当成为自我调节的市场体系这一信念基础之上的乌托邦神话”②在他看来，正是在资本主义条件下资本积累的至上性决定了通过将自然的资本化来解决环境问题只是一种饮鸩止渴式的“乌托邦神话”资本主义的主要特征就在于，“它是一个自我扩张的价值体系，经济剩余价值的积累因为建立在掠夺性的开发和竞争法则的基础之上而赋予了力量，它必然要在越来越大的规模上进行”，而资本主义的这一个特征经常被以自然资本化为主要内容的“市场乌托邦观念”所忽视。③那些力主通过把自然资本化来解决环境问题的经济学家的悲哀就在于他们“很少研究由于经济持续增长带来的经济规模的不断扩大所给环境造成什么影响”。他们根本就不想面对“在维持生态系统与生物圈同维护资本主义所代表的快速无限的经济增长之间，存在着一种固有的冲突”这客观事实。他们居然把可持续发展归结为给“地球定价”，这实际上同“把经济扩张主义与自然同一而语”样荒唐。他们还相信所有的环境成本都有希望实际内化到一种“创造利润的经济环境”之中，这简直是痴心妄想，在私有市场结构中怎么可能将社会和环境成本全部内化昵他们天真地认为，随着生态资源的减少，经济也将相应地注重保护资源，但是“这种和谐的对应关系并不存在”，我们实际所看到的是：“土地成本的上涨从未中断过建筑物的拔地而起和城市景观的水泥硬化”，这难道还不能说明问题吗五、生态危机批判与社会变革运动既然在不触动资本逻辑、资本主义制度前提下的任何企图消除生态危机的举措，都不可能从根本上解决问题，那么，要从根本上消除生态危机的唯一选择就是直面资本逻辑、资本主义制度，变资本主义制度为社会主义制度。生态马克思主义者的可贵之处就是在资本主义世界中，一再发出声音，强调走向社会主义是消除生态危机的最佳选择。他们把对生态危机的分析、批判变成了对社会主义必然性的论证。在分析马克思的资本与生态矛盾的理论的基础之上，进一步论述马克思是如何从生态的角度论证社会主义的必然性的，贯穿于所有生态马克思主义者的著作之中。奥康纳指出：资本逻辑与生态危机在他看来，目前的环境保护运动虽然风起云涌，但尚未成为真正的社会变革运动。

当务之急是如何使这一运动转化为旨在对资本主义进行彻底变革的社会主义运动。

真正的社会主义之所以能有效地保护生态环境，主要原因就在于它不是以资本为中心，不把资本逻辑作为社会的主要组织原则，不按照效用原则把一切东西都变成“有用的体系”，也不按照增殖原则一切都为着获取最多的利润，这样，就切断了资本与自然界的那种对立关系，也就是说，在社会主义制度下，自然界已不单纯作为有用的工具，也不无止境地从自然界猎取资源和无止境地向自然界倾倒垃圾。高兹曾经提出，如果真的要有效地开展生态保护工作，那么必须具备下述这样的社会环境：所生产的物品是实用的、不易损坏的，所制造的机器是易于修理的、可长时期使用的，所提供的服饰是较长时间都不会过时的；合理而科学的中央计划决定了主要的大企业都仅仅为满足居民的基本需要而生产，当然除了由国家控制的大企业之外，各个地区和城镇都有自己的生产体系，但在那里市民们同样在为自己而生产，在依照他们的情趣而生产；人们当然不仅在从事生产活动，还有充分的闲暇时间去进行学习，学习切自己感兴趣的东西，其中包括所有那些被商业从人们身上剥夺并且只有通过买卖才能重新获得的各种专业技术。高兹指出，在这样一种社会环境下，“从生态的观点看那些节俭的措施，如生产耐用品，实施低能源和资源的消费等，使那些在经济学上可用国民生产总值的形式加以衡量的产品大为减少了”①这样的社会环境不就是社会主义的社会环境吗在高兹看来，论证了只有在这样的社会环境下才能实施生态保护，也就是等于说明了保护生态环境的最佳选择就是社会主义制度。

社会主义社会不是以资本为中心，其宗旨应当是千方百计地满足人的真正的需要，实现人的解放，这样就不会出现过度的生产，不进行过度生产就不会导致严重的生态危机。佩珀就认定真正的社会主义社会决不是一个“导致污染的社会”。在他看来，理由十分简单：真正的社会主义旨在实现人的解放，而一个污染重重的社会还能谈论什么人的解放吗真正的社会主义必然实施的是“共同所有制”，“共同使用制”就意味着要有计划地使用资源，而旦做到了有计划地使用资源，那岂不是能使资源的枯竭最小化了吗真正的社会主义不是为了利润而生产，那还不会千方百计地去避免生产对任何人都没有实际用处的废弃物吗人类社会之所以要走向这种真正的社会主义，人类之所以要设计出这样一种社会形态，不能仅仅是为了实现社会公正，另重要理由就是为了消除生态矛盾。佩珀强调，在个“没有过度生产，没有过度需求循环的，非消费主义的稳态社会即社会主义社会”中，最重要的是“人的需求要比在资本主义社会中具有更多的稳定性和可预测性”，人们将完全根据自己的真实的需要来组织生产，人们在进行生产时会充分顾及到对环境的影响，也就是说，“将完全从对环境的影响出发来决定生产什么与不生产什么”①以前人们一般都从资本主义经济危机中来论证社会主义的必然性，实际上人们也应从资本主义生态危机中来论证社会主义的必然性。与此相应，以前人们只是从生产力和生产关系的社会化的角度来说明社会主义的优越性，实际上人们也应从生产条件的社会化的角度来说明社会主义的优越性，而一旦这样去认识社会主义的优越性，社会主义对解决生态危机的得天独厚就一清二楚了。奥康纳认为，人们都会认识到马克思的理论的一个重大功能就是告诉人们在资本主义社会中必然会滋生出种“反对力量”。那么这种“反对力量”何以产生可能人们只是以为根据马克思的理论，这种“反对力量”由资本主义的经济危机孕育而成，而实际上，马克思的理论还深刻地揭示出，这种“反对力量”又与资本主义的生态危机相伴随。既然根据马克思的理论，生态与资本是必然对立的，那么在资本主义社会中出现“反对力量”也是理所当然的。他指出，无论是基于马克思的相关理论还是考察当今的社会现实，都需要我们认真地思考这样两个问题：是“关于传统的资本的生产过剩的危机与资本的不充分发展的危机之间的内在联系的问题”二是“自然界和人类的受损与资本的受损之间的关系问题”。我们不仅要把第一个问题认真地提出来加以思考，更要把第二个问题认真地提出来做出详尽的研究。“一旦我们做到了这一点，那么我们就会顺理成章地认识到当今我们所需要的，其实并不是业已见到的那种所谓的'社会主义的建设'而是对自然的'社会主义式的重建'包括对我们人自身这'自然，的重建”②他还提出，一些传统的马克思主义者总认为“生产力和生产关系更为社会化形式的发展”，即生产力和生产关系不断走向社会化，资本主义就必然会向社会主义过渡。但实际上，在生态马克思主义者看来，生产条件的“更为社会化的供应模式”的发展，即生产条件日益走向公共化和社会化，也会促使资本主义向社会主义过渡。如此说来，“通向社会主义的道路可能有两条，而并非只有一条”，或者更为确切地说，“有两种趋势都能够导致生产力、生产关系、生产条件以及这些条件的生产和再生产的社会关系的社会化程度的增加”③生产力与生产关系的社会化程度的增加固然会导致走向社会主义，“生产条件以及这些条件的生产和再生产的社会关系的社会化程度的增加”也会导致走向社会主义，我们不能只在马克思的著作中看到前一种趋势，也应从马克思的著作中观察到后一种趋向。

如果把社会主义简单地理解成只是发展生产力，那么社会主义也会无止境地去的联系。事实上，这样去领会社会主义的本质是片面的，起码没有把社会主义与资资本逻辑与生态危机本主义的界限区别开来。柏格特认为，马克思并没有把人的未来发展观，即社会主义的发展观简单地归结为扩展和完善资本主义的已高度发达的反生态的技术去实现自由时间和大众消费的增长。①事实上，马克思展望了一个质上丰富的人一自然关系和人一人的关系的图景，这个图景是新生态（prcrecological）和新人类（prcrhuman）的。②柏格特讨论了与马克思的“联合生产”密切相关的“公有财产”的内涵。

马克思曾说：“从一个较高级的经济的社会形态的角度来看，个别人对土地的私有权，和个人对另个人的私有权样，是十分荒谬的。甚至整个社会，个民族，以至一切同时存在的社会加在一起，都不是土地的所有者。他们只是土地的占有者，土地的受益者，并且他们应当作为好家长把经过改良的土地传给后代。”③柏格特引用马克思的这句话指出，马克思的“公有财产”对土地、对自然的态度是使用而非所有，是“联合生产”合理地管理人与自然间的物质和能量交换，而且是以生产者作为他们自己的社会组织的主人为前提的。柏格特指出，马克思强调“人与自然不是两个独立的存在物”，人与自然是辩证统的，共产主义没有必要破坏人与自然的统，而只是利用自然来服务于作为自然的和社会的存在物的人的可持续发展。实现恩格斯所说的“到那时，人将不仅感受到而且知道他们是与自然统一的”。共产主义社会的人类对自然承担的是管理责任。在共产主义条件下，生产增长的最终目的以及生产者对自然的利用方式已保证共产主义的财富观不是反生态的。共产主义条件下生产的增长和扩大再生产是否是生态的归根到底取决于“实践”的含义，取决于被满足的需要的本性。而在共产主义条件下，人的需要主要是指减少束缚、全面发展的需要，而不是资本主义条件下无限追求消费的需要。

一当人们注重在生产领域而不是在消费领域获取享乐，那生态危机就从根源上得以消解了。在生态马克思主义者中，最早也是最系统地论述“人的满足最终在于生产活动而不在于消费活动”的是莱易斯。他强调，只有在社会主义制度下才能改变把消费与满足等同起来的观念，才能“使满足的可能性将主要来自于生产活动的组织功能，而不是像今天的社会那样主要寄托于消费活动的功能”。⑤这绝不只是一个人们注意力的转移的问题，这直接涉及人们是否真正获得幸福，是否真正能创造出一种能确保自己自我实现的环境的问题。事实上只要人们真正搞清楚了，仅仅依靠不断增长的消费是不足以补偿其他生活领域中遭受的挫折的，那他们就自然地会意识到人类幸福生活的前景取决于在消费领域之外的其他领域。

现在社会已发展到这样一种程度，一当人们真正意识到了有必要减低自己的消费需求、改变自己的高消费的生活方式，那就与此同时必然会去思考如何使切个人的劳动活动和自由时间的活动富有丰富的意义。这就是说，人们对减低自己的消费需求、改变自己的高消费的生活方式的企求，必然与到生产活动中去寻求满足的企求内在地联系在一起。一方面，由于人的能动性就是人的真正本质之所在，所以人类通过参加直接性的生产活动能得以自我实现，能真正创造性地生活；另方面，由于割断了生产与消费的直接联系，由于这是在缩减了资本主义的生产能力基础上的生产，所以这种生产的结果不是走向与自然日益对立而是走向与自然的和谐。

人类确实正在面临严酷的选择：或者忠实地服务于“利润和生产”这个上帝，忍受日益失控的生态和社会危机；或者拒绝“利润和生产”这个上帝，而朝向自然和人类社会和谐地共同进化。解决生态问题的最终出路就是变资本主义生产方式和生活方式为社会主义的生产方式和生活方式。这就是生态马克思主义者所得出的结论。

六、在限制与发挥资本逻辑之间保持合理的张力既然资本按照其效用原则与增殖原则的属性，在本质上是反生态的，那么为了保护生态环境，当今人类能否告别资本，建立一个没有资本的世界阐明人们在实际面对资本时应当从现实出发。资本与生态之间关系不是简单的截然对立的关系，事实上，这种关系是极其复杂的。我们在阐述资本与生态之间的关系时，既要把它们之间的对立清楚地呈现于前，又要认真地分析两者之间关系的复杂性。

资本既是社会的范畴又是历史的范畴，在资本的概念中既包含着对人类血腥的负面效应，也包含着对人类所带来的“文明化趋势”，尽管随着历史的进程，它的正、负效应之间的比例正在日益发生变化，即正效应日益下降、负效应不断增加。

资本按其内在的逻辑，一定要突破现有的生产能力和生产手段的限制，一定要突破现有的消费数量、消费范围和消费种类的限制。而这突破的过程，显然也就是文明进步的过程，当然也是资本发挥其文明化作用的过程。①马克思和恩格斯在《共产党宣言》中是这样说的：“资产阶级在它的不到一百年的阶级统治中所创造的生产力，比过去切世代创造的全部生产力还要多，还要大。”②马克思还这样直接论①童世骏：《中西对话中的现代性问题》，上海：学林出版社，2010年，第403页。

资本逻辑与生态危机述资本的历史作用：“因此，如果说以资本为基础的生产，1方面创造出普遍的产业，即剩余劳动，创造价值的劳动，那么，另一方面也创造出一个普遍利用自然属性和人的属性的体系，创造出一个普遍有用性的体系，甚至科学也同一切物质的和精神的属性一样，表现为这个普遍有用性体系的体现者，而在这个社会生产和交换的范围之外，再也没有什么东西表现为自在的更高的东西，表现为自为的合理的东西。因此，只有资本才创造出资产阶级社会，并创造出社会成员对自然界和社会联系本身的普遍占有。由此产生了资本的伟大的文明作用；它创造了这样一个社会阶段，与这个社会阶段相比，一切以前的社会阶段都只表现为人类的地方性发展和对自然的崇拜。''①马克思在这里讲得十分清楚，资本的文明作用正在于它创造了这样个历史阶段人类历史第二大社会形态以市场经济为基础的历史阶段。②问题在于，资本的这种创造生产力、促使人类”文明化“的作用的历史使命尚没有完成。它还在继续履行自己的作用。只要资本还存在，它必然给我们带来各种灾难，其中包括对自然界的损害，这种灾难就不可避免地成为人们的存在论处境。但是，资本并不是我们说取消就能够取消掉的，只要它的历史使命尚未完成，只要它给人类带来”文明化趋势“的功能尚存，那么就不可能人为地把它取消掉。③人类活动的目标不可能是单的，而总是多元的。社会系统的活动指向总是个有机的目标系统，而这就是由这种多元性所决定的。正是由于我们处于这样一个有机的目标系统中，从而当需要我们做出自己的目标选择时，我们往往处于”非此即彼“的两难境地，即往往为了达到某些特定的目标，而被迫放弃或排斥另一些目标。无数的经验教训告诉我们，在这种情况下，为了达到某目标而完全舍弃其他目标的做法是非常愚蠢的，聪明的做法是综合、平衡与协调所面临的各种目标，在此基础上制订出自己合理的行动方案。我们应当用这样一种思路来处理消除生态危机的目标与其他目标之间的关系。不可否认，对当今的人类来说，最主要的目标或许就是消除生态危机、建设生态文明。但与此同时，我们还必须正视其他目标的存在。我们不可能也不应当为了实现消除生态危机的目标而把其他目标完全抛之脑后。

人类为了实现消除生态危机、建设生态文明这一目标需要与资本逻辑决裂，而人类追求其他目标很可能还需要进一步实施资本逻辑。具体地说，当今人类除了急需摆脱生态危机之外，还有着继续发展生产力、增加社会财富、实现现代化的既定目标，而为了达到后者的目标，现实告诉人们必须选择市场经济的道路，选择市场经济在某种意义上就是选择资本逻辑，即使经济的运行按照资本的逻辑展开。资本的“文②孙承叔：《资本与社会和谐》，重庆：重庆出版社，2008年，第34页。

③罗骞：《论马克思现代性批判及其当代意义》，上海：上海人民出版社，2007年，第117页。

明化趋势“的最主要的表现就是它的生产性，即它能促进生产力的发展。在这种情况下，人类必须在保护生态环境与发展生产力之间保持平衡，与此相应，也必须在限制资本与利用资本之间保持平衡。

一个正确的选择就是在限制和发挥资本逻辑之间保持合理的张力。对现代化的不同取向决定了对资本会有不同的态度：那种以追求丰富的物质财富为唯目标的传统的现代化必然一味地扩张资本的作用；而实施“以生态导向的现代化”则努力地在利用资本的同时限制资本。当然，真正要实现生态文明，对资本仅仅限制还是不够的，还得最终超越资本。资本在世界上存在一天，它对生态破坏的可能性也就存在一天。限制资本仅仅是降低其破坏的程度，而要从根本上杜绝这种破坏还得超越它。只有到了人类真正超越资本之时，才是生态文明真正建成之日。这就要求我们，在把利用资本与限制资本结合在一起的同时，还要考虑如何把利用资本与超越资本结合起来。这里必须要充分认识的是，资本在当今中国的存在肯定还有其合理性，但这种合理性无法构成反对超越它的充分理由，我们不能等到资本的合理性完全丧失殆尽以后再去考虑超越它。马克思主义的辩证法早已昭示我们：异化的生成与异化的摒弃是同一个历史过程，我们同样可以这样说，资本的利用与资本的超越也是同个历史过程。

随着对资本的这种既利用又限制的基本态度的确立，对生产的态度也需要调整。

与资本逻辑紧紧联系在一起的是过度生产。资本对自然界的伤害具体是借助于过度生产实现的。为了保护生态环境我们必须改变过度生产。但为了推进现代化进程，不断地扩大生产、发展经济是一个既定方针。那么就面临一个如何正确处理改变生产与扩大生产的关系问题。我们应当像在限制与超越资本逻辑和发挥与实施资本逻辑之间保持合理的张力那样，在改变生产与扩大生产之间也保持合理的张力，即对于生产既要扩大又应改变，而只有这样生产既能达到为满足人的真实需要服务之目的，又实现了服务于满足非人类生命物种生存发展的需要。

从传统的现代化模走出来，实施“以生态为导向的现代化”，无论是对生产的目的还是对生产的形式都要做出相应的改变和调整。按照“以生态为导向的现代化”的要求，我们不能单纯地去扩大生产、发展生产，还得不断地改变生产、调整生产。这里所说的“改变”与“调整”，就既包括了对生产目的的“改变”与“调整”，也包括了对生产形式的“改变”与“调整”。我们为什么要去生产当然既不是“为了生产而生产”，也不是仅仅为了“价值和剩余价值”而生产。在确立生产的目的时必须充分顾及两个方面：首先，应当明确生产就是为了满足人的需要，而且这种需要必须是人的真实的需要而不是“虚假的需要”其次，还应当使生产具有限制在“生态系统的承载力”的范围之内。那么我们究竟如何去组织生产昵实施市场经济模式是一个很好的选择，但实施市场经济不等于可以排斥政

we are manufcatory and can supply the best price and good quality .

it  is full range of CYLINDER LINER  for the following type :

Engine Cylinder Liner

Engine Cylinder Liner,Engine Part Cylinder Liner,Diesel Engine Liner,Cylinder Liner For Ship,Cylinder Liner For Diesel Engine

ZhouShan HeCheng Machinery Co., LTD. , http://www.hcmarineparts.com