alternative’ to that order itself, recognising that ‘violence done to the earth is reproduced at the ideological level’ as racialisation and labour exploitation (p. 163). In contrast to environmentalisms that pit nature’s interest against humans’ (e.g. deep ecology or Aldo Leopold’s land ethic), the insights Claborn develops suggest that the belief that humans are universally monsters bent on destroying our world is a cover, perhaps unwitting, for racial capitalism. Ultimately, this important ecohistorical study helps us see that redressing global climate catastrophe today requires a reparative approach that extends, I would argue, far beyond the juridical framework of civil rights to the radical collective possibilities richly imagined across the Black cultural tradition.

中文翻译：

---

Katherine MH Reischl，摄影素养：俄罗斯作家手中的相机

替代”秩序本身，认识到“对地球的暴力行为在意识形态层面被复制”为种族化和劳动剥削（第 163 页）。与将自然的利益与人类的利益相悖的环保主义（例如深层生态学或奥尔多·利奥波德的土地伦理）相比，Claborn 发展的见解表明，人类普遍是一心想要摧毁我们的世界的怪物的信念是种族资本主义的掩饰，也许是在不知情的情况下. 最终，这项重要的生态历史研究帮助我们看到，今天纠正全球气候灾难需要一种修复方法，我认为，这种方法远远超出了公民权利的司法框架，扩展到了黑人文化传统中丰富想象的激进集体可能性。