You must log in or register to comment.

Dumai wrote (edited )

wouldn't say it's necessarily ecofash but it probably matters that there were actual ex-nazis among its earliest proponents, without even getting into the likes of linkola and foreman. but the misanthropy, eugenics, malthusianism, racism -- i mean that sounds like most people's description of eco-fascism, but that's just as easily lib shit half the time. anyway here's a critique from an actual anprim, ironically hitting on a lot of stuff people ding anprims for nowadays. quite frankly i have always found the fact this essay exists hilarious, though i wish he went harder on them for the malthusianism


Kinshavo OP wrote


I only had the wikipedia article for information, and they state it like it was a 60s thing born after Rachel Carson's Silent Spring. That's why I was confused about some comments


Dumai wrote (edited )

well savitri's only called a deep ecologist in retrospect because her views on animal rights and environmentalism overlap so much with what "deep ecology" means now. little bit ahistorical on my part soz


metocin wrote

I just read A Radical Green Political Theory by Alan Carter and in the last appendix he goes into deep ecology vs social ecology and besides the whole eco-fash thing, the main concerns are the focus on spirituality (can be alienating to secular folks) and the lack of an emphasis on the social factors causing ecological disruption (which is what social ecology is focused on).


loukanikos wrote

I feel like deep ecology, along with a lot of other currents in green politics and environmentalism has dangerous elements and strong overlap with ecofascist tendencies. However, that could be said of a lot of things that green anarchists are interested in. Like if some ecofascists were radical vegans (and I think savitri devi was actually) that shouldn't preclude an interest in veganism. Its tempting to make a sort of reductio ad hitlerum by referencing the nazi underground and stuff but I think like with a lot of things we should kind of take what we like instead of just trying to refute the whole/ philosophy. And that is kind of what has been done if you consider that a lot of deep ecology ideas live on in the concept of degrowth, rewilding, and so forth.

One acknowledgement, though: my feelings would likely be different if I felt that statists or some prominent political party had successfully and holistically coopted deep ecology in a dangerous way but really I don't think they ever managed that. At best you see liberals or ecofash or whatever making references to some ideas/concepts but as far as I know its not like a hierarchical entity ever arose to evangelize deep ecology.