SMPLCTY (interview question #8)
Dr Simon Ussher has started emailing me interview questions about my recent books on aesthetics (see here). Over coming weeks I’ll post my responses to his questions.
Can you say more about your notion of SMPLCTY? In what sense does it signify an ecological civilisation? And can you explain the unusual spelling?
SMPLCTY is my signifier for a possible form of ecological civilisation grounded in sufficiency rather than excess, in art rather than consumerism, and in meaningful participation rather than alienated labour in service of endless economic growth. The unusual spelling is deliberate. By removing the letter ‘i’ from simplicity, I wanted to evoke a ‘less is more’ philosophy – or more precisely, a philosophy that upholds an ethos that ‘just enough is plenty’. The missing ‘i’ also symbolises a diminished egoism, a movement away from the possessive individualism that defines consumer capitalism and toward a more communal and ecological consciousness.
When I describe SMPLCTY as an ecological civilisation, I mean a civilisation that recognises the biophysical limits of the planet and consciously and organically organises itself within them out of reverence and enlightened restraint. Industrial civilisation has been built on the myth of perpetual growth – the assumption that economies can expand indefinitely on a finite planet. I reject that premise. My view is that material sufficiency is both all that is necessary for a rich human life and all that is sustainably possible over the long term.
So SMPLCTY embodies a different civilisational logic. I believe that freedom and flourishing imply enlightened material restraint. Instead of orienting society around relentless GDP growth, consumer acquisition, and technological innovation, we must ask ourselves: How much is enough? Enough energy, enough consumption, enough labour, enough wealth – for whom, and at what ecological cost? Although it is an oversimplification, the basic vision of ecological civilisation can be encapsulated by a slogan: enough, for everyone, forever.
But I want to stress that this is not a philosophy of deprivation or grim austerity. The central claim running throughout my work is that human beings can live extraordinarily rich, meaningful, and diverse lives on modest material and energetic foundations. In fact, I argue that many of the deepest forms of fulfilment are low-impact by nature: friendship, music, gardening, philosophy, craft, political participation, contemplation, love, poetry, art, immersion in nature. These are not diminished, and are often enhanced, by consuming less and living more simply.
This is why aesthetics is so central to my project. SMPLCTY is not merely an economic or environmental proposal; it is an aesthetic and existential vision. I maintain that art and aesthetic experience can help humanity ‘live more with less’. As I noted earlier, the archetypal citizen of this civilisation is what I call the ‘poet-farmer’ – someone who contributes to material provision and community life, while also cultivating their creative and aesthetic capacities. In a just and sustainable society, I don’t think material provision and creativity need to be considered mutually exclusive.
In this sense, SMPLCTY represents a transition from homo economicus to homo aestheticus. Industrial civilisation trains us to see ourselves primarily as consumers and economic actors. I want to recover another conception of the human being: the creative, meaning-making, artful species.
I would like to add, however, that I do not present SMPLCTY as a utopian blueprint or prediction. I describe it as an ‘orienting vision’. We need some image of a desirable destination if we are to move beyond the destructive trajectories of our growth-based civilisation. Whether humanity reaches anything like SMPLCTY remains uncertain. But I believe the deeper ecological crises become, the clearer it will be that some form of voluntary simplification or degrowth is necessary if civilisation is to endure. Art and creativity will be necessary features of any such prosperous descent.
