Beneath the Anthropocene, the Capitalocene[L’en-deçà de l’Anthropocène, le Capitalocène]

For some years now, the perspective opened up by digital studies, around a new paradigm of knowledge, has been trying to return to the great sharing (Nature/Artefact), as an analysis of the production of human beings and their social institutions through technology, as well as that of the various ways of being of men, generated by the different techniques. The work in the perspective of digital studies brings together scientific, philosophical, economic and also ecological discourses. At the crossroads of a critical theory reinvented by the social sciences, social psychology, media sociology and cultural anthropology, digital studies aims to become a third culture understood, in the age of the Internet, as a synthesis of the Sciences, Arts and Humanities, by focusing on "this common matrix in which the social order, the natural order and the technical order are made and experienced". The content of this issue of the journal and the purpose of this article consist in being part of this gap, in order to explore the different meanings and implications of the concept of Capitalocene, in a context where the digital paradigm tends to set itself up as the mastermind of the transformations of societies, economies and the planetary environment. This proposal does not seek to set itself up as a new evolutionism, nor does it seek to impose a determinism that would make a historically constructed concept the rule of absolute organization of economic, social and environmental structures. On the contrary, this concept questions more than it claims to solve, the enigma of the dysfunctions of the activity and the negative externalities on its environment. It asserts itself as a critical questioning of the links between economy and ecology, questioning the economic analyses that integrate ecology into trade-offs and calculations of opportunity, of which the pollution rights market or carbon market is an illustration. But it also seeks to go beyond the sometimes somewhat simplistic approaches that make the polysemic principle of degrowth the stake of a form of political ecology. Rather, Capitalocene embodies the crystallisation of economic power relations around the capture of natural resources and human and social capacities, with what Felix Guattari called the extraction of " machinic surplus value ", an expression whose meaning has lost none of its topicality.