Chapter 9: Environmental Politics, Global Sustainability, and Cute Robots

International Relations Theories & Wall-E

Understanding the complexities of global politics requires tools that help us analyze power, cooperation, culture, and inequality. International relations (IR) theories—realism, liberalism, constructivism, Marxism, and feminism—offer frameworks to make sense of how nations, corporations, and individuals interact with each other and the environment. These theories don’t just explain past behavior; they also provide insights into how we might respond to pressing challenges like environmental degradation, climate change, and resource scarcity. The animated film Wall-E, while fictional, offers a poignant lens through which we can explore these theories in action. By examining the events of Wall-E through each theoretical perspective, we can uncover the underlying dynamics that contribute to environmental collapse and imagine pathways for political solutions.

Realism: Competing for Survival in Wall-E’s Wasteland

Realism emphasizes the centrality of power, survival, and self-interest in global politics. From a realist perspective, the events of Wall-E can be understood as the failure of states to prioritize long-term survival over short-term gains. Realists argue that in an anarchic international system—where no central authority exists above nations—states act in their own interest to secure resources and power. In the film, the Earth’s ecological collapse mirrors what happens when competition for resources outweighs collective action. The unchecked consumption depicted in Wall-E suggests a realist world where no single actor enforces environmental regulations, and states focus instead on maximizing economic growth to outcompete rivals. Realists might also interpret humanity’s retreat to the Axiom spaceship as a rational decision for survival, prioritizing the safety of a select group over the restoration of a ruined Earth. This perspective highlights the challenges of collective action in addressing global environmental crises, as each state prioritizes its own immediate interests. However, this theory struggles to explain how cooperation might arise to save the planet, transitioning us to liberalism.

Liberalism: Finding Hope in Cooperation, From the Axiom to Earth

Liberalism offers a more optimistic perspective, emphasizing the role of cooperation, institutions, and shared interests in addressing global challenges. From a liberal viewpoint, Wall-E demonstrates what happens when the mechanisms for international cooperation fail. In the real world, liberal theorists point to treaties like the Paris Agreement or organizations like the United Nations as vital tools for mitigating climate change by bringing states together to create and enforce environmental standards. In the film’s dystopian future, the absence of such cooperation is evident—no global governance structures were able to prevent environmental degradation or create incentives for sustainability. Liberalism would also highlight the potential of humanity’s eventual return to Earth, suggesting that cooperative governance and shared responsibility could enable collective recovery. The relationship between Wall-E and Eve, representing mutual aid and trust, serves as a microcosm of the liberal ideal that working together can overcome even the direst circumstances. While liberalism underscores the potential for collaboration, constructivism delves deeper into the cultural and social norms that shape human behavior.

Constructivism: Shifting Norms and Rethinking Humanity in Wall-E’s World

Constructivism focuses on the role of ideas, identities, and social norms in shaping global politics. Constructivists would argue that the events of Wall-E reflect how societal values and norms—particularly those tied to consumerism—shape political and environmental outcomes. The film critiques a culture obsessed with consumption and convenience, where humans on the Axiom have normalized wastefulness to the point of losing their connection to the natural world. Constructivism helps us understand how these destructive norms became entrenched and how shifting cultural values might drive change. For instance, the small plant Wall-E discovers symbolizes the potential for new ideas—such as sustainability and environmental stewardship—to reframe humanity’s identity and priorities. Constructivist theorists in real-world contexts often point to the power of global movements, like Fridays for Future, which use ideas and symbols to transform societal norms and push for stronger environmental action. This theory suggests that rethinking humanity’s relationship with the environment is as critical as implementing policies, linking to the material concerns of Marxism.

Marxism: Buy-N-Large and the Costs of Capitalist Overreach

Marxism interprets global issues through the lens of class conflict and economic exploitation. A Marxist analysis of Wall-E would focus on how capitalism’s drive for profit led to environmental devastation. The Buy-N-Large corporation, depicted in the film as controlling every aspect of society, embodies the unchecked power of corporate interests prioritizing growth over sustainability. Marxists argue that such systems exploit both labor and natural resources, creating immense inequality and ecological harm. In the real world, similar patterns can be seen in how industrialized nations disproportionately consume resources and outsource environmental degradation to poorer nations in the Global South. The conditions aboard the Axiom also reflect Marxist concerns, with humans rendered passive consumers, entirely dependent on a system that strips them of agency and autonomy. For Marxists, overcoming environmental crises requires dismantling exploitative capitalist systems and replacing them with more equitable, sustainable models of production and consumption. While Marxism critiques economic systems, feminism turns the focus to power dynamics in human relationships.

Feminism: Gender, Power, and Environmental Justice

Feminist IR theory highlights how power dynamics, including gender, intersect with global political and environmental issues. Feminist interpretations of Wall-E might focus on how the film critiques hierarchical systems that concentrate power in the hands of corporations like Buy-N-Large, sidelining marginalized voices in the process. Feminists argue that environmental harm often disproportionately affects women, especially in vulnerable communities, as they are frequently the primary caregivers and resource managers in their households. In the real world, feminist scholars point to examples like the Chipko movement in India, where women played a leading role in protecting forests from deforestation. In Wall-E, Eve’s character can be interpreted as a feminist symbol, taking an active role in reclaiming the planet while Wall-E provides support through care and collaboration. This partnership contrasts with the passive, infantilized humans on the Axiom, emphasizing the importance of diverse, inclusive leadership in addressing global challenges. Feminism invites us to rethink who holds power and how global environmental policies can better serve marginalized groups.

By applying these five theories to Wall-E, we see how each framework offers unique insights into the political, economic, and cultural dynamics of environmental collapse and recovery. While realism highlights the self-interest that drives environmental neglect, liberalism and constructivism emphasize the potential for cooperation and normative change. Marxism critiques the capitalist systems that perpetuate environmental harm, while feminism urges us to consider whose voices are included in the conversation. Together, these theories provide a comprehensive understanding of the challenges humanity faces and the pathways toward a more sustainable and equitable future. As Wall-E reminds us, the choices we make today will shape the world for generations to come.