Envirosocialism:
Contradiction or Promise?(1)
By David Orton
For the task of global ecology can be understood in two ways: it is
either a technocratic effort to keep development afloat against the
drift of plunder and pollution; or it is a cultural effort to shake off
the
hegemony of ageing Western values and gradually retire from the
development race. (Sachs 1993:11)
[Introductory
Note: This essay, “Envirosocialism: Contradiction or Promise?”, is one
of
fourteen
essays in
the 1994 publication Green on Red:
Evolving Ecological Socialism.
The essays
were published in Canada as Annual No. 9, by the Society for
Socialist
Studies and
Fernwood Publishing. My essay is being made available
on the internet for
the first
time. The thinking behind this decision is that this article is a background
contribution
from the mid-1990s to ongoing discussions about what is sometimes
called “eco-socialism”. Is
eco-socialism something new theoretically, or does it amount
to putting an
“eco” before
more-or-less traditional, human-centered socialist
assumptions?
Is it right to say that a future eco-friendly society will
be “socialist,”
or does this
pre-empt the wide-ranging naming and other discussions which are
part of the
birth of anything new socially? The essay was written to raise some of
these fundamental
questions, which deeper Greens who are also Reds confronted
in the 1990s
and still face today. What is, however,
"new" since this article was
first written,
is the rise of religious fundamentalism and the consequent emergence
of
the "security state" and what this has meant for the work of the global radical
ecology movement. The essay may
also be helpful in understanding the origins and
ongoing evolution of
the left biocentric theoretical tendency within deep ecology.]
Writing about "Envirosocialism", immediately raises a number of
questions. What,
for instance,
does the content
of a radical socialist environmental position
encompass?
Where are we to find role models given that the
environmental legacy
of "actually
existing socialist societies," many of whom have now departed the
historical
stage, has been so disastrous? What is the character of the
environmental
movement
itself? Is it a subversive
force or a "greening up" of industrial capitalism?
What does it matter whether Nature is privately or collectively owned,
if it is being
destroyed? How
can a human-centered
or class-centered socialist ethics, protect
non-human life
forms or the physical environment itself?
How does one theoretically
make the
transition from human-centered, or anthropocentric,
ethics to a more
inclusive
ethics, and how does one bring about this change in society?
Why are jobs and corporate profits – the immediate benefits from the
ecological
carnage of
industrial forestry – more
important than protecting old growth forests
in Clayoquot
Sound or anywhere else in Canada or the United
States? The
stunning
photographs of some of this carnage can be seen in the book,
Clearcut: The
Tragedy Of Industrial Forestry, which shows "The Industrial
World View As
Expressed In
Our Forests":
What's
happening in our forests is only one result, although a
vivid one, of the rampant industrial mentality expressed in all
modern activity. A mentality that views nature as mere raw
material, awaiting conversion to commodity, and that assumes
humans to be superior to all other life. It is this failed paradigm
that has led us to the great ecological crisis we now face.
(Devall 1993)(2)
What does it mean in Canada, that organized labour is usually on the
wrong
side in
environmental issues, speaking with the
employers against the Earth
and in defense
of self-interest?(3) Is there then a
mutual self-interest
between
the capitalist
class and the working class in the continuation of industrial
society? If so, what is the
social base for radical environmentalism?
Socialism, communism, and Marxism as doctrines, are themselves products
of industrial
society, so are they capable of
fundamental change, of being
"greened", if
industrial society itself is being called into question?(4)
The
implication of
Marx's Labor Theory of Value, is that nature is valueless,
unless worked upon by humans.
How does one resolve conflicts between between nature or ecosystem
rights
and social
justice for first nations? Does the
resolution of land claims in Ontario
by the NDP
government, have to mean the dismantling of
provincial parks like
Algonquin and
Quetico, as they have come to be known? (See Federation of
Ontario
Naturalists 1993; and World Wildlife Fund Canada 1993.) Why is "land
ownership" by aboriginal inhabitants taken for granted? How can
land-claim
settlements
further the interest of the
natural world?
If existing levels of economic growth are already destroying the
planet's life-
support
systems, how is it environmentally
progressive to call for more
growth or
"development," as every elected provincial
social-democratic
government is
doing in Canada? How do we move away from a consumer
society –
relentlessly pounded in by the media, with consumerism as the
basis of self-identity and an
intimate component of the growth economy?
How does
envirosocialism deal with the need for a
different basis for self-
identity, so
that an injury to nature is recognized as an injury to self?(5)
In Canada, how does a radical
socialist environmentalist work to bring about
ecological and
social change, when most organized environmentalists are part
of the
federally funded Canadian Environmental Network (CEN)?(6)
Should an
environmental
organization (or a socialist journal like the Socialist Studies
Bulletin) accept funding from the capitalist
state apparatus rather than relying
on grass roots
fund raising? In the case of CEN, government funding means
environmentalists accept sitting down regularly with industry and
government
representatives. It means working within the boundaries of the existing
capitalist
economic
system – the market economy – to define and "solve" environmental
problems; and
it means accepting the continuation of a growth economy,
packaged in
the federal Green Plan language of “sustainable development.”(7)
Internationally, an ominous CEN
move is exporting mainstream environmental
thinking to
the Third World. The federal government is providing large grants
for various
CEN groups to "twin" with environmental groups in the Third World,
through an
"Environment and Development Support Program". Promoted
liaisons must
include a "development" group. Very detailed information has to
be provided to
the Canadian government about the northern and southern
groups
receiving the funding, with "indicators" for success in the project
decided by the
funding agency.(8)
Given the government's funding
strategy for the environmental movement,
what is the
organizing strategy for radical socialist environmentalists, for
breaking this
government hegemony, so they can work with others on issues
and put forth
counter visions? Where are the socialist or green magazines
in Canada, in
which an open-minded green-red or red-green debate can
take place on
some of these questions?(9)
NECESSITY FOR A SOCIALIST PERSPECTIVE
While these are painful questions
to face, I continue to believe that there is an
entry for a socialist perspective
into the environmental movement in Canada
and the United
States. Since the end of the Cold War, environmentalism has
become THE
enemy of the corporate class, because it interferes with the
destruction of
the natural world for profit. The setting up of anti-environmental
organizations,
which claim to be genuine environmental groups but are
funded by
major corporations, shows that the absorption of environmental
groups has
been only partially successful in keeping the industrial capitalist
ship afloat.(10)
The environmental movement is a collective movement,
because it
seeks to restrict and then end the private, destructive use of nature.
For green
socialists or socialist greens, entry into such a movement must mean
being
practically involved in environmental struggles and through the
struggles
themselves,
presenting a radical ecological and political analysis.
Several green and environmental
activists whose work I respect have reproached
me, or the
environmental group Green Web for advocating the continuing
relevance of
some kind of socialist perspective. Two statements from Green
Party members
in Ontario and England, given in personal letters, are illustrative:
Re Bulletin #41 ... I wish that it was possible to call it something
other than “socialist
biocentrism.” Not because I don't like the term
socialist but because it carries
too much baggage. After all even
the Ontario NDP ... call
themselves socialists! (Whyte 1994)
I
notice that you write about the possibility and desirability of a
“socialist biocentrism.” Having
had some experience of many
brands of left-wing thought and
organizations as well as
witness the way they consistently
have denied all tenets of
ecological thinking, I suspect
that such a marriage will prove
barren and end in an acrimonious
divorce. I think that we should
be looking to develop ideas,
policies and strategies that look
beyond the traditional political
spectrum....At the end of the day,
I prefer to judge people by what
they do and by the stances they
take on actual issues. I like the
look of Green Web so I don't mind
what labels you wear....I don't
think, however, that the turn-off
effect of words like socialism on
the general public should be
underestimated. (Irvine
1993)
There is no "answer" to the above
criticisms. In the end it remains a
leap of faith
to be an envirosocialist, especially given the historical
record of
"socialist societies," past and present, and of the theoretical
doctrines.
WHAT IS THE SOCIAL BASE?
Ecology teaches us that in nature
everything is interconnected. One
can become
involved in a "small" issue, and through it unravel the world.
As many
communities in Canada are facing "development" proposals,
citizens who
take up the fight to oppose such proposals can become
radicalized
through the interconnected nature of the issues and the
class alliance
between the corporate or government developer and
the state
apparatus. They then become receptive to revolutionary ideas.
This is a
potential mass base for a green socialism.
But we must also think globally.
Eurocentric global ecological destruction –
a source of
"Northern" wealth generation and the generator of the
"ecological
debt" owed to the Third World by industrialized countries –
perhaps began
with the voyage of Columbus in 1492. In his brilliant essay
"Global
Ecology and the Shadow of 'Development,'" Wolfgang Sachs
(1993:5-6)
gives a capsule picture of this existing world reality:
The best one
can say is that development has created a global
middle-class of
individuals with cars, bank accounts, and career
aspirations. It is made
up of the majority in the North and small
elites in the South and its size
roughly equals that eight per cent
of the world population which
owns a
car. The internal rivalries
of that class make a lot of noise
in world politics, condemning
to silence the overwhelming
majority of the people. At the end
of development, the question of
justice looms larger that ever.
In the radical environmental
movement, linking environmental integrity to
social justice
is on the agenda everywhere. The historical concern with
class analysis
and redistribution of wealth, and the self-sacrifice for the
common good of
the socialist and communist movements, are both
needed. But a
radical green envirosocialism also needs a new theoretical
orientation,
very different from traditional socialist thinking, to have any
theoretical
credibility or provide any guidance for the radical ecology
movement, and
for the way ahead.
INDUSTRIAL
SOCIETY IS THE PROBLEM
As an environmentalist and a
green who is also a socialist, I have come
to the
conclusion that industrial society is the fundamental problem, not
only
ecologically but also socially. Such a viewpoint has severe
repercussions
for a socialist environmentalist. Industrial society can have
a capitalist
or socialist face. In his book, Regarding
Nature: Industrialism
and Deep
Ecology, Andrew McLaughlin (1993:172) states:
The core
hypothesis of this book is that industrialism is the hub of a
set of social
practices that are destructive to the rest of nature.
Expansionary industrialism,
in both its variants of capitalism and
socialism, requires the destruction
of species and ecosystems,
and it now threatens the whole biosphere....
What is required is
a perspective that takes
industrialism itself
as part of the problem
and inspires efforts at its
transformation... We must create a
butterfly out of the caterpillar
of industrialism.(11)
We must also acknowledge, as
Clive Ponting (1991) indicates, that there
are many other
historical examples of the collapse or degradation of the
environment
that do not involve Western-centered value systems. The
example of the
environmental collapse of Easter Island, because of cultural
projects by
the Polynesian inhabitants, is a particularly graphic case
(Ponting 1991:
ch. 1). Richard Sylvan (n.d.:16), a left deep ecologist and
Australian
philosopher, writes about Ponting’s work:
What several
of these examples also reveal is that no very high level
of
technology is needed to inflict serious environmental damage;
persistence in pursuit of an
ideological project (with nothing directly
to
do with basic needs) will suffice. Other cultures did, or would have
(given
the technology and numbers), wrecked similar damage. For
instance,
salination, megafaunal elimination, and so on, were well
established before the rise of
modern Western paradigms, or in
regions
outside their influence.
Ponting (1991:32-35) argues that
the weight of historical evidence is that
Aboriginal
groups in the Americas and Australia hunted many large mammals
to extinction.
My own preliminary position is that deep ecology is a movement
beyond
indigenous attitudes to nature, which center around human use,
however
respectfully carried out. One might characterize the best Native
positions
regarding relationships to the natural world as "deep stewardship" –
a position that still
remains human-centered. Although adequate for hunting
and gathering
societies with little technology and small numbers of people, it is
not
encompassing enough for the survival of the natural world in the 1990's.
IN
THE FORESTRY STRUGGLE
In November 1993 I took part in
the First North American Temperate Forest
Conference,
held for three days in Burlington, Vermont. It was attended by
several
hundred forest activists, including a large indigenous contingent.
Speakers from
First Nations and indigenous organizations played prominent
roles. One of
the aspects of the conference which struck the two of us who
traveled from
Nova Scotia was the awareness of being part of a radical
movement for
change, with a distinct culture and music. Several well known
Earth First!
musicians were there, and they tapped into this culture with many
songs
celebrating those who defend the earth, and the sacrifices that have to
be made by
activists. There was a sense of collective power at the conference,
which was
energizing and something that any state security force would find
hard to defeat.
I was asked to give two talks.
The first one, given as an Eastern North American
regional
report, outlined the "pulp culture" of the Atlantic Region of Canada and
presented some
of the characteristics of "pulp mill forestry." The talk concluded
with four
practical issues of concern facing activists in the region: the
evaluation
of plantation
forestry; the increasing use of biological controls in forestry; the
contentious
area of ecosystem rights and Native rights; and the basic attitude
by forest
activists towards the pulp and paper industry (see Green Web Bulletin
No. 40, 1993;
and Wild Earth, Spring 1994).
The second talk was given as part
of a panel discussion on the issue of
"sustainable
forestry." The two other speakers, Tracy Katelman (Institute for
Sustainable
Forestry) and Richard Miller (Forest Partnership), argued in favour
of this and
discussed its characteristics. My talk basically opposed the focus by
some forestry
activists on sustainable forestry within the existing system. I
argued that a
sustainable forestry requires a sustainable society; that forestry
activists must
oppose capitalist industrialism in their work and the core values
of this
society; and put forward an alternative philosophy. Under the heading
"An
Alternative Philosophy" I put forward the possible contribution of a
socialist
tradition to
the radical environmental movement:
I think the bones of a basic alternative philosophy for our forestry
and other environmental work draw
on traditional native and
deep ecology thinking - the
eight-point deep ecology platform –
and with a strong social justice
component which has its roots in
the socialist tradition. This
alternative philosophy expresses a new
relationship to nature, which is
biocentric or ecocentric, not
human-centered.
Putting the earth first means
ecosystem rights before human rights.
When considering human rights,
give native-indigenous rights first
consideration, but not at the
expense of ecosystem rights....Social
justice is only possible in a
context of ecological justice. We have
to move from a shallow,
human-centered ecology to a deeper
all-species centered ecology.
The social component of the
alternative philosophy must advocate
building a movement against
industrialism, and advocating a
no-growth economy. We need to
raise the banner of living more
simply and reduce population. We
must advocate the cancellation
of debts for countries in the
Two-Thirds World and the transfer of
wealth to "have-not" countries.
Our orientation has to be that
governments and industry in
"developed" countries are partners in
environmental crimes. The values
we advance in our work as
forestry activists, or in the
illusive pursuit of a "certifiable"
sustainable forestry, cannot help
destroy the natural world.
(Orton 1994:24)
THE
GREEN WEB
The Green Web (GW) is a small
independent green research group with its
nucleus based
in Nova Scotia. The GW sees its mandate as serving the
informational
and theoretical needs of activists in the green and environmental
movements. We
have become part of a local, provincial, national, and
international
network of activists who receive, exchange, and distribute
information
and analysis both through the mail and electronically.
The GW is also part of other
anti-toxics, forestry, and anti-biocide networks,
which foster
information exchange; and it has exchanges with many
movement
publications. It neither solicits nor accepts funding from governments
or
corporations. A number of activists make financial donations to support
the
work, and many
provide information and ideas.
GW material is produced as
Bulletins (over forty of them at present). The
contents are
reports on specific investigations or analyses done in Nova Scotia
and articles
reproduced (with the permission of the authors) because of their
theoretical
importance and relevance for activists. GW Bulletins cover a number
of main themes:
- forestry biocides;
- green theory – including socialist
biocentrism, movement, and party discussion;
- forestry and the pulp and paper
industry;
- “Sustainable development;”
- wildlife and parks.
A brief statement of basic
beliefs is given on the “Green Web Literature” list of
publications:
We believe the capitalist world-wide economic system is destroying
the Earth. This system, with its
human-centered view of nature as
a "resource" and with its roots
in endless economic growth and
consumerism, has us all on a
death path. Needed are new ecological,
social, economic, political,
spiritual and cultural visions, and
reductions in human populations.
New environmental ethics
and an associated environmental
economics are required. Societies
have to be ecologically
sustainable for the survival of all species
on Earth. (“Green Web
Literature” 1994)
THE
LEFT BIOCENTRIC TENDENCY
While much of the work is focused
on practice, the GW sees itself as part of a
left
biocentric tendency that is emerging in the green and environmental
movements. The
deep ecology component draws from the work of the
Norwegian
philosopher Arne Naess (see especially Naess 1989). This left
biocentric
tendency also represents a left focus within the deep ecology
movement. It
should be understood that "left" in this biocentric context,
means
anti-capitalist but not necessarily "socialist." Social, political, and
economic
questions, as well as wilderness and wildlife and the defense
of forests,
are part of this left biocentric agenda. There is a major concern
with social
justice. Other tendencies – such as social
ecology, ecological
Marxism, and
ecofeminism
– while
raising important questions, are not
biocentric but
remain human-centered in their fundamental orientations.
Ecology is not
their core value and humans occupy centre stage in the
ethical
universe.
There is perhaps agreement among
left biocentrists that industrial capitalism
has to go –
both industrialism and capitalism. But the nature of its
replacement is
the subject of continuing thinking and discussions. Various
names and
conceptualizations have been formulated by writers to try and
encapsulate
this emerging left biocentric tendency: "deep green theory"
(Richard
Sylvan); "socialist biocentrism" (Helga Hoffmann and David Orton);
"ecologism"
(Andrew Dobson); "radical ecocentrism" (Andrew McLaughlin);
and
"revolutionary ecology" (Orin Langelle, Anne Petermann, and Judi Bari).
The final
terminology and content of the left biocentric tendency are yet to
be decided,
but the preliminary written work indicates some of the developing
commonalities
– as well as some of the problems. The tentativeness of this
emerging
tendency needs be stressed, and that discussions are ongoing.(12)
I believe that those who would
fall into a left biocentric "grouping" would give
a critical
support to deep ecology. All would give support to the eight-point
deep ecology
platform (see Appendix). All would perhaps oppose any
absorption of
mainstream deep ecology into the North American personal
development
movement through a fixation on "Self realization" – a route
mapped out by
the Australian deep ecologist Warwick Fox (1990) – and
ultimate
absorption into the capitalist status quo. All left biocentrists, would
consider deep
ecology a “subversive” philosophy, with goals that cannot be
fulfilled
within industrial capitalism.
CONCLUSION
As for my question,
"Envirosocialism: Contradiction or Promise?" the discussion
presented here
will probably allow either position to be upheld. It would be
wrong to say
that radical green envirosocialism is prominent in the consciousness
of the left in
Canada. Historically many socialists and communists have cruelly
suffered or
died in the attempt to further the collective well-being of
working-class
people. So it
is perhaps particularly hard to take a non-human-centered stand
when the
interests of the earth and workers collide. But a socialist biocentric
view
does accepts a
deep ecology philosophical position. It sees that wild nature is
being rapidly
destroyed and that humans are not "superior" to other forms of life.
In those
conflicts of interests which so frequently arise – symbolized in the
issues
of Clayoquot
Sound – the appropriate position is “earth first.”
Starting to raise the kind of
questions suggested here can be painful. The discussion
meets with
considerable entrenched opposition and requires a forum where this can
take place.
The work of the Green Web has, in the main, developed with very little
encouragement
or support from the left in Canada, and this is particularly true within
our own
bioregion. Non-socialist environmentalists and greens have been much
more
open-minded in
the pursuit of a radical ecology and where this leads, and in
recognizing
the necessity to rethink received truths. When the world for all
species is
being
destroyed before our eyes, there is no more significant, and ultimately
hopeful,
political
struggle than that of the radical global ecology movement. It is where
we
should be
working.
NOTES
1. I acknowledge the
contribution to this article of my partner Helga Hoffmann. Over
the
years she has taken part in continuing discussions of the issues raised
here.
See also
Orton 1993, where some of the ideas here first appeared.
2. The quotation is
taken from the back cover. Forestry activists provided the text to
accompany the photos of clear-cuts. For example,
Charles Restino and D.
Orton
jointly
wrote the description of forestry in Nova Scotia.
3. There are
countless examples of this. One which is particularly obnoxious, in a
Nova
Scotia context, is the conduct of Local 9332 of the United Steelworkers
of
America, at
the Westray Mine in Pictou County, Nova Scotia. The Local agitated
to
get this death
mine back in production as soon as possible after the mine
explosion;
and a strip mine
in Stellarton started, without any environmental
assessment, against
the wishes of the
Stellarton Concerned Citizens Against
Strip-Mining. The main public
concern was jobs
for miners who were members
of the Local, even though there are still
dead miners
buried underground.
Corporate voices and union voices were hard to
differentiate on
the issue of
resuming underground mine production and starting
the
strip mine without
any environmental assessment.
4. Gare (1993:83-84)
says that by 1931, "It could be fairly argued that the Soviet
Union
led the world in ecology."
5. Challenging the
capitalist basis of self-identity through the consumption of
consumer
goods; replacing this by a self-identification with the natural world,
using the concept of
"Self-realization" and mechanisms such as the "Council of
All Beings"
to do this – have
all been important contributions of deep ecology.
6. The Canadian
Environmental Network Bulletin, 4:1 (Summer 1993), notes
that
Environment Canada provides annual core funding of $600,000 to CEN
and
the
regional networks. We are also told (p.1):
“The federal
government provides various kinds of participant funding
for a multitude of
consultations. ENGO reps get compensation for
travel,
communications, research, brief-writing, and (occasionally)
the time they spend
in meetings with governments and industry.”
7. See Canada
1990. The language of “sustainable development” permeates
this
document. For a critique and repudiation of sustainable development,
see Green Web
Bulletin 1990, 1994.
8. The "Program
Guidelines & Proposal Outlines" for the Environment And
Development Support Program, obtainable from the
CEN, is the source
of
much of the
information in this paragraph. The CEN
Bulletin 4:2
(Autumn 1993)
contains the
newsletter of this Program. It says that to
date: “More than 50
Canadian environment
groups have been funded to
operate projects in partnership with NGOs
throughout the
southern
hemisphere.” Following "favorable" assessment of the
pilot
phase of the
Program, permanent funding of $1.25 million dollars
for 1993-94 was
approved, along
with funding of $10 million for a five-year period.
9. On the socialist
side, Canadian Dimension, is
essentially committed to
a left
social-democratic position and quite conservatively adheres to
some
basic
assumptions, for example: unionized workers as a central
focus; state
as an agency of
change; off-again, on-again support for
the NDP. Writing for this
magazine, a radical
envirosocialist of a
biocentrist persuasion has to be cautious in
floating new ideas,
which
bump up against the ageing social-democratic
paradigm.
On the green
side
there is now really no magazine which is interested in
the subject
matter of this article. Capitalism,
Nature, Socialism: A
Journal of
Socialist Ecology
(CNS), is a quarterly academic
journal,
published in the United States,
but with an
international group of editors,
including James O’Connor (see his
chapter in this book)
and myself as
editor-at-large. CNS tries to deal with the
red-green
interface, but comes
at this mainly from the red side. "Ecological
Marxism", is the
strongest
tendency it
presents. A red-green alliance cannot be about converting
the greens to
become reds.
10. See the
listing and description of over 50 corporate-front "environmental"
groups, in Deal 1993. The B.C. Forest Alliance, listed in the Guide, was
created by the Burson-Marstellar international public relations company,
at the request of the timber industry. The industry gave birth to this
"citizens group", to counter the environmental movement. Jack Munro, a
former of the IWA in Canada, is chairman of the board. To complete the
picture, Patrick Moore, one of the founders of Greenpeace, is director
of
the forest practices committee. Funding is courtesy of the forest
industry.
See also Megalli and Friedman 1991.
11. McLaughlin (1993) combines a
deep ecology and social justice perspective
coming out of the socialist tradition. The final chapter, “For a Radical
Ecocentrism” should be required reading for any
environmental activist
seeking an alternative worldview to industrial
madness.
12. Richard
Sylvan and Val Plumwood (formerly Richard Routley and
Val Routley) originally worked together on deep
green theory. Sylvan,
an original thinker and prolific author, has
continued this work,
particularly as a sharp and perceptive critic of the
philosophical fuzziness
of deep ecology. He is not part of the "club" of
deep ecology academics,
and is not, unfortunately, well known to movement
activists in Canada
and the United States. Warwick Fox has said that
Sylvan has the "most
comprehensive philosophical critique of deep ecology
that has been
written to date." See Sylvan and Bennett 1994; and
Sylvan 1994.
A preliminary
argument for socialist biocentrism was first given in Orton
1989; see also Orton 1991.
For a full
discussion of ecologism and a good introduction to green political
thinking, see Dobson 1990. For a sympathetic yet
critical assessment of
Dobson’s view of “Environmentalism,” from a Canadian
perspective, see
Orton (forthcoming).
Radical ecocentrism is outlined in the final chapter
of McLaughlin (1993),
which is also reproduced in Green Web Bulletin, No. 38.
Revolutionary ecology is the terminology being used
by Orin Langelle,
Anne Petermann, and Judi Bari. They are U.S.
forestry activists interested
in creating a biocentric perspective that draws from
deep ecology and
social ecology, and the working-class traditions of
the Industrial Workers
of the World. For a preliminary statement, see
Langelle 1993:4; and
“Earth First!” (1993). The view of the working class
in today’s ecological
struggles is a more traditional “left” view.
I would also consider U.S. writers David Johns and
Bill McCormick to be
in the left biocentric tendency. See Johns 1992; and
McCormick 1993:10-11.
McCormick has written many articles on population
questions, always a
sensitive topic for the left. Another deep ecologist
on the left is the Australian
academic Robyn Eckersley. I would not assign her to
a left biocentric
tendency as defined here, although she does speak of
“ecocentric socialism.”
See Eckersley 1992.
REFERENCES
Canada. 1990. Canada’s Green Plan. Ottawa.
Canadian
Environmental Network. 1993. CEN Bulletin,
4:1 (Summer).
Deal, Carl.
1993. Greenpeace Guide to
Anti-Environmental Organizations.
Berkeley, CA:
Odonian Press.
Devall, Bill,
ed. 1993. Clearcut: The Tragedy of
Industrial Forestry. San
Francisco:
Sierra Club Books and Earth Island Press.
Dobson,
Andrew. 1990. Green Political
Thought: An Introduction. London:
Harper Collins
Academic.
“Earth First!
in Northern California: An Interview with Judi Bari.” 1993.
Capitalism,
Nature, Socialism: A Journal of Socialist Ecology (CNS), 4:4.
Eckersley,
Robyn. 1992. Environmentalism and
Political Theory: Toward
an Ecocentric
Approach. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Federation of
Ontario Naturalists. 1993. “Putting Nature First: Conservation
Principles to
Guide the Settlement of Aboriginal Land Claims.” October.
Fox, Warwick.
1993. Towards A Transpersonal
Ecology: Developing New
Foundations
For Environmentalism. Boston: Shambala.
Gare, Arran.
1993. “Soviet Environmentalism: The Path Not Taken.” Capitalism,
Nature,
Socialism: A Journal of Socialist Ecology (CNS), 4:4.
Green Web Bulletin. 1990.
“Sustainable Development: Expanded Environmental
Destruction,”
No. 16 (February).
Green Web Bulletin. 1991.
“Discussion: Socialist Biocentrism.” Reprint of an
exchange
between James O’Connor and D. Orton, from CNS, 2:3 (1991) No. 29.
Green Web Bulletin. 1994.
“Struggling Against ‘Sustainable Development’: A
Canadian
Perspective.” No. 41 (January).
“Green Web Literature.” 1994. January.
Irvine, Sandy.
1993. Letter to author. June 25. (Irvine is co-editor of Real World:
The Voice of
Ecopolitics (U.K.), and an associate editor of The Ecologist. He has
been a member
of the Labour Party, the International Socialists, and SERA – the
Socialist
Environment and Resources Association.)
Johns, David.
1992. “The Practical Relevance of Deep Ecology.” Wild Earth, 2:2
(reprinted in Green Web Bulletin, No. 34).
Langelle,
Orin. 1993. “Defining Practice From The Field: Revolutionary Ecology.”
The Alarm: A
Voice of Revolutionary Ecology, 7 (Summer Solstice).
McCormick,
Bill. 1993. “The Stork Is The Bird Of War.” Real World: The Voice of
Ecopolitics,
(Summer).
McLaughlin,
Andrew. 1993. Regarding Nature:
Industrialism and Deep Ecology.
Albany: State
University of New York Press.
Megalli, Mark
and Andy Friedman. 1991. Masks of
Deception: Corporate Front
Groups in
America. Washington, D.C.: Essential Information.
Naess, Arne.
1989. Ecology, Community and Lifestyle.
Trans. and revised by
David
Rothenberg. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Orton, David.
1989. “Green Marginality in Canada.” Presentation, Learned Societies
Conference,
Quebec City (reprinted in Green Web
Bulletin, No. 4).
_____. 1993.
“Envirosocialism.” Paper originally written in December 1992 and
circulated
through Green Web and
subsequently printed in Green
Multilogue,
8:1 (November).
_____. 1994.
“Sustainable Forestry.” Earth First!
Journal, XIV:3.
_____.
Forthcoming. “A Review of Dobson’s View of Environmentalism.”
Canadian
Dimension.
Ponting,
Clive. 1991. A Green History Of The
World: The Environment
and the
Collapse of Great Civilizations. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Sachs,
Wolfgang. 1993. “Global Ecology and the Shadow of ‘Development.’”
In Global Ecology: A New Arena of Political
Conflict, ed. Wolfgang Sachs
(Halifax:
Fernwood Publishing).
Sylvan,
Richard. n.d. “Paradigmatic Roots Of Environmental Problems.” Mimeo,
The Australian
National University.
______. 1994. Deep Pluralism. Edinburgh:
University of Edinburgh Press.
R. Sylvan and
D. Bennett. 1994. The Greening of
Ethics. Cambridge: White
Horse Press.
Whyte, Ian.
1994. Letter to author. January 17. (Whyte is secretary of the Green
Party of
Ontario, and is involved with anti-biocide and parks/wilderness issues).
World Wildlife
Fund Canada. 1993. “Protected Areas and Aboriginal Interests
in Canada.”
July.
Appendix: The Deep Ecology Platform
1) The
well-being and flourishing of human and nonhuman life on Earth have
value
in themselves (synonyms: inherent worth, intrinsic
value, inherent value).
These values are independent of the usefulness of
the nonhuman world for
human purposes.
2) Richness
and diversity of life-forms contribute to the realization of these
values
and are also values in themselves.
3) Humans have
no right to reduce this richness and diversity except to satisfy vital
needs.
4) Present
human interference with the nonhuman world is excessive, and the
situation is rapidly worsening.
5) The
flourishing of human life and cultures is compatible with a substantial
decrease of the human population. The flourishing of
nonhuman life requires
such a decrease.
6) Policies
must therefore be changed. The changes in policies affect basic
economic, technological, and ideological structures.
The resulting state of
affairs will be deeply different from the present.
7) The
ideological change is mainly that of appreciating life quality (dwelling
in situations of inherent worth) rather than
adhering to an increasingly higher
standard of living. There will be a profound
awareness of the difference
between big and great.
8) Those who
subscribe to the foregoing points have an obligation directly or
indirectly to participate in the attempt to
implement the necessary changes.
Arne Naess and
George Sessions, from Bill Devall, ed., Clearcut: The
Tragedy of
Industrial Forestry (San Francisco: Sierra Club Books and Earth
Island Press,
1993), p.235.
To obtain any
of the Green Web publications,
write to us at:
Green Web, R.R. #3, Saltsprings, Nova Scotia, Canada, BOK 1PO
E-mail us at: greenweb@tncwireless.ca
Back
to
The Green Web
A Taste
of Green Web Writings
and Left Biocentrism
http://home.ca.inter.net/~greenweb/Envirosocialism.html
Last updated: September 09, 2012