Green PoliticsGreen movementCritique of modern society, ideologies, arrogance of humanism

Green ethicThreatsAgendaDifferent approaches, strategies, tactics

Green politicsMovement, ideology emerges from

environmental crisis of late 20th centuryNew ideological form

No fully-formed structureNo settled orthodoxyNo name all adherents agree on

Green movement/environmental movement = Green politics

Critique of modern societyUnreflective use of human technological power

to “master” nature for human endsEspecially economic growth

Other modern ideologiesJustify or acquiesce in degradation, destruction

of natural environmentTwofold assault on “arrogance” of modern

technological societyCritique of assumptions, shortcomings of

modern ideologiesArticulation, justification of Green ideology,

ethic

Critique of other ideologiesAll modern ideologies – right and left, liberal

and conservative, Marxist and non-Marxist – share humanist assumption

Anthropocentrism or humanismHuman beings are natural, rightful masters of

natureNature is resource base for humansNature has no value apart from this

Arrogance gives us poisoned, polluted planet whose species are now in grave peril from man-made ills

Arrogance of humanismAssumption we are superior to nature and her

species, and separable or apart from them is falseWe, like all species, are deeply dependent upon

each other and upon conditions that nurture, nourish us

We are not discrete, disconnected creatures; we rely on other species, and they on us

Ecology = study, recognition, and appreciation of myriad connections and interconnections, intricate web of life

Web has been torn, disrupted by humans in rush to “master” nature and acquire wealth, worldly goods

Green/environmental ethicAll things are connectedAll actions produce consequencesIntimate interconnectednessAll life is deserving of respect and

preservation (if not sacred)Our fate is connected with fate of other

creaturesLife can be created, sustained only under

certain conditionsSuch conditions need to be maintained,

preserved, including clean air, water, habitat

Threats to necessary conditionsNuclear war, Omnicide = destruction of

everythingEcocide = destruction of ecosystems that

sustain life on earthEach defines central part of Green agenda

Work for PeaceDuty to be pacifists, work for peaceDoes not mean avoiding all conflictSome conflicts inevitable, especially between

those destroying environment and those dedicated to protecting it

Should not refrain from participating in confrontations, should take part in peaceful, life-respecting ways

Stop ecocideDuty to slow, stop and/or reverse destructive

processesIndividual actions (not buying or using products

wrapped in non-biodegradable plastic or Styrofoam, and recycling cans, bottles, and newspapers) to more public collective actions (boycotting bottlers and stores)

Not necessary for everyone to boycott, protestOnly need enough to make dent in producers’

profitProducers, distributors will look for alternatives

Green divisionsCenter upon means, strategies and tactics,

rather than endsEnd is preservation of planet, its natural

environment and ecosystems, and species it nourishes, including human species

Interest group politics/radical actionSome form, support coalitions of

environmental interest groupsSend lobbyists to Washington, state capitals

to press for pro-environmental legislationOther say earth and inhabitants are not

special interest but universal one with pressing needs

Not time for “politics as usual,” but for more urgent actions

Environmental actionSome (e.g., Greenpeace) favor dramatic, direct-

action (confronting whalers, polluters, developers face-to-face, head-on) aimed at raising public consciousness

More conservative groups (e.g., Sierra Club) favor low-key approach aimed at educating, informing

Others (e.g., Nature Conservancy) favor low-profile strategy of buying private land for nature preserves, wilderness areas

All agree public, political action important

Religious greensSome favor religious rituals aimed at raising

consciousness, heightening awareness of peril

Earth is common mother, goddess Gaia, from whom we all draw nurture, sustenance

Can overcome anthropocentric pride, humanistic arrogance, come to think in earth-centered, not human-centered, terms

Some “deep ecologists” speak in religious terms

Earth First!Other “deep ecologists,” e.g., Earth First!

speak in Malthusian termsEarth can get along very well without

humans, who tend to plunder, despoil planetIf human beings cannot live with other

species, walk lightly upon earth, demise is not to be regretted but welcomed

Social ecologistsSuspicious of religious language and militant

anti-humanism Humanism has been arrogant, but need not be in

futureHumans have capacity to reflect upon and learn

from mistakesHuman beings are responsible for messWe owe it to ourselves, other species, to our

children and their grandchildren, to take responsibility for cleaning up, reversing mess we have made

Key termstime horizonstragedy of the commonsgreenhouse effectacid rainecotagesocial ecologydeep ecology

Discussion questions1. What are the major differences between the Light Greens

and the Dark Greens within the environmental movement? Which of these two has the better position, and why?

2. How can Greens claim to be promoting freedom and democracy when they want to limit what people can do to the natural environment? Does it make sense to say that Greens are promoting either freedom or democracy? Why or why not?

3. Greens often see themselves as part of a counter-ideology that must try to correct the mistaken beliefs and assumptions of other  ideologies. Are they right to think of themselves in this way? That is, are the Greens right to blame current environmental problems on liberalism, socialism, and other ideologies? Why or why not?