Ecofascism: A Left Biocentric Analysis

creepshowDavid Orton, writing in Green Web Bulletin #68:

Fascism comes in many forms. Contemporary fascist-type movements (often an alliance of conservative and fascist forces), like the National Front (France), the Republicans (Germany), the Freedom Movement (Austria), the Flemish Block (Belgium), etc., may have ecological concerns, but these are not at the center of the various philosophies and are but one of a number of issues used to mobilize support – for example crime-fighting, globalization and economic competition, alleged loss of cultural identity because of large scale immigration, etc. For any organization which seeks some kind of popular support, even a fascist organization, it would be hard to ignore the environment. But these would be considered “shallow” not defining or “deep” concerns for deep ecology supporters. None of these or similar organizations call themselves ecofascists. (One time German Green Party member, ecologist Herbert Gruhl, who went on to form other political organizations, and to write the popular 1975 book A Planet Is Plundered: The Balance of Terror of Our Politics, did develop what seems to be an intermeshing of ecological and fascist ideas.) While for fascists, the term “fascist” will have positive connotations (of course not for the rest of us), “ecofascist” as used around the environmental and green movements, has no recognizable past or present political embodiment, and has only negative connotations. So the use of the term “ecofascism” in Canada or the United States is meant to convey an insult!

Many supporters of the deep ecology movement have been uncomfortable and on the defensive concerning the question of ecofascism, because of criticism levelled against them, such as for example from some supporters of social ecology, who present themselves as more knowledgeable on social matters. (The term “social ecology” implies this.) This bulletin is meant to change this situation. I will try to show why I have arrived at the conclusion, after investigation, that “ecofascism” has come to be used mainly as an attack term, with social ecology roots, against the deep ecology movement and its supporters plus, more generally, the environmental movement. Thus, “ecofascist” and “ecofascism”, are used not to enlighten but to smear.

Read more here.

9 Comments on "Ecofascism: A Left Biocentric Analysis"

  1. meat puppet | Sep 28, 2013 at 2:40 am |

    or the witch be taken your soul.

  2. Jin The Ninja | Sep 28, 2013 at 7:42 am |

    calling bookchin “bitter and self-serving” did nothing to make an argument. maybe deep green needs to look at itself, and why so many other eco-anarchist forces think of them as such, rather than present all other views as simply ‘jealous’ of deep green ideology.

    • I will have to research this eco-anarchist and deep green ideology, as I have never heard of such things. Where is a good place to start?

  3. Anarchy Pony | Sep 28, 2013 at 11:13 am |

    In my experience the term is primarily used as an insult to describe any who remotely give a shit about defending environment and wildlife, and is usually used by people with proto fascist tendencies themselves.

    • Hmmm, that’s not my experience at all. From what I can tell in my interaction with various people and ideologies in society, “ecofascists” are:

      A) The so-called liberal-leftist, green energy proponents whom are younger, usually in the 19-25 age range just entering or graduating from post secondary organizations. They are usually finacially unaware, subscribe to anything green-trendy, and have a deep loathing of independent thought or action. These types are usually ultra-conformists to a false paradigm of unconformity, and are the footsoldiers in the movement (they do most of the work for)-

      B) The green movement planners/investors, whom are mostly politicians and big energy/oil conglomerates, the money and brains behind the green movement operations. They are usually in the 35-65 age range, dress very well and are highly educated and deeply connected in upper-echelon social circles.

      The “A” types are short sighted, influential and gravely fail to follow the money trail back to it’s source. The “B” types are usually very sociopathic, have no regard for honesty and extremely bottom-line and profit driven, so much so that they will even lobby politicians in all countries to change legislation in their favor.

      • Anarchy Pony | Sep 28, 2013 at 12:32 pm |

        In my experience it’s simply used as a basic insult for anyone remotely eco-minded that would seek to place restrictions on economic/industrial activity in an attempt to limit their harm on the biosphere, and are thus “tyrants” who are “destroying freedom”. I don’t often see it used technically accurately.

  4. BuzzCoastin | Sep 28, 2013 at 1:23 pm |

    what’s the difference between
    Fascism, Democracy & Communism?

    they’re all names for the same kind of oppressive governments
    but some prefer one name to another

  5. bobbiethejean | Sep 28, 2013 at 2:25 pm |

    Me: Pft. Eco-fascists. They’re so misguided. Who cares about the planet anyway? We can always just move to Planet B if we….. oh…. right. We don’t have a Planet B. Hm. Oh but it doesn’t really matter because when we die, we get to go live in heaven with GOD for all eterni….. oh wait…… there’s really no proof for that, is there? Hmmmm…. I bet SCIENCE will save us! Science will allow us to become so technologically advanced that we could just move right next door and…… except that science and education are being defunded down to nothing so probably not. Hm. Well fuck! Maybe we should possibly start getting just a little bit concerned about the fact that we’re destroying the planet and try to…..


Comments are closed.