Green anarchism, also known asecological anarchism oreco-anarchism, is ananarchist school of thought that focuses onecology andenvironmental issues.[1] It is ananti-capitalist andanti-authoritarian form ofradical environmentalism, which emphasisessocial organization,freedom andself-fulfillment.[2]
Ecological approaches to anarchism were first formulated during the 19th century, as the rise ofcapitalism andcolonialism causedenvironmental degradation. Drawing from theecology ofCharles Darwin, the anarchistMikhail Bakunin elaborated anaturalist philosophy that rejected the dualistic separation ofhumanity fromnature. This was developed into anecological philosophy byPeter Kropotkin andÉlisée Reclus, who advocated for thedecentralisation anddegrowth of industry as a means to advance bothsocial justice andenvironmental protection.
Green anarchism was first developed into a distinct political theory by sections of theNew Left, as a revival in anarchism coincided with the emergence of anenvironmental movement. From the 1970s onwards, three main tendencies of green anarchism were established:Murray Bookchin elaborated the theory ofsocial ecology, which argues thatenvironmental issues stem directly fromsocial issues;Arne Næss defined the theory ofdeep ecology, which advocates forbiocentrism; andJohn Zerzan developed the theory ofanarcho-primitivism, which calls for the abolition oftechnology andcivilization. In the 21st century, these tendencies were joined bytotal liberation, which centresanimal rights, andgreen syndicalism, which calls for the workers themselves to managedeindustrialisation.
At its core, green anarchism concerns itself with the identification and abolition of socialhierarchies that cause environmental degradation. Opposed to theextractivism andproductivism of industrial capitalism, it advocates for the degrowth and deindustrialisation of the economy. It also pushes for greaterlocalisation and decentralisation, proposing forms ofmunicipalism,bioregionalism or a "return to nature" as possiblealternatives to thestate.
Before theIndustrial Revolution, the only occurrences ofecological crisis were small-scale, localised to areas affected bynatural disasters,overproduction orwar. But as theenclosure ofcommon land increasingly forced dispossessed workers into factories, more wide-reaching ecological damage began to be noticed byradicals of the period.[3]
During the late 19th century, ascapitalism andcolonialism were reaching their height, political philosophers first began to develop critiques ofindustrialised society, which had caused a rise inpollution andenvironmental degradation. In response, these early environmentalists developed a concern fornature andwildlife conservation,soil erosion,deforestation, andnatural resource management.[4] Early political approaches to environmentalism were supplemented by theliterary naturalism of writers such asHenry David Thoreau,John Muir andErnest Thompson Seton,[5] whose best-selling works helped to alter the popular perception of nature by rejecting the dualistic "man against nature" conflict.[6] In particular, Thoreau's advocacy ofanti-consumerism andvegetarianism, as well as his love for thewilderness, has been a direct inspiration for many eco-anarchists.[7]
Ecology in its modern form was developed byCharles Darwin, whose work onevolutionary biology provided a scientific rejection ofChristian andCartesiananthropocentrism, instead emphasising the role ofprobability andindividual agency in the process ofevolution.[8] Around the same time,anarchism emerged as a political philosophy that rejected all forms ofhierarchy,authority andoppression, and instead advocated fordecentralisation andvoluntary association.[9] The framework for an ecological anarchism was thus set in place, as a means to reject anthropocentric hierarchies that positioned humans in a dominating position over nature.[10]
The ecological roots of anarchism go back to the classical anarchists, such asPierre-Joseph Proudhon andMikhail Bakunin, who both conceived ofhuman nature as the basis for anarchism.[1] Drawing from Charles Darwin's work,[11] Bakunin considered people to be an intrinsic part of their environment.[12] Bakunin rejectedCartesian dualism, denying itsanthropocentric andmechanistic separation ofhumanity fromnature.[13] However, he also saw humans as uniquely capable of self-determination and called for humanity to achieve a mastery of its own natural environment as a means to achievefreedom.[14] Bakunin'snaturalism was developed into anecological philosophy by the geographersPeter Kropotkin andÉliseé Reclus, who conceived the relationship between human society and nature as adialectic. Theirenvironmental ethics, which combinedsocial justice withenvironmental protection, anticipated the green anarchist philosophies ofsocial ecology andbioregionalism.[4]
Like Bakunin before him, Kropotkin extolled thedomestication of nature by humans, but also framed humanity as an intrinsic part of its natural environment and placed great value in the natural world.[14] Kropotkin was among the first environmentalist thinkers to note the connections between industrialisation, environmental degradation andworkers' alienation. In contrast toMarxists, who called for an increase in industrialisation, Kropotkin argued for thelocalisation of the economy, which he felt would increase people's connection with the land and halt environmental damage.[3] InFields, Factories and Workshops, Kropotkin advocated for the satisfaction of human needs throughhorticulture, and thedecentralisation anddegrowth of industry.[15] He also criticised thedivision of labour, both betweenmental andmanual labourers, and between therural peasantry andurban proletariat.[16] InMutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution, he elaborated on the natural basis forcommunism,[1] depicting the formation ofsocial organisation amonganimals through the practice ofmutual aid.[14]
Reclus himself argued that environmental degradation caused by industrialisation, exemplified to him by massdeforestation in thePacific Northwest, was characteristic of the "barbarity" of moderncivilisation, which he felt subordinated both workers and the environment to the goal ofcapital accumulation.[16] Reclus was also one of the earliest figures to develop the idea of "total liberation", directly comparing theexploitation of labour withcruelty to animals and thus advocating for bothhuman andanimal rights.[17]
Kropotkin and Reclus' synthesis of environmental and social justice formed the foundation foreco-socialism, chiefly associated withlibertarian socialists who advocated for a "return to nature", such asRobert Blatchford,William Morris andHenry Salt.[18] Ecological aspects of anarchism were also emphasised byEmma Goldman andAlexander Berkman, who, drawing from the work of Henry David Thoreau, conceived of anarchism as a means to promote unity between humans and the natural world.[7] These early ecological developments in anarchism lay the foundations for the elaboration of green anarchism in the 1960s, when it was first taken up by figures within theNew Left.[19]
Green anarchism first emerged after the dawn of theAtomic Age, as increasinglycentralized governments brought with them a new host ofenvironmental andsocial issues.[20] During the 1960s, the rise of theenvironmental movement coincided with a concurrent revival of interest in anarchism, leading to anarchists having a considerable influence on the development ofradical environmentalist thought.[21] Principles and practices that already formed the core of anarchist philosophy, fromdirect action tocommunity organizing, thus became foundational to radical environmentalism.[22] As the threats presented byenvironmental degradation,industrial agriculture andpollution became more urgent, the first green anarchists turned todecentralisation anddiversity as solutions forsocio-ecological systems.[23]
Green anarchism as a tendency was first developed by the American social anarchistMurray Bookchin.[24] Bookchin had already began addressing the problem of environmental degradation as far back as the 1950s.[25] In 1962, he published the first major modern work ofenvironmentalism,Our Synthetic Environment, which warned of the ecological dangers ofpesticide application.[26] Over the subsequent decades, Bookchin developed the first theory of green anarchism,social ecology,[27] which presented socialhierarchy as the root of ecological problems.[28]
In 1973, Norwegian philosopherArne Næss developed another green anarchist tendency, known asdeep ecology, which rejected ofanthropocentrism in favour ofbiocentrism.[29] In 1985, this philosophy was developed into a political programme by the American academicsBill Devall andGeorge Sessions, while Australian philosopherWarwick Fox proposed the formation ofbioregions as a green anarchist alternative to thenation state.[30]
Following on from deep ecology,[31] the next major development in green anarchist philosophy was the articulation ofanarcho-primitivism, which was critical ofagriculture,technology andcivilisation.[32] First developed in the pages of the American anarchist magazineFifth Estate during the mid-1980s, anarcho-primitivist theory was developed byFredy Perlman, David Watson,[33] and particularlyJohn Zerzan.[34] It was later taken up by the American periodicalGreen Anarchy and British periodicalGreen Anarchist,[33] and partly inspired groups such as theAnimal Liberation Front (ALF),Earth Liberation Front (ELF) andIndividualists Tending to the Wild (ITS).[35]
By the 1970s, radical environmentalist groups had begun to carry outdirect action againstnuclear power infrastructure, with mobilisations of theanti-nuclear movement in France, Germany and the United States providing a direct continuity between contemporary environmentalism and the New Left of the 1960s.[36] In the 1980s, green anarchist groups such asEarth First! started taking direct action againstdeforestation,roadworks andindustrial agriculture.[37] They called their sabotage actions "monkey-wrenching", afterEdward Abbey's 1984 novelThe Monkey Wrench Gang.[38] During the 1990s, theroad protest movements in the United Kingdom andIsrael were also driven by eco-anarchists, while eco-anarchist action networks such as theAnimal Liberation Front (ALF) andEarth Liberation Front (ELF) first rose to prominence.[36] Eco-anarchist actions have included violent attacks, such as those carried out by cells of theInformal Anarchist Federation (IAF) andIndividualists Tending to the Wild (ITS) against nuclear scientists and nanotechnology researchers respectively.[39]
As environmental degradation was accelerated by the rise ofeconomic globalisation andneoliberalism, green anarchists broadened their scope of action from a specific environmentalist focus into one that agitated forglobal justice.[40] Green anarchists were instrumental in the establishment of theanti-globalisation movement (AGM), as well as its transformation into the subsequentglobal justice movement (GJM).[41] The AGM gained support in both theGlobal North and Global South, with theZapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN) becoming a key organisation within the movement.[42] It also gained a wide range of support from different sectors of society, not only includingactivists fromleft-wing politics or the environmental and peace movements, but also people fromtrade unions, church groups and the agricultural sector. Trade unionists were the most prominent presence at the1999 Seattle WTO protests, even outnumbering the environmentalists and anarchists.[43] Drawing from its anarchist roots, the AGM adopted a decentralised and non-hierarchical model ofhorizontal organisation, embracing new "anarchical" technologies such as theinternet as a means to network and communicate.[44] Through the environmental and anti-globalisation movements,contemporary anarchism was ultimately able to achieve a "quasi-renaissance" in anarchist ideas, tendencies and modes of organisation.[45]
Writers such as Murray Bookchin andAlan Carter have claimed contemporary anarchism to be the only political movement capable of addressingclimate change.[46] In his 1996 bookEcology and Anarchism, British anthropologistBrian Morris argued that anarchism is intrinsically environmentalist, as it shared the ecologist principles of decentralisation, non-hierarchical social organisation and interdependence.[7]
By the 21st century, green anarchists had begun to move beyond the previous century's divisions into social ecologist and anarcho-primitivist camps, establishing a new body of theory that rejected the dualisms of humanity against nature and civilisation against wilderness.[47] Drawing on the biocentric philosophy of deep ecology, in 2006,Mark Somma called for a "revolutionary environmentalism" capable of overthrowingcapitalism, reducing consumption and organising theconservation of biodiversity.[48] Somma championed a form ofsolidarity between humanity and the non-human natural world, in a call that was taken up in 2009 bySteven Best, who called for eco-anarchists to commit themselves to "total liberation" and extend solidarity to animals.[49] To Best,morality ought to be extended to animals due to theirsentience and capacity to feelpain; he has called for the abolition of the hierarchy between humans and animals, although he implicitly excludes non-sentient plants from this moral consideration.[50]Drawing fromeco-feminism,pattrice jones called for human solidarity with both plants and animals, neither of which she considered to be lesser than humans, even describing them as "natural anarchists" that do not recognise or obey any government's laws.[51]
In 2012, Jeff Shantz developed a theory of "green syndicalism", which seeks to use ofsyndicalist models of workplace organisation to link thelabour movement with theenvironmental movement.[26]
The green anarchist theory ofsocial ecology is based on an analysis of the relationship betweensociety andnature.[52] Social ecology considers human society to be both the cause of and solution to environmental degradation, envisioning the creation of arational andecological society through a process ofsociocultural evolution.[53] Social ecologistMurray Bookchin saw society itself as a natural product ofevolution,[54] which intrinsically tended toward ever-increasingcomplexity and diversity.[55] While he saw human society as having the potential to become "nature rendered self-conscious",[56] inThe Ecology of Freedom, Bookchin elaborated that the emergence ofhierarchy had given way to a disfigured form of society that was both ecologically and socially destructive.[57]
According to social ecology, the oppression of humans by humans directly preceded the exploitation of the environment by hierarchical society, which itself caused avicious circle of increasing socio-ecological devastation.[58] Considering social hierarchy to go against the natural evolutionary tendencies towards complexity and diversity,[59] social ecology concludes that oppressive hierarchies have to be abolished in order to resolve theecological crisis.[60] Bookchin thus proposed a decentralised system ofdirect democracy, centred locally in themunicipality, where people themselves couldparticipate in decision making.[61] He envisioned aself-organized system ofpopular assemblies to replace thestate and re-educate individuals into socially and ecologically minded citizens.[62]
The theory ofdeep ecology rejectsanthropocentrism in favour ofbiocentrism, which recognizes theintrinsic value of all life, regardless of its utility to humankind.[29] Unlike social ecologists, theorists of deep ecology considered human society to be incapable of reversing environmental degradation and, as a result, proposed a drastic reduction inworld population.[30] The solutions tohuman overpopulation proposed by deep ecologists includedbioregionalism, which advocated the replacement of thenation state withbioregions, as well as a widespread return to ahunter-gatherer lifestyle.[38] Some deep ecologists, including members ofEarth First!, have even welcomed the mass death caused bydisease andfamine as a form ofpopulation control.[63]
The theory ofanarcho-primitivism aims its critique at the emergence oftechnology,agriculture andcivilisation, which it considers to have been the source of all social problems.[31] According to American primitivist theoristJohn Zerzan, it was thedivision of labour in agricultural societies that had first given way to thesocial inequality andalienation which became characteristic ofmodernity. As such, Zerzan proposed the abolition of technology and science, in order for society to be broken down and humans to return to a hunter-gather lifestyle.[64]Libertarian socialists such asNoam Chomsky andMichael Albert have been critical of anarcho-primitivism, with the former arguing that it would inevitably result ingenocide.[35]
Green syndicalism, as developed byGraham Purchase andJudi Bari,[65] advocates for the unification of thelabour movement withenvironmental movement and fortrade unions such as theIndustrial Workers of the World (IWW) to adopt ecological concerns into their platforms.[66] Seeingworkers' self-management as a means to address environmental degradation, green syndicalism pushes for workers to agitate their colleagues,sabotage environmentally destructive practices in their workplaces, and formworkers' councils. Green syndicalist Jeff Shantz proposed that afree association of producers would be best positioned to dismantle the industrial economy, through the decentralisation and localisation of production.[26] In contrast toMarxism andanarcho-syndicalism, green syndicalism opposesmass production and rejects the idea that the industrial economy has a "liberatory potential"; but it also rejects the radical environmentalist calls for a "complete, immediate break with industrialism".[67]
Although a diverse body of thought, eco-anarchist theory has a fundamental basis unified by certain shared principles.[68] Eco-anarchism considers there to be a direct connection between the problems ofenvironmental degradation andhierarchy, and maintains ananti-capitalist critique ofproductivism andindustrialism.[69] Emphasisingdecentralisation andcommunity ownership, it also advocates for thedegrowth of the economy and the re-centring of social relations aroundlocal communities andbioregions.[36]
Green anarchism traces the roots of all forms of oppression to the widespread transition fromhunting and gathering tosedentary lifestyles.[70] According to green anarchism, the foundation ofcivilisation was defined by theextraction andimportation ofnatural resources, which led to the formation ofhierarchy throughcapital accumulation and thedivision of labour.[71] Green anarchists are therefore critical ofcivilisation and its manifestations in globalized capitalism, which they consider to be causing asocietal andecological collapse that necessitates a "return to nature".[65] Green anarchists upholddirect action as a form of resistance against civilisation, which they wish to replace with a way ofsimple living in harmony withnature. This may involve cultivatingself-sustainability, practisingsurvivalism orrewilding.[72]
Eco-anarchism considers the rise ofstates to be the primary cause of environmental degradation, as states promote greater industrial extraction and production as means to remain competitive with other state powers, even at the expense of the environment.[73] Drawing from the ecological principle of "unity in diversity", eco-anarchism also recognises humans as an intrinsic part of the ecosystem that they live in and how their culture, history and language is shaped by their local environments.[65] Eco-anarchists therefore argue for the abolition of states and their replacement withstateless societies,[73] upholding various forms oflocalism andbioregionalism.[74]
Ecological anarchism considers theexploitation of labour undercapitalism within a broader ecological context, holding thatenvironmental degradation is intrinsically linked with societaloppression.[75] As such, green anarchism is opposed toindustrialism, due to both its social and ecological affects.[16]
