This primer is not meant to be the "defining principles" for a green anarchist �movement�, nor an anti-civilization manifesto. It is a look at
some of the basic ideas and concepts which collective members share
with each other, and with others who identify as green anarchists. We
understand and celebrate the need to keep our visions and strategies
open, and always welcome discussion. We feel that every aspect of
what we think and who we are constantly needs to be challenged and
remain flexible if we are to grow. We are not interested in developing
a new ideology, nor perpetuating a singular world-view. We also
understand that not all green anarchists are specifically anti-civilization
(but we do have a hard time understanding how one can be against all
domination without getting to its roots: civilization itself). At this point,
however, most who use the term �green anarchist� do indict civilization
and all that comes along with it (domestication, patriarchy, division of
labor, technology, production, representation, alienation, objectification,
control, the destruction of life, etc.). While some would like to speak in
terms of direct democracy and urban gardening, we feel it is impossible
and undesirable to "green up" civilization and/or make it more "fair".
We feel that it is important to move towards a radically decentralized
world, to challenge the logic and mindset of the death-culture, to end
all mediation in our lives, and to destroy all the institutions and physical
manifestations of this nightmare. We want to become uncivilized.
In more general terms, this is the trajectory of green anarchy in thought
and practice.
Anarchy vs. Anarchism
One qualifier that we feel is important to begin
with is the distinction between "anarchy" and
"anarchism". Some will write this off as
merely semantics or trivial, but for most
post-left and anti-civilization anarchists, this
differentiation is important. While anarchism
can serve as an important historical reference
point from which to draw inspiration and
lessons, it has become too systematic, fixed,
and ideological - everything anarchy is not.
Admittedly, this has less to do with
anarchism's social/political/philosophical
orientation, and more to do with those who
identify as anarchists. No doubt, many from our
anarchist lineage would also be disappointed by
this trend to solidify what should always be in
flux. The early self-identified anarchists
(Proudhon, Bakunin, Berkman, Goldman,
Malatesta, and the like) were responding to
their specific contexts, with their own specific
motivations and desires. Too often, contemporary
anarchists see these individuals as representing
the boundaries of anarchy, and create a
W.W.B.D. [What Would Bakunin Do (or more
correctly - Think)] attitude towards anarchy,
which is tragic and potentially dangerous.
Today, some who identify as "classical"
anarchists refuse to accept any effort in
previously uncharted territory within anarchism
(ie. Primitivism, Post-Leftism, etc.) or trends
which have often been at odds with the rudimentary
workers' mass movement approach
(ie. Individualism, Nihilism, etc.). These rigid,
dogmatic, and extremely uncreative anarchists
have gone so far as to declare that anarchism is a
very specific social and economic methodology
for organizing the working class. This is obviously
an absurd extreme, but such tendencies
can be seen in the ideas and projects of many
contemporary anarcho-leftists (anarchosydicalists,
anarcho-communists, platformists,
federationists). "Anarchism", as it stands today,
is a far-left ideology, one which we need to get
beyond. In contrast, "anarchy" is a formless,
fluid, organic experience embracing multifaceted
visions of liberation, both personal and
collective, and always open. As anarchists, we
are not interested in forming a new framework
or structure to live under or within, however
"unobtrusive" or "ethical" it claims to be.
Anarchists cannot provide another world for
others, but we can raise questions and ideas,
try to destroy all domination and that which
impedes our lives and our dreams, and live
directly connected with our desires.
What Is Primitivism?
While not all green anarchists specifically
identify as "Primitivists", most acknowledge
the significance that the primitivist critique has
had on anti-civilization perspectives. Primitivism
is simply an anthropological, intellectual, and
experiential examination of the origins
of civilization and the circumstances
that led to this nightmare we currently
inhabit. Primitivism recognizes that for
most of human history, we lived in
face-to-face communities in balance
with each other and our surroundings,
without formal hierarchies and institutions
to mediate and control our
lives. Primitivists wish to learn from
the dynamics at play in the past and in
contemporary gatherer-hunter/primitive
societies (those that have existed and
currently exist outside of civilization). While some primitivists wish for an
immediate and complete return to
gatherer-hunter band societies, most
primitivists understand that an
acknowledgement of what has been
successful in the past does not unconditionally
determine what will work in the
future. The term "Future Primitive", coined by
anarcho-primitivist author John Zerzan, hints that
a synthesis of primitive techniques and ideas can
be joined with contemporary anarchist concepts
and motivations to create healthy, sustainable, and
egalitarian decentralized situations. Applied
non-ideologically, anarcho-primitivism can
be an important tool in the de-civilizing project.
What is Civilization?
Green anarchists tend to view civilization as
the logic, institutions, and physical apparatus
of domestication, control, and domination.
While different individuals and groups prioritize
distinct aspects of civilization (i.e. primitivists
typically focus on the question of origins,
feminists primarily focus on the roots and
manifestations of patriarchy, and insurrectionary
anarchists mainly focus on the destruction of
contemporary institutions of control), most
green anarchists agree that it is the underlying
problem or root of oppression, and it needs to
be dismantled. The rise of civilization can
roughly be described as the shift over the past
10,000 years from an existence within and
deeply connected to the web of life, to one
separated from and in control of the rest of life.
Prior to civilization there generally existed ample
leisure time, considerable gender autonomy
and equality, a non-destructive approach to the
natural world, the absence of organized violence,
no mediating or formal institutions, and strong
health and robusticity. Civilization inaugurated
warfare, the subjugation of women, population
growth, drudge work, concepts of property,
entrenched hierarchies, and virtually every
known disease, to name a few of its devastating
derivatives. Civilization begins with and relies
on an enforced renunciation of instinctual
freedom. It cannot be reformed and is thus
our enemy.
(For a more in-depth look at civilization, check out:
Back to Basics Volume One: The Origins of Civilization)
Biocentrism vs. Anthropocentrism
One way of analyzing the extreme discord
between the world-views of primitive and
earth-based societies and of civilization, is that
of biocentric vs. anthropocentric outlooks.
Biocentrism is a perspective that centers
and connects us to the earth and the
complex web of life, while anthropocentrism,
the dominant world view of
western culture, places our primary
focus on human society, to the exclusion
of the rest of life. A biocentric view does
not reject human society, but does move
it out of the status of superiority and puts
it into balance with all other life forces.
It places a priority on a bioregional
outlook, one that is deeply connected
to the plants, animals, insects, climate,
geographic features, and spirit of the place
we inhabit. There is no split between
ourselves and our environment, so there
can be no objectification or otherness
to life. Where separation and objectification
are at the base of our ability to
dominate and control, interconnectedness is
a prerequisite for deep nurturing, care, and
understanding. Green anarchy strives to
move beyond human-centered ideas and
decisions into a humble respect for all life
and the dynamics of the ecosystems that
sustain us.
A Critique of Symbolic Culture
Another aspect of how we view and relate to
the world that can be problematic, in the sense
that it separates us from a direct interaction, is
our shift towards an almost exclusively symbolic
culture. Often the response to this questioning
is, "So, you just want to grunt"� Which might
be the desire of a few, but typically the
critique is a look at the problems inherent with
a form of communication and comprehension
that relies primarily on symbolic thought at
the expense (and even exclusion) of other
sensual and unmediated means. The emphasis
on the symbolic is a movement from direct
experience into mediated experience in the
form of language, art, number, time, etc.
Symbolic culture filters our entire perception
through formal and informal symbols. It�s
beyond just giving things names, but having
an entire relationship to the world that comes
through the lens of representation. It is debatable
as to whether humans are "hard-wired"
for symbolic thought or if it developed as a
cultural change or adaptation, but the symbolic
mode of expression and understanding is
certainly limited and its over-dependence leads
to objectification, alienation, and a tunnel vision
of perception. Many green anarchists
promote and practice getting in touch with and
rekindling dormant or underutilized methods
of interaction and cognition, such as touch,
smell, and telepathy, as well as experimenting
with and developing unique and personal
modes of comprehension and expression.
The Domestication of Life
Domestication is the process that civilization
uses to indoctrinate and control life according
to its logic. These time-tested mechanisms of
subordination include: taming, breeding,
genetically modifying, schooling, caging,
intimidating, coercing, extorting, promising,
governing, enslaving, terrorizing,
murdering - the list goes on to include almost
every civilized social interaction. Their movement
and effects can be examined and felt
throughout society, enforced through various
institutions, rituals, and customs. It is also the
process by which previously nomadic human
populations shift towards a sedentary or settled
existence through agriculture and animal
husbandry. This kind of domestication demands
a totalitarian relationship with both the land
and the plants and animals being domesticated.
Whereas in a state of wildness, all life shares
and competes for resources, domestication
destroys this balance. The domesticated landscape
(e.g. pastoral lands/agricultural fields,
and to a lesser degree horticulture and
gardening) necessitates the end of open sharing
of the resources that formerly existed;
where once "this was everyone's," it is
now "mine". In Daniel Quinn's novel
Ishmael, he explains this transformation
from the "Leavers" (those who accepted
what the earth provided) to that of the
"Takers" (those who demanded from
the earth what they wanted). This notion
of ownership laid the foundation for
social hierarchy as property and power
emerged.
Domestication not only changes the
ecology from a free to a totalitarian
order, it enslaves the species that are
domesticated. Generally the more an
environment is controlled, the less
sustainable it is. The domestication of
humans themselves involves many
trade-offs in comparison to the foraging,
nomadic mode. It is worth noting here
that most of the shifts made from
nomadic foraging to domestication
were not made autonomously, they
were made by the blade of the sword
or barrel of the gun. Whereas only 2000
years ago the majority of the world
population were gatherer- hunters, it is now
.01%. The path of domestication is a colonizing
force that has meant myriad pathologies for
the conquered population and the originators
of the practice. Several examples include a
decline in nutritional health due to over reliance
on non-diverse diets, almost 40-60
diseases integrated into human populations per
domesticated animal (influenza, the common
cold, tuberculosis, etc.), the emergence
of surplus which can be used to feed a
population out of balance and which
invariably involves property and an end
to unconditional sharing.
The Origins and Dynamics of Patriarchy
Toward the beginning in the shift to civilization,
an early product of domestication
is patriarchy: the formalization of male domination
and the development of institutions
which reinforce it. By creating false gender
distinctions and divisions between men
and women, civilization, again, creates an
"other" that can be objectified, controlled,
dominated, utilized, and commodified.
This runs parallel to the domestication of
plants for agriculture and animals for
herding, in general dynamics, and also in
specifics like the control of reproduction. As
in other realms of social stratification, roles
are assigned to women in order to establish
a very rigid and predictable order, beneficial
to hierarchy. Woman come to be seen as
property, no different then the crops in the
field or the sheep in the pasture. Ownership
and absolute control, whether of land, plants,
animals, slaves, children, or women, is part
of the established dynamic of civilization.
Patriarchy demands the subjugation of the
feminine and the usurpation of nature, propelling
us toward total annihilation. It defines
power, control and dominion over wildness,
freedom, and life. Patriarchal conditioning
dictates all of our interactions; with ourselves,
our sexuality, our relationships to each other,
and our relationship to nature. It severely
limits the spectrum of possible experience.
The interconnected relationship between the
logic of civilization and patriarchy is undeniable;
for thousands of years they have shaped
the human experience on every level, from the
institutional to the personal, while they have
devoured life. To be against civilization,
one must be against patriarchy; and to
question patriarchy, it seems, one must
also put civilization into question.
Division of Labor and Specialization
The disconnecting of the ability to care
for ourselves and provide for our own
needs is a technique of separation and
disempowerment perpetuated by civilization.
We are more useful to the system, and
less useful to ourselves, if we are alienated
from our own desires and each other
through division of labor and specialization.
We are no longer able to go out into the
world and provide for ourselves and our
loved ones the necessary nourishment
and provisions for survival. Instead, we are
forced into the production/consumption
commodity system to which we are
always indebted. Inequities of influence
come about via the effective power of
various kinds of experts. The concept of a
specialist inherently creates power dynamics
and undermines egalitarian relationships.
While the Left may sometimes recognize
these concepts politically, they are viewed
as necessary dynamics, to keep in check or
regulate, while green anarchists tend to see
division of labor and specialization as fundamental
and irreconcilable problems, decisive
to social relationships within civilization.
The Rejection of Science
Most anti-civilization anarchists reject science
as a method of understanding the world.
Science is not neutral. It is loaded with
motives and assumptions that come out of, and
reinforce, the catastrophe of dissociation,
disempowerment, and consuming deadness
that we call "civilization." Science assumes
detachment. This is built into the very word
�observation.� To �observe� something is to
perceive it while distancing oneself emotionally
and physically, to have a one-way channel of
"information" moving from the observed thing
to the"self," which is defined as not a part of
that thing. This death-based or mechanistic
view is a religion, the dominant religion of our
time. The method of science deals only with
the quantitative. It does not admit values or
emotions, or the way the air smells when it's
starting to rain - or if it deals with these
things, it does so by transforming them into
numbers, by turning oneness with the smell
of the rain into abstract preoccupation with the
chemical formula for ozone, turning the way
it makes you feel into the intellectual idea that
emotions are only an illusion of firing neurons.
Number itself is not truth but a chosen style
of thinking. We have chosen a habit of mind
that focuses our attention into a world removed
from reality, where nothing has quality or
awareness or a life of its own. We have chosen
to transform the living into the dead. Careful thinking
scientists will admit that what they
study is a narrow simulation of the complex
real world, but few of them notice that this
narrow focus is self-feeding, that it has built
technological, economic, and political systems
that are all working together, which suck our
reality in on itself. As narrow as the world of
numbers is, scientific method does not even
permit all numbers - only those numbers
which are reproducible, predictable, and the
same for all observers. Of course reality itself
is not reproducible or predictable or the same
for all observers. But neither are fantasy worlds
derived from reality.
Science doesn�t stop at pulling us into a
dream world � it goes one step further and
makes this dream world a nightmare whose
contents are selected for predictability and
controllability and uniformity. All surprise
and sensuality are vanquished. Because
of science, states of consciousness that
cannot be reliably disposed are classified
as insane, or at best "non-ordinary", and
excluded. Anomalous experience,
anomalous ideas, and anomalous people
are cast off or destroyed like imperfectly shaped
machine components. Science is
only a manifestation and locking in of an
urge for control that we�ve had at least since
we started farming fields and fencing animals
instead of surfing the less predictable (but
more abundant) world of reality, or �nature.�
And from that time to now, this urge has driven
every decision about what counts as
"progress", up to and including the genetic
restructuring of life.
The Problem of Technology
All green anarchists question technology on
some level. While there are those who still
suggest the notion of "green" or "appropriate"
technology and search for rationales to cling
to forms of domestication, most reject technology
completely. Technology is more than
wires, silicon, plastic, and steel. It is a complex
system involving division of labor, resource
extraction, and exploitation for the benefit of
those who implement its process. The interface
with and result of technology
is always an alienated, mediated,
and distorted reality.
Despite the claims of postmodern
apologists and other
technophiles, technology is
not neutral. The values and
goals of those who produce
and control technology are
always embedded within it.
Technology is distinct from
simple tools in many regards.
A simple tool is a temporary
usage of an element within
our immediate surroundings
used for a specific task.
Tools do not involve complex
systems which alienate the
user from the act. Implicit in
technology is this separation,
creating an unhealthy and
mediated experience which
leads to various forms of authority.
Domination increases
every time a new "time-saving"
technology is created, as it
necessitates the construction of
more technology to support,
fuel, maintain and repair the
original technology. This
has led very rapidly to the
establishment of a complex
technological system that seems to have an
existence independent from the humans who
created it. Discarded by-products of the technological
society are polluting both our physical
and our psychological environments. Lives
are stolen in service of the Machine and the
toxic effluent of the technological system's
fuels - both are choking us. Technology
is now replicating itself, with something
resembling a sinister sentience. Technological
society is a planetary infection, propelled
forward by its own momentum, rapidly ordering
a new kind of environment: one designed for
mechanical efficiency and technological
expansionism alone. The technological system
methodically destroys, eliminates, or subordinates
the natural world, constructing a
world fit only for machines. The ideal for
which the technological system strives is the
mechanization of everything it encounters.
Production and Industrialism
A key component of the modern techno-capitalist
structure is industrialism, the mechanized
system of production built on centralized
power and the exploitation of people and nature.
Industrialism cannot exist without genocide,
ecocide, and colonialism. To maintain it, coercion,
land evictions, forced labor, cultural destruction,
assimilation, ecological devastation, and global
trade are accepted as necessary, even benign.
Industrialism's standardization of life objectifies
and commodifies it, viewing all life as a
potential resource.
A critique of industrialism is a natural
extension of the anarchist critique of the state
because industrialism is inherently authoritarian.
In order to maintain an industrial society, one
must set out to conquer and colonize lands in
order to acquire (generally) non-renewable
resources to fuel and grease the machines. This
colonialism is rationalized by racism, sexism,
and cultural chauvinism. In the process of
acquiring these resources, people must be
forced off their land. And in
order to make people work
in the factories that produce
the machines, they must be
enslaved, made dependent,
and otherwise subjected
to the destructive, toxic,
degrading industrial system.
Industrialism cannot exist
without massive centralization
and specialization:
Class domination is a tool
of the industrial system that
denies people access to
resources and knowledge,
making them helpless and
easy to exploit. Furthermore,
industrialism demands that
resources be shipped from
all over the globe in order
to perpetuate its existence,
and this globalism undermines local autonomy
and self-sufficiency. It is a mechanistic worldview
that is behind industrialism. This is the
same world-view that has justified slavery,
exterminations, and the subjugation of women.
It should be obvious to all that industrialism
is not only oppressive for humans, but that it
is also fundamentally ecologically destructive.
Beyond Leftism
Unfortunately, many anarchists continue to be
viewed, and view themselves, as part of the
Left. This tendency is changing, as post-left
and anti-civilization anarchists make clear
distinctions between their perspectives and the
bankruptcy of the socialist and liberal orientations.
Not only has the Left proven itself to
be a monumental failure in its objectives, but
it is obvious from its history, contemporary
practice, and ideological framework, that the
Left (while presenting itself as altruistic and
promoting "freedom") is actually the antithesis
of liberation. The Left has never fundamentally
questioned technology, production, organization,
representation, alienation, authoritarianism,
morality, or Progress, and it has almost nothing
to say about ecology, autonomy, or the individual
on any meaningful level. The Left is a general
term and can roughly describe all socialist
leanings (from social democrats and liberals
to Maoists and Stalinists) which wish to
re-socialize "the masses" into a more "progressive"
agenda, often using coercive and
manipulative approaches in order to create a
false "unity" or the creation of political
parties. While the methods or extremes in
implementation may differ, the overall
push is the same, the institution of a collectivized
and monolithic world-view based
on morality.
(For a more in-depth look at the anti-civilization
anarchist view of the Left check out: �Back to Basics
Volume Two: The Problem of the Left�)
Against Mass Society
Most anarchists and "revolutionaries" spend
a significant portion of their time developing
schemes and mechanisms for production,
distribution, adjudication, and communication
between large numbers of people; in other
words, the functioning of a complex society.
But not all anarchists accept the premise of
global (or even regional) social, political, and
economic coordination and interdependence,
or the organization needed for their administration.
We reject mass society for practical
and philosophical reasons. First, we reject the
inherent representation necessary for the
functioning of situations outside of the realm
of direct experience (completely decentralized
modes of existence). We do not wish to run
society, or organize a different society, we want
a completely different frame of reference. We
want a world where each group is autonomous
and decides on its own terms how to live, with
all interactions based on affinity, free and open,
and non-coercive. We want a life which we live,
not one which is run. Mass society brutally
collides not only with autonomy and the
individual, but also with the earth. It is simply
not sustainable (in terms of the resource
extraction, transportation, and communication
systems necessary for any global economic
system) to continue on with, or to provide
alternative plans for a mass society. Again,
radical de-centralization seems key to autonomy
and providing non-hierarchical and sustainable
methods of subsistence.
Liberation vs. Organization
We are beings striving for a deep and total
break with the civilized order, anarchists
desiring unrestrained freedom. We fight for
liberation, for a de-centralized and unmediated
relationship with our surroundings and those
we love and share affinity with. Organizational
models only provide us with more of the same
bureaucracy, control, and alienation that we
receive from the current
set-up. While there might be
an occasional good intention,
the organizational model
comes from an inherently
paternalistic and distrusting
mindset which seems
contradictory to anarchy.
True relationships of affinity
come from a deep understanding
of one another
through intimate need-based
relationships of day-to-day
life, not relationships based
on organizations, ideologies,
or abstract ideas. Typically,
the organizational model
suppresses individual needs
and desires for "the good of
the collective" as it attempts
to standardize both resistance
and vision. From parties, to platforms, to
federations, it seems that as the scale of
projects increase, the meaning and relevance
they have for one's own life decrease.
Organizations are means for stabilizing creativity,
controlling dissent, and reducing
"counter-revolutionary tangents" (as chiefly
determined by the elite cadres or leadership).
They typically dwell in the quantitative, rather
than the qualitative, and offer little space for
independent thought or action. Informal,
affinity-based associations tend to minimize
alienation from decisions and processes, and
reduce mediation between our desires and our
actions. Relationships between groups of
affinity are best left organic and temporal,
rather than fixed and rigid.
Revolution vs. Reform
As anarchists, we are fundamentally opposed
to government, and likewise, any sort of
collaboration or mediation with the state
(or any institution of hierarchy and control).
This position determines a certain continuity
or direction of strategy, historically referred
to as revolution. This term, while warped,
diluted, and co-opted by various ideologies
and agendas, can still have meaning to the
anarchist and anti-ideological praxis. By
revolution, we mean the ongoing struggle to
alter the social and political landscape in a
fundamental way; for anarchists, this means
its complete dismantling. The word "revolution"
is dependent on the position from which it is
directed, as well as what would be termed
"revolutionary" activity. Again, for anarchists, this is activity which is aimed at the complete
dissolving of power. Reform, on the other
hand, entails any activity or strategy aimed at
adjusting, altering, or selectively maintaining
elements of the current system, typically
utilizing the methods or apparatus of that
system. The goals and methods of revolution
cannot be dictated by, nor performed within,
the context of the system. For anarchists,
revolution and reform invoke incompatible
methods and aims, and despite certain
anarcho-liberal approaches, do not exist on a
continuum. For anti-civilization anarchists,
revolutionary activity questions, challenges,
and works to dismantle the entire set-up or
paradigm of civilization. Revolution is also not
a far-off or distant singular event which we build
towards or prepare people for, but instead, a
life-way or practice of approaching situations.
Resisting the Mega-Machine
Anarchists in general, and green anarchists in
particular, favor direct action over mediated
or symbolic forms of resistance. Various
methods and approaches, including cultural
subversion, sabotage, insurrection, and political
violence (although not limited to these) have
been and remain part of the anarchist arsenal
of attack. No one tactic can be effective in
significantly altering the current order or its
trajectory, but these methods, combined with
transparent and ongoing social critique, are
important. Subversion of the system can
occur from the subtle to the dramatic, and can
also be an important element of physical
resistance. Sabotage has always been a vital
part of anarchist activities, whether in the form
of spontaneous vandalism (public or nocturnal)
or through more highly illegal underground
coordination in cell formation. Recently,
groups like the Earth Liberation Front, a radical
environmental group made up of autonomous
cells targeting those who profit off of the
destruction of the earth, have caused millions of
dollars of damage to corporate outlets and
offices, banks, timber mills, genetic research
facilities, sport utility vehicles, and luxury
homes. These actions, often taking the form of
arson, along with articulate communiqu�s
frequently indicting civilization, have inspired
others to take action, and are effective means
of not only bringing attention to environmental
degradation, but also as deterrents to specific
earth destroyers. Insurrectionary activity, or
the proliferation of insurrectionary moments
which can cause a rupture in the social peace
in which people's spontaneous rage can be
unleashed and possibly spread into revolutionary
conditions, are also on the rise. The riots in
Seattle in 1999, Prague in 2000, and Genoa
in 2001, were all (in different ways) sparks
of insurrectionary activity, which, although
limited in scope, can be seen as attempts to move
in insurrectionary directions and make
qualitative breaks with reformism and
the entire system of enslavement.
Political violence, including the targeting
of individuals responsible for
specific activities or the decisions which
lead to oppression, has also been a
focus for anarchists historically. Finally,
considering the immense reality and all pervasive
reach of the system (socially,
politically, technologically), attacks on
the techno-grid and infrastructure of the
mega-machine are of interest to anti-civilization
anarchists. Regardless of
approaches and intensity, militant
action coupled with insightful analysis
of civilization is increasing.
The Need To Be Critical
As the march towards global annihilation
continues, as society becomes
more unhealthy, as we lose more control
over our own lives, and as we fail to create
significant resistance to the death-culture,
it is vital for us to be extremely critical of
past "revolutionary" movements, current
struggles, and our own projects. We cannot
perpetually repeat the mistakes of the past
or be blind to our own deficiencies. The radical
environmental movement is filled with single issued
campaigns and symbolic gestures and
the anarchist scene is plagued with leftist and
liberal tendencies. Both continue to go through
rather meaningless activist motions, rarely
attempting to objectively assess their
(in)effectiveness. Often guilt and self-sacrifice,
rather than their own liberation and freedom,
guide these social do-gooders, as they proceed
along a course that has been plotted out by the
failures before them. The Left is a festering sore
on the ass of humanity, environmentalists have
been unsuccessful at preserving even a fraction
of wild areas, and anarchists rarely have anything
provocative to say, let alone do. While
some would argue against criticism because it
is �divisive�, any truly radical perspective
would see the necessity of critical examination,
in changing our lives and the world we inhabit.
Those who wish to quell all debate until
"after the revolution", to contain all discussion
into vague and meaningless chatter,
and to subdue criticism of strategy, tactics,
or ideas, are going nowhere, and can only hold
us back. An essential aspect to any radical
anarchist perspective must be to put everything
into question, certainly including our own
ideas, projects, and actions.
Influences and Solidarity
The green anarchist perspective is diverse and
open, yet it does contain some continuity and
primary elements. It has been influenced by
anarchists, primitivists, Luddites, insurrectionalists,
Situationists, surrealists, nihilists, deep
ecologists, bioregionalists, eco-feminists, various
indigenous cultures, anti-colonial struggles,
the feral, the wild, and the earth. Anarchists,
obviously, contribute the anti-authoritarian
push, which challenges all power on a fundamental
level, striving for truly egalitarian
relationships and promoting mutual aid
communities. Green anarchists, however,
extend ideas of non-domination to all of life, not
just human life, going beyond the traditional
anarchist analysis.
From primitivists, green
anarchists are informed with a critical and
provocative look at the origins of civilization,
so as to understand what this mess is and how
we got here, to help inform a change in direction.
Inspired by the Luddites, green anarchists
rekindle an anti-technological/industrial direct
action orientation.
Insurrectionalists infuse a
perspective which waits not for the fine-tuning
of a crystalline critique, but identify and
spontaneously attack current institutions of
civilization which inherently bind our freedom
and desire.
Anti-civilization anarchists owe
much to the Situationists, and their critique of
the alienating commodity society, which we
can break from by connecting with our dreams
and unmediated desires.
Nihilism's refusal to
accept any of the current reality understands
the deeply engrained unhealth of this society
and offers green anarchists a strategy which
does not necessitate offering visions for society,
but instead focuses on its destruction.
Deep ecology, despite its misanthropic tendencies,
informs the green anarchist perspective with
an understanding that the well-being and flourishing
of all life is linked to the awareness of
the inherent worth and intrinsic value of the
non-human world independent of use value.
Deep ecology's appreciation for the richness and
diversity of life contributes to the realization
that the present human interference with the
non-human world is coercive and excessive,
with the situation rapidly worsening.
Bioregionalists bring the perspective of living
within one�s bioregion, and being intimately
connected to the land, water, climate, plants,
animals, and general patterns of their
bioregion.
Eco-feminists have contributed to
the comprehension of the roots, dynamics,
manifestations, and reality of patriarchy, and
its effect on the earth, women in particular,
and humanity in general. Recently, the destructive
separation of humans from the earth
(civilization) has probably been articulated
most clearly and intensely by eco-feminists.
Anti-civilization anarchists have been profoundly
influenced by the various indigenous cultures
and earth-based peoples throughout history
and those who still currently exist. While we
humbly learn and incorporate sustainable
techniques for survival and healthier ways of
interacting with life, it is important to not flatten
or generalize native peoples and their cultures,
and to respect and attempt to understand their
diversity without co-opting cultural identities and
characteristics. Solidarity, support, and attempts
to connect with native and anti-colonial struggles,
which have been the front-lines of the fight
against civilization, are essential as we attempt to
dismantle the death-machine. It is also important
to understand that we, at some point, have
all come from earth-based peoples forcibly
removed from our connections with the earth,
and therefore have a place within anti-colonial
struggles.
We are also inspired by the feral,
those who have escaped domestication and
have re-integrated with the wild. And, of
course, the wild beings which make up this
beautiful blue and green organism called Earth.
It is also important to remember that, while
many green anarchists draw influence from
similar sources, green anarchy is something
very personal to each who identify or connect
with these ideas and actions. Perspectives
derived from one's own life experiences within
the death-culture (civilization), and one's own
desires outside the domestication process, are
ultimately the most vivid and important in the
uncivilizing process.
Rewilding and Reconnection
For most green/anti-civilization/primitivist
anarchists, rewilding and reconnecting with
the earth is a life project. It is not limited to
intellectual comprehension or the practice of
primitive skills, but instead, it is a deep
understanding of the pervasive ways in which
we are domesticated, fractured, and dislocated
from our selves, each other, and the
world, and the enormous and daily undertaking
to be whole again. Rewilding has a physical
component which involves reclaiming skills
and developing methods for a sustainable
co-existence, including how to feed, shelter,
and heal ourselves with the plants, animals,
and materials occurring naturally in our
bioregion. It also includes the dismantling of
the physical manifestations, apparatus, and
infrastructure of civilization. Rewilding has an
emotional component, which involves healing
ourselves and each other from the 10,000
year-old wounds which run deep, learning
how to live together in non-hierarchical
and non-oppressive communities, and deconstructing
the domesticating mindset in our
social patterns. Rewilding involves prioritizing
direct experience and passion over mediation
and alienation, re-thinking every dynamic and
aspect of our reality, connecting with our feral
fury to defend our lives and to fight for a liberated
existence, developing more trust in our intuition
and being more connected to our instincts, and
regaining the balance that has been virtually
destroyed after thousands of years of patriarchal
control and domestication. Rewilding is the
process of becoming uncivilized.
(For a more in-depth look at reconnecting to our
wild-selves and primitive skills, check out:
�Back to Basics Volume Three: Rewilding�)
For the Destruction of Civilization!
For the Reconnection to Life
|
