Deep Ecology- Bookchin on Social Ecology

Exam 4

Author

Bookchin

Overall argument

Criticism of Deep Ecology. Why should we disagree with Ness and other Deep Ecologists? In line with Ecofeminism. Deep ecology treats all of humanity as one thing and treats equality

Ecofeminism: Connects our ecological movement to gender issues/injustices

Naess: The Shallow and the Dee

Something we should be learning about ourselves when we take ecology seriously. In this understanding of ourselves, it implies that the ecosystem and components is the system as a whole is more real and important  than individuals

Bookchin says what abotu ecology?

People misuse ecology in a shallow way to promote the fight against pollution and resource depletion

• There are deeper concerns: diversity, complexity, autonomy, decentralization, symbiosis, egalitarianism, and  classlessness.

Who is Bookchin critiquing?

Naess who believes in deep thinking: we think of ourselves as temporary individuals and the ecosystem is more permanent.

What 7 things does Bookchin say about Deep ecology?

Rejection of man-in-environment image

Biospherical egalitarianism: equal right to flourish

Live and let go, fight against cultural/economic invasion (diversity and symbiosis)

Anti-class posture: toward a future classless diversity

Fight against pollution and resource depletion

Complexity (not complication). Integrate actions in which the whole person is active

Local autonomy and decentralization. Reduction of hierarchies

What does Bookchin say about Earth day Festivals?

the call for patchwork reforms and vows form EPA bureaucrats just promotes the engineering of nature so we can ravage it without harming ourselves

What does Bookchin say what we should do?

We shouldn’t do shallow or deep ecology, rather we need an ecological philosophy that transforms our domineering market society into a nonhistorical cooperative one that will live in harmony with nature

• We don’t want to repeat the same problems with 70s environmentalism: latent anti-feminism, elitism, authoritarian tendencies, arrogance

Two tendencies in environmentalism and what is the problem with both coexisting?

(1) social reactionary macho “daniel Boones” and (2) deeply concerned naturalists, social radicals, and feminists

• Deep ecology is so broad, and so vague, formless, and a self-contradictory ideology that it includes both perspectives can be deep ecology as there is no clear distinction

• Disagreement in theory, sensibility, ethics, practical, and political consequences

What does Bookchin say about humanity?

Deep Ecology accuses the vague species of "humanity"

It treats it as if all humanity was equal, equitable in their ecological influence.

That sincere naturalist is merged with Foreman (Earth First! Who argues that humanity is  a cancer in the world of life.)

“The worst thing we could do in Ethiopia is give aid- just let nature seek its own balance, to let people there just starve”

Explain foreman

• In a way, the deep ecologists are getting confused between the events caused by nature and by humans

• If globally there is enough food, it isn’t an ecological problem, but rather than humans distributing it wrong.

• We can starve say because we can’t find food out in the environment or one day (Elon Musk) stole our food

eep ecology fails to engage with reality. It's shortsided

Why does the critique of Deep Ecologist understanding humanity show up in morally problematic “eco brutalist”?

 Bookchin calls this ecobrutalism because it ignores that some humans, the elite, exploit others, the poor, thus leading to saying things like let them starve in Ethiopia to let nature seek its balance. 

What is Social Darwinism

Malthus incorporated a model of food scarcity with social Darwinism: only the fittest survive (rich, white, privileged, imperialists)

• Justified class domination, racism, degradation of women, and British imperialism

Example of social Darwinism

Neo-malthusians challenged the use of antibiotics to control disease and prevent death after WWII (mainly in Asia, Africa, and Latin America)

What does Bookchin say the cause of hunger is?

Hunger has its own origins not in natural shortages of food or population growth, but in social and cultural decisions.

• Nothing more reveals the superficiality of DE’s ideological framework than its own biological treatment of population issues (If we have enough food globally, it's about distribution)

• Earth First!: Aids is desirable as a means of population control

What does Deep Ecology say about nature?

“Nature” becomes a scenic view, not evolutionary development that is cumulative and includes the human species

• treats nature as a view that is separate from humans, rather than it being what produces human beings itself

What does Bookchik say Deep Ecology is?

Deep ecology is the fast food of quasi-radical environmentalists: everything can be expected in such a comic philosophy

• What about pathogens? Is smallpox an endangered species

• Cannot be substance because everything can be expected

Aside from misunderstanding DE as treatign natire as a “scenic view”, what else is it misunderstood to be?

Spiritual Eco-babble” and nature worship.

What is the "Spiritual Eco-babble" critique

A dismissal of Deep Ecology’s mysticism; argues that "nature worship" ignores the political and economic roots of environmental issues