Why "Degrowth" Is Shooting Itself in the Foot
And What We Should Say Instead
Let's be honest: words matter. They're not just labels we slap onto ideas – they're the battleground where economic visions live or die. And right now, the "degrowth" movement is committing slow suicide with its name.
I know, I know. "It's just semantics," you might say. But is it really? The language we choose shapes what we can imagine, what questions we ask, and ultimately, what futures we create.
The Problem with Economic Double-Speak
Have you ever noticed how economists seem to speak their own language? It's not just you – economics is riddled with terms that mean completely different things depending on who's talking.
Take "growth" – arguably the most contested term in economics:
To mainstream economists: More GDP! More stuff! Higher numbers!
To many heterodox economists: Evolution of capabilities, improved wellbeing, better quality of life
This isn't just academic nitpicking. When a post-Keynesian economist says "we need growth," they likely mean "people need good jobs and better lives." When ecological economists hear "growth," they picture environmental destruction and climate chaos.
We're talking past each other, and it's crippling our ability to create meaningful alternatives.
As Joan Robinson famously put it, "The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists." But how can we avoid deception when we can't even agree on what our words mean?
The Degrowth Self-Sabotage
Let's cut to the chase: "degrowth" is a terrible name for a brilliant movement.
Think about it. The very label accepts the mainstream framing that "growth = more stuff" and then just slaps a negative prefix on it. It's like accepting your opponent's definition of the game and then announcing you want to lose!
What's truly maddening is that degrowth advocates don't actually want less of everything. They want:
MORE wellbeing and happiness
MORE free time and autonomy
MORE community resilience
MORE ecological health
MORE democratic control
And LESS resource depletion, pollution, and exploitation. It's not about shrinking everything – it's about selectively growing what matters and reducing what's killing us.
But try explaining that when your movement's name literally means "make things smaller." Good luck with that messaging at your next family dinner when Uncle Bob starts ranting about how you want everyone to be poor.
The Heterodox Circular Firing Squad
Here's where it gets even messier. Ecological economists often use "growth" in the mainstream sense – as GDP expansion – when critiquing its environmental impacts. Meanwhile, post-Keynesians and MMT folks use "growth" to mean improving living standards and capabilities.
So what happens when these natural allies meet? Total confusion!
The ecological economist says, "We need degrowth," and the post-Keynesian hears, "I want people to be unemployed and suffer." The post-Keynesian says, "We need green growth," and the ecological economist hears, "I want to destroy the planet with endless consumption."
It's the world's most unnecessary argument, fueled entirely by terminology. As someone who's sat through these debates, I can tell you – it's exhausting.
What Should We Say Instead?
Let's stop leading with what we're against and start proclaiming what we're for.
The most powerful reframing I've encountered is "sustainable sufficiency." This isn't just a new label – it's a conceptual breakthrough based on a profound insight: **the opposite of scarcity isn't abundance, but enough.**
Think about that for a second. Our entire economic system is built on the idea that scarcity requires endless growth toward abundance. But what if the real solution is finding sufficiency – enough for everyone, within planetary boundaries?
This reframing is revolutionary because it:
Flips from negative to positive framing
Centres adequacy rather than excess
Makes room for both social floors and ecological ceilings
Challenges the core logic of endless expansion
Other powerful alternatives include:
Prosperity Without Growth (as ecological economist Tim Jackson brilliantly frames it)
Regenerative Economics
Qualitative Development
Wellbeing Economy
Any of these frameworks would serve us better than the self-defeating "degrowth" label.
The Elephant in the Room: Power
Let's not be naive. Any discussion of "enough" must address the obvious question: who decides what's enough, and who controls access to resources?
Our current system is riddled with artificial scarcity – situations where we have the technical capacity to meet everyone's needs but maintain scarcity to preserve profits. Think about it:
We have enough houses for everyone, but homelessness persists
We produce enough food for 10 billion people, yet hunger remains
Medical knowledge could save millions, but patents restrict access
As Yanis Varoufakis puts it, "Economic models dressed up in complex mathematics give the impression of science, while containing assumptions that would be laughed out of the room if stated in plain language." And one of those laughable assumptions is that our scarcity problems are technical rather than political.
Any meaningful alternative must address not just what constitutes "enough," but who has the power to define and distribute it. Without this power analysis, we're just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.
Breaking Down the Silos
The terminology mess around "growth" isn't just academic – it's actively preventing natural allies from finding common ground:
Post-Keynesians and MMT economists with their focus on jobs and public purpose
Ecological economists with their emphasis on planetary boundaries
Institutional economists examining power dynamics
Feminist economists centring care work
Imagine getting past the terminology wars and recognising our shared goals. With frameworks like "sustainable sufficiency," we can build bridges between these traditions and create a truly powerful heterodox coalition.
The Strategic Path Forward
Let's be strategic. Mainstream economics maintains its dominance partly through mathematical obfuscation – making simple but wrong ideas sound complex and impressive. We need to fight back with clarity, not confusion.
The degrowth movement tried to create new terminology but accidentally reinforced the framework it was fighting. "Sustainable sufficiency" offers us a chance to shift the conversation to entirely new terrain.
By moving beyond reactive critiques to proactive framing, we can articulate a vision powerful enough to challenge the growth obsession t driving us toward ecological collapse.
This isn't just about words—it's about creating conceptual space for economies organised around what really matters: well-being for all within a flourishing living world.
What do you think? Do terms like "degrowth" help or hinder our cause? What language do you find most effective when talking about alternatives to growth-obsessed economics? Share your thoughts below!
Unmask Economics with Me
Economics has a dirty secret: no one really knows how this thing works.
Sure, we've got models. Equations. Theories backed by centuries of academic papers. But then reality hits - a pandemic, a banking crisis, a random tweet from Elon - and suddenly, those elegant models look more like elaborate fiction.
We're done pretending.
These draft papers aren't polished academic work. They're our attempt to rebuild economic theory from the ground up. We're looking at everything from Indigenous trading systems to modern monetary mechanics, asking questions like:
What if we've completely misunderstood how taxes work? (Our Strategic Preparatory Financing paper suggests we have.)
What if the economy isn't about equilibrium but about buffer stocks all the way down? (Orthodox economists are already pushing back on this one.)
What if the informal networks keeping communities alive during crises aren't just stopgaps but the foundation of how economies actually function?
Some of these ideas will fail. Some might fundamentally change how we think about economics. Either way, paid subscribers get a front-row seat to the mess. You'll see every draft, every revision, every moment where we realise we got it wrong and have to start over.
No promises of getting rich. No pretence of having all the answers. These are just real attempts at understanding how this complex system actually works.
Think of it as peer review, but before the peers get their hands on it.
Achieve Financial and Mental Wellness
Looking for effective resources to help overcome financial stress and anxious thoughts? This subscription has you covered.
As a paying subscriber, gain unlimited access to 5 powerful tools absolutely free:
A comprehensive eBook guides transforming your finances through proven habits and strategies.
4 Anxiety-Busting wall posters that provide techniques to quiet worried thoughts and build resilience. Great for personal or professional use!
Whether you seek tools for personal growth or your mental health practice, these science-backed resources can significantly boost well-being over the long run.
Subscribe now to empower yourself and your clients with an all-inclusive wellness toolkit. Finally, take command of money mindsets and unlock healthier, wealthier lives for all. Your future of financial peace and mental ease is just a click away!
If you enjoyed this post, please consider buying me a coffee by pressing the button below.
I agree. A simple change to "Regrowth" would be good enough for a start.
The era of edge lords, social media hype, influencer grift, sensationalism and in this case irony has to go. The too clever-by-half slogans do indeed shoot the good guys in the feet, maybe even the head.