A History of the World in Seven Cheap Things

Patel and Moore argue that the conceptual divide between nature and society is a relatively recent invention, emerging in the 16th century as a strategic response to the crisis of feudalism and the rise of early capitalism. This dualistic worldview, which the authors term the “Cartesian revolution,” not only enabled the cheap appropriation and exploitation of the natural world but also excluded the majority of humans from the category of “Society,” relegating them to the realm of “Nature.” They argue that this binary has become so deeply entrenched in modern thought that it is often taken for granted as a natural and inevitable way of understanding the world.

Patel and Moore assert that the unraveling of the feudal system compelled ruling elites to seek new strategies for maintaining and expanding their wealth and power. Central to these strategies was the concept of “cheap nature”—the idea that nature could be treated as an infinite and expendable resource, external to human society, which could be appropriated and exploited at minimal cost. This cheapening of nature, the authors contend, was made possible by the Cartesian dualism of mind and matter, which posited a fundamental separation between the realm of human thought and agency (society) and the material world of bodies and objects (nature).

However, Patel and Moore emphasize that the nature-society divide did not simply separate humans from the rest of the natural world; it also drew boundaries within humanity itself. The authors highlight how the invention of nature and society was deeply entwined with the projects of colonialism, racism, and patriarchy. Indigenous peoples, Africans, and women were all placed on the nature side of the divide, cast as savage, irrational, and closer to animals than to civilized European men: “[T]he realm of Nature included virtually all peoples of color, most women, and most people with white skin living in semicolonial regions (e.g., Ireland, Poland)” (51). This exclusion was not merely conceptual but had devastating material consequences, justifying the enslavement, dispossession, and genocide of those deemed to be part of nature. Patel and Moore argue that this dualistic worldview has been central to the creation and maintenance of global hierarchies of power and inequality.

Despite its historical specificity, the nature-society divide has become so deeply ingrained in modern thought that it is often taken for granted as a self-evident and timeless truth. Patel and Moore argue that this naturalization of the nature-society binary is itself a testament to the power of the Cartesian revolution in shaping humans’ understanding of the world. They explain that while “the credit (and blame) is shared by many, it makes sense to call this a Cartesian revolution” (54), referring to the French philosopher René Descartes. Patel and Moore contend that Descartes’s second “law of capitalist ecology,” which was inspired by the views of Frances Bacon, had a huge impact on colonizing nations: “European civilization (or ‘we,’ in Descartes’s word) must become ‘the masters and possessors of nature.’ Society and Nature were not just existentially separate; Nature was something to be controlled and dominated by Society” (52). The authors argue that “[t]he Cartesian outlook, in other words, shaped modern logics of power as well as thought” (52). They also point out that, today, “[w]e take for granted that some parts of the world are social and others are natural” (47). However, “In the English language, the words nature and society assumed their familiar meanings only after 1550,” during “a decisive period in England’s capitalist and colonial history” (46). From the natural sciences to economics to popular culture, the idea that nature and society are separate and opposing realms has become a basic premise of everyday life. However, by excavating the historical origins and material consequences of this dualism, Patel and Moore argue that the social and political construction of this binary becomes apparent. They believe that challenging the binary opens up space for imagining alternative ways of understanding and inhabiting the world.