Alt Fails

Bookchin advocates a form of radical extremism that prevents leftist coalitions over environmental institutions which prevents the rise of mass movements and political change Light 98-Senior Fellow @ the Center for American Progress, PhD in Ethics and Pu lic Polic! @ "C-#i$erside
and "CLA, former Assistant Professor of Philoso%h! and En$ironmental Studies @ &'" and S"&'(inghamton )Andrew, *(oo+chin as,and Social Ecolog!-, Social Ecology After Bookchin, .998, %/ 0-12

(oo+chin3s %ersonal %olitical histor!, as he is the first to admit, is the source of his uni4ue a%%roach to de ates in %olitical ecolog!/ &o one can fault him for that/ Surel! (oo+chin has alwa!s gotten %art of it right in his critical inter5ections/ 6an! %eo%le, including m!self, ha$e not understood im%ortant %arts of his argument, and ha$e made some mista+es in our commentar! a out his wor+/ And surel!, some dee% ecologists ha$e said some ridiculousl! awful things/ (ut the 4uestion is whether the a%%roach to %olitical ecolog! that (oo+chin cham%ions, including a

tendenc! to ma+e 5udgement a out interlocutors ased on a few e7treme e7am%les, is what we need toda!/ 8 am not entirel! s+e%tical a out the %ossi ilit! of a rise of neofascism in America or an!where else, ut 8 do thin+ that the %eo%le to worr! a out are not dee% ecologists/ 9he reason to tr! to reach e!ond the e7tremes of an! green %osition is that on the en$ironmental frontlines, we need to e a le to draw on as man! %eo%le as %ossi le in olstering a set of claims that is not well recei$ed in the rest of societ!/ 9hose of us, li+e m!self, and li+e (oo+chin , who come to %olitical ecolog! through 4uestions a out human social ine4ualit!, and who es%ouse a tem%ered form of anthro%ocentrism, need to wor+ toward the %ossi ilit! of forming wor+a le green alliances, rather than ado%ting a stance that too easil! dismisses %otential allies/ 8 do not thin+ that the histor! of the :ld or &ew Left so far gi$es us reason to thin+ that the old intransigent a%%roach to each other3s $iews, e$idenced in the colla%se of oth of those %eriods of left acti$ism, is what we want to see ha%%en toda!/ ;e need to e more com%ati le, within limitations/ Political ecolog! must e democratic/ :ther %olitical ecologists, such as Arne &aess, agree that too hard di$isions, while good for de$elo%ing shar%er theories, ha$e a dulling effect on de$elo%ing ecological mo$ements/ <as (oo+chin has such a dulling effect= <as his :ld Left st!le infected the
de$elo%ment of %olitical ecolog! as a od! of theoretical wor+s and as a mo$ement= 8n some wa!s he and it has/ (ut ironicall!, this effect is no clearer that as found in (oo+chin3s relationshi% with his own circle of su%%orters and fellow tra$elers/ Some da!, the com%lete histor! of %olitical ecolog! will more accuratel! iterate the slow dissolution of social ecolog! down to the $iews of one %erson and one %erson onl!, 6urra! (oo+chin/ Social ecolog!

is not a mo$ement, and as a theor! it has come to e re%resented almost e7clusi$el! ! (oo+chin3s wor+/ ;hen social ecologists go too far afield from this theor!, the! are %ushed out of the cam%, or else lea$e $oluntaril! out of frustration/ 9his tendenc! within social ecolog! should not e transferred to the wider green mo$ement/ 8f that were to ha%%en, then the mo$ement would ecome an archi%elago of isolated cells not coo%erating with each other out of s%ite/ (ut this is not to sa! that social ecolog! should e a andoned ecause of its own social histor!/ All of the authors in this
$olume are united in the con$iction that social ecolog! is one of the most im%ortant odies of theor! a$aila le to %olitical ecologists/ 9o isolate it from other con$ersations would e, and is toda!, a real traged!/ (ut if social ecolog! is to e reser$ed onl! to the wor+ of (oo+chin the indi$idual, then this ma! well e the fate of this contri ution to en$ironmental thought/ After riefl! descri ing (oo+chin3s od! of wor+, 8 will return to this issue/

Bookchins alternative failssmall societies force conformity that prevent innovation and undermine cooperation. di>erega, 9?-PhD in Political 9heor! and @isiting Assistant %rofessor in the De%artment of Ao$ernment, St/
Lawrence "ni$ersit! )Aus, S%ring,Summer, *S:C8AL EC:L:A', DEEP EC:L:A', A&D L8(E#AL8S6,Critical #e$iewB
From a neoli eral %ers%ecti$e 8 will de$elo% two asic criticisms of (oo+chin3s argument/ First, he does

not understand %ro lems of scale/ (oo+chin ignores differences etween face-to-face interactions among %eo%le who +now one another and those in$ol$ing strangers, and he a%%ears unaware of the *coordination %ro lem- and how it a%%lies to his %raise of a decentraliCed societ!/ Second, his $iew of com%etition and coo%eration, oth as the! occur in the mar+et and in nature, is much too sim%listic/ As a conse4uence, he understands neither mar+ets nor ecos!stems/ 9he $irtues of organic societies are 4uite real, and modernit! has rought a great loss !
diminishing their role in our li$es/ (ut to a significant degree the $irtues of %remodern organic societ! grow from its small scale/ 8nformal means for +ee%ing the %eace and %reser$ing social mores can easil! o%erate in such an en$ironment/ <el% for those who are %oorl! off through no fault of their own can also flourish under such circumstances, as can friendliness and interest in the well eing of +nown others/ Aarret <ardin %oints out that the <utterites, a growing grou% of small religious communities now num ering more than 1D,DDD mem ers in the "nited States, deli eratel! limit the siCe of their communities to .1D, for the! ha$e disco$ered that whene$er a grou% grows larger than that, shir+ing of communit! wor+ egins to increase faster than %o%ulation/ ;hen %o%ulation growth within a <utterite communit! e7ceeds .1D, it s%lits into two communities/E9 :n the other hand, strong %ressure for social conformit! is often the dar+ side of %remodern societ!/ 9his %ressure, and the %ower of gossi% and ostracism against the de$iant, hel%ed maintain eha$ior in accordance with grou% norms, and ena led such societies to dis%ense with the more im%ersonal means for enforcement characteristic of larger societies/ 8n such societies ostracism and e7ile were often se$ere %unishments for those who met with wides%read disa%%ro$al/ 6oreo$er, it has usuall! een in large cities Frelati$e to their societies2 that creati$it! in the arts and sciences est

***Aff Answers***

flourishes/ 8n the relati$e anon!mit! of ig cities, %eo%le who march to the eat of different drummers can more easil! find +indred souls and a$oid social disa%%ro$al than in small homogeneous communities / 8n a word,
the good things a out small communities stem from e$er!one3s +nowing and eing interested in one another G and so do the ad things/ Failing to a%%reciate this connection is a consistent %ro lem among communitarian thin+ers/0D &ot all small face-to-face societies a%%ear

inclined to reed conformism/ 6an!, though not all, &ati$e American cultures, such as the La+ota, honored indi$idualit!/ (ut those that did so were also fre4uentl! highl! com%etiti$e, which 8 dou t would %lease (oo+chin / 8n fact, the wide $ariet! of modes of life among &ati$e American %eo%les suggests that (oo+chinHs idealiCed image of organic societies is ased at est on selecti$e e7tra%olation from some %eo%les while ignoring the e7%erience of others /0. For an anal!st who continuall! writes of the ad$antages of holistic reasoning and an ecological %ers%ecti$e, (oo+chin dis%la!s a %eculiar inclination to %ic+ and choose the social features he li+es and disli+es, without an! a%%arent awareness that societies cannot e constructed sim%l! !
com ining together all the things we ha%%en to li+e and eliminating those we disli+e/ 9here is a dee%er shortcoming in (oo+chin3s one-sided %raise of the $irtues of small societies/ 9he! ha$e traditionall! een hostile to or indifferent toward strangers / 9his is e$en true of

the more indi$idualistic &ati$e American cultures/ (oo+chin ac+nowledges that the! rarel! made %ro$ision for the needs of strangers,
ut ne$er %auses to as+ wh! this *o$ersight- occurred/ ;hen our relationshi%s are intensel! face-to-face we tend to mistrust those a out whom we +now little/ (oo+chin ne$er wonders whether relationshi%s de%ending u%on %ersonal +nowledge of one another can e du%licated for humanit! as a whole, where our +nowledge of %articulars must necessaril! e small to none7istent/ All this has een discussed ! F/ A/ <a!e+, and it is a great %it! that (oo+chin a%%ears unaware of <a!e+Hs wor+/0? Face-to-face relationshi%s, in contrast to im%ersonal mar+et %rocesses, %romote intense human interactions/ ;hen friendl! or lo$ing, this is the greatest of lessings/ (ut intensit! is not alwa!s en5o!a le ecause it is not alwa!s friendl!/ ;isdom and com%assion, which would ma+e it consistentl! so, are rare/ <istoricall! a world of small face-to-face communities or tri es has

een a world of countless feuds and %ett! wars/ ;e cannot +now that this was so in %rehistoric times, ut the archaeological e$idence is not encouraging/ (oo+chin argues that we ad$ance o$er the %ast *when we relate on the asis of a sim%le affinit! of tastes, cultural similarities, emotional com%ati ilities, se7ual %references, and intellectual interests/-0E <e a%%arentl! means that we choose these relations, rather than ta+ing them for granted as in the case of small tri es/ 8s not such *freedom to choose- the ourgeois ideal= 8s it not attained most readil! within a large im%ersonal cit!, where those see+ing different modes of life can locate +indred s%irits= 8n large cities we can choose our friends/ Such circumstances are e7tremel! unli+el! in the face-to-face societies he ad$ocates/ 9he large-scale achie$ement of intimac! he ad$ocates within a small grou% would re4uire intolera le conformit!/ (oo+chin a%%ears una le to %ercei$e the e7istence of an! t!%e of relationshi% that falls etween the e7tremes of dee% intimac! and im%ersonal hostilit!/ (u!ers and sellers in mar+et orders are su%%osedl! *%olariCed against each other,- while it would e etter for them *to care for each other3s well- eing , for them to feel dee%l! res%onsi le to each other, and for them to e cemented ! a dee% sense of o ligation for their mutual welfare/-00 9his attitude goes well e!ond res%ect and com%assion for others/ 8t is also im%ossi le among %eo%le who do not +now one another / Further, the great gift li eral ci$iliCation
ga$e to humanit!, as <a!e+ and Po%%er so clearl! e7%lain, is that ! ma+ing coo%eration %ossi le along %urel! a stract and %rocedural grounds, the sco%e for %eaceful interaction was e7traordinaril! roadened/ Peo%le no longer needed to agree a out man! s%ecifics in order to enefit from %eaceful coo%eration/01 9his e7tension of the sco%e of coo%eration came at the necessar! cost of reducing the intensit! of human relations/ 9his o ser$ation

rings me to a fatal wea+ness in (oo+chin3s anal!sis / 8n an! societ! needing to %ro$ide for more than the needs of a relati$el! small %o%ulation, wides%read im%ersonal coordination of goods and ser$ices ecomes necessar!/ (oo+chin would %resuma l! not want to do without railroads to mo$e food in times of localiCed cro% failure or anti iotics to cure u onic %lague/ (ut to uild a rail line or manufacture $accines re4uires a $er! widel! integrated economic s%here/ An autar+ic count! in Iansas, or e$en @ermont, could not do it/ An!thing li+e a modern econom! cannot e ased u%on face-to-face relationshi%s/ 8t is sim%l! too com%le7/ <ere enters the calculation %ro lem first raised ! 6ises, a
%ro lem that has undermined e$er! attem%t to create a nonmar+et econom! more com%le7 than a $illage/ (oo+chin a%%ears unaware that such a %ro lem e7ists G e$en though 6ises, echoed ! 6a7 ;e er, first called attention to the matter in the .9?Ds, su se4uentl! generating an enormous literature, and e$en though the %ro lem has now ecome manifest in the fall of communist societies/0J ;hat, then, of (oo+chinHs %ro%osal for re%lacing the nation state with a federation of small inde%endent cit! re%u lics= 8 agree with him, and with writers going ac+ to Aristotle, that the %olis %ro$ides a framewor+ where citiCenshi%, that is, mem ershi% in a communit! of %olitical e4uals, can e easil! e7%ressed/ &or is ci$ic localism necessaril! anachronistic/ Kane Kaco s argues con$incingl! that cities, not nations, are the fundamental %olitical and economic units of the modern world/ Larger units, such as states and nations, ha$e essentiall! ar itrar! %olitical oundaries/0L 9here would e nothing o 5ectiona le a out (oo+chinHs %ro5ect if its %ur%ose were to en$ision $ia le institutions a le to encom%ass small-scale self-go$ernment, while simultaneousl! %reser$ing the ad$antages made %ossi le ! modern institutions/ (oo+chin3s error lies not in his ad$ocac! of munici%al $alues, for in this regard he ma! well e right Fe$en if the! are not 4uite the cure-all he seems to suggest2/ #ather, his shortcoming

is in failing to discuss the framewor+ wherein small communities could coo%erate together/ ;hat institutional ties would hel% them coordinate their acti$ities= 8n this regard his a%%arent ignorance of the mar+et3s role in coordinating intricate relationshi%s among inde%endent entities is a fatal wea+ness/

Bookchins alternative is flawedoppression of humans and oppression of nature are not connectedbetter management of nature is superior to anarchy. <ughes 89-Assistant Director of 8nstitutional #esearch and Planning, and Lecturer in Pu lic Polic! Studies,
at 9rinit! College in <artford )Kames, M(e!ond (oo+chinismN A Left Areen #es%onse,M Socialist #e$iew 89/E, htt%N,,www/changesurfer/com,(ud,(oo+chin/htmlB

S8&CE C:&SC8:"S&ESS %la!s such a central role in (oo+chinHs ethics, this a%%ears to e in contradiction to his assertion that humans o%%ress nature/ A +e! Fa%%arentl! %s!chod!namic2 %oint in (oo+chinHs %olitics seems to e that we humans egan Mo%%ressingM nature

ecause we were o%%ressing each other/ (ut the Mo%%ressionM of nature is fundamentall! different from the o%%ression of sentient eings/ 8t is, in fact, meaningless, since Mo%%ressionM onl! has meaning in reference to sentient eings with conscious intents/ 8tHs not wrong to %ut radioacti$e waste in the ground ecause we Mo%%ressM the dirt, ut ecause we and other sentient life forms are threatened ! those to7ins , and ecause we, humans, aestheticall! $alue a non-irradiated en$ironment/ ;e donHt Mo%%ressM nature, ut rather im%act on it in a wa! that causes us, and other sentient eings, harm or dis%leasure/ (oo+chin seems confused on this asic %oint/ ;alter 9ruett AndersonHs adamantl! MmanagerialM
Areen line, articulated in 9o Ao$ern E$olution is an e7am%le of an ecological %olitics that is more com%ati le with the anthro%ocentrism of democratic left thought than (oo+chinHs meta%horical eco-anarchism/ Anderson %oints out that humans ha$e een im%acting on the ecos!stem for tens of thousands of !ears, and that our challenge is not to withdraw from nature altogether Fas dee% ecologists suggest2, or to get into organo-

anarchic harmon! with it Fas (oo+chin suggests2, ut to start managing it res%onsi l! / 9he asic thrust of (oo+chinHs Msocial ecolog!M is the assertion that ecological destruction is a direct result of Msocial hierarch!/M 9hus, an anarchic societ! is the onl! answer to ecological destruction/ ;hile it is %ro a l! true that social hierarchies ma+e it more
difficult to reorient oursel$es toward ecological %rotection, this seems to e another ma5or wea+ness of (oo+chinHs anal!sis/ 8t seems 4uite %ossi le that an egalitarian societ! could e ecologicall! destructi$e, and $ice-$ersa / 8n fact, (oo+chin contradicts himself when

he %oints out that feudalism was not ecologicall! destructi$e, and ac+nowledges the %ossi ilit! that cor%orate ca%italist or ureaucratic collecti$ist societies could institute ecological %olicies / 8f social hierarch! and ecocide are
relati$el! autonomous, the left can onl! stri$e to understand how the! interact, reinforce, and undercut one another, and uild a set of $alues and mo$ements to change them oth/ ;hat (oo+chin tends toward is the reduction of the struggle against one to the struggle against the other/

he alternative is vague and unsupported by any evidencehierarchy is inevitable. Damian Fin ar ;hite, DE/ Lecturer at Aoldsmith College/ *<ierarch!, Domination, &ature,- :rganiCation
and En$ironment, Sage Kournals/
:ne immediate %ro lem that arises is that it

is difficult to a$oid eing struc+ ! the sheer $agueness and im%recision that seem to linger around this whole enter%rise/ So although *organic societ!- is not %resented as a h!%othetical *state of nature- ut %ostulated as a historical actualit! , as 6ar! 6ellor F.99?, %/.?02 has noted, it is ne$er made $er! clear ! (oo+chin when or where this earl! form of human association actuall! e7isted/ At %oints in 9he Ecolog! of Freedom,
one can find references to an *earl! &eolithic- $illage societ! and get the im%ression that organic societ! conse4uentl! can e located at a crosso$er moment when hunter-gatherers first egan to settle down into a horticultural societ!/ Elsewhere, in other writings, one can gain the distinct im%ression that this societ! stretched well u% to the emergence of the earl! cities/.. (oo+chin3s narrati$e does seem further %ro lematic ! the

manner in which his e7%ositions wings rather dramaticall! etween a *refle7i$e $oice,- which a%%ears to acce%t he is em ar+ing on a highl! s%eculati$e e7ercise to a much more confident tone, which at times seems to $irtuall! claim a Aod3s e!e $iew/ 9hus, one encounters %ersistent e7am%les of a carefull! 4ualified and tentati$e insight eing 4uic+l!
rewor+ed into a su stanti$e %ro%osition a few sentences later, where a s%eculation on *%reliterate- %ractises, $alues, or institutions is then suddenl! transformed into an im%lausi l! detailed account of *how things reall! were ac+ then/-.? Ai$en the time scales that are eing dealt

with here, and the manner in which these s%eculations are often unsu%%orted ! e$idence or su%%orted ! one or two case studies, it is difficult to a$oid an immediate sense that a certain creati$e em ellishing is going on / Additional %ro lems emerge when it ecomes e$ident that (oo+chin3s own understanding of what he has demonstrated does, at times, seem at odds with the actual narrati$e he %ro$ides/ For e7am%le, as we ha$e seen, one of the oldest claims that (oo+chin
ma+es of his account of historical de$elo%ment is that it *radicall! re$erses- central features of historical materialism/ 9hus, 6ar7 and Engels, Adorno and <or+heimer, are all chastised for their @ictorian image of *sting! nature- and the $iew that freedom from material want necessitated the *domination of nature/- 8ndeed, at $arious %oints, (oo+chin F.99D 2 has em%haticall! re5ected the $iew *that forms of

domination / / / ha$e their sources in economic conditions and needs- F%/ 012/ :n the contrar!, we are told the idea of domination initiall! arose from within societies as %art of the de$elo%ment of social hierarchies, *which are not necessaril! economicall! moti$ated at all- F%/ 0J2/ <owe$er, an im%licit recognition of the role that material factors %la!ed in the de$elo%ment of hierarch!, and e$en a certain sense that the de$elo%ment of hierarch! is ine$ita le, can also e unearthed from (oo+chin3s wor+/

Bioregionalism is too isolated to solveinternational solutions are needed. 9a!lor, ?DDD G :sh+osh Foundation Professor of #eligion and Social Ethics, and Director of En$ironmental
Studies at the "ni$ersit! of ;isconsin F(ron, (eneath the Surface, ?DDD, %g/ ?8?2,,&<< (ioregionalism generall! fails to gra%%le ade4uatel! with the %ro lem of %ower/ Conse4uentl!, it has little Manswer to s%ecificall! glo al en$ironmental %ro lems,M such as atmos%heric de%letion and the disru%tion of ocean ecos!s tems ! %ollution and o$erfishing/ Political scientist Paul ;a%ner argues that this is ecause ioregionalism assumes Mthat all glo al threats stem from local instances of en$ironmental a use and that ! confronting them at the

local le$el the! will disa%%ear/-&or does ioregionalism ha$e much of a res%onse to the Mglo aliCationM of cor%orate ca%italism and consumerist mar+et societ!, a%art from ad$ocating local resistance or long-odds cam%aigns to re$o+e the cor%orate charters of the worst en$ironmental offenders/ 9hese efforts do little to hinder the inertia of this %rocess/M And little is e$er said a out how to restrain the $oracious a%%etite of a glo al-cor%orate-consumer culture for the resources in e$er! corner of the %lanet/ E$en for the de$out, %romoting dee% ecological s%iritualit! and ecocentric $alues seems %itifull! inade4uate in the face of such forces/ Perha%s it is ecause the! ha$e little if an! theor! of social change, and thus cannot re all! en$ision a %ath toward a sustaina le societ!, that man! ioregional dee% ecologists re$ert to a%ocal!%tic scenarios/ 6an! of them see the colla%se of ecos!stems and industrial ci$iliCation as the onl! %ossi le means toward the en$isioned changes / :thers decide that
%olitical acti$ism is ho%eless, and %rioritiCe instead s%iritual strategies for e$o+ing dee% ecological s%iritualit!, ho%ing, self-consciousl!, for a miracle/

Alt!Authoritarianism
Bookchins bioregionalism would result in small" oppressive communities. Carter, DL/ Senior Lecturer in Politics @ "ni$ersit! of 'or+/ *9he Politics of the En$ironment,- %/ 19, &eil/
DecentraliCation ma! e a necessar! condition for %artici%ator! democrac!, ut there

is no guarantee that a decentraliCed societ! will e democratic/ Sale F.98D2 concedes that a societ! ased on a natural ioregion ma! not alwa!s e characteriCed ! democratic or li eral $alues ecause another HnaturalH %rinci%le, di$ersit!, im%lies that ioregional societies should oast a wide range of %olitical s!stems, some of which , %resuma l!, might e authoritarian/ E$en if the %olitical s!stem is democratic, there ma! e draw ac+s a out life in a small communit!/ Social control mechanisms ma! %ro$e o%%ressi$e if, as Aoldsmith et al/ F.9L?2 suggest, offenders are rought to heel ! the weight of %u lic o%inion/ Discrimination against minorities or non-conformist o%inion ma! e rife/ Small %arochial societies ma! also e intellectuall! and culturall! im%o$erished, %erha%s reducing inno$ation in clean technologies FFran+el .98L2/ So, ironicall!, the homogenous decentraliCed societ! ma! lac+ the di$ersit! that ecologists $alue/

Bioregionalism Bad # $nvironment

Bioregionalism would cause more rapid environmental destruction. ;hite, DE-Lecturer at Aoldsmith College )Damian Fin ar, *<ierarch!, Domination, &ature,- :rganiCation
and En$ironment, Sage Kournals, htt%N,,www/$edeg!let/hu,o+o%oliti+a,;hiteO?D-O?D<ierarch!, O?DDomination,O?D&ature/%df, DIPB
6ore su

stantial difficulties with organic societ! can e found at the methodological le$el / :ne central %ro lem here would seem to e that e$idence for (oo+chin3s s%eculations is not drawn in the main from %aleo-anthro%ological research ut rather from ?Dth-centur! ethnogra%hic studies of tri al societies and historical accounts of Euro%ean encounters with
the non-Euro%ean/ 9hus, his s%eculation on gender differentiation in organic societ! is informed ! EliCa eth 9homas3s studies of the (antu/ Discussions of animism ma+e reference to Edward (/ 9!lor3s o ser$ation of the %ractises of &ati$e Americans/ @arious other accounts of the ecological em eddedness of humanit! at the dawn of ci$ilisation draw from Doroth! Lee3s studies of the <o%i and ;intu tri es/ &ow, this %ractise is

5ustified in 9he Ecolog! of Freedom on the asis that the cultural facts of dress, technics, and en$ironment that lin+ %rehistoric %eo%les with e7isting *%rimiti$es- is so stri+ing that it is difficult to elie$e that Si erian mammoth hunters of !ester!ear /// were so dissimilar from the Arctic seal hunters of de Poncin3s da!/ F(oo+chin, .98?, %/ 1L2 'et reser$ations could immediatel! e $oiced here gi$en that the im%licit Fand highl! 4uestiona le2 assum%tion underl!ing this is that tri al %eo%le ha$e li$ed in a %ermanentl! static state , without change or social de$elo%ment/ Ai$en the growing recognition among social anthro%ologists that man! su%%osedl! isolated smallscale societies ha$e een %art of wider, often glo al s!stems of e7change for man! millennia, such an a%%roach would seem to e increasingl! %ro lematic Fsee Ellen, .98J, %/ 92/ 6ore generall!, esta lishing the e7act nature of human-nature
relations among tri al %eo%le would seem further com%licated ! the fact that as the historical geogra%her 8an Simmons F.99J2 has noted, *9he ethnogra%hic %icture is rather s%ott! on this %articular to%ic so it does not seem %ossi le to gi$e a com%lete %icture for all grou%s e$en for near-recent times, let alone the %ast- F%/ JJ2/ 8ndeed, if we turn to the anthro%ological record, %ro lems with (oo+chin3s account of

organic societ! would seem to ecome e$en more entrenched/ &ota l!, there would now seem to e growing %aleo-anthro%ological e$idence that earl! humans were in$ol$ed in su stanti$e resha%ing of their natural en$ironment, e$en to the %oint where the! %roduced su stanti$e en$ironmental degradation / .0 9hus, although
(oo+chin F.98?2 in 9he Ecolog! of Freedom ma! claim that *&eolithic artefacts seem to reflect a communion of humanit! and nature that %atentl! e7%ressed the communion of humans with each otherN a solidarit! of the communit! with the world of life that articulated an intense solidarit! within the communit! itself- F%/ J.2, elsewhere we can find su stanti$e e$idence that %oints directl! to the contrar!/ .1 8t could also e noted that e$en if we acce%ted the notion that anthro%ological data on more recent *tri al societies- %ro$ide a legitimate asis for s%eculation a out earl! humanit!, these studies would similarl! seem to suggest that the de$elo%ment of earl! human societies was %ro a l! mar+ed ! much more com%le7 and $aria le social %atterns, %ractises, and institutions than are found in the com%osite account %ro$ided in 9he Ecolog! of Freedom/ 9hus, concerning (oo+chin3s F.98?2 claim

that relations in organic societ! were *distinctl! ecological- F%/ 12, it could sim%l! e noted here that the anthro%ological e$idence on *tri al- %eo%le and hunter-gatherers hardl! lends un4ualified su%%ort to such a generalisation/ .J 9he claim that organic societ! was *stri+ingl! non-domineering not onl! in its institutionalised structure ut in its $er! language- F(oo+chin, .99D , %/ 0L2 similarl! could meet an! num er of contrar! e7am%les from small-scale societies,.L as could the related claim of an egalitarian se7ual di$ision of la our, .8 and so on/
9here would seem to e su stanti$e reasons, then, to dou t the whole account of organic societ! found in 9he Ecolog! of Freedom and #ema+ing Societ!/ (! the earl! .99Ds, it increasingl! a%%eared that (oo+chin himself had ecome less and less comforta le with man! as%ects of this %eriod of his wor+/ 8nitiall! res%onding to certain currents in dee% ecolog!, committed to what (oo+chin F.99.2 now saw as *ata$istic cele rations of a m!thic &eolithic and Pleistocene- F%/ 7772, .9 the second edition of 9he Ecolog! of Freedom %ro$ided a new introduction that 4ualified and re$ised man! earlier commitments/ &ow ceding to the anthro%ological e$idence that earl! humanit!3s relations with the natural world ma! well ha$e een much less harmonious than %re$iousl! %resumed and warning against romanticising earl! humanit!3s interconnectedness with nature, one can find an uncomforta le attem%t to hang on to certain elements of his own organic societ! thesis/ 9hus, we are told, *as humanit! egan to emerge from first nature, %ossi l! in the Pleistocene and certainl! in the Palaeolithic, their relations to animals as other was largel! com%lementar!- F%/ 7l$ii2/

%ede the &olitical

'ierarchies are natural and inevitableBookchins utopian alternative destroys the (eft. <ughes 89-Kames K, Assistant Director of 8nstitutional #esearch and Planning, and Lecturer in Pu lic Polic!
Studies, at 9rinit! College in <artford, M(e!ond (oo+chinismN A Left Areen #es%onse,M Socialist #e$iew 89/E, htt%N,,www/changesurfer/com,(ud,(oo+chin/htmlB
F8&ALL' (::IC<8&

SEE6S to lead himself ac+ into one of the same errors that he so elo4uentl! criti4ues in dee% ecolog!N the se%aration of the social order from Mthe natural/M :n the one hand, (oo+chin insists that, since humans are naturall! e$ol$ed, an!thing we do is natural/ :n the other hand, he insists that nature a hors hierarch!, and that once we get ac+ in touch with our continuit! with the natural order we will eschew hierarch!, and $ice $ersa/ 9his is again the %ro lem of the lea% from 8S to :"A<9/ <ierarchies e7ist in the ecos!stem , including animal class and gender s!stems, and our hierarchies are 5ust as Mnaturall!M e$ol$ed as theirs/ 9he reason for us to o%%ose hierarch! has to do with an e7istential human ethical decision, not with its Munnaturalness/M (oo+chinHs e4uation of nonhierarchical organiCation with ecolog! leads us astra! not onl! %hiloso%hicall!, ut also %oliticall!P it leads us into a uto%ian re5ection of engagement with the actual e7isting Fal eit hierarchical2 %olitical structures, such as the Democratic Part! and Congress/ A com%le7 social order, li+e a com%le7 organism, re4uires some degree of s%ecialiCation, centraliCation and hierarch!/ (ut the range of %ossi ilities within the human social niche is $er! road and we need to ethicall! decide which of these %ossi le ada%tations will ensure the sur$i$al of the s%ecies and the ecos!stem , while satisf!ing
our ethical goals/ Some historical %eriods allow onl! slow and cumulati$e change, while other Mtransformati$e crisisM %eriods, when the social e4uili rium is M%unctuated,M allow ra%id and re$olutionar! change/ :ur challenge is discerning when the window of o%%ortunit! is o%en for radical change, and when we must wage a more modest Mwar of %osition/M 9he %ro5ect of the left is to recogniCe the e$er-changing limits of this window, and to

%osition oursel$es within it without either e7tinguishing oursel$es in uto%ian and a%ocal!%tic %ro5ects, or
the dominant gene-%ool of %ossi ilities/

lending into

Bookchins ideological focus alienates the public and prevents a broad#scale movement. Clar+, 98-Aregor! F/ Curtin Distinguished Professor in <uman Letters and the Profession, Professor of

Philoso%h!, and a mem er of the En$ironmental Studies facult! @ Lo!ola "ni$ersit!, PhD, 6A, (A @ 9ulane "ni$ersit! )Kohn, *6unici%al DreamsN A Social Ecological Criti4ue of (oo+chin3s Politics,htt%N,,raforum/info,article/%h%E=idQarticleR.DE9B ;hile Mthe Peo%leM are identified ! (oo+chin as the emerging su 5ect of histor! and agent of social transformation, he also identifies a s%ecific grou% within this large categor! that will e essential to its successful formation/ 9hus, in the strongest sense of agenc!, the M3agent3 of re$olutionar! changeM will e a Mradical intelligentsia,M which, according to (oo+chin, has alwa!s een necessar! Mto catal!CeM such change / ).LB
9he nature of such an intelligentsia is not entirel! clear, e7ce%t that it would include theoreticall! so%histicated acti$ists who would lead a li ertarian munici%alist mo$ement/ Presuma l!, as has een historicall! the case, it would also include %eo%le in a $ariet! of cultural and intellectual fields who would hel% s%read re$olutionar! ideas/ (oo+chin is certainl! right in em%hasiCing the need within a mo$ement for social

transformation for a siCa le segment of %eo%le with de$elo%ed %olitical commitments and theoretical grounding/ <owe$er, most of the literature of li ertarian munici%alism, which em%hasiCes social criti4ue and %olitical %rograms $er! hea$il!, has seemed thus far to e directed almost e7clusi$el! at such a grou%/ Furthermore, it has assumed that the ma5or %recondition for effecti$e social action is +nowledge of and commitment to (oo+chin3s theoretical %osition/ 9his ideological focus, which reflects (oo+chin3s theoretical and organiCational a%%roach to social change, will ine$ita l! hinder the de$elo%ment of a roadl!- ased social ecolog! mo$ement, to the e7tent that this de$elo%ment re4uires a di$erse intellectual milieu lin+ing it to a larger %u lic/ Particularl! as (oo+chin has ecome increasingl! sus%icious of the imagination, the %s!chological dimension, and an! form of Ms%iritualit!,M and as he has narrowed his conce%tion of reason, he has created a $ersion of social ecolog! that is li+el! to a%%eal to onl! a small num er of highl!-%oliticiCed intellectuals/ Des%ite the commitment of social ecolog! to unit!-in-di$ersit!, his a%%roach to social change increasingl! em%hasiCes ideological unit! o$er di$ersit! of forms of e7%ression/ 8f the Mradical intelligentsiaM within the mo$ement for radical democrac! is to include a significant num er of %oets and creati$e writers, artists, musicians, and thoughtful %eo%le wor+ing in $arious %rofessional and technical fields, a more e7%ansi$e $ision of the sociall!-transformati$e %ractice is necessar!/

$ngaging institutions is essential to protect the environment ) bioregionalism and locali*ed activism does not provide not a lens for substantive social change <ar$e!, 99 GDistinguished Professor of Anthro%olog! at the Cit! "ni$ersit! of &ew 'or+ FDa$id, Alo al
Ethics and En$ironment2
(ut the content and s%irit of an! such Hre$olutionar!H mo$ement is a $er! much more o%en 4uestion/ 8 am certainl! %re%ared to listen, for e7am%le, to some of the more radical decentraliCing and communitarian, e!en ioregionalist %ro%osals that circulate within green %olitics/ (ut as 8 see+ to translate such %otentiall! fecund ideas into m! own language, 8 find m!self wanting to transform them through that dialectical conce%tion of the relations etween uni$ersalit! and %articularit! with which 8 egan/ For e7am%le , mediating institutions %la!a $ital role in gi$ing sha%e and

%ermanence, solidit! and consistenc! to how we relate with others and with the natural world we inha it/ 9o gi$e u% on some $ersion of the central state a%%aratus, for e7am%le, is to surrender an e7traordinaril! %owerful instrument Fwith all of its warts and wrin+les2 for guiding future socia-ecological transformations/ 9o o%t out of considering glo al forms of go$ernance is similarl! to a andon not onl! ho%e a out ut also real concern for a wide range of glo al en$ironmental issues For to %resume, without e$idence, that acting %urel! locall! will ha$e the desired glo al effect2/ ;e cannot cease to transform the world an! more than we can gi$e u% reathing, and it seems to me neither feasi le nor desira le that we tr! to sto% such a %rocess now, though there is much to e said a out what directions/ such transformations might ta+e and with what ris+s and socio-%olitical effects/ 8 also
find m!self 4uestioning the wa!s in which man! en$ironmental grou%s imagine the future geogra%h! of the world to e/ :f course, we ha$e to recogniCe that socio-en$ironmental relations $ar! geogra%hicall!, that structures of feeling and cultural understandings understood as whole wa!s of life e7ist oth in a state of une$en geogra%hical de$elo%ment Fa somewhat, unilinear conce%tion of a singular de$elo%mental %rocess2 and in a world differentiated historicall! and geogra%hicall! ! radical differences in what the language of Sde$elo%mentH might mean/ (ut, eing a geogra%her, 8 did not need the en$ironmentalists to tell me this Fit has een a focus of m! own attem%ts to create a more geogra%hicall! aware historical materialism for man! !ears now2/ 9he ioregionalists and social ecologists, as well as man! of those drawn to more communitarian as%ects

of en$ironmentalism, certainl! reinforce the im%ortant idea that %lace- ased or regionall! ased %olitics are more often than not a significant seed- ed for radical socio-ecological %olitics as well as +e! sites for radical change, ut in so doing the! do not reall! %ro$ide an ade4uate framewor+ for thin+ing a out how future geogra%hies of %roduction, distri ution, consum%tion and e7change might e %roduced/

$nvironmental &ragmatism +ood

Broader philosophical ,uestions should be cast aside in the face of true conse,uences ) pragmatism is the best way to approach environmental conservation &orton 9J-Professor of Philoso%h! @ Aeorgia 9ech F&r!an, En$ironmental Pragmatism, Ed, Light and IatC
%g/ .??2
8n our search for an en$ironmental ethic we will ne$er, 8 su mit, find an! en$ironmental $alues or goals more defensi le than the sustain-a ilit! %rinci%le, which asserts that each generation has an o ligation to %rotect %roducti$e ecological and %h!sical %rocesses necessar! to su%%ort o%tions necessar! for future human freedom and welfare/ 9he normati$e force su%%orting the %rotection of the en$ironment for future

generations should e ased on a commitment to uilding 5ust, well-ada%ted and sustaina le human communities/ Acce%ting res%onsi ilit! for our e7%anding num ers and for the %ower of our technologies follows sim%l! from the recognition that we now affect the %roducti$it! of the human ha itat and the $er! sur$i$al of the human communit!/ 9his res%onsi ilit! ecomes less and less esca%a le as we learn the man! conse4uences, e7%ected and une7%ected, of our increasingl! $iolent and %er$asi$e alteration of natural s!stems /E8 9his
%rinci%le is consistent with a Darwinian em%hasis on sur$i$al and com%lements a %ragmatic conce%tion of truth/ 9he acce%tance of oth the facts of human im%acts and the associated moral res%onsi ilit! to %rotect the integrit! of ecological communities as re%ositories of man! human o%tions and $alues in the future is destined, in the terms of Peirce, to e ado%ted as the conclusion of all rational in4uirers, as the! struggle through man! e7%eriments to ma+e coherent sense of human e7%erience/ 8 elie$e that oth the descri%ti$e %ro lem of understanding the

im%acts of our actions on future generations and our resulting res%onsi ilities as moral eings must e addressed within %rocesses of in4uir! constituti$e of the Peirceian communit! of in4uirers,actors/ For e7am%le, considering s%ecies threatened with e7tinction to re%resent M oo+sM of information G information that ma! e essential to future generations in their struggle to understand and act within a changing en$ironment G seems to entail that the o ligation to contri ute to the %rocess of in4uir! re4uires %rotection of the sources of information and +nowledge for future in4uirers/

+ood environmental decisions are made by evaluating conse,uences &orton 9J-Professor of Philoso%h! @ Aeorgia 9ech F&r!an, En$ironmental Pragmatism, Ed, Light and IatC
%g/ .??2
9his multi-scalar and iogeogra%hic a%%roach to en$ironmental $alues assumes at the outset that management will %roceed from a human %ers%ecti$e and also, that human $alues 4uite legitimatel! sha%e the modeling decisions of ecological and %h!sical scientists / 9his latter %oint is deser$ing of further e7%lanationN the decisions of iological and %h!sical scientists ha$e an una$oida le normati$e com%onent/ 9he %oint is not to %urge science of those $alues, which is oth im%ossi le and undesira le, the %oint is to understand and 5ustif! those $alues in s%ecific conte7ts re4uiring action, and to attem%t to ad5ust them through %u lic discussion and education when the! ecome malada%ti$e/ A successful

integrati$e ethic for the en$ironment must e morall! %luralistic, ut it must also e conte7tual , rather than either o 5ecti$ist or su 5ecti$ist/ Aood en$ironmental decisions are ones that ta+e into account li+el! im%acts on a num er of s%atio-tem%oral scales in s%ecific conte7ts / As the world ecomes more full of humans and as technolog! ecomes
more %owerful, there will e more and more cases in which there will e s%ill-o$er im%acts from one le$el of hierarchical organiCation to another, es%eciall! from our e7%anding economic and social s!stems to the natural s!stems that form their ecological conte7t/ En$ironmental %olic!

and action must do more than enhance $alues in one d!namic, such as the d!namic dri$ing the economic decision of indi$idual farmersP it is necessar! also to e7amine the im%acts on the larger - and usuall! slower-changing d!namic that determines the structure and di$ersit! of the landsca%e/ <ere the focus of moral anal!sis turns to multi%le generations and to the landsca%e scale/ 9he goal of an integrati$e ethic should e to sort the man! and $arious $alues that humans deri$e from their en$ironment and to associate these $aria les with real d!namic %rocesses unfolding on the $arious le$els and scales of the %h!sical and ecological conte7t of our acti$ities/ En$ironmental %ro lems are in this sense essentiall! scalar %ro lems
and 8 see+ to define models that illuminate the d!namics which su%%ort human $alues/

'umans have a moral responsibility to act to preserve the environment absent philosophical ,uestions &orton 9J-Professor of Philoso%h! @ Aeorgia 9ech F&r!an, En$ironmental Pragmatism, Ed, Light and IatC
%g/ .??2

9hus ends m! e7%lanation of, and %lea for, a %ractical en$ironmental ethic that see+s to integrate %luralistic %rinci%les across multi%le le$els,d!namics/ #ather than reducing %luralistic %rinci%les ! relating them to an underl!ing $alue theor! that recogniCes onl! economic %references or MinherentM $alue as the ontological stuff that unifies all moral 5udgments, 8 ha$e sought integration of multi%le $alues on three irreduci le scales of human concern and $aluation, choosing %luralism o$er monism, and attem%ting to integrate $alues within an ecologicall! informed, multi-scalar model of the human ha itat/ 8 elie$e that the non-ontological, %luralistic a%%roach to $alues can etter e7%ress the inducti$el! ased $alues and management a%%roach of Leo%oldHs land ethic, which can e seen as a %recursor to the tradition of ada%ti$e management/ And, i f the %ro lem of en$ironmentalism is

the need to su%%ort rationall! the goals of en$ironmental %rotection T the %ro lem Callicott misconcei$ed as the need for a realist moral ontolog! to esta lish the Mo 5ecti$it!M of en$ironmental goals T then 8 endorse the roadl! Darwinian a%%roach to oth e%istemolog! and morals %ro%osed ! the American %ragma tists/ 9he en$ironmental communit! is the communit! of in4uirersP it is the communit! of in4uirers that, for etter or worse, must struggle, immediatel! as indi$iduals and indefinitel! as a communit!, oth to sur$i$e and to +now / 8n this struggle useful +nowledge will e information a out how to sur$i$e in a ra%idl! e$ol$ing culture and ha itat/ 8t is in this sense that human actors are a %art of multila!ered natureP our actions ha$e im%acts on multi%le d!namics and multi%le scales/ ;e humans will understand our moral res%onsi ilities onl! if we understand the conse4uences of our action as the! unfold on multi%le scalesP and the human communit! will onl! sur$i$e to further e$ol$e and ada%t if we learn to achie$e indi$idual welfare and 5ustice in the %resent in wa!s that are less disru%ti$e of the %rocesses , e$ol$ing on larger s%atiotem%oral scales, essential to human and ecological communities/1E

&ragmatism is the best way to access social ecology and environmental preservation. Par+er 9J-Professor of Philos%h! @ Arand @alle! State "ni$ersit! FIell!, Professor of Philoso%h!, Arand
@alle! State "ni$ersit!, En$ironmental Pragmatism Ed/ Light and IatC2
Pragmatism sees %hiloso%hical ethics as an ongoing attem%t to determine what is good, and what actions are right/ 9he sudden emergence of a new area of ethical in4uir! is a signal that something has changed at a $er! dee% le$el of our collecti$e life/ E7%erience has thrown us a whole new set of %ro lems in recent !ears, resulting in a atch of new intellectual industries/ En$ironmental ethics is one among se$eral new disci%lines that ha$e emerged, first to e7tend, and then to transform settled wa!s of thin+ing a out $alue/6edical ethics, usiness ethics and feminist,feminine ethics are other de$elo%ments similar in this wa! to the emergence of en$ironmental ethics/ 8n each of these areas, traditional theories were first a%%lied to new %ro lematics/ 9he new %ro lematics soon outstri%%ed the a$aila le conce%tual resources, showing the inade4uacies of such recei$ed theoretical orientations as utilitarianism, contractualism and deontological ethics/ E7tension of conce%ts shaded o$er into the de$elo%ment of new conce%ts, new theoretical framewor+s/ 9he tendenc! of en$ironmentalists to rel! on ecological meta%hors in their thin+ing has led some to em race an ethic that recogniCes the centralit! of relations/ 9his ethic, li+e that of %ragmatism, recogniCes the intrinsic $alue, within and for the s!stem, of all the things related/ 6uch wor+ in feminist and feminine ethics also focuses on relations/ A num er of writers ha$e noted that the notion of an Methic of careM a%%ears to e a %romising direction for en$ironmental ethics to %ursue, and the literature on MecofeminismM is growing steadil!/M From the %ragmatic %ers%ecti$e, this

emerging ethic of relationshi%s a%%ears to e ontologicall! more sound than traditional ethical theories/ En$ironmental ethics has also een associated with inno$ati$e %u lic %olic!-ma+ing %rocedures, new a%%lications of the legal s!stem, and grass-roots acti$ism/ 9hese wa!s of %utting en$ironmental awareness into action ha$e come a long wa! in the %ast few decades, ut of course there is a long wa! !et to go/ 9he aim in all these areas, according to the %ragmatic $iew, is to +ee% e7%erimenting with wa!s to restructure our social institutions so that the %u lic has a real $oice in determining the +ind of en$ironments we inha it / Pragmatism, as noted efore, sees indi$iduals as the source of genuine insight into what is needed, and accordingl! tries to ma7imiCe %artici%ation in go$erning/ Pragmatism is, in this res%ect as in others, closel! allied with the ideals of the social ecolog! mo$ement/?D

-uncipalism Fails
Alt failsBookchin massively overestimates the potential for revolution in ./ society Clar+ 98-Aregor! F/ Curtin Distinguished Professor in <uman Letters and the Profession, Professor of

Philoso%h!, and a mem er of the En$ironmental Studies facult! @ Lo!ola "ni$ersit!, PhD, 6A, (A @ 9ulane "ni$ersit! )Kohn, *6unici%al DreamsN A Social Ecological Criti4ue of (oo+chin3s Politics-, in Social Ecology after Bookchin, ed/ Andrew Light, %/ .0DB
Statements li+e this one e7%ress (oo+chin3s

dee% faith in re$olutionar! %olitics , a faith which, while far from eing s%iritual, is certainl! *religious- in the con$entional sense of the term/ Li+e religious faith, it shows great resilience in the face of em arrassing e$idence from the merel! tem%oral realm/ :ne of the most enduring as%ects of (oo+chin3s thought is his ho%e for a%ocal!%tic re$olutionar! transformationP his 4uest is to create a od! of ideas that will ins%ire a $ast re$olutionar! mo$ement and lead *the Peo%le- into their great re$olutionar! future/ <is e7aggerated assessment of the re$olutionar! %otential of the "/S/ societ! a 4uarter centur! ago is not an isolated a erration in his thought/ 8t %refigures man! later anal!ses, including his recent disco$er! of su%%osedl! %owerful tendencies in the direction of his li ertarian munici%alism/

he alternative re0ects progressivism that isnt directly aimed at mincipalism" which alienates the ma0ority of the left and prevents change Clar+ 98-Aregor! F/ Curtin Distinguished Professor in <uman Letters and the Profession, Professor of

Philoso%h!, and a mem er of the En$ironmental Studies facult! @ Lo!ola "ni$ersit!, PhD, 6A, (A @ 9ulane "ni$ersit! )Kohn, *6unici%al DreamsN A Social Ecological Criti4ue of (oo+chin3s Politics-, in Social Ecology after Bookchin, ed/ Andrew Light, %/ .JD-.J.B 9he relationshi% etween immediate %ro%osals and long-terms goals in li ertarian munici%alism is not alwa!s $er! clear/ ;hile (oo+chin see changes such as the neigh orhood %lanning assem lies in (urlington, @ermont, as an im%ortant ad$ance, e$en though these assem lies do not ha$e %olic!-ma+ing For law-ma+ing2 authorit!, he does not see certain rather far-reaching demands ! the green mo$ement as eing legitimate / <e recogniCes as significant %olitical
ad$ance structural changes Fli+e %lanning assem lies of munici%all! run ser$ices2 that mo$e in the direction of munici%al democrac! or economic munici%aliCation, electoral strategies for gaining %olitical influence or control on ehalf of the munici%alist agenda, and to some degree, alternati$e %ro5ects that are inde%endent of the state/ :n the other hand, he seems to re5ect, either as irrele$ant or as a dangerous form of

coo%tation, an! %olitical %ro%osal for reform of the nation-state e!ond the local For sometimes, the state2 le$el/ (oo+chin harshl! criticiCes, as ca%itulation to the dominant s!stem, all a%%roaches that do not lead toward munici%al direct democrac! and munici%al self-management/ 9his criti4ue of reformism 4uestions the wisdom of acti$e %artici%ation ! munici%alists, social ecologists, left greens, and anarchists in mo$ements for social 5ustice, %eace, and other *%rogressi$e- causes when the s%ecific goals of these mo$ements are not lin+ed to a com%rehensi$e li erator! $ision of social, economic, and %olitical transformation For, more accuratel!, to the %recisel! correct $ision2/ (oo+chin often dis%arages such *mo$ement- acti$it! and urges acti$ists to focus on wor+ing e7clusi$el! on ehalf of the %rogram of li ertarian munici%alism /

&erm12eformism +ood
Bookchin thinks that a wide variety of political strategies need to be tried simultaneously. (oo+chin and Foreman, 9.-UDirector Emeritus @ the 8nstitute for Social Ecolog!, UU"S en$ironmentalist
and founder of Earth FirstV )6urra!, Da$e, Defending the Earth: a dialogue between Murray Bookchin and Dave Foreman, South End Press @ (oston, Ed/ ., Pg/ E9-0DB

;e were %rett! clear from the eginning, howe$er, that we were not the radical en$ironmental mo$ement/ ;e onl! saw oursel$es as one slice of the radical en$ironmental mo$ement/ 8 +now 8 ha$e no a solute, total, and com%lete answer to the worldwide ecological crisis we are in/ 6! %ath is not the right %athP itHs the %ath that wor+s for me/ 8 thin+ there are doCens and doCens of other a%%roaches and ideas that we will need in order to sol$e the crisis weHre in right now/ ;e need that +ind of di$ersit! within our mo$ement/ 8n Earth FirstV, we ha$e tended to s%ecialiCe in what weHre good atN wilderness %reser$ation and endangered s%ecies/ 9hat doesnHt mean the other issues arenHt im%ortantP it 5ust means that we mostl! tal+ a out what we +now most a out/ ;e wor+ on what mo$es us most %articularl!/ 8t doesnHt mean that we3re the whole o%eration, or that we3re co$ering all the ases/ ;e need all the a%%roaches and angles/

2eformism solvesthe alt is a false choice between utopia and oblivion Clar+ 98-Aregor! F/ Curtin Distinguished Professor in <uman Letters and the Profession, Professor of

Philoso%h!, and a mem er of the En$ironmental Studies facult! @ Lo!ola "ni$ersit!, PhD, 6A, (A @ 9ulane "ni$ersit! )Kohn, *6unici%al DreamsN A Social Ecological Criti4ue of (oo+chin3s Politics-, in Social Ecology after Bookchin, ed/ Andrew Light, %/ .0?-.0EB (oo+chin concludes with the 6anichaean %ronouncement that the onl! alternati$es at this momentous %oint in histor! are the realiCation of *the oldest conce%ts of uto%ia- through re$olution or *a disastrous )sicB form of fascism/- 9his theme of * uto%ia or o li$ion- continued into the .9LDs and e!ond with his slogan *anarchism or annihilation- and the enduring message that ecoanarchism is the onl! alternati$e to ecological catastro%he / 9he theme ta+es on a new incarnation in his recent *9heses on
6unici%alism,- in which he ends with the threat that if humanit! turns a deaf ear to his %olitical anal!sis Fsocial ecolog!3s *tas+ of %reser$ing and e7tending the great tradition from which it has emerged-2, then *histor! as the rational de$elo%ment of humanit!3s %otentialities for freedom and consciousness will indeed reach its definiti$e end/- ;hile (oo+chin is certainl! right in sa!ing that we are at a crucial turning

%oint in human and earth histor!, he has ne$er %resented a careful anal!sis of wh! some t!%es of reformism For an! alternati$es to his own %olitics2 cannot %ossi l! a$oid ending in either fascism or glo al ecological catastro%he/ <is claims are reminiscent of those of (a+unin, who s%ent much of his career writing a long wor+ whose ma5or, !et 4uite unsu stantiated, thesis was that Euro%e3s onl! o%tions were militar! dictatorshi% or anarchist social re$olution/

&ragmatism solveswe can still have larger revolutionary goals while engaging in reformism Clar+ 98-Aregor! F/ Curtin Distinguished Professor in <uman Letters and the Profession, Professor of

Philoso%h!, and a mem er of the En$ironmental Studies facult! @ Lo!ola "ni$ersit!, PhD, 6A, (A @ 9ulane "ni$ersit! )Kohn, *6unici%al DreamsN A Social Ecological Criti4ue of (oo+chin3s Politics-, in Social Ecology after Bookchin, ed/ Andrew Light, %/ .J.-.J?B 9here is, in fact, an ins%iring histor! of struggle for limited goals that did not etra! the more far-reaching $isions, and indeed re$olutionar! im%ulses, of the %artici%ants / 9o ta+e an e7am%le that should e meaningful to (oo+chin, the anarchists who fought for the eight-hour wor+ da! did not gi$e u% the goal of the a olition of ca%italism / 9here is no reason wh! left greens toda! cannot fight for a thirt!-hour wor+ wee+ without gi$ing u% their $ision of economic democrac!/ 8ndeed, it seems im%ortant that those who ha$e uto%ian $isions should also stand with ordinar! %eo%le in their fights for 5ustice and democrac! Te$en when man! of these %eo%le ha$e not !et de$elo%ed such $isions, and ha$e not !et learned how to articulate their ho%es in theoretical terms/ "nless this occurs, the %re$ailing dualistic s%lit etween reflection and action will continue to e re%roduced in mo$ements for social transformation , and the +ind of *Peo%le- that li ertarian munici%alism %resu%%oses will ne$er ecome a realit!/ 9o re5ect all reform %ro%osals at the le$el of the nation-state a %riori reflects a lac+ of sensiti$it! to the issues that are meaningful to %eo%le

now/ (oo+chin correctl! cautions us against succum ing to a mere *%olitics of the %ossi le/- <owe$er, a %olitical %urism that dogmaticall! re5ects reforms that %romise a meaningful im%ro$ement in the conditions of life for man! %eo%le chooses to stand a o$e the actual %eo%le in the name of *the Peo%le- Fwho des%ite their ca%italiCation remain merel! theoretical2/

he alt trades#off with necessary reformismabsent basic changes revolutionary change will fail anyways Clar+ 98-Aregor! F/ Curtin Distinguished Professor in <uman Letters and the Profession, Professor of
Philoso%h!, and a mem er of the En$ironmental Studies facult! @ Lo!ola "ni$ersit!, PhD, 6A, (A @ 9ulane "ni$ersit! )Kohn, *6unici%al DreamsN A Social Ecological Criti4ue of (oo+chin3s Politics-, in Social Ecology after Bookchin, ed/ Andrew Light, %/ .8.-.8?B

Pro%osals for fundamentall! restructuring societ! through local assem lies Fand also citiCens3 committees2 ha$e great merit, and should e a central %art of a left green, social ecological, or ecocommunitarian %olitics/ (ut we must consider that these reforms are unli+el! to ecome the dominant %olitical %rocesses in the near future / "nfortunatel!, %artial ado%tion of such %ro%osals Fin the form of $irtuall! %owerless neigh orhood assem lies and *town meetings,- or citiCens committees with little authorit!2 ma! e$en ser$e to deflect energ! or diffuse demands for more asic cultural and %ersonal changes / :n the other
hand, ma5or cultural ad$ances can e immediatel! instituted through the esta lishment of affinit! grou%s, small communities, internall! democratic mo$ements for change, and coo%erati$e endea$ors of man! +inds/ Ad$ocates of radical democrac! can do no greater ser$ice to

their cause than to demonstrate the $alue of democratic %rocesses ! em od!ing them in their own forms of self-organiCation/ ;ithout imaginati$e and ins%iring e7am%les of the %ractice of ecological, communitarian democrac! ! the radical democrats themsel$es, call for *munici%alism,- *demarch!,- or an! other form of %artici%ator! democrac! will ha$e a hollow ring/ (oo+chin has made a nota le contri ution to this effort insofar as his wor+ has hel%ed ins%ire man! %artici%ants in ecological, communitarian, and %artici%ator! democratic %ro5ects/ <owe$er, to the e7tent that he has increasingl! reduced ecological %olitics to his own narrow, sectarian %rograms of li ertarian munici%alism, he has ecome a di$isi$e, de ilitating force in the ecolog! mo$ement and an o stacle to the attainment of man! of the ideals he has %roclaimed/

/ocial $cology!Anthropocentric
/ocial ecology reinforces anthropocentrism Fo7 90-Professor of Philoso%h! @ the "ni$ersit! of Central Lancaster );arwic+, Dee% Ecolog! for the ?.st
Centur!, htt%N,,www/dhushara/com, oo+,renewal,$oices?,dee%/htmB
:ne ma! certainl! s%ea+ in terms of certain forms of human social organiCation eing more conduci$e to certain +inds of relationshi%s with the nonhuman world than others/ (oo+chin, howe$er, insists far too much that there is a straightforward, necessar! relationshi%

etween the internal organiCation of human societies and their treatment of the nonhuman world/ 9o this e7tent, his social ecolog! is constructed u%on a logicall! facile asis/ 6oreo$er, it ser$es to reinforce anthro%ocentrism, since the assum%tion that the internal organiCation of human societies determines their treatment of the nonhuman world carries with it the im%lication that we need onl! concentrate on interhuman egalitarian concerns for all to ecome ecologicall! well with the world-a %oint 8 ta+e u% again later/ 8n doing $iolence to the com%le7ities of social interaction, sim%listic social and %olitical anal!ses of ecological destruction are not merel! descri%ti$el! %oor and logicall! facile, the! are also morall! o 5ectiona le on two grounds, sca%egoating and inauthenticit!/

ech +ood
echnology is a means of freeing people from labor and allowing freedom and creativity (oo+chin and @ane+ ?+-UDirector Emeritus @ the 8nstitute for Social Ecolog!, UU8nter$iewer )6urra!,

Da$e, 8nstitute for Social Ecolog!, *8nter$iew with 6urra! (oo+chin F(! Da$e @ane+2,- 8,.,?DDD, htt%N,,www/social-ecolog!/org,?DDD,D8,inter$iew-with-murra!- oo+chin- !-da$e-$ane+,, DIPB F(oo+chin s%ea+ing2
;hen the S%anish Ci$il ;ar ro+e out in .9EJ, 8 went ac+ to the Communists, ecause the! seemed to e the onl! ones who were fighting Franco/ 8 wanted to fight in S%ain, ut 8 was too !oung/ Soon after re5oining the Communists, 8 left them again, this time %ermanentl!/ After high school, 8 did not go to college T 8 went to wor+ in a foundr! near &ew 'or+/ 8 ho%ed that the Second ;orld ;ar would end in re$olutions, as the first war had, and ecame a 9rots+!ist/ ;hen the war ended without a re$olution, 8 ecame disillusioned with orthodo7 6ar7ism and realiCed 8 had to rethin+ e$er!thing/ 8 came out of the arm! and went to wor+ in the automo ile industr!, where the wor+ers, formerl! militant, were ecoming e$er more middle class in their mentalit!/ So in the .91D 8 went to the #CA 8nstitute, where 8 studied electronic engineering/ 8 saw that man!

machines could ultimatel! re%lace most human toil/ (eing a socialist, 8 wanted to reduce the amount of la or that %eo%le ha$e to gi$e to societ!, whether under ca%italism or socialism, so that the! could e free to ecome creati$e human eings, follow their own interests, and fulfill their own talents/

hesis 3rong
Bookchin is wrongthxere is no correlation between hierarchy and domination of nature. ;hite, DE/ Lecturer at Aoldsmith College/ *<ierarch!, Domination, &ature,- :rganiCation and En$ironment,
Sage Kournals, Damian Fin ar/
8t would seem e$ident, though, that the historical se4uence (oo+chin F.991 2 defends is sim%l! not $er! con$incing / (oo+chin3s starting %oint here that *the domination of nature first arose within society as %art of its institutionalisation into gerontocracies /// not in an! endea$our to control nature or natural forces- F%/ .0?2 would a%%ear com%letel! untena le/ 9he whole strength of this claim is clearl!

de%endent on the ros! image of a singular organic societ! that we can find in his earlier wor+ / &ow, gi$en Fa2 the
criticisms of this that ha$e een offered a o$e, F 2 the cautionar! words offered ! Iu%er a out recognising the huge s%atial $ariation that was $er! li+el! a central feature of the relationshi% etween human societies and their natures, and Fc2 the manner in which (oo+chin himself later

retreats from this %osition, this claim would seem to fall a%art / 8ndeed, if we follow the $iew of the later (oo+chin F.991c2, who
states, *8n the and and tri e societies of %re-histor!, humanit! was almost completely at the mercy of uncontrollable natural forces - F%/ .??2, such an assertion would seem to suggest that if an!thing, central elements of the asic 6ar7ian thesis are more con$incing as an e7istential statement of the human condition/ 9hat is, as 6ar7 argues in @olume E of apital, *the associated %roducers- need to rationall! regulate their interchanges with nature, ring it under their common control, instead of eing ruled ! it as ! the lind forces of natureP and achie$ing this with the least e7%enditure of energ! and under conditions most fa$oura le to, and most worth! of, their human nature/ Fas cited in Smith, .99J, %%/ 08-092 (oo+chin3s ecocentric critics ha$e flagged a second line of argument that needs to e considered here/ Fo7 F.989, %/ .12 and Ec+ersle! F.99?2 ha$e argued that (oo+chin does not

full! recognise that there is not a straightforward relationshi% etween hierarchical forms of social organisation and the actual domination of nature/ 9hus, Fo7 has argued that historical e7am%les can e offered of hierarchical societies Fe/g/, ancient Eg!%t2 that had relati$el! enign relations with nature / E4uall!, Ec+ersle! has argued that it is %ossi le to conce%tualise a relati$el! nonhierarchical societ! that is ne$ertheless e7tremel! e7%loitati$e ecologicall!/ ??

here is no correlation between hierarchy and social dominationthe alternative is more likely to increase social domination. ;hite, DE/ Damian Fin ar , Lecturer at Aoldsmith College/ *<ierarch!, Domination, &ature,- :rganiCation
and En$ironment, Sage Kournals/
9o mo$e on from the organic societ! issue then, how %lausi le is the rest of (oo+chin3s social hierarch! thesis= 9he conce%t of social hierarch! clearl! denotes the most stri+ing and interesting conce%tual inno$ation that can e found in social ecolog!, delineating (oo+chin3s %osition from the %reoccu%ations of classical critical theor!/ 8f we consider this issue at the s!nchronic le$el for the moment, one considera le ad$antage of this demand to %lace *hierarch!- at the centre of critical social theor! is that it clearl! o%ens u% the %ossi ilit! of e7amining multila!ered forms of domination, e7clusion, and silencing that are not sim%l! reduci le to e%i%henomena of class relations/ 6oreo$er, (oo+chin3s claim that it is li+el! forms of

social hierarch! ased on generontocracies, %atriarchies, %riest cults, and warrior grou%s %ro a l! %ro$ided the %recursors to the latter de$elo%ment of class and %roto-state structures would seem reasona l! uncontro$ersial Fsee Aiddens, .98.P 6ann, .98J2/ An issue that does need further e7amination though is that it is not clear that the com%le7ities that %la! out in the relationshi%s etween social hierarch! and social domination are full! theorised ! (oo+chin / For e7am%le, as numerous critics ha$e o ser$ed FEc+ersle!, .99?P Fo7, .989P Io$el, .9982, there is clearl! a range of social relations that are in certain senses hierarchical !et do not self-e$identl! contri ute to social domination / 9em%orar! 4uasi-hierarchical relations ased on the acce%tance of certain forms of authorit! such as %arent-child relations FIo$el, .9982 can e sociall! ena ling/ Student-teacher relationshi%s FEc+ersle!, .99?2 also in$aria l! contain elements of
hierarch! and if freel! chosen can e ena ling/ 8ndeed, one could thin+ of a range of sociall! stratified relations that are emergent from functionall! differentiated social roles and that are hierarchical in a certain sense ut that also alle$iate social domination/ 8n this latter categor!, it could well e argued that an! sociall! com%le7 and %oliticall! %luralistic societ! see+ing to a$ail itself of the gains of high

technolog! is going to e mar+ed ! certain forms of social stratification through tas+ differentiation/ As long as these *hierarchies- are o%en and su 5ect to democratic recruitment, rotation, and control, and influence in one s%here of social life is not allowed to cumulate in other s%heres F;altCer, .9812, it is sim%l! not gi$en that such relations necessaril! contri ute to social domination / 8ndeed, contra certain currents of li ertarianism, it clearl! needs to e recognised that certain democraticall! controlled re%resentati$e structures or sociall! differentiated roles might actuall! relie$e social domination/ Con$ersel!, one could imagine certain nonhierarchical societies F%erha%s most stri+ingl! the +ind of neo-%rimiti$ist fantasies ad$ocated ! some eco-anarchists 2 that would surel! e7acer ate social domination of humans ! nature and %erha%s through the *t!rann! of structurelessness- FFreeman, .9LD2 further facilitate
domination of some humans ! others/ 8t would seem im%ortant, then, for a credi le critical social theor! to e a le to distinguish more carefull!

etween coerci$e and o%%ressi$e social-stratified social relations and re%resentati$e %olitical formsTwhich clearl! gi$e rise to social dominationTand such relations ased on *legitimate authorit!- or *democratic authorit!,- which %erha%s do not/ ?. ;hat can we ma+e though of the further diachronic lin+ that (oo+chin has sought to forgeN etween social hierarch!, social domination, and the *idea- of dominating nature=

ransition 3ars
he transition to bioregionalism will cause ma0or wars. 9a!lor, ?DDD G :sh+osh Foundation Professor of #eligion and Social Ethics, and Director of En$ironmental
Studies at the "ni$ersit! of ;isconsin )(ron, (eneath the Surface, ?DDD, %g/ ?8?B
8t is not clear, howe$er, that in the long run and on e$er! continent and during e$er! era, $iolence

and conflict would e greater under ioregional forms of %olitical organiCation than under %olitical units drawn according to iore gional differences/ Fear of al+aniCation raises im%ortant concerns, ut a uni $ersal condemnation of ioregional %olit! does not logicall! follow/ Aar! Sn!der, for e7am%le, would li+el! %oint to anthro%ologist A/ L/ Iroe erHs wor+ which shows that &ati$e
Americans ha$e usuall! li$ed %eacefull!, largel! in differing ioregional %ro$inces/ 18 A more trenchant %ro lem is how ioregionalists Fand the anarchists who influenced their most influential theorists2 often assume that %eo%le are naturall! %redis%osed Funless corru%ted ! life in unnatural, hierarchical, centraliCed, industrial societies2 Q to coo%erati$e eha$ior/ ; 9his de ata le assum%tion a%%ears to de%end more on radical en$ironmental faith, a +ind of Paul She%ard-st!le m!thologiCing, than on ecolog! or anthro%olog!/ "nfortunatel! for ioregional theor!, e$olutionar! iolog!

shows that not onl! coo%eration %romotes s%ecies sur$i$alP so also, at times, does aggressi$e com%etiti$eness/ JD (ased on its undul! ros! $iew of the %otential for human altruism, it is dou t ful that ioregionalism can offer sufficient structural constraints on the e7ercise of %ower ! selfish and well-entrenched elites / 8t should e o $ious, for e7am%le, that nation-state go$ernments will not $oluntaril! cede authorit!,M An! %olitical reorganiCation along ioregional lines would li+el! re4uire Mwides%read $iolence and dislocation/- Few ioregional ists seem to recogniCe this li+elihood, or how de$astating to nature such a transitional struggle would %ro a l! e/ 6oreo$er, ma+ing an im%ortant
ut often o$erloo+ed %oint a out %olitical %ower, %olitical theorist Daniel Deudne! warnsN