Talk:Green anarchism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I changed this from a redirect to primitivism because they are not the same thing. See talk page -- Sam
Nice one- thanks Sam quercus robur
But I don't know a lot about green anarchism in particular, so elaborate away, friend. -- Sam
wasn't really on my 'to do' list, but, I'lll do me best :-) quercus robur
It doesn't reallly bother me either way, but I thought the wiki standard for 'see also' was
==See also==
Cheers quercus robur
Actually "see also" is very simple and doesn't need headings (in fact I change this each time I see it). Simply state;
--mav
Green Anarchism is defined as "Green anarchists practise an underground resistance based... ". Is the "underground" requisite, or merely typical? If not requisite, then this should be reworded.
Thanks: Greenfyre (who is not logged in)
All anarchist movements exhibit a high range of diversity (as do most movements, I suppose). This article struck me as a little odd, because I can't imagine any self-respecting anarchist joining the Green Party. Perhaps this is a regional thing. I live in the US. I want to change the article some, but I don't want to remove what someone else feels is correct from their perspective.
The reason for an anarchist joining a green party, as I have done myself, is clearly because many anarchists believe that electoral politics are a useful vehicle for futhering the green anarchist agenda. Keep in mind that Murray Bookchin, who more or less invented the idea of green anarchism, or at least the euphemism "Libertarian Municipalism", was a vocal member of the American Green Party for a good number of years.
Contents |
[edit] NPOV Dispute
It seems to me that this article has been written with the purported superiority of this particular political philosophy firmly in mind. Therefore, effort must be made to neutralise the point of view.
Statements such as "as opposed to obsolete isms such as socialism or liberalism" are particularily glaring, offensive and POV (not to mention that "ism" is a suffix, not a noun). Falcon 17:07, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Actually, see ism. "The word ism was first used in 1680 and can be found in the works of such well-known writers as Thomas Carlyle, Julian Huxley and George Bernard Shaw." Livajo 14:42, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
-
- That still doesn't change the fact that the statement was very POV and extremely offensive. Especialy to socialists and liberals. And, it is not backed up correctly or encyclopædic in the least. Falcon 01:03, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- I am beginning a complete rewrite of the article, in hopes to resolve this problem. I will not delete the NPOV flag.
- My editting is now complete. Most of the information is from the original article, however it has been reworked into (what I hope is) NPOV phrasing.
[edit] some things wrong with article
I read this article and feel that there a few problems with it:
-Green anarchists are hold diverse views, and many are in fact anti-technology, however this article paints it as though all green anarchists are pro-green technology.
-For some (anarcho) primitivism and green anarchy are the same; for others, anarcho-primitivism is the part of green anarchy concerned with the origins of civlization.
-There is a strong rejection of the term ideology among anarchists, espeically green anarchists. Ideology is seen as a rigid framework of thought, usually external to the individual. Many anarchists hold very fluid and personal ideas connected by some common beliefs.
-There is no mention of the green anarchists who are also anti-civilization green anarchists, which is probably the major line of green anarchy in the world.
I don't know the rules for changing articles, but if someone wants to rewrite this, please see www.greenanarchy.org and their back to basics series.
[edit] this article needs to be cleaned up.
i'll definitely move it along, but it needs to be neatly divied up like the other articles. Lockeownzj00 04:49, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Try this:
[note: i tried to be as unbiased as possible (which is impossible) but this is coming from a green anarchist]
Green anarchists compose a diverse and open movement of people who take influences from a variety of different places. These include anarchists, radical ecologists, feminists, Situationists, surrealists, Luddittes, primitivists, post- and anti-leftists, indigenous and pre-civilized people, the feral and the wild.
The green anarchist critique focuses on the institutions of domination that make up society, all grouped under the broad term “civilization”. These institutions include the state, capitalism, globalization, domestication, patriarchy, science, technology, work, etc. These institutions, according to green anarchists, are inherently destructive and exploitative (to humans and the environment) – therefore, they cannot be reformed. This movement generally rejects progress through current political lines, favoring direct and autonomous action, sabotage, insurrection, bioregionalism, and reconnecting with the wild to create meaningful change.
There are two main points of contention among green anarchists: civilization and technology.
Green anarchists can be described as anti-civilization anarchists or anarcho-primitivists (the anarchist critique of civilization), though certainly not all are anti-civilization.. Likewise, there is a strong critique of technology among green anarchists, though not all reject it entirely.
Civilization is taken to be the totality of institutions (described above) that are responsible for the destruction of human freedom and the environment. Physically, civilization is demarcated by the domestication of plants, animals, and humans (though its beginning have been traced back through time, language, art, and symbolic culture – see John Zerzan). Agriculture created a surplus and the conditions for the rise of these institutions. Before agriculture, humans often lived as autonomous bands of gatherer-hunters without any leadership, authority, division of labor, organized violence, environmental destruction, etc. Essentially, gatherer-hunters are perceived to be part of our anarchist ancestry since all humans practiced that mode of life for around two million years. Civilization is often seen as more of a paradigm then a physical thing, and one that places human beings above and outside of the natural world. This is seen as the first step towards and justification for the destruction of nature (humans included).
Technology is seen as a system rather than a specific physical tool. Technology requires the exploitation of the environment through the creation and extraction of resources, and the exploitation of people through labor, work, and slavery, industrialism, specialization and the division of labor. There is no “neutral” form of technology as things are always created in a certain context with certain aims and functions. Green technology is often rejected because it simply keeps the same exploitative system and only changes it on the surface to make it seem environmentally friendly despite the constant level of human and natural exploitation. In place of technology, green anarchists favor low- to no-tech living, using sustainable and local resources.
Green anarchists are not advocating a return to the stone age or the replication of gatherer-hunter lifeways; instead they are advocating a deep questioning of the reality we have been given, and wish to see those questions (namely the questioning of civilization) be put into effective praxis by creating new communities that exist without these institutions of domination while at the same time resisting the current ones in place.
[edit] Anti-industrialism=Green Anarchism ?
It's mentioned above that Green Anarchism is fundamentally different from Primitivism, but this article basically presents the primitivist position. Would it not be more precise to say that Green Anarchism is equivalent to anarchist anti-industrialism? This would include most social ecologists, post left anarchists, and others who identify as green anarchists but not as primitivists
I think this article should resemble this: http://eng.anarchopedia.org/index.php/Green_anarchism
[edit] Green Anarchy is anti-civilization anarchy
The current momentum of the green anarchist movement is very similar to the anarcho-primitivist movement, sometimes indistinguishable except that AP's usually discuss theory more than praxis, but to many the words are interchangable. The article referenced is old, out of date, and just seems plain wrong as a description for the GA movement. Check out greenanarchy.info for clarifcation.
[edit] green anarchism is not anarcho-primitivism
I think that it is important to keep a clear distinction between green anarchism and anarcho-primitivism. It is not the same thing. anarcho-primitivism is a part of green anarchism. Not all green anarchists are against technology, while all primitivists are against technology.
[edit] Discussion on end of civilization
Anarchists input would be appreciated at Talk:End_of_civilization. There seems to be some disagreement what the end of civilization actually means. nirvana2013 17:46, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Racism
I am a firm beliver in the values and traditions of being a green Anarchist. With that I would like to give some advice. STOP BEING SO PC!!!! Everyone can take a joke. Whether you're Black or White or Asian or Indian, everyone makes fun of each other. Its a fact of life. So everyone can take a lesson from this. Stop being so politicaly correct and enjoy life, celebrate and poke fun of oneanothers flaws. Because before you know it, We will all be living communaly with the differences aside.
Bold textNick (Nitro) Angola —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 168.169.26.3 (talk) 13:05, 25 January 2007 (UTC).
