Getty Images Emma Chambers Actress Emma Chambers, who starred in “Notting Hill” and the BBC’s “The Vicar of Dibley,” died on Feb. 21 of natural causes. Demokratik ekolojinin hayat bulduğu ve şekillendiği belli alanlar olduğu bunu yaparken de yerleşimin bütününün kaderini ve refahını düşünmektedir. The Russian-American anarchist Emma Goldman called the magazine she founded. Küçük insana zaten bütün hayat ve büyük harfle Kültür sürekli sen .. Ahmet Oktay’ın hazırlayıp sunduğu “Okurken Yazarken” Buradaki beden faşizmi, daha sonra Emma Goldman’a ve diğerlerine yönelen ‘cadılaştırma’.
|Published (Last):||17 May 2014|
|PDF File Size:||7.53 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||9.18 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
A general overview of aboriginal issues as articulated in the Canadian Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples 5 volumes and a left biocentric critique given. Implications of aboriginal views for wildlife, forestry, parks, land claims and social justice. What should be supported and what should be opposed on ecocentric and social justice considerations? Past treaties dictated to aboriginals by a feudal-colonial state in Canada — can they be models for contemporary land use and redress of grievances?
Treaty rights or social and ecological justice today: What is the relationship of contemporary aboriginal views to deep ecology and left biocentrism within industrial capitalist society? Deep stewardship of traditional aboriginal thinking as human-centered.
The imposition and implications of the industrial consumer culture on aboriginals and non-aboriginals. How the environmental movement in Canada and elsewhere should define itself — reformist or subversive. Assumptions of green electoralism and their congruence with the continuation of industrial capitalism and shallow ecology.
The disenfranchisement of the electorate with the parliamentary road and liberal democracy: Liberal democracy and ecocentric democracy: Is there a political vehicle for a revolutionary deep ecology in our contemporary world?
Why some left bios work inside green parties and why others work from the outside, and the example of the federal Canadian Green Party.
The following essay was built off of two previously published pieces: Revolutionary Ecology is a term a growing number of activists are using to help define and broaden our analysis, commitment, and approach in dealing with the human-caused crises besieging this planet and all of its inhabitants. This is by no means a definitive or conclusive piece concerning the position of Revolutionary Ecology. We intend for this to open up an evolving debate in the struggle to liberate all life on Earth and allow for the uninterrupted continuation of evolutionary potential.
This is not intended as a formal academic treatise; it was not conjured up in a programmed university setting and written by a scholar. Instead, this comes from the field-and represents among other things a synthesis of contributions on the subject by revolutionary activists well-known and unknown.
So what is Revolutionary Ecology? This belief stems from the growing consciousness regarding the interconnectedness of all life, and the realization that human beings are not separate from or in control of Nature. Revolutionary Ecology calls for liberation: Central to our practice is the belief that a revolutionary movement and future society should be modeled after natural ecosystems, which operate non-hierarchically, symbiotically, and derive their strength from diversity.
Revolutionary Ecology is not bandwagon leftism or some arcane academic model. Life itself depends upon our success as a species in this endeavor.
Red Rosa: A Graphic Biography of Rosa Luxemburg by Kate Evans
In writing this we are assuming that those who read this are people largely disillusioned and angry with the current condition of life on earth: All of these are exacerbated by the latest ideology of capitalism: Thus far, Deep Ecology led our collective members to accept that all life has intrinsic worth an Earth-centered perspective.
Social Ecology taught us that at the root of the ecological crisis is a social crisis and that the termination of systems of greed, domination, and oppression is the first step in the creation of an ecologically-based, sustainable, and harmonious society.
Revolutionary Ecology can be viewed as a synthesis of the two which also incorporates other recognitions-like Ecofeminism, Revolutionary Unionism, Green Anarchism, and Luddism.
Ecofeminism addresses the inextricable connections between the domination of women and the domination of the natural world. Prior to the emergence of Revolutionary Unionism, the Luddites fought for community control of emmq human-scaled technology that put human needs before the accumulation of profit.
Green anarchists recognize that any attempts to build sustainable, non-hierarchical communities must be based on an inherently ecocentric worldview. We must understand that everything is interconnected. An injury to one is an injury to all. To the multinationals, we humans, all other species, and the Earth itself are viewed as resources to be devoured by a few in a hideous nightmare of profit margins.
Under industrial corporate capitalism, ecocide and genocide are quite profitable for the ruling class. If the major problems have been identified, how do we then begin to implement solutions? It is our belief that a system so inherently flawed cannot be reformed-and that it is a blatant waste of time, energy, and resources to attempt such reform. Revolutionary Ecology is opposed to all management for power or profit. Such management leads to domination and the subsequent loss of biological and cultural diversity and freedom through the manipulation of control and power.
The futility of reform and the necessity of revolution are hard for many liberals and reformists to swallow because it challenges their comfortable and usually very privileged worldviews.
So how can we coalesce and implement our objectives into a powerful global movement? We need to make clear the connections between all struggles for liberation. As Revolutionary Ecologists who recognize that ecosystem health is essential to human survival, we strive to: Symbiotically, activists from all approaches must work to understand the views we are each presenting for a holistic comprehension of how Life and Nature proceed on Earth.
When we achieve understanding, the common enemy-the antithesis of Life-will be easier to disassemble because more people will be united around the greater cause, while continuing to focus on a variety of issues and levels. As we course through the 21st century, the problem has been intensified by the onslaught of goldma corporations who operate with the sanction of governments globally.
irene la sen photos on Flickr | Flickr
Global deforestation has reached epidemic proportions-and we are now learning that forecasted global warming has actually been in progress for decades. The globalization of capital and the interweaving of financial and governmental institutions have also opened the flood gates for even greater destruction of ecosystems ecocide and the annihilation of traditional peoples, cultures, and values genocide.
In the s, many sectors of the radical environmental movement paid little attention to the social causes of ecological destruction. Similarly, the urban-based social justice movement has a difficult time recognizing the importance of biological issues, often dismissing as trivial all but concerns related to environmental racism.
Yet in order to effectively respond to the crises we face today, we must merge these issues. The enemies yaakren Life play upon our disagreements, isolating and yaar,en with terrifying effectiveness and consequences all of us in the world who work toward meaningful change. Beginning with the very reasonable yet no less revolutionary concept that we must change or dispense with social practices that threaten the continuation of life on Earth, we need a theory of Revolutionary Ecology that will encompass social and biological issues, class struggle, and a recognition of the role of global corporate capitalism in the oppression of peoples and the destruction of Nature.
That theory is called deep ecology, and it is the core belief of the radical environmental movement. The problem is that, in the early stages of this debate, deep ecology was yaarkeb associated with such despicable right-wing godman as eco-fascism a.
Ecosystem protection is needed now more than ever due to the magnitude of the unprecedented destruction that is altering Earth and killing Life.
For real ecosystem protection and parallel eco-restoration efforts to succeed on a long term basis, a cataclysmic change must transpire. Deep ecology is a revolutionary worldview; these ideas as such do not constitute the Absolute Truth, nor do they represent a finished thought process.
We seek to spark more debate and advance the discussion indefinitely. Deep ecology, or biocentrism, is the recognition that nature does not exist to serve humans. Rather, humans are one small albeit no less significant part of nature, one species among many.
All species have a right to exist for their own sake, regardless of their usefulness to humans.
And biodiversity is a value in itself, essential for the flourishing of both human and nonhuman life. These principles are not just another political theory. Biocentrism is a law of nature that exists independently of whether or not humans recognize it. Nature still operates in a biocentric fashion-and will ultimately trump our delusions with hard-nosed reality.
Red Rosa: A Graphic Biography of Rosa Luxemburg
We belong to the Earth. The capitalist system is in direct conflict with the natural hauatm of biocentrism and ecocentrism. Capitalism, first of all, is based on the principle of private property: The principles of biocentrism and ecocentrism discredit the concept that humans can own the Earth or any other living beings. The attitude behind such actions is arrogant to the point of absurdity.
Hurwitz is a mere blip in the life of these ancient trees; while he may temporarily have the power to destroy them, he does not have the right!
Even beyond private property, though, capitalism conflicts with biocentrism and ecocentrism around the golvman concept of profit. Profit consists of taking out more than you put in. This is certainly contrary to the fertility cycles of Nature, which depend upon a balance of give and take. According to Marxist theory, profit is stolen from the workers when the capitalists pay them less than the value of that which they produce. The portion of the value of the product that the capitalist keeps, rather than pays to the workers, is called surplus value.
The amount of surplus value that the capitalist can keep varies with the level of organization of the workers, and with their level of privilege within the world labor pool. This analysis does not consider, however, that part of yaarkwn value of a product comes not just from the labor put into it, but also from the natural resources used to manufacture the product.
But this cannot happen under capitalism because the capitalist class exists hayamt extracting profit not only from the workers, but also from the Earth. Many acolytes of Marx will cite Critique yaarkeb the Gotha Program to say that Marx did recognize Nature, as well as labor, as a source of value. But Marx makes the distinction between use value, which he says comes from nature and labor, and exchange value, which he says comes from labor alone.
It would seem intuitively obvious to even the most casual observer that use value, provided by Nature, helps significantly to determine exchange value.
Value, use value AND exchange value, comes from both labor and Nature. Modern day corporations are the very worst manifestation of this pathology. A small business may survive on profits; its basic purpose is to provide sustenance for the owners, who are human hayattm with a sense of place in their communities. But a corporation has no purpose for its existence, nor any moral guide to its behavior, other than to accumulate profits. And global foldman now are beyond the control of any nation or government.
In fact, the government is in the service of the corporations, its armies poised to yaaarken their hqyatm around the world and its secret police ready to infiltrate and disrupt any serious resistance at home.
Biocentrism and ecocentrism contradict Marxism. While Marxism represents a brilliant critique of capitalism, in practice it has not presented any solutions to the current ecological and social crises.
They do not come close to addressing the relationship of such a society to the Earth-or rather, they assume that this relationship will remain the same as it is under capitalism: While Marx stated that the primary contradiction in industrial society is the contradiction between capital and labor-these debacles would indicate there is an equally yaarrken contradiction between industrial society and the Earth.
Many people envision yaarkem of socialism that would not destroy the Earth and Life. Ecological socialism, among other things, would have to deal with the issue of centralism. The Marxist concept of a huge body politic relating to some central planning authority presupposes 1 authoritarianism of some sort; and 2 the use of mass-production technologies that are inherently destructive to the Earth and corrosive to the human spirit.