← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Buddy
Thread ID: 11444 | Posts: 25 | Started: 2003-12-12
2003-12-12 01:50 | User Profile
"Green" Nazis? If this article is true, then the Green Party isn't what I thought it was. [url]http://politicallyright.com/article149.htm[/url]
2003-12-12 02:22 | User Profile
The article sets off my BS alarm.
2003-12-12 03:20 | User Profile
Judson Cox is credited on the bottom of the article as having a "unique" perspective. Actually, I think they mean [B]quintessential Neocon ZOGified[/B] perspective.
2003-12-12 13:51 | User Profile
[QUOTE] When I met this girl, who shall remain unnamed, she was not committed to any political ideology. She was an unusually bright girl; attractive and well humored, with a scathing wit. .... Eventually, she admitted to me that she had become a Nazi [/QUOTE] A natural progression.
2003-12-12 19:05 | User Profile
Green Nazis:
[url]http://www.nazi.org/[/url]
That's the Libertarian National Socialist Green Party, and it's fair to disclose that I write for that site sometimes.
2003-12-12 19:07 | User Profile
Further useful information:
[url]http://www.taivaansusi.net/politiikka/ekofasismi.html[/url]
[url]http://www.panix.com/~clays/Una/[/url]
Many of us who were schooled and raised as leftists turned around and asked the left if it had misinterpreted its values, and that's how we ended up in third front politics.
2003-12-12 21:15 | User Profile
I used to be a leftist, but this article still doesn't get past my BS meter. It just sounds made up by someone trying to conflate things for propaganda reasons.
2003-12-12 22:07 | User Profile
Evidence, however, does prove that anti-Semitism on the Left is increasingly common. What was formerly agreed to be the most egregious evil of the twentieth century is now embraced and tolerated by many of the most influential leaders and constituencies of the Left. As an active Republican and committed conservative, I can attest that anti-Semitism is not tolerated on the Right. Other conservatives would roundly condemn any Republican who expressed such bigoted rhetoric.
Paint the Left as anti-semitic Nazis using ridiculous exaggerations, hysteria, and lies -> the rubes on the "Right" who define being "Right-wing" as a knee-jerk opposition to "the Left" scurry to defend the Tribe.
Fools.
2003-12-12 23:34 | User Profile
Actually health-foodism, "physical culture" (excercise), and eugenics all go way way back in the various White Nationalist movements. This always made me chuckle seeing these far-left hippies utterly supporting these gifts of the White Nationalists. Kind of like how a suburban yuppie living in a nice White neighborhood owes his physical safety to White skins and frankly thugs in the proudest sense of the term. You can look this up, health foods and the "natural" lifestyle have deep Aryan roots. And as far as that goes, the far-left radio station I often listen is the only one I've heard use the "neocon" word and they use it a lot. In fact, they all but name the Jew and I actually won't be all that surprised if they do one day soon. Just as Uncle Wolf always preferred former Communists (as long as Aryan!) as recruits over wishy-washy middle-of-the-roaders, not everyone on the left is stupid. I feel many are ready to come over to our side, since biologically it's their side too! Whether we tap away at a keyboard or fight with our stompin' boots, we're all one Folk!
2003-12-13 01:59 | User Profile
I agree completely, Edana.
2003-12-14 04:14 | User Profile
The left is currently being accused of "anti-Semitism" mainly for its support of Palestine. The true public agenda seems to be avoiding making the connection between eugenics, fascism, "blood and soil" and environmentalism.
2003-12-22 15:50 | User Profile
Pentti Linkola
Finnish fisherman, environmentalist, ecofascist and amateur biologist who wrote of the need for curtailing immigration, killing most of humanity and abandoning most of modern technology.
Pentti Linkola writes about the apocalyptic climactic changes that will soon effect us here in humanityland, but he doesn't take the easy way out that most authors do. Instead, he chooses to be brutally honest and suggests that we've already missed our chance to curb our damage of the world, so what we must do is to begin the elimination of human and technological excesses now.
Vital quotes
"What to do, when a ship carrying a hundred passengers suddenly capsizes and only one lifeboat? When the lifeboat is full, those who hate life will try to load it with more people and sink the lot. Those who love and respect life will take the ship's axe and sever the extra hands that cling to the sides of the boat."
"Any dictatorship would be better than modern democracy. There cannot be so incompetent dictator, that he would show more stupidity than a majority of the people. Best dictatorship would be one where lots of heads would roll and government would prevent any economical growth."
"The most central and irrational faith among people is the faith in technology and economical growth. Its priests believe until their death that material prosperity bring enjoyment and happiness - even though all the proofs in history have shown that only lack and attempt cause a life worth living, that the material prosperity doesn't bring anything else than despair. These priests believe in technology still when they choke in their gas masks."
"That there are billions of people over 60kg weight on this planet is recklessness."
[url]http://www.anus.com/zine/db/linkola_pentti/[/url]
2003-12-22 15:58 | User Profile
Nazi Environmental links/discussion:
[url]http://www.nazi.org/library/environment_index.html[/url]
Fascist Ecology: The "Green Wing" of the Nazi Party and its Historical Antecedents
[url]http://www.spunk.org/library/places/germany/sp001630/peter.html[/url]
"Ecology in the 20th Century" by Anna Bramwell - contains a chapter on the NS greens.
[url]http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0300045212/[/url]
"Blood and Soil" by Anna Bramwell
Anna Bramwell's Blood and Soil is a strange, rare little book.I might never have heard of it, had I not seen it cited in abibliography of a book on the S.S.
Richard Walther Darre (1895-1953) was Hitler's Agriculture Minister until 1941. He was also a major figure in the Nordic racialist movement, and was one of those people who was responsible for the "pagan" wing of the Nazi Party.
I got hold of this book expecting it to be just another book on the "evils" of the Nordic Renaissance. I was surprised, however, to read a book that shed light on the fact that the Nordic movement was far more complicated than the "blond hair-blue-eye-let's-breed-superpeople syndrome" so often found in the American press.
Ms. Bramwell writes about many figures in the movement, such as Paul Schultze-Naumberg a nd his wife, Hans F.K. Gunther, Bernhard Kummer, Johann van Leers and L.F. Clauss. I learned a lot about how the Nordic ideal was just that, an ideal, and that not all Nordics were supposed to be blond, for instance. Nordicism encompassed more than just a "racial" stereotype. It was a temperament, a way of life, a philosophy. It was a back-to nature movement, that stressed temperance and healthy living.
[url]http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0946041334/[/url]
2003-12-28 23:56 | User Profile
Ahn Fyuh Wi Dizayah's Anti-Racism List presents:
THE NAZI GREEN PHENOMENON
-*-
You may also want to see my Anti-Racist Resources List.
[url]http://www.geocities.com/g848138/anti-racist.txt[/url]
-*-
My Encounter
With A 'Nazi Green' by Judson Cox
During the ‘2000 elections, I was enrolled as a student at the University Of Georgia. During a presidential election, a large university campus is a fascinating place to be. It is a microcosm of political views, ranging from the mainstream to the absurd. During the election season, I was involved with both Republican and Libertarian club events, though the colorful activities of other political factions did not escape my attention. The daily panorama of politics ranged from Libertarian gun raffles, which succeeded in raising funds and generating media attention, to parades of Greens, with their threats of violence, their costumes, and their typically macabre signs decrying capitalism, environmental destruction, and the military. There were also the banal activities of the Gore/Lieberman supporters, and the politically incorrect witticisms that have come to be expected from College Republicans.
The smaller organizations ranged from racial identity groups, hardcore communists, holdout supporters of Jell-O Biafra, and Frank Zappa For President boosters (surely a boon for the running mate, as Zappa had recently expired). There was even a loose-knit cadre of anarchists and Marxists who leafleted and spray-painted the campus with the message: "Pigasus For President.” I assume that this was not the same pig that the Yippies ran against President Nixon. Given that many in this group identified themselves as witches, however, I will not rule out reanimation.
Not long before the election madness, I met a girl who gave me a unique insight into the Left. When I met this girl, who shall remain unnamed, she was not committed to any political ideology. She was an unusually bright girl; attractive and well humored, with a scathing wit. We spent a good deal of time together. But at some point after our meeting, she began a strange transformation. Gradually, her mood darkened; her humor became far more negative and surfaced less frequently. She began avoiding political discussions. Eventually, she admitted to me that she had become a Nazi (yes, an actual Hitler-quoting Nazi).
Of course, I tried to dissuade her. I did my best to explain the failures of socialism, and to defend the Jewish people. I attempted both reason and emotion. I debunked the "Protocols Of The Wise Men Of Zion" as Czarist propaganda, and I countered the conspiracy theories concerning the Rothchilds and Israel. I listed the great accomplishments of famous Jews. I even convinced her that science, philosophy, religion, art, economics, and literature have all been greatly furthered by Jewish accomplishments. Though it was all for naught. She had surrounded herself with charismatic Nazis, and had been thoroughly persuaded by their lies. It was the end of our friendship.
Time passed, and we traveled in different circles. It was not until the ‘2000 election that our paths crossed again. I spotted her among a mob of Green Party members who were agitating to get Ralph Nader on the ballot. At the time, I hoped Nader would be to Al Gore what Ross Perot was to George Bush, so I approached her and offered to sign her petition.
"Hey, ____," I said, "I thought you were a Nazi; what are you doing supporting Nader?"
"I am a Nazi," she replied, "That's why I'm supporting Nader."
I must have looked a bit puzzled, because she continued, "What do you think Nazism is? It's National Socialism. Only we don't support any one nation. We want an end to all capitalist governments, and the environmental destruction they entail. Also, we're all against the Jews. The Jews run everything; they are responsible for capitalist exploitation and environmental destruction. They are responsible for poverty, war, and global warming. What they are doing to Palestine, they will do to all of us if we let them."
"So," I asked in disbelief, "the Green Party is anti-Semitic?"
"Most of us are," she replied, "Some of us even call ourselves ‘Nazi Greens,’ especially in Europe."
"You are insane," I told her, as I walked away, feeling nauseous.
This exchange helped me understand what would otherwise be a puzzling phenomenon. That is, in the past few years, the Left has grown increasingly anti-Semitic. On its face, this just does not make sense. Jews are generally associated with liberal causes, yet modern liberalism is growing less accepting of Jews. The work of western intellectuals like Edward Said, longtime champion of radical Palestinians, is partly to blame for the Left’s increasing anti-Semitism; but this problem reaches far beyond the Palestinian cause. The Leftwing movement that began with Israeli divestment campaigns (which equate Israel to Apartheid South Africa) on college campuses has grown to the point where the phrase "Zionist conspiracy" is a virtual shibboleth (if you will pardon the expression).
The rise of anti-Semitism on the Left came to a head following the September 11th terror attacks. With the appearance of books claiming to prove that Israel was behind the attacks, the Zionist conspiracy became common currency. Liberal websites and leaders spread this message, until blatant anti-Semitism became commonplace at every war protest. Leftwing, Francophile protesters brandished placards blaming the world's ills on Jews, while their French counterparts defaced synagogues and graves, and attacked Jews in the streets.
This tide of sentiment is not limited to young radicals. Indeed, there is now a veritable cottage industry in which lawyers, led by the ACLU, make a living defending those who seek to, or who actively encourage, killing Jews in Israel and abroad. More and more, the Left makes it clear that the only religion of which they approve is the one that preaches the killing of Jews (and Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, etc.)- radical Islam.
Even among mainstream democrats, anti-Semitism is not condemned. When Jesse Jackson used the slur, "hymie town," a single liberal did not denounce him, nor was Al Sharpton rebuked when he said he would not tolerate a Hadassah (Lieberman's wife) in the White House. And Hillary Clinton is forgiven for reportedly calling Dick Morris a "Jew bastard." The "Zionist conspiracy" is even being leveled against the Bush administration as the term "neoconservative" has resurfaced as a synonym for ‘Jewish conservative.’ From the radical fringe to the highest ranks of the Democratic Party, the Left claims that the Bush administration is nothing more than Israel’s pawn.
I do not pretend that my experience with a Nazi turned Green is evidence that all Greens are Nazis; I am sure many are not. I also do not believe that all liberals are anti-Semitic, nor that all liberals are tolerant of anti-Semites. Evidence, however, does prove that anti-Semitism on the Left is increasingly common. What was formerly agreed to be the most egregious evil of the twentieth century is now embraced and tolerated by many of the most influential leaders and constituencies of the Left. As an active Republican and committed conservative, I can attest that anti-Semitism is not tolerated on the Right. Other conservatives would roundly condemn any Republican who expressed such bigoted rhetoric.
The same simply cannot be said of the Left. To gauge how dangerous this situation is, consider this: If a leader were to arise- a man who was a vegetarian, a radical environmentalist, a tea-drinking, nature worshipping, anti-smoking fanatic, a socialist, a proponent of abortion and of medical research utilizing fetal tissue, a man who would outlaw speech and ideas that are politically incorrect, an animal rights activist, a controversial artist and writer, and a pagan whose harshest rhetoric was directed against Jews and Christians- he could, with the requisite charisma, quickly rise to leadership in the Green Party. Indeed, such a man would find few critics among Democrats, and would be widely applauded by the faculty at most American colleges.
Only a few decades ago, such a man did exist, and he did become the leader of a modern nation. That man was Adolph Hitler.
Judson Cox is a political columnist from the mountains of North Carolina. As a college student, and Director of Communication for the Foundation for Conservative American Values, he has a unique perspective on matters of politics, economics, and culture.
[url]http://politicallyright.com/article149.htm[/url]
-*-
But what is leftism? During the first half of the 20th century leftism could have been practically identified with socialism. Today the movement is fragmented and it is not clear who can properly be called a leftist. When we speak of leftists in this article we have in mind mainly socialists, collectivists, "politically correct" types, feminists, gay and disability activists, animal rights activists and the like. But not everyone who is associated with one of these movements is a leftist. What we are trying to get at in discussing leftism is not so much a movement or an ideology as a psychological type, or rather a collection of related types.
[url]http://www.panix.com/~clays/Una/una1.html#section2[/url]
-*-
It has only been the last several years that articles addressing the Nature-Loving and Nature-Preserving policies of the NSDAP have appeared in print. Even so, there is a juvenile and shortsighted tendency among those who are still "right-thinking" to oppose anything mentioning the environment because "The Left" supports such issues. This is funny considering that some critics of the Third Reich have highlighted the NSDAP's Green tendencies and compared the "Nazis" to Hippies and New Agers! Of course all of this is due to people who can only think in dualistic terms and have not grasped the Third Position.
[url]http://www.taivaansusi.net/politiikka/ekofasismi.html[/url]
-*-
"We recognize that separating humanity from nature, from the whole of life, leads to humankind’s own destruction and to the death of nations. Only through a re-integration of humanity into the whole of nature can our people be made stronger. That is the fundamental point of the biological tasks of our age. Humankind alone is no longer the focus of thought, but rather life as a whole . . . This striving toward connectedness with the totality of life, with nature itself, a nature into which we are born, this is the deepest meaning and the true essence of National Socialist thought."
[url]http://www.spunk.org/library/places/germany/sp001630/peter.html[/url]
-*-
Berlin, Germany: Two academics warn that the German Green Party is echoing neo-fascist ideas by promoting native plants.
[url]http://www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m0GER/2001_Spring/74925397/p1/article.jhtml[/url]
-*-
A quote from PETA founder Ingrid Newkirk (Washington Post, November 13, 1983), shows how far a biocentric view can lead to moral relativism and disregard for human suffering: "Six million Jews died in concentration camps, but six billion broiler chickens will die this year in slaughter houses."
[url]http://squawk.ca/lbo-talk/0207/0479.html[/url]
-*-
"Blood and Soil" by Anna Bramwell
Anna Bramwell's Blood and Soil is a strange, rare little book.I might never have heard of it, had I not seen it cited in abibliography of a book on the S.S.
Richard Walther Darre (1895-1953) was Hitler's Agriculture Minister until 1941. He was also a major figure in the Nordic racialist movement, and was one of those people who was responsible for the "pagan" wing of the Nazi Party.
I got hold of this book expecting it to be just another book on the "evils" of the Nordic Renaissance. I was surprised, however, to read a book that shed light on the fact that the Nordic movement was far more complicated than the "blond hair-blue-eye-let's-breed-superpeople syndrome" so often found in the American press.
Ms. Bramwell writes about many figures in the movement, such as Paul Schultze-Naumberg a nd his wife, Hans F.K. Gunther, Bernhard Kummer, Johann van Leers and L.F. Clauss. I learned a lot about how the Nordic ideal was just that, an ideal, and that not all Nordics were supposed to be blond, for instance. Nordicism encompassed more than just a "racial" stereotype. It was a temperament, a way of life, a philosophy. It was a back-to nature movement, that stressed temperance and healthy living.
[url]http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0946041334/[/url]
-*-
The mix of mysticism, romanticism, and pseudo-environmentalist concerns propagated by Steiner and his cohorts brought anthroposophy into close ideological contact with a grouping that has been described as the green wing of National Socialism.29 This group, which included several of the Third Reich's most powerful leaders, were active proponents of biodynamic agriculture and other anthroposophist causes. The history of this relationship has been the subject of some controversy, with anthroposophists typically denying any connection whatsoever to the Nazis. To understand the matter fully, it is perhaps best to set it in the context of anthroposophy's attitude toward the rise of fascism.
[url]http://maalainen.blogspot.com/2003_06_01_maalainen_archive.html[/url]
-*-
Norwegian philosopher Arne Naess coined the term "deep ecology" in 1972 to express the idea that nature has intrinsic value, apart from its usefulness to human beings. This distinction between a biocentric and human-centered -- anthropocentric -- perspective has been hotly debated in the environmental movement ever since. In its most extreme form, a biocentric perspective leads to utter disregard for human welfare. David Foreman, the founder of the deep ecology organisation appropriately named Earth First!, notoriously called for humanitarian organisations to sit back and watch Ethiopians starve to death during the famine of 1987: "The worst thing we could do in Ethiopia is to give aid [to the starving children] -- the best thing would be to just let nature seek its own balance, to let people there just starve."
Ingrid Newkirk, the founder of the anti-fur animal rights organisation PETA sees people as parasites. "Humans have grown like a cancer. We're the biggest blight on the face of the earth," she told Reader's Digest in June 1990. In 1983 she explained to the Washington Post that the lives of individuals have no value, only the survival of the species: "I am not a morose person, but I would rather not be here. I don't have any reverence for life, only for the entities themselves. I would rather see a blank space where I am."
Although the terrorist fringe of the environmental movement usually is labelled left-wing, it has more in common with the green wing of the German Nazi party. The fact that radical environmentalists are also staunch anti-capitalists does not necessarily place them in the left-socialist camp. The National Socialists where also strongly anti-capitalist. The Nazi's disregard for the individual and preoccupation with race is well known, but that this also had a distinctively green twist is less appreciated.
[url]http://www.techcentralstation.com/070202M.html[/url]
-*-
Adolf Hitler was the first world leader to establish any kind of systematic environmental policy, and his record has since not been matched by any of the "moral" Western leaders of today. We must ask ourselves whether we value cheap industrial products more than having a non-toxic, non-carcinogenic natural environment in which to live, breathe, breed and die.
[url]http://www.nazi.org/library/environment.html[/url]
-*-
End of Ahn Fyuh Wi Dizayah's Anti-Racist Report on the Nazi Greens. Dec. 25, 2003
2003-12-29 00:00 | User Profile
This is a related concept, although not NS-specific. Although this guy is an "anti-racist," he compiles information well.
Ahn Fyuh Wi Dizayah's Field Guide to:
DEEP ECOLOGY
*
[url]http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=nhDHb.28893%24V23.11827%40fe1.texas.rr.com[/url]
2003-12-29 00:07 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Edana]I used to be a leftist, but this article still doesn't get past my BS meter. It just sounds made up by someone trying to conflate things for propaganda reasons.[/QUOTE]
I think this is correct about the Judson Cox article. However, Green Nazis do exist, as do links between the two extremes of right and left, which in my view supports that hypothesis that perhaps the right/left distinctions are artificial and cripple any meaningful debate on the issues actually at hand.
2003-12-31 02:58 | User Profile
From the Politicallyright article:
Only a few decades ago, such a man did exist, and he did become the leader of a modern nation. That man was Adolph Hitler.
Oh boy, now that's scary. :ohmy:
2003-12-31 04:46 | User Profile
Remember 99% of the leadership of so-called Greens are Marxists. It is for the most part just front for Marxism. Just take a look at what happened when they tried to take up the subject of immagration. The prmotion of marxist always comes first. Also remember the "Greehouse Gas" treaty, it did nothing to reduce CO2 but it helped build World Government.
2004-01-02 01:19 | User Profile
I agree. The reason the Green party has failed is that leftist retards have clogged its ranks and tacked on irrelevant items to the agenda. I laughed at a "Green" who said he was an anti-racist: "What does that have to do, at all, with being Green?"
2004-01-04 22:16 | User Profile
Yes -- recall Hitler's "shovel army" of tree planters [seen in the movie "Triumph of the Will"].
2004-02-13 04:58 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Acorn]Actually health-foodism, "physical culture" (excercise), and eugenics all go way way back in the various White Nationalist movements. This always made me chuckle seeing these far-left hippies utterly supporting these gifts of the White Nationalists. Kind of like how a suburban yuppie living in a nice White neighborhood owes his physical safety to White skins and frankly thugs in the proudest sense of the term. You can look this up, health foods and the "natural" lifestyle have deep Aryan roots. And as far as that goes, the far-left radio station I often listen is the only one I've heard use the "neocon" word and they use it a lot. In fact, they all but name the Jew and I actually won't be all that surprised if they do one day soon. Just as Uncle Wolf always preferred former Communists (as long as Aryan!) as recruits over wishy-washy middle-of-the-roaders, not everyone on the left is stupid. I feel many are ready to come over to our side, since biologically it's their side too! Whether we tap away at a keyboard or fight with our stompin' boots, we're all one Folk![/QUOTE]
This is similar to my experience. Anyone in the struggle is with us and against the degeneration. However, most have no idea what they're doing. Similarly, to the poster who complained about Greens being mostly Marxist, I think most Marxists/Christians don't realize what their ideology fully involves. They think only in the present tense. With time, they might also have a place.
2004-02-13 07:52 | User Profile
When considering the Green Nazis and the birth of their ideology alongside other forms of Nazism, one should also bear in mind fascist Henry Ford. (a reciepient of the Grand Cross of the German Eagle)
Most folks assume that because of inventions involving the automobile that Henry Ford was a hard-core industrialist. Not so.
[I]Mr. Ford actually viewed himself as a farmer![/I] Like many fascists, Ford enjoyed forays into unspoiled regions of Divine Nature, birdwatching, vegetarianism, teetotalling and avoiding the evils of tobacco.
Original Green Nazis condemned the immoral, decadent, cosmoplitan cities filled with alien jews (who had no root in the soil, unlike the noble aryan farmer).
2004-02-13 15:16 | User Profile
The ecologist European New Right
[url]http://www.communalism.org/Archive/3/dspe.html[/url]
The Dark Side of Political Ecology By Peter Zegers
ââ¬ÅIf the word ecology is used to describe our outlook, it is preposterous to invoke deities, mystical forces to account for the evolution of first nature into second nature. Neither religion nor a spiritualistic vision of experience has any place in an ecological lexicon. Either the term ecology applies to natural phenomena by definition, or it is a chic metaphor for the disempowered consciousness that fosters mysticism or outright supernaturalism.ââ¬Â
[Murray Bookchin, The Ecology of Freedom: The Emergence and Dissolution of Hierarchy. (Montréal: Black Rose, Second edition 1991) p. xxi]
The ecology movement has over the last decades been a battleground for both progressive and reactionary ideas. The notions one encounters in the ecology movements range from genuinely progressive and humanist ones to extremely misanthropic, even ecofascistic ones. In the essay ââ¬ÅWill ecology become 'the dismal science'?ââ¬Â American social ecologist Murray Bookchin identified nearly ten years ago some of the anti-humanistic tendencies within the ecology movement in the United States: deep ecology, biocentrism, Gaian consciousness, and eco-theology. Basic to these outlooks is a suspicion of reason and an emphasis on the importance of intuitive and irrational approaches to ecological issues. Bookchin concluded the essay with this note: ââ¬ÅIt is not only the great mass of people that must make hard choices about humanity's future in a period of growing ecological dislocation; it is the ecology movement itself that must make hard choices about its sense of direction in a time of growing mystification.ââ¬Â (1) Since Bookchinââ¬â¢s essay was published in 1991, these anti-humanistic tendencies have unfortunately become even more prominent. A case in point is one of the leading American deep ecologists, Bill Devall. Together with George Sessions, Bill Devall introduced the ideas of Arne Næss, the founder of deep ecology, to the American public. Devall uttered on August 2, 1998, at the conference Gold and Green, a racist remark against Mexican immigrants: according to him, they ââ¬Ådid what gangs of Mexicans always do ââ¬â rape, pillage, burn, murder.ââ¬Â He also made the point that the owner of Maxxam Corporation (a firm threatening a redwood forest in California) was ââ¬Åa criminal Jewish capitalist.ââ¬Â Devallââ¬â¢s associate George Sessions, also present at this conference, lamented about the left wing perspective of a lot of people in the ecology movement and claimed that social justice issues only would distract attention from the real cause of the ecological crisis: overpopulation. In order to counteract the ecological imbalance Sessions suggested that an authoritarian regime should be implemented, like the one that ruled Japan from 1615 to 1836. (2) Is this just a marginal incident? Because of the premisses on which deep ecology is predicated I very much doubt this.
The Political Implications of Deep Ecology Deep ecology is a vague and formless concept and one can find all kinds of mixtures of reactionary and seemingly progressive ideas in it. Deep ecologists claim very different thinkers as pioneers of deep ecology, one can for example find Heidegger alongside Spinoza. No effort is made to explain how these very different thinkers can be rubricated in the same category. Commenting on this lack of coherence Arne Næss wrote: ââ¬ÅWhy Gleichschaltung? Why monolithic ideologies? We have had enough of those in both European and world history.ââ¬Â (3) To put a demand for coherence on a par with a Nazi operation is telling enough and reveals his limited understanding of fascism. Næss continues in the same article: ââ¬ÅIt would, in my view, be a cultural disaster for humankind if one philosophy or one religion were to become established on earth. It would be a disaster if future Green societies were so similar that they blocked the development of deep cultural differences.ââ¬Â (4) Does this also apply to human rights and democracy? In another interview he stated: ââ¬ÅDiversity in every aspect of our existence should be a norm, whether it is biodiversity, cultural diversity or economic diversity. Diversity of ideas is also very important. If we thought that there is one correct idea, one absolute truth, one right way to sustainability, then we might end up creating a kind of eco-fascism. It is only through multiplicity, plurality, diversity and inclusivity that we can find self-realization. There is no one final definition of self-realization. Everyone will find their own meaning in this word. Through deep questioning we come to deep ecology and through deep ecology we come to self-realization, but all this means nothing. It remains a kind of theory. It is through practice that we find realization. As each one of us has our own body, we have our own ââ¬Ërealizationââ¬â¢.ââ¬Â (5) Maybe because of this limited understanding of eco-fascism Næss does not mind being published by extreme right wing publications in France and Italy. Indeed his ideas bear a close resemblance to the 'ethno-pluralism' advocated by Alain de Benoist and others in the Nouvelle Droite. American author Kirkpatrick Sale, who is very close to deep ecology, is very clear about the fact that democracy and human rights need not be respected, but that we instead should respect the denial of democracy and human rights! Kirkpatrick Sale wrote: ââ¬Å[Bioregional diversity] does not mean that every community in a bioregion, every subregion within an ecoregion, every ecoregion on a continent, would construct itself along the same lines, evolve the same political forms. Most particularly it does not mean that every bioregion would be likely to heed the values of democracy, equality, liberty, freedom, justice and the like, the sort that the liberal American tradition proclaims. Truly autonomous bioregions would inevitably go in separate and not necessarily complementary ways, creating their own political systems according to their own environmental settings and their own ecological needs ââ¬Â¦ Different cultures could be expected to have quite different views about what political forms could best accomplish their bioregional goals, and (especially as we imagine this system on a global scale) those forms could be at quite some variance from the Western Enlightenment-inspired ideal. And however much one might find the thought unpleasant, that divergence must be expected and ââ¬â if diversity is desirable ââ¬â respected.ââ¬Â (6)
Not only does deep ecology oppose the universal concepts of democracy and human rights through its misguided understanding of diversity, the ideas of Næss verge also on the mystical and he himself seems to be aware of this since he quotes New Age-author Charlene Spretnak approvingly when she calls for 'emotional involvement and caring' instead of rational thinking. (7) It is therefore not very surprising that New Age-authors Fritjof Capra and Charlene Spretnak have embraced the label deep ecology. Fritjof Capra is like Spretnak very outspoken in his anti-rationalism: ââ¬ÅUltimately, deep ecological awareness is spiritual or religious awareness.ââ¬Â (8) Charlene Spretnak declares humanism to be the principal enemy of an ecological politics. In 1984 she said in an address to the annual gathering of the E.F. Schumacher Society: ââ¬ÅGreen politics rejects the anthropocentric orientation of humanism, a philosophy which posits that humans have the ability to confront and solve the many problems we face by applying human reason and by rearranging the natural world and the interactions of men and women so that human life will prosper.ââ¬Â (9) Spretnak and Capra wrote a book about the German Greens where they, in spite of the 'pluralism' of deep ecology, made very clear that they are hostile to left wing tendencies in the Green movement. (10) Unfortunately no such demarcation exists for right wing tendencies in the ecology movement. The Right seems to be very grateful to enter this lack of demarcation and it would indeed be very hard to demarcate deep ecology from the Right because it shows structural similarities with Right ideology. Although Capra and Spretnak seem to be aware of the German past, they have trouble seeing the continuity with the present. They describe Herbert Gruhl as a 'conservative' politician, whereas the term eco-fascist would be more appropriate. Gruhl was one of the founders of Die Grünen but left the party in 1982 (which Capra and Spretnak seem to regret and blame the 'marxists' for) to found the Ãâkologisch Demokratische Partei (Ecological Democratic Party). When this party decided in 1989 to distance itself from the extreme Right political party Die Republikaner against the will of Gruhl, he withdrew and founded the Unabhängige Ãâkologen Deutschlands. He was one of the first to use ecological discourse for xenophobic purposes. (11) Capra and Spretnak also do not seem to understand why many Germans are so suspicious about ideas that bear a close resemblance to the Blut und Boden (Blood and soil) theories of the Nazis. Instead of analyzing this resemblance and continuity, they choose to ignore it and as a consequence they were uncritical of Rudolf Bahro's views that only a few years later culminated into a kind of spiritual fascism. (12)
Deep ecology is a very eclectic bag of ideas and there are yet other features that are very disturbing because of the reactionary implications. Fundamental for deep ecology is the completely unfounded assertion that the ecological crisis is caused by 'overpopulation'. There is not a single line in the vast literature on deep ecology that explains why this would be the case. It is simply a matter of faith for adherents of deep ecology and because of this, critique of this aspect has not resulted in a change of ideas in this matter. (13) Some of the supporters of deep ecology have publicly stated that AIDS and famines are nature's revenge on humankind and that we should not do anything about it. A case in point is Dave Foreman, an activist of the environmental direct action group Earth First!, who said in an interview to Bill Devall: ââ¬ÅWhen I tell people how the worst we could do in Ethiopia is to give aid ââ¬â the best thing would be to just let nature seek its own balance, to let the people there just starve ââ¬â they think that is monstrous. But the alternative is that you go in and save these half-dead children who never will live a whole life. Their development will be stunted. And what is going to happen in ten years' time is that twice as many people will suffer and die. Likewise, letting the USA be an overflow valve for problems in Latin America is not solving a thing. It is just putting more pressure on resources we have in the USA. It is just causing more destruction of our wilderness, more poisoning of water and air, and it is not helping the problems in Latin America.ââ¬Â (14) Not a single protest against this raving was uttered by Devall, one of the leading exponents of deep ecology in the United States. We understand from his statements at the Gold and Green conference quoted above why Bill Devall did not bother to contradict Foreman. Deep ecology lacks a theory of the social causes of the environmental crisis and the only solution they can think of is a reduction of population. How to achieve this is not made clear, but some supporters do not exclude draconic, indeed eco-fascistic measures.
The anti-humanist notion of 'biocentrism', the notion that all living beings have equal 'intrinsic worth', is another disturbing feature in deep ecology. This 'biocentrism' has its counterpart in 'anthropocentrism', the view that human happiness and welfare should precede all other priorities. In the book The Arrogance of Humanism (1981) David Ehrenfeldt wrote in this 'biocentric' vain about the right of the smallpox-virus to exist. Since then tons of paper have been produced with articles about 'intrinsic worth', 'biocentric democracy', and 'biocentrism' and its implications. Indeed deep ecology has become a booming academic industry. The way seems to be opened for the discussion of how much human suffering and death is acceptable in the name of an 'ecological ethics'. Again, there is not the faintest idea about the social roots of the environmental problems. All people, regardless of their position in society, are held equally responsible for the destruction of the environment in this view. Humanity's 'original sin' was 'anthropocentrism' (theological words apply very neatly in this way of thinking). Deep ecologists have a very static view on nature or 'wilderness'. As important as they profess to value 'wilderness', they never explain very much the meaning of this concept. For them 'nature' is just a scenic view, untouched by human intervention even though in reality there is no 'wilderness' left on this earth. Nevertheless some deep ecologists want to exclude people from some areas, at least people not living 'traditional' (pre-1500 A.D., according to Foreman) lifestyles. (15) Hand in hand with their reverence for 'wild' nature goes a depreciation of science and technology. These are held responsible for the desacralization of nature and consequently the destruction of the environment. Bill Devall, in his usual subtle way, states it like this: ââ¬ÅStudents in natural resources sciences and management ââ¬â are much like the guards in Nazi death camps.ââ¬Â (16) In another passage he makes the same comparison: ââ¬ÅI see an analogy between rescuers of Jews and homosexuals in Nazi-occupied Europe and strategic monkeywrenching (a tactic used by the environmental direct action group Earth First!, PZ) in the late twentieth century.ââ¬Â (17) Like Næss, Devall has no hesitations about using inappropriate analogies that trivialize the Holocaust.
The Extreme Right and Ecology Even more disturbing than the reactionary implications of basic tenets of deep ecology is the use of ecological concepts by groups and individuals of the extreme Right. Many people in the ecology movement consider themselves to be 'beyond Left and Right', but this position unfortunately makes them very vulnerable to overtures from the extreme Right, which (especially in Europe) is trying to modernize its rhetoric (the slogan was, tellingly enough, invented by the German right wing ecologist Herbert Gruhl for Die Grünen). By adopting ecological themes and concepts and incorporating them into its propaganda, the extreme Right today is seeking to gain mainstream public acceptance. For example, in France the Nouvelle Droite (New Right) has shown a lot of interest in deep ecology. Nouvelle Droite is the name for a tendency in the extreme right wing milieu that tries to modernize its ideology. A central organization in this field is the Groupement de Recherche et d'Ãâ°tudes pour la Civilisation Européenne, founded in 1968. Its leading ideologue is Alain de Benoist, who is constantly changing his ideas, but nonetheless always opposed the egalitarian ideas that originated in the Enlightenment. (18) It is far beyond the scope of this article to explain in any detail the history of GRECE. (19) Suffice it for now to say that De Benoist and his supporters became interested in ecology around 1993. In an article about the European New Right (ENR) Mark Wegierski wrote: ââ¬ÅAlthough some ENR members at one time advocated technocracy, they have now embraced ecology as one of the most hopeful tendencies on the planet today. The 1993 GRECE colloquium was dedicated to ecology.ââ¬Â (20) From the milieu around GRECE a new ecological organization was founded in the early nineties. This organization called Nouvelle Ãâ°cologie (New Ecology) organizes conferences and lectures and publishes the magazine Le recours aux forêts. Nouvelle Ãâ°cologie regards itself as the French branch of the international deep ecology movement and tries to influence the ecology movement toward a right wing direction.
Even as the extreme Right has picked up and incorporated ecological themes, some prominent ecologists have themselves evolved toward reactionary positions and do not mind to work together very closely with the extreme Right. The British ecologist Edward Goldsmith is a case in point. Goldsmith has been a well-known figure in the international environmentalist movement for several decades. In 1970 he founded the journal The Ecologist, which has long been a leading voice for the movement. He was one of the authors of the 1972 bestseller A Blueprint for Survival. Already in this book some conservative views were exhibited: ââ¬ÅIf there is no hierarchy there will be constant bickering and fighting. There will also be no mechanism for ensuring the perpetuation of those qualities required if the society is to survive.ââ¬Â (21) The overall obsession in Blueprint is 'stability' and 'order'. According to the authors of Blueprint the causes of the environmental crisis are to be found in economic and demographic growth. Like the authors of the Limits to Growth report of the conservative Club of Rome, whom they regard as like-minded individuals, their view on the environmental crisis is extremely limited. In 1991 he received the Right Livelihood Award, the 'alternative Nobel prize'. He is presently very much involved with international campaigns against the WTO, MAI, nuclear energy, and genetically modified organisms. For years, Goldsmith had also been known for his socially paleo-conservative views, especially on the role of women and the family. In an interview he said: ââ¬ÅIn my view women perform a very important role, both with regard to social coherence as well as of the viewpoint of the protection of the environment. They do not have the typical male chauvinism and competiteveness. I am in favor of the kind of feminism Vandana Shiva stands for, whom I know very well by the way, but which is completely at odds with the American kind of feminism that in the end results only in a reversal of male chauvinism into female chauvisnism. You know, one has to accept the differences between men and women, just like those of ethnic groups and cultures. For me, as well as for Shiva, cultural, ethnic, and also biological diversity, destroyed by the global economy, are very important.ââ¬Â (22) In The Way: An Ecological World-View (1992, revised and enlarged edition 1998) Goldsmith tries to formulate his worldview. Like Fritjof Capra he bases his views on an unlikely mix of mechanistic systems theory and eastern mysticism. Many of Goldsmiths ideas focus on religion and its alleged role in shaping the social order. Western society went wrong, he asserts, when it embraced technology, science, and progress instead of the traditional 'Way' (or Tao). The monotheistic religions are also to blame for the desacralization of nature. Goldsmith thinks society should be reorganized so that it accords with the precepts of 'Gaia' which means arranged in the same plan and governed by the same laws as the Cosmos and the natural world. Religion is the means through which the laws of nature should be instrumentalized in society. Goldsmith puts it himself this way: ââ¬ÅThe argument put forward in this book is that we can only conceivably do better if, among other things, we set out to re-interpret our problems in the light of a very different world-view ââ¬â the worldview of ecology ââ¬â inspired as it must be by the chthonic world-view entertained by our remote ancestors who knew, as modern man no longer knows, how to live on this planet.ââ¬Â (23) He sees potential in the religious fundamentalist movements in the Moslem world and India. He states: ââ¬Å[t]here are signs ââ¬Â¦ that such movements are likely to preach a return to the vernacular way of life ââ¬Â¦[A] considerable proportion of the revitalist movements that have so far sprung up in the Third World have been 'nativistic' ââ¬â which is to say that they correctly attributed the ills against they were reacting to the way of life imposed upon them by their colonial masters, and preached a return to the Way of their ancestors ... We cannot afford to wait and see whether such movements will develop into revivalist cults that are powerful enough to transform our society. Instead, we should work towards their development by helping to create the conditions in which they are likely to emerge. Let us remember that the world-view of ecology is very much that of the vernacular community-based society.ââ¬Â (24) Interestingly, he refers a few times very favorably to deep ecology in his book The Way: An Ecological World-View, which he hopes will develop into a movement to perform the task put forward in the book. Goldsmith thanks deep ecology founder Arne Næss, ââ¬Åwho, after reading a summary of this book in The Ecologist, urged me to complete it and get it published.ââ¬Â (25) The view that people should obey the laws of nature (or Gaia) can be found in deep ecology, but also in New Age and the Nouvelle Droite.
The views of Goldsmith are also a potential justification for racism. Nicholas Hildyard, a former associate of Goldsmith, wrote a critique of his views and showed convincingly that he is in favor of separation of different so called 'ethnic groups'. (26) In an article for The Ecologist Goldsmith wrote: ââ¬ÅThe Catholics and the Protestants in Northern Ireland constitute two distinct ethnic groups, of different origin, with different manners and traditions and different motivations and capacities. They could occupy the same geographic area and form a single society if they were capable of living in cultural symbiosis with each other, which they have done up to now. The Catholics, however, are no longer willing to fill the lower echelons of the economic hierarchy, as the cultural pattern which previously enabled them to do so has largely broken down. The only remaining solution is to separate them territorially. Ataturk separated Greeks and Turks very successfully, although there was a terrible outcry at the time and it undoubtedly caused considerable inconvenience to the people who were forced to migrate. But should we not be willing to accept measures of inconvenience in order to establish a stable society?ââ¬Â (27) Few people would agree with his rather peculiar view that Irish Catholics and Protestants are two distinct ethnic groups. In his book The Way he adds more in general: ââ¬ÅSocial evolution has led to the development of complex social groupings and to a wide diversity of different ethnic groups, each perfectly adapted to the specialized environment in which it lives.ââ¬Â (28) This view accords perfectly with Nouvelle Droite views on ethnicity, which is also in favor of territorial separation of different 'ethnic' groups. In the 1990s he therefore has become very attractive to the Nouvelle Droite.
The popularity of Goldsmith's writings among the Nouvelle Droite has made him welcome at Nouvelle Droite conferences. On 27 November 1994 he was one of the featured speakers for the 25th annual conference of GRECE, the major Nouvelle Droite organization in France. Its theme was (very tellingly) ââ¬ÅLeft-Right: the end of a system.ââ¬Â He also gave an interview to their magazine Elements in October 1996. Goldsmith was also a welcome guest at the conference of the Flemish connection of Nouvelle Droite in Belgium. On 11 November 1997 he was a speaker on the third colloquium of the Delta Stichting, the Belgian connection of GRECE, about How can we survive decadence? His speech was called Against progress: the U-turn we need. Another speaker at this conference was Alain de Benoist, with whom Goldsmith obviously does not mind sharing a platform. Goldsmith has also contributed his writings to Nouvelle Droite publications, such as the Flemish Tekos. This magazine is published by the Delta Foundation, which has a lot of contacts with the extreme Right Vlaams Blok (Flemish Bloc). Guy de Martelaere, collaborator of Tekos, found translating Goldsmithââ¬â¢s writings to be an uplifting experience: ââ¬ÅThe Tekos-colloquium in Antwerp on 11 November was a big success. The conservative-ecological theses of Edward Goldsmith have attracted a lot of interest and acceptance from Nouvelle Droite audiences, which partly have yet to discover green thought. Alain de Benoist, internationally the leading ideologue of the Nouvelle Droite, and Luc Pauwels, chief editor of the Belgian periodical Tekos, are moving into an ecological direction, inspired among other things by contact with Goldsmith and his ideas. I myself got the task to translate one of Goldsmith's most recent and philosophically profound articles for Tekos.ââ¬Â (29)
In recent years, Goldsmith has also been an active supporter of Nouvelle Ãâ°cologie in France. Laurent Ozon, a disciple of Alain de Benoist, is the director of this organization. Laurent Ozon wrote in an article about housing: ââ¬ÅFor ecologists it is today essential to safeguard for every people its creative local expression, its possibility even to live or to exist as a constructive part of a culture that participates in the diversity of life. Because the uprooting caused by the individualization of style and the globalization of construction standards is an important weapon in the war waged by the forces of money, hate, and standardization against the natural communities and their ecosystems.ââ¬Â (30) The writings of Goldsmith are an important source of inspiration for Ozon. Besides being the director of Nouvelle Ãâ°cologie, Ozon has very active against the war of NATO in Kosovo as the leading figure in the Collectif Non àla Guerre, which tried to build an alliance between Left and Right in opposition to the the intervention of NATO in Kosovo. Nouvelle Ãâ°cologie also has the support of Antoine Waechter, the leading exponent of the 'neither Left nor Right' faction within the green movement in France, the socalled 'ninis'. On May 29, 1989, Waechter declared on French public television: ââ¬ÅTo open the borders for foreigners is a dangerous utopia. Bearing in mind the demographic explosion in the Third World, there would be millions of people wandering to an already overpopulated Europe. The damage on the cultural and environmental level would be devastating.ââ¬Â (31) How would the Nouvelle Droite not be interested in such an ecologist? In September 1993 Krisis, the journal edited by Alain de Benoist, asked for and got an interview from him. In this interview Waechter said: ââ¬Å[I]f there is a place today for an autonomous ecological movement, it is precisely because political ecology is accompanied by a philosophy of action completely different than that supported by the Right-Left cleavage, that structured the French political landscape for two centuries and shows today clear signs of exhaustion.ââ¬Â (32) Waechter broke away from Les Verts in 1994 because he thought they were too much leaning toward the Left and he founded the political party Mouvement Ãâ°cologiste Indépendant (Independent Ecology Movement). The new party received the full support of Nouvelle Ãâ°cologie and its whereabouts got plenty of coverage in Le recours aux forêts (the title of this magazine is a reference to an article by the German extreme right wing author Ernst Jünger that was translated to French and published in Krisis in 1993). Waechter has made several electoral alliances with the autonomists in Alsace. The autonomist party in Alsace (like in Brittany) has a long history in right wing politics. In an interview in Alsace Presse in December 1998 Waechter explained his differences with Les Verts, and its candidate Daniel Cohn-Bendit. Waechter said: ââ¬ÅOur list is truly ecological, whereas that of Daniel Cohn-Bendit is a list of the Left with an ecological coloration. Our aim is to make sure that the list of Les Verts does not accumulate the votes of distracted voters, that is the votes of the Leftists and the votes of those with an ecological sensibility that could be seduced by the centrist discours of Cohn-Bendit.ââ¬Â (33) In a letter to the daily Libération Waechter protested against the accusation of working together closely with extreme Rightists on a conference in Paris in January 1999: ââ¬ÅWhat are they reproaching me for? To have participated in a forum and presenting a lecture about Robert Hainard. Is there a single idea in my lecture that resembles closely or distantly the theses of the extreme Right? No, for sure. Is there a single word from the moderator, Laurent Ozon, that would justify such a connection? Not any more so. Burt Laurent Ozon has had the courage to ask some iconoclast questions and to gather some intellectuals of different persuasions to answer them. This is disturbing because this enterprise is situated outside of the convenient cleavage. Just like an ecological list is disturbing because it destroys the myth according to which the ecologists are represented at the European elections by Les Verts. Why can not the Left and the Right deal with the emergence of political ideas that are different from socialism and liberalism?ââ¬Â (34)
Edward Goldsmith was, like Antoine Waechter, one of the featured speakers in this conference in Paris which had as its theme: Ecology against progress? It was organized by Nouvelle Ãâ°cologie and Goldsmith presented his usual paleo-conservative views on Family, Community, Democracy. Of course Alain de Benoist and several other people of the Nouvelle Droite were also present. A report of this conference was published in Le recours aux forêts, the magazine of Nouvelle Ãâ°cologie, which earlier devoted a special issue to the views of Edward Goldsmith. In the interview in this special issue of Le recours aux forêts on his views, Goldsmith said: ââ¬ÅIn both France and England, as well as in Germany, the Greens have the tendency to align themselves with the Left, because the Left is thought of as being less linked to the big multinational corporations, and therefor more inclined to protect the interests of the people. But, in my view, this will change, because of the simple reason that there practically no difference anymore between the Left and the Right, neither in France nor in Germany and the United States ââ¬Â¦ It goes without saying that it is a question of time before a party will be created to represent all these groups that are marginalized by the global economy and also of those who want to preserve what is left of our society, of its culture, and its natural environment. The next political cleavage will be the one between the parties in favor of the global economy and those in favor of the local and communitarian economy. Of course I hope the ecologists will play an important role in the formation of this party, that could be a federation of parties.ââ¬Â (35)
In advance of the European elections of May 1999, Goldsmith tried to put his ideas into practice and he wanted to form an electoral alliance with Waechter's MEI. But in February 1999 the right wing affiliations of both Edward Goldsmith and Antoine Waechter were exposed, whereupon the alliance was broken up. (36) Fortunately Waechterââ¬â¢s MEI did not get many votes in the subsequent election. In September 1999 Goldsmith wrote a letter to the magazine Silence in which he defended his attendance at the conference of GRECE in 1994 by stating that he also spoke at a conference organized by the trotskyist party in Switzerland. He says he never checks the organizations who invite him to speak at their conferences. He states that he does not know about the current political views of GRECE (although he admits that it was founded from a extreme Rightist background) and he defends Alain de Benoist by saying that the Frenchman is critical of the views on immigration of the Front National. Indeed, De Benoist is critical of Front National, but that does not mean he is not part of the extreme right wing. It seems to escape Goldsmith that not every criticism of the Front National is necessarily progressive. De Benoist is in disagreement with the strategy used by Front National, not its principles. Goldsmith also denied that he was involved with financing the MEI campaign for the European elections but Antoine Waechter said otherwise in a press statement issued by the MEI dated 7 December 1998. Very revealing Goldsmith writes at the end of this letter: ââ¬ÅIt may be worthwhile to mention that all my African, Hindu and Polynesian friends (except those who were too much exposed to Western influences) agree on the principles of this worldview.ââ¬Â (37) Makes one wonder where these friends stand in the political spectrum. Goldsmith seems to believe in some kind of cultural apartheid and that different cultures should not influence one another.
Alain de Benoist said of Goldsmith in an interview: ââ¬ÅI am ââ¬Â¦ in sympathy with the views expressed by ââ¬Â¦ Edward Goldsmith, in such works as The great U-turn (1988), The Way: an Ecological Worldview (1991) and again, very recently, in a collection of pieces entitled The Case against the Global Economy and for a Turn toward the Local (Sierra Club Books, San Francisco 1996).ââ¬Â (38) Goldsmith's book was translated into French as Le défi du XXIe siècle - Une vision écologique du monde. His book is very well received by the connections of the Nouvelle Droite in Germany and Italy as well. The Way was translated to German and Heinz-Siegfried Strelow, one of the leading exponents of the Unabhängigen Ãâkologen Deutschlands (Independent Ecologists of Germany) wrote that it should become obligatory reading for conservative ecologists (which is nothing but an euphemism for ecofascists). (39) In Italy The Way was published as Il Tao dell'Ecologia and Goldsmith also contributed an article to the right wing magazine Diorama Letterario under the same title. (40) This magazine is the Italian connection of GRECE and headed by Marco Tarchi, a political scientist working at the university of Florence. Goldsmith went to Florence on 17 February 1999 to speak about Community, Local Economies, and Globalization. He did not mind sharing a platform with Marco Tarchi on this occasion. Tarchi is a well-known supporter of GRECE, a former member of the neo-fascist Movimento Sociale Italiano and nowadays very close to the separatist Lega Nord. He professes an interest in the deep ecology of Arne Næss. (41) In a review of Robyn Eckersley's Environmentalism and Political Theory: Toward an Eco-centric Aproach for the British far Right magazine The Scorpion the known neo-nazi Michael Walker wrote: ââ¬Å[I]t is precisely deep ecology and bio-regionalism that are most likely to inspire a conservative or anti-liberal, even anti-humanist, dare we say even racialist, green perspective. There is no lack of dire warnings from the Left about the dangers for the uninitiated of bio-regionalism, which by its very name invites the novice to consider the biological implications of the conservation of differences. Deep ecology is so radical in its anti-capitalism that anti-capitalism is more important than anti-fascism and saving the world more important than either, more important than anything else in fact.ââ¬Â (42) Fortunately so far there have been no signs of the far Right making serious overtures to the ecology movement in Britain, but judging from this assessment of Michael Walker, the ecology movement should be very vigilant.
The Challenge for the Ecology Movement There is a very real danger that the right wing will significantly influence the ideology and practice of the ecology movement. The Nouvelle Droite will gladly take the opportunity to use the similarities in thinking of the anti-humanist and anti-rationalist currents in the ecology movement. In this they have the full support of Edward Goldsmith. The ecology movement once was a very promising movement, but unfortunately the promise of a new kind of politics was never fulfilled. Instead it drifted into mysticism and religion on the one hand and to an uncritical acceptance of the status quo on the other hand (cfr. Les Verts in France, Die Grünen in Germany, Agalev and Ecolo in Belgium, I Verdi in Italy). The current rise of mysticism, religion, and obscurantism in Europe and North America will be regarded by the right wing as a gigantic opportunity to spread their message. In spite of the statement by the neo-nazi Michael Walker about the anti-capitalist nature of deep ecology, capitalism has nothing to fear from mystical ecology. The social causes of environmental degradation are 'deeply' mystified by the acolytes of deep ecology, bioregionalism and ecofeminism. It is more likely that these tendencies will result in authoritarian measures against the poor and weak in society. As an antidote to this kind of thinking American social ecologists Janet Biehl and Peter Staudenmaier wrote: ââ¬ÅWhat prevents ecological politics from yielding reaction or fascism is an ecology movement that maintains a broad social emphasis, one that places the ecological crisis in a social context.ââ¬Â (43) Rather than in a context of race, ethnicity, bioregion, mysticism, and the like, ecological politics should be embedded in the struggle against hierarchical domination and class exploitation, the fundamental social causes of environmental problems.
Ecology, if unmediated by social theory and philosophy, can easily result in terrible disasters. Context is all-important, as Murray Bookchin points out correctly: ââ¬ÅTo think ecologically is to enter the domain of nature philosophy. This can be a very perilous step. Serious political ambiguities persist in nature philosophy itself: namely its potential to nourish reaction as well as revolution. Contemporary society is still seared by images of nature that have fostered highly reactionary political views. Vaporous slogans about 'community' and humanity's 'oneness with nature' easily interplay with the legacy of 'naturalistic' nationalism that reached its genocidal apogee in Nazism, with its myths of race and 'blood and soil'. It requires only a minor ideological shift from the ideas of the nineteenth-century Romantic movement and William Blake's mystical anarchism to arrive at Richard Wagner's mystical nationalism.ââ¬Â (44) With the goal of creating a rational, humanist, and truly democratic society, social ecology stands out as the complete opposite of the current anti-humanist, irrationalist, and authoritarian trends in the ecology movement and in society at large. We have to make hard choices and think critically and rationally about these choices. We face a grim future if the battle against the reactionary trends is not won.
Notes
Murray Bookchin, ââ¬ÅWill Ecology become 'the Dismal Science'?ââ¬Â in The Progressive (1991). Reprinted in Which Way for the Ecology Movement? (Edinburgh & San Francisco: AK Press, 1994).
Quoted in David Kubrin, ââ¬ÅToxic Ideologiesââ¬Â in Reclaiming Quarterly, Summer 1999.
Arne Næss, ââ¬ÅDeep Ecology and Ultimate Premisesââ¬Â in The Ecologist, Vol. 18, Nos. 4/5 (1988). Reprinted in Society and Nature, Vol. 1, No. 2 (1992), p. 108.
idem, p. 113.
Interview with Arne Næss and Helena Norberg-Hodge in Resurgence, January 1997.
Kirkpatrick Sale, Dwellers in the Land: The Bioregional Vision (Philadelphia: New Society Publishers, 1991), p. 108.
Arne Næss, ââ¬ÅDeep Ecology and Ultimate Premisesââ¬Â in The Ecologist, Vol. 18, Nos. 4/5 (1988). Reprinted in Society and Nature, Vol. 1, No. 2 (1992), p. 112.
Fritjof Capra, The Web of Life: A New Synthesis of Mind and Matter (London: Flamingo, 1997), p. 7. In The Turning Point: Science, Society, and the Rising Culture (1982) Capra also stated his support for deep ecology.
Charlene Spretnak, The Spiritual Dimension of Green Politics (Santa Fe: Bear & Co., 1986), p. 27.
Fritjof Capra and Charlene Spretnak, Green Politics: The Global Promise (London: Hutchinson, 1984).
For Herbert Gruhl, see Janet Biehl, ââ¬Å'Ecology' and the Modernization of Fascism in the German Ultra-rightââ¬Â in Janet Biehl & Peter Staudenmaier, Ecofascism: Lessons from the German Experience (Edinburgh & San Francisco: AK Press, 1995). I also highly recommend the writings of Jutta Ditfurth, Feuer in die Herzen: Gegen die Entwertung des Menschen (Hamburg: Konkret Literatur Verlag, 1997) and Entspannt in die Barbarei. (Ãâko-)Faschismus und Biozentrismus (Hamburg: Konkret Literatur Verlag, 1996). Although there was a public break between the ÃâDP and Gruhl, this did not have much influence on the formers ideology. In fact they continued to spread his books and pamphlets and kept informal relations with their erstwhile leader.
For Rudolf Bahro, see Janet Biehl, ââ¬Â'Ecology' and the Modernization of Fascism in the German Ultra-rightââ¬Â. See also the exchange between James Hart and Ullrich Melle who defend Rudolf Bahro and Janet Biehl in Democracy & Nature #11/12 (Vol. 4, no. 2/3, 1998).
See Murray Bookchin, Re-enchanting Humanity: A Defense of the Human Spirit against Anti-Humanism, Misanthropy, Mysticism and Primitivism (London: Cassell, 1995).
Dave Foreman interviewed by Bill Devall, ââ¬ÅA Spanner in the Woodsââ¬Â in Simply Living Vol. 12 (c. 1986). Quoted in Murray Bookchin, The Philosophy of Social Ecology (Montréal: Black Rose, second revised edition, 1995), p. 117. In 1989 there was a public debate in New York between Dave Foreman and Murray Bookchin about their differences. Foreman distanced himself from his statements in the interview he gave to Bill Devall in this debate, but soon thereafter he started using the same eco-brutalist language again. This is hardly surprising because it is inherent in 'biocentric' thinking. After leaving Earth First!, Foreman joined the board of directors of the conservationist organization Sierra Club and tried, fortunately unsuccessfully so far, to have it adopt an anti-immigration policy. The debate was published in Steve Chase (ed.), Defending the Earth: A Dialogue between Murray Bookchin and Dave Foreman (Boston: South End Press, 1991).
Dave Foreman, ââ¬ÅA Modest Proposal for a Wilderness Preserve Systemââ¬Â in Whole Earth Review #53 (Winter 1986). Quoted by Bill Devall, Simple in Means, Rich in Ends: Practicing Deep Ecology (Layton: Gibbs Smith, 1988), pp. 164-165.
Bill Devall, Simple in Means, Rich in Ends, p. 49.
ibid., p. 149.
For his intellectual development see the detailed analysis of Pierre-André Taguieff in Sur la Nouvelle Droite (Paris: Descartes & Cie, 1994). Unfortunately Taguieff takes the proclamations of De Benoist about his politics being neither Left nor Right far too serious.
In Krisis #15 De Benoist published ââ¬ÅLa nature et sa valeur intrinsiqueââ¬Â (September 1993). Under the pseudonym Robert de Herte he wrote in Elements #79 ââ¬ÅLes deux écologiesââ¬Â, ââ¬ÅHerbert Gruhl et les 'verts' allemandsââ¬Â and ââ¬ÅÃâ°cologie et réligionââ¬Â (January 1994).
Mark Wegierski, ââ¬ÅThe European New Rightââ¬Â in Telos #98/99 (Winter 1993/Fall 1994). Telos, once a leading neo-marxist theoretical journal in the United States, has unfortunately been transformed into a platform for European Nouvelle Droite authors.
The Ecologist, A Blueprint for Survival (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1972), p. 102. For a critique of its conservatism see David Pepper, The Roots of Modern Environmentalism (London & New York: Routledge, 1984).
Edward Goldsmith interviewed by Paul Gimeno in Oikos #3. Oikos is a publication of the Belgian (Flemish) green party Agalev. My translation from the Dutch. For a critique of the reactionary ecofeminism of Vandana Shiva, see the excellent essay by Maria Wölflingseder, ââ¬ÅKosmischer Größenwahnsinn. Biologistische und rassistische Tendenzen im New Age und im spirituellen Ãâkofeminismusââ¬Â in Gerhard Kern & Lee Taynor (eds.), Die esoterische Verführung: Angriffe auf Vernunft und Freiheit (Aschaffenburg: Alibri Verlag, 1995), pp. 187-210. See also from the same author ââ¬ÅFetisch Weiblichkeit: ÃÅber die diffizilen Zusammenhänge zwischen spirituellen Ãâkofeminismus und rechter Ideologieââ¬Â in: Renate Bitzan (ed.), Rechte Frauen: Skingirls, Walküren und feine Damen (Berlin: Elefanten Press, 1997), pp. 56-71. For a critique of American ecofeminism see Janet Biehl, Rethinking Ecofeminist Politics (Boston: South End Press, 1991).
Edward Goldsmith, The Way: An Ecological World-View (Athens GA: University of Georgia Press, 1998). Revised and enlarged edition, p. 424.
Edward Goldsmith, idem p. 437-438.
Edward Goldsmith, idem p. xvii.
Nicholas Hildyard, `Blood' and 'Culture': Ethnic Conflict and the Authoritarian Right (London: Cornerhouse briefing #11, January 1999).
Edward Goldsmith, ââ¬ÅBasic Principles of Cultural Ecologyââ¬Â in The Ecologist, Vol. 1, no. 12, 1971, p. 4. Quoted by Nicholas Hildyard, op. cit., pp. 12-13.
Edward Goldsmith, The Way, p. 420.
Guy de Martelaere, ââ¬ÅNieuws en korte beschouwingenââ¬Â in Gwenved #23 (January 1998). Guy de Martelaere also publishes in the British right wing periodicals Perspectives: European identities, autonomies and initiatives, edited by the Transeuropa Collective, and Alternative Green, a magazine edited by Richard Hunt. My translation from the Dutch. In 1997 Tekos (no. 85) published a translation of the first editorial Goldsmith wrote in 1970 for The Ecologist. It also published a translation of ââ¬ÅScientific superstitionsââ¬Â (from The Ecologist, vol. 27, no. 5, Sept/Oct. 1997). Guy de Martelaere translated parts of The Way to Dutch for the publishing house of Tekos. Goldsmith also gave an interview to the right wing Belgian periodical De Vrijbuiter (Spring 1998) in which he praised the traditional family and traditional community.
Laurent Ozon, ââ¬ÅL'habitat, un enjeu pour les écologistesââ¬Â in Le recours aux forêts #4. My translation from the French. Ozon's articles are translated and published in Italian in Diorama Letteraria, and in Dutch in the extreme right wing paper of Voorpost, SOS-Nieuwsbrief.
Quoted by Philippe Pelletier, L'imposture écologiste (Paris: Reclus, 1993), pp. 101-102. My translation from the French. See also Thierry Maricourt, Les nouvelles passarelles de l'extrême droite (Paris: Syllepse, 1997).
ââ¬ÅNi droite, ni gauche. Entretien avec Antoine Waechterââ¬Â in Krisis #15 (September 1993), pp. 16-23. My translation from the French. In the same issue was published ââ¬ÅEight Theses on Deep Ecologyââ¬Â by Arne Næss.
Interview with Antoine Waechter in Alsace Presse, 8 December 1998. My translation from the French.
Antoine Waechter, Libération, 15 February 1999. My translation from the French.
Interview with Edward Goldsmith in Le recours aux forêts #3. My translation from the French.
Christiane Chombeau, ââ¬ÅLe dérive extrémiste d'Antoine Waechterââ¬Â in Le Monde, 18 February 1999. Nicole Gauthier, ââ¬ÅWaechter accusé par les siens de dérive bruneââ¬Â Libération, 12 February 1999.
Letter of Edward Goldsmith in Silence #248 (September 1999). Emphasis added. My translation from the French. Arne Næss seem to share this purist, ââ¬Ënativistââ¬â¢ view: ââ¬ÅThe quite young Dalai Lama was exalted by cameras and films that were ââ¬Ësmuggledââ¬â¢ to him ââ¬Â¦ When such a central personality, raised from the cradle in a strong culture, tumbles headlong for something so specifically Western technology as a camera, what chances does the culture have to survive? The enthusiasm of the Dalai Lama maybe reveals the demonic force of modern industrial technology.ââ¬Â Arne Næss, ÃËkologi, samfunn og livsstil (Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 5th edition 1976) pp. 111-112. Translation from the Norwegian by Eirik Eiglad.
Alain de Benoist interviewed in the British right wing magazine Right Now! A Magazine of Politics, Ideas, and Culture, 1997.
Heinz-Siegfried Strelow in Junge Freiheit #47 (1996), quoted by Jean Cremet, ââ¬ÅNeue Rechte: jetzt generationen- übergreifendââ¬Â in AK 403, 5 June 1997. The UÃâD split away from the Ãâkologisch-Demokratische Partei (Ecological Democratic Party). The MEI is affiliated with the latter. Reports of Hannes Krill in the Süddeutsche Zeitung of 26 and 29 January 2000 indicate that the split between Die Grünen and the ÃâDP could be restored in the near future. Die Grünen have got rid of their left wing that temporarily blocked the influence of the ecofascists.
Edward Goldsmith, ââ¬ÅIl tao dell'ecologiaââ¬Â in Diorama Letteraria #214 (May 1998).
Marco Tarchi, ââ¬ÅCari liberali, adesso è vostro il pensiero unicoââ¬Â in Liberal #26 (May 1997). Tarchi also contributed to the American journal Telos, see ââ¬ÅIn Search of Right and Leftââ¬Â in Telos #103 (Spring 1995). Like De Benoist Tarchi is critical of Alleanza Nazionale (the former Movimento Sociale Italiano), but that does not mean he is not right wing, he is merely from a rival tendency on the Right.
Michael Walker, ââ¬ÅA Darker Shade of Greenââ¬Â in The Scorpion #19. This British magazine is very close to GRECE. Michael Walker is also a collaborator of Elemente, the magazine of the German branch of the Nouvelle Droite.
Janet Biehl and Peter Staudenmaier, ââ¬ÅIntroductionââ¬Â in Ecofascism, pp. 2-3.
Murray Bookchin, The Philosophy of Social Ecology, pp. 101-102. Emphasis added.
2004-02-15 15:37 | User Profile
[QUOTE=AntiYuppie]The Jew entered this stage of his life cycle centuries before any white man did.[/QUOTE]
And, to the extent that an emotionally-crippled guilt-ridden people can idealize anything, idealized it and made it part of their culture. When one approaches Judaism and most Christian cults with an analytical and truly scientific, one is able to find the origin of liberalism in western mindsets and it is this egalitarian, competitive, value-based, ownership-oriented type of society that will always foster these cosmopolitan values.
2004-02-17 18:22 | User Profile
[QUOTE=AntiYuppie] in spite of the fact that the natural world fares much better under white Western rule than in any colored Third World country.[/QUOTE]
I think your analysis is spot-on except this part seems a little off. The problem is technology or rather the way we use it: specifically, third world overpopulation and first world overconsumption. And we must remember who supplies/supplied the third world with the technology which allowed overpopulation in the first place. Like slavery and its consequences, it most certainly is "our fault". Before the more primitive peoples had a balance struck with nature in that there was a high death rate accompanying the consistently high birth rate. Thankfully, we have viruses like AIDS which keep the population in check to an extent in certain areas of the globe but these alone will not curb the spawning and gluttony before the machine consumes us all.