relocating green themes in modern ideological thinking

8/13/2019 Relocating Green Themes in Modern Ideological Thinking

1/18

Indian Political Science ssociation

ECOPOLITICS AND IDEOLOGY RELOCATING GREEN THEMES IN MODERN IDEOLOGICALTHINKINGAuthor(s): Padam NepalSource: The Indian Journal of Political Science, Vol. 65, No. 4 (Oct.-Dec., 2004), pp. 603-619Published by: Indian Political Science AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41856079.

Accessed: 17/12/2013 13:39

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Indian Political Science Associationis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The

Indian Journal of Political Science.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 109.11.119.207 on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 13:39:12 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ipsahttp://www.jstor.org/stable/41856079?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/41856079?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ipsa


2/18

The IndianJournal fPoliticalcienceVol.LXV,No.4, Oct-Dec., 004ECOPOLITICS AND IDEOLOGY RELOCATING

GREEN THEMES IN MODERNIDEOLOGICAL THINKING

PadamNepalThe riginnddevelopmentf he onceptf copoliticssdebatednd o isthenaturendcontentf he onceptfecopoliticstself his wes othe luid aturef he onceptof copoliticshichsstill n tsnascenttage,tthe ametimeccasionallylaimingtsroot o berootedn ntiquity.Thepresent aper, ocusingn t'he omplexnd evenparadoxicalelationshipetweencopoliticsndmodernity,attemptsorelocatecopolitics,nd or hatmatter,he reenthoughtsnd deas cross he road anvassf hemodernideologies.his xercisesexpectedogiven nsightnto herelationshipetweenhemoderndeologiesnd copolitics.For this urpose,he aper s broadlyividedntothreesectionsThe irstectionttemptsconceptualizationf heconceptf copolitics;he econdectionxplorescross hebroad anvassfmoderndeologiesnd ttemptsoexploretheGreen nessor otherwisefthevariousdeologiesnquestion.he hirdnd he inalectionhall epresentednlieu f conclusion.

I. Conceptualizing EcopoliticsThetermEcopolitics(Conley: 997:Cover age)has ppearedonly ecently.ence t s all themore ikely hat furtheronfusion ill

be addedto thatwhich ometimesevelopsbetween nvironmentndecology.There s, therefore,necessityoattemptnelucidationf theconceptofecopolitics.However,ny attemptt theunderstandingftheconceptmaynotbearfruitionithout prior onsiderationf theconcepts f environmentndecology.Derivedfrom heFrenchwords4environor environner' eaningaroun round-abouto urround',6to encompass' inEnglish sagethetermenvironmentrefers o the4totalof things r circumstancesroundan organism includinghumans The term, herefore,roadlyndicates he urroundingsf anindividualrganismr communityforganisms,angingptothe ntireBiosphere,he one of earthhat s able tosustainife.Bysurroundingsis meant ll thenon-livingnd ivingmaterialshat lay nyrole nan

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/18

TheIndianJournal fPolitical cience 604organism'sxistence,romoil andairtowhat norganismeeds nandtheorganismshatmayfeed on it. Otherfactors ikeheat, ight ndgravitationctingn the rganismlsoconstitutests nvironment.vena brief ncounter ith heword4environmentprovokeswopersuasivesuggestionsor ossible tructuringf a contemporaryefinition.irstit s identifieds a 4totality, everythinghat ncompassesachand allof us, and this association s established noughto be nothighlydismissed.nthe econd ense, he ermndicates processderivative,one that lludes o some sort faction rinteraction,t theveryeastinferringhat he ncompassings active,nsome wisereciprocal,hatthe nvironment,hatevertsnature,s not implynerthenomenonobeimpacted ithoutesponserwithoutffectinghe rganismnnature.Thesecondmeaning fthetermnvironmentearsdynamism,hichcan be illustratedhroughystemsheory.imply ut, systemmay edefined s having hefollowingeatures:irstthe ystems the nter-connected elements;second it forms special unitywiththeenvironment;hirdusually ny nvestigatedystems an elementf ahigherrderystem;nd ourthelementsfany nvestigatedystemntheir urn sually ppear s systemsf a lower rder. ence, systemhas a hierarchicalharacter, anifestedoth nthe chainofsystems'inclusions ntoone another nd in the nteractionf individual ub-systemsBlanberg, adovskyndYudin:1977).There s also the hirdusageof he ermnvironment.t sthe opular sagewherenvironmentis seenas a problemrea,with ssues ike4greenhouseeffect' acidrain' 'soilerosionetc.Ecology, nthe ther and,s the cientifictudyof the inter-relations f plants, animals, and the environment(EncyclopediafKnowledge,993,Vol.6, .325). t s a disciplineocusedonstudyinghe nteractionsetweennorganismf somekind nd tsenvironmentEnvironmentalncyclopedia2nddition): 999:p.343).Occasionally,here re someconfusionshat rise outof thesynonymousse oftheconcepts fecology ndenvironment. henthe woaresynonymouslysed,the forementionedhird enseof theterm nvironmentetsmixedup with cology, hereby,eadingtoconfusions.n the hirdense s aforementioned,nvironmentonnotesa problemrea.Whatsrecognizeds the roblemrea s but hehumaneffects n thebiophysicalystem, hichs often egative. he humanattitudehat enerates hich ictates hat ffects avebeenmadeontotheenvironmenthatneeds to be withheld o save theenvironment



4/18

EcopoliticsndIdeology elocating 605constituteshe mplicitlycological erspective.ence, hemeaningsfthetwo termsunconsciously etoverlapped nd mixedup, therebyleading o subtle onfusion.In the fieldof interdisciplinarytudies, cology s seen as aperspective. he standard orms f interdisciplinarytudies re: first,borrowingconcepts, tools, techniques,and models fromotherdisciplines;econd, tudyinggivenproblem romheperspectivesfdifferentisciplines eferredo as interpntration',herebarriersbetween ariousdisciplinesrebroken own;andthird,reationfadisciplinaryybridcrossboundaries fteneading oa newdiscipline.These techniqueswhich reused o facilitatentegrationmong ocialscienceshave beenpointed utyGiovanni artorinhisarticlentitled"SociologyofPolitics nd Political ociology" nLipson ed) Politicsand theSocial Sciences De andBhattacharya:983).Althoughn allthesethree enses we can see thatEcopolitics s whatexists n thepresentorms but nly he irstechnique.olitical ciencehasborrowedtechniques fromecology like the concepts of ecotage, ecoteur,ecoterrorismtc. but t has notborrowednymodelas suchfromhediscipline fEcology.When cology s considereds a perspectiventhe tudy f a discipline,he aiddisciplineemainsxternaloecology,andecology nturn,xternalo thediscipline.The abovecontentionanbe illustrated ith ertainxamples.Social ecologyfirstmergeds a perspectivenGeography;t was notinternalized.hen ocialistdeologynternalizedcology ndvie-versaat thehands ofMurray ookchin,temerged s a separate cademicdiscipline,dentifieds Deep Ecology. imilarlyeminismasbeen aseparatebranchofknowledge orquite ongas manifestednMaryWollstonecrafsindicationf theRights f Women1792) andMillsSubjection of Women.When it started onsidering cology as aperspective,he twowere external o each other. co-feminismhusemerged s a perspective ithinhe iteratureffeminism,eco' and'feminism'separatedby a 'hyphen'.Here, Ecology had not beeninternalizedyfeminism.ncourse ftime,twas realized hat he wowerenseparable.eminismad nternalizednd cology ad nternalizedfeminism,eading othe mergencef newfield f tudyEcofeminism'where the separating 'hyphen' between 'eco' and 'feminism'conspicuouslyisappeared. hus a new nterdisciplinaryybridalled



5/18

The IndianJournalfPolitical cience 606'Ecofeminisnmerged, uttingcrosstheboundariesfecology ndfeminismsee Shiva ndMaes: 1993).When tcomes opolitics, hatwe see isthemarriageetweenPolitical cience nd cology esultsn he mergencef n4ecopoliticaVperspective.o far, incepolitical ciencehas borrowed nlysomeconcepts romcologywithoutny eparate ramework,thas notbeeninternaized nthe isciplinefpoliticalcience.Hence tmaynot e outofplace to statethat copolitics merges s a result f themutualinternalizationetweencology ndpoliticsnthe amevein s publicadministrationrewoutofpoliticalscienceas an independentndautonomouscademic iscipline.his,however, akes t mperativeodistinguishbetween ecopolitics and environmentalpolitics.Environmentalolitics efers o thestudy f theenvironmentalssueswithxitingonceptsnd heoreticalrameworkfpoliticalcience. ere,ecological erspectivesexternalopolitical cience.On the ther and,ecolopoliticssthe tudyfpoliticsromnecological erspective,hereecologytselfs seenfrompoliticalerspective.necopolitics,cologicalperspectives internalizedypoliticalcience. hisperspectiveelievesthat opoliticaludgementspossiblewithoutcological wareness ndnoecological wareness ithoutoliticaludgement.heemergencef'ecopolitics's a separate isciplinesbut distantope.This sbecauseit eems pparentlyhe erspectivesyet o be crystallized.etwehopebecausewe havemany lements ithwhich copolitical erspectiveanbe developed.Possibly,we mayhave latent copolitical erspectivewithin olitical science in majorpolitical ideologies,theoriesofdevelopment,raditions fpolitical thought,ctivities f the non-governmentalrganizationsNGOs), growing odyof environmentallegislationndgrowing esearch utputsn protestmovements,ewsocialmovements,tc.II. Ecopolitics and Modern Ideological Thinking

Anapparent aradox eems obind copoliticsndmodernitytogether:t the ametime heformermerges enouncinghefailurefseveral f he romisesfmodernity,tdoes sobymakingse of lementsthatie n he eryore f heatterTavolaro: 001 p.1 Thus, copoliticsshares very omplex elationshipith heproject fmodernity.hisobviouscontradictionaybe approached rom ariousperspectives.Because of this ontradiction,nderstandingfecopolitics,ndfor hat



6/18

Ecopoliticsnd deology elocating 607matter, cologism as an ideology has been seen fromdifferentperspectives.newayofunderstandingcopoliticss through 'thick'and thin' eadingf t. cholarsikeAndrewobson 2000:p.7),YannisStravrakakis1 97 p.266-270; 000), ndBrian axter1 99:p.1 perceive'ecologism' as 'thick', egardingt as a full-fledgedndindependentideologyn themanner f Liberalismnd socialism. ontrarily,reeden(1994; 1996)regardst s a 'thin'deology.reedenmakes morphologicalanalysis of the ideologies in which he perceives the structuralarrangementf political concepts n terms f 'core, adjacentandperipheral' lements. ccording oFreeden, he coreconsists f theconceptual omponents, hich, n an empirical tudy f a particularideological iscourse,re almost niversallyound obe at the entre ftheoretical oncerns. he coreshapesand constrainshecontent ndstructuringf the djacentndperipheraloncepts. reedenrgues hatecologism as a core onsistingnonly ouroncepts,iz theman-naturerelationship,alues reservation,olism,nd mplementationf cologicallifestyles,hich re "insufficientntheirwntoconjure pa vision rinterpretationf human nd social interactionrpurpose" Freeden:1996:p. 27).On the ther and,thick'deologiesike iberalism,reedensays,havetwelve lementsothe onceptualore. Sincethe onceptualcore here has conspicuously ailedto supply strong onstrainingstructure oradjacentdecontestations,t has allowed existenceofmultivariatenecopoliticalhought.Concurringo Freeden's thin' eading fecologism,we havelocated woparallel, ompetingndquite ftenontradictoryariantsfecopolitics.One is the CritiquefModernitytrend.Theoriginfthistrendmaybe traced o the ateeighteenthenturyn thewritingsfthinkersike mmanuel ant nd,more orcefully,ousseau,whomadeeffortso checkwhatwasperceiveds thewrongfulse of ndustryndtechnology;ndpreached ackto naturehilosophy.his trendppearsas a continuityf theproject fmodernity.he secondtrend s the'Scientificnstrumentalationalitytrend, ith imits Growths itsphilosophical asis.Thesecond rendwithinhe copolitical iscourseruns arallel othe irstrend,ometimes anifestingtself s a dominanttrend. he rallyingoint f this rendmaybe located nthe cologicalcatastrophehat tartedeingboldlymanifestednthe secondhalfofthe1960s.Hence, t asserts hatmodernityaveto man materialistic



7/18

TheIndianJournalf Political cience 608outlook, hich avealsothepotentialodestroyatures never eforeasthere asno deological estraintothe rocessAdams:1 93:p.31 ).Ecopoliticss an ideology,herefore,mergeds a reactiongainst hefailure f themodernityroject o address he ppalling onsequenceson environmentroducedby the materialisticiew of man of themodernityroject. he moderndeologies,nthe ikes fSocialism ndLiberalism-roducedy he nlightmenthinking,ere oundnadequateto address heproblem f environmentalegradationnd other ocialissues like oppressionof women,which ed to theemergence fecopoliticalndfeministdeologiesmongmany thers,lubbed nderthe ommoname fNew Radical deologies. copoliticsnthis eadingcan be seen both s a productnd a critiquef themodernityroject,which ccounts or he omplex elationshipetweenhe wo.Thus, doptinghe thin' eadingf ecopolitics',ndtherefore,acknowledginghe xistence fmultipleariationsf copolitics,resentworks a humblettemptobrieflyurveyhemajor trands f modernideologies, hat s, socialism whichhas been furtherategorizedsMarxism, uildSocialism,Democratic ocialism,Anarchism or hepurpose f thepresenttudy)iberalism,onservatismnd te traditionof Critical heory,nd trace ut fthey ave nybearing necopoliticsandanalyse heir erceptionhereto.his s expectedogive ninsightas towhatxtenthe copoliticalhinkingf odays rootednthehistoryof modern deological thinking, f course with changes' and'continuities' at the same time eadingto thedevelopment f theideologyof ecologism to bridgetheinadequaciesof the modernideologies.Liberalism

Liberalisms a political deology ommittedotherightsndlibertyf the ndividual. lassicalLiberalism,nderpinnedyLaissezFaireeconomynddefendedn thewritingsf John ocke andAdamSmith,s hasbeenpointedutbyEckersleyEckersley:992:p.23),seethenon-human orld npurelynstrumentalerms.t s seen s no morethan meansto human nds. John ocke sees theearth s giventohumans or the upportndcomfortftheireing",ndregardsatureas valuableonly fhumanabour s mixed o it for ppropriationnd



8/18

Ecopoliticsnd deology elocating 609otherwise, alueless.Liberalism lso has a belief n thecontinuouseconomic rowthnd a faithnthe bility fscientificrogressor heachievementfan equitable nd sustainableuture. ence, copoliticsis often een as conflicting ith iberalism here trequires oercivesolutionso environmentalroblems.hissignificantody f iterature,particularlyf lassical iberalism,annot econcile ithcologicaldeas.Herein ies the cological ritiquef iberalism,hich avesthewayforthedevelopmentfecopoliticsndecologism s an ideology.However, ntheother and, lthoughocke has beenusuallycritiqueds an arch-individualisthoencouraged cologically ecklessexploitationfnature uilding n histheoryfproperty,et tis thesametheory, hich peaksvolumes n hisdeeplygreen deas. Lockebelieved hatGodwas thewhole osmos. notherwords, e contendedthat niverse elonged o God. In creatinguman ersons odconfersonpersons limitedelf-ownershipthe wnershipfhisownperson.He advocated he abour heoryfpropertyndheldthatwithwhateverhe mixes is abour,t onstitutesisprivateroperty.his abour-centrictheoryof property f Locke had deep greenshades, which thecontemporaryildernesscologistsngeneralndtheir orth mericancounterpartsnparticularaveheavily orrowedn heirreenheorizing.Moreover,Mill,Benthamnd other iberalutilitariansaveshown ertain ualificationsordominatinghenon-humanorld.Asforxample,nMill'sworks e can ocate defencef cological iversity.A significantmountfJ.S. Mill'swritingsnhappinessan beviewedas fundamentaloany ttempttproducing Greendeology.Williams(1995: p. 123) points utthatMill's writingsn happiness ad suchattributess personal ffection,ocial feeling,rt,poetry, istoryndmentalulture, hichs a clearforerunnerfthepostmaterialisthesis.Theextensionfhisutilitarianalculus yBenthamo all sentienteingsis yetanother lementwithin iberal radition, hichhas providedphilosophicalouchstoneor he ontemporarynimaliberationheories.These maybe cited as both logical extensionof liberalism, ndfurthermore,s evidence o supporthe rgumenthat iberal houghthas influencedcopoliticalhinking.Marxism



9/18

The IndianJournalfPoliticalcience 610Marxism as at ts orecertaineatureshatre atoncecentralto cologismGarner:998:p.58;Pepper,993: p.59pp;Williams:995:p. 139).ThewritingsfMarx ndEngels hemselveseveal heirdeasofandconcern ornature.Marxism howshowunder apitalism,abourerand soil, man and naturewere exploited.In the 4Economic andPhilosophic anuscripts'f1 44,Marxhasdescribedhenatures44theinorganic ody fman n as much s nature s man sdirectmeansoflife and44thematerialtheobject nd instrumentfhisactivity. It

had been increasinglyssimilatedthrough umaneffortsntoan4organicpart fhumanity.oungMarxwas here eferringo the abourprocessas effectingheprogressivehumanisationof nature nd4naturalisationofhumanity.e argued atbothhumanitynd externalnatureransformedach other s labourprocess xpanded umanity'sproductiveowers.However,matureMarx in hisCapitalwas moreeconomically re-occupiednd he saw limits o man'smasteryvernaturendconsistentlyaw human reedoms being nverselyelatedto humanity'sependence n nature.He came to theviewthat hestrugglefmanwith ature ouldbe transformedutnot bolished. hiswas the ental featurefMarx'suxtapositionffreedomndnecessity.Thecontinuityrom oungMarx s onlyhisconcept f*homo aber,which emained central hemen hiswritings.Man Naturerelationship as been furtherlaboratedbyFrederickngelsnhis4Dialectics fNature Engelsmakes distinctionbetween 4Man and 4Animal* and says that the animal uses itsenvironmentndbringsbout hangesn tsimply y tspresence;manbyhis changesmakes t serve tsends,masters t.He, however,sskeptical o such a victoryf man over nature nd contends hat henature akes tsrevenge n us for very ictoryver t. He cites theexample fthe ll effects f thedestructionf forestsnMesopotamia,Greece,Asia Minor,Alpsandelsewhere o showhow naturevengeson man.He furthertates hatmanbyno means ules vernatureikeconquerorver foreign eople, ike omeonetandingutside ature.Hence,under lassicalMarxism,nvironmentalroblemsre traced othe xploitativeynamicsfcapitalism here olutions re seen nthetransformationftherelations fproduction.Despitehavingdealt ndepthwith he ssues of ecological



10/18

Ecopoliticsnd deology elocating 611crisis, ome scholarsikeEckersleyoint utthat or he rthodoxco-Marxists,tmakesno senseto saythat henon-human orld ught obe valuedandprotectedor ts own sake.Guha and Alier GuhaandAlier: 1998:p. 23) saythatwith xceptionsuch s RaymondWilliams,mostMarxists hose to nterpretnvironmentalisms a frivolouspperclassfad. omeMarxistshoughthat nvironmentalismasa dangerous,romanticndanti ndustrialrend.urther,avidHeld Held:199 p.6)saysthatMarxism oesnot ee the mpotencefecological uestionsand hencemarginalizesndevenexcludes tfrom olitics s itcannotbe reduced o class relatedmatters.owever,uchargumentsaynotbe wholly enable.Guild Socialism

Ecological lementsre raceableotheGuild ocialistdeas oo,especiallyn thewritingsfPenty, rage,Gill and Read.Hobson ndCole developedtheGuild ideas of Penty, utGill,Orageand Readdeveloped by-way ith sort f hiftnthemeocusing ore n ethicaland estheticimensions.enty'sriticalttitudeowardsommercialismofcapitalism,ndGill'soppositiono ndustrialismeveal uch deasasofGandhi, ndhence pproximatecological hought,lthoughn quitecrude ndrudimentaryorm.enty oints ut o theneed osimplifyifein a radicalway, hedesire or unified uman xistence asedon theemotions,nd thebeliefn the4unconscious isdomof thepeople.Hecondemnedhe artificial'ivilizationhat esaw,whichwas, ccordingtohim, oomed ocollapse roughts otal ottenness.owever, morepowerfulxpositionfthis dea can be foundn Read. Readportrayedsimplewayof life based on the4cultivationfearth freefrom hedisruptionsf the4commercialpiriand from ll 4immoralnd anti-social tendencies'. e ecologists lso focuson thenegative mpact fcommercial pirit f capitalism n environmentnd advocateforsimplifiedife tyle, hichwould educe trainnthe iophysicalystem.Readalso warned atmankindackingnydirect ontact ith he rganicrhythmsndbalanced rocesses fnature ouldwalk ikeblind nimalsin toa darkergethat istoryadeverknown. is ideasappearedn afantasy ublished n 1935 called the4GreenChild Stanley ierson(Pierson:1979:pp.201-249) alls these ocialistss 4ethicalocialistsHowever, heir pposition o industrialism,ritical ttitude



11/18

The IndianJournal f Political cience 612towards apitalism,dvocacyofsimple ife nd aesthetic nd ethicaldimension f their houghtppreciating aturalharmonyre all inproximityith he enets fecological houghtftoday. ence, twouldnot be a misnomer o call them eco-socialists insteadof 'ethicalsocialists'.Democratic Socialism

Democratic ocialistsdeason ecology ndenvironmentanbe hadfromhewritingsfJames ' Connerwhoputs na veryucidwayhow he roblemf nvironmentnd cology anbeaddressed roma socialistperspective. e points ut theweakness fbothorthodoxMarxism nd liberaldemocracynddevelops sortof middlepath.Conneraystat iberalismrde-centralism,ndcentralism,hats,self-determinationnd the overallplanning,oordinationndcontrol fproductionmustbe sublated ordeveloping reen ocialism.This isbecause, saccordingoConnerConnernMerchant:996:pp.165pp),localism erse won'twork ndrelyingnthe iberal emocratictate nwhichdemocracyhasmerely proceduralrformalmeaning illnotwork ither. ence, ccordingohim, heonlypolitical orm atmightwork, uitingcologicalproblemsn a democratictate n which headministrationf he ivision f ocial aboursdemocraticallyrganized.However,tneeds obe noted hat is deascentermore nthepolitical ormequiredn ddressingcological roblemsnlikeMarxismwhich oncentrates ore nman-natureelationship.Anarchism

Anarchism,notherariant fsocialism,lso embodies omeelements fecopolitical hought.copolitical deas inanarchism retraceableo the houghtsfsocialanarchistsikeKropotkin,nd ater,intheworks fMurray ookchinwho s generallyranded s a socialecologist, and also RobertNisbet who is associated with theEcocommunalchool.Kropotkinaidtheconceptualoundationorradical heoryf humancologywhile eveloping istheoryfmutualaid in his4MutualAi (1917).Aspointed utbyBenewick ndGreen,Kropotkiniewednaturendpeople n nature s organic,nterrelatedwholes. To harmonise herelationshipetweenpeople and nature,Kropotkinawtheneed to create human ommunity,hichived n



12/18

Ecopoliticsnd deology elocating 613harmonyith tself. oreover,ropotkinecriedhehumanizingffectsofbureaucracynd nstitutionalorms, hich,ven nadvertently,ausethe trophyfpeople'sdesire omould,heirnvironmentsBenewickandGreen: 998:p.l37).Murray ookchin,heoristf nd pokesmanor ocial cology,belonged o thecampofSocial anarchismHis numerousublicationson4social ecologyhave oughto restore senseofcontinuityetweenhumanocietyndthe reativerocess f naturalvolutions thebasisfor hereconstructionf anecoanarchistolitics.His socialecology sgroundedn anecological ensibilityhat ejectshenstrumentalosturetoward ature hat s characteristicfsocialist hought.ocial ecologyof Bookchin mergesutofa classicalphilosophicalradition,icks fftheorganismichreadnwesternntologicalhilosophyhat uns romAristotleoHegel, he ocialtraditionnitiatedyMarx ndKropotkin,and the historicalperspectiveopened by the age.of democraticrevolutions.ttries o advance definitionf natures anevolutionaryphenomenon,ncontrasto the argelyhistoricalmages hat boundinmuch f the urrentcopoliticaliteraturesee Bookchin: 990:p.l).Bookchins social cology, hichsa versionf coanarchism,rticulatesa socialecological ision fparticipatory,galitarian,eco-communitiesin whichhumans ee themselvesndact,not as dominatorsfnaturebut as participantsn it His 'OurSyntheticnvironmentScarcityAnarchism 'The PhilosophyofSocial Ecology , and 'TowardEcologicalSocietyshow onnectionsetweenhe ominationfhumansbyone anothernd the domination fnature yhumans.He assertsthat uchhierarchys a social invention,ntroducedntowhatwereessentiallygalitarian, utuallynterdependentommunities.is richecologicaldeas, ccordingoSoumitrae (De: 1999: 46), re ategorizedasrepresentinghe cocentric ing f mancipatoryhemen heourneyfrom nvironmentalismo ecocentrism theculminatingoint nthedevelopmentf ecocentricolitical heory.Ecocommunalisms another choolofthoughthat kersleyregardss a veinofanarchismcocommunalisms a termttributedothework fscholars ikeRobertNisbet.AccordingoEckersley,t s agenericermhat ncompassesdiverse ange fUtopian,isionaryndessentiallynarchistreenheorieshateekthe evelopmentfhuman-scale,cooperativeommunitieshat nable he ounded ndmutualistic



13/18

TheIndianJournal fPolitical cience 614developmentfhumanswhile tthe ame time espectinghe ntegrityofnon-humanorld. espite ertain ifferences,cocommunalismndsocialecology hare ome common eatures. oth eekto abolish hemodern ation tate, oth rgue hat narchismraws ts nspirationsfromcology,ndfinally,oth ppose ll formsf ocialdominationndthedominationf thenon-human orld.Anarchisthought,s revealedbytheabovediscussion, as green lementsuite nabundance.Conservatism

Conservatisms a politicaldeologyhatsaverse oprogressivechange,oriented o thepreservationf institutionsnd values andcommitted o tradition nd authority.t is concernedwiththeconservationfthebestof thepast nd ofhierarchyndthe tatus uoThere s a necessitynd usefulnessoexplore herelationshipetweenecopolitical houghtndconservatismecausemany bservers n theLefthave oftenwrongly) haracterized reenPoliticalthoughtrecopoliticss a new ncarnationfconservatismheypoint ut omenotable oints fcommonalityetween onservatismndecopolitics,themost ignificantfwhich re nemphasisnprudencen nnovation,thedesire opreservehe xistinghingso maintainontinuityith hepast, tc.Moreover,ome of thepolitical ributarieshathaveflowedinto ontemporarycopolitical hought aybe traced o conservativesources ike n the deas of Edmund urke nd others. herefore,t simperative o delve intothe ideas of Burke,Oakeshott nd otherconservativeshilerelocating reen recopoliticalhemesnmodernideological hinking.utthis hallnotbe the ttemptor he present.Ecopoliticaldeas arealso traceable o Nazithinkinghichsbranded s a strand fconservatismhere re some nstancesf thecongruenceetween he deasofEnvironmentalismndNazism,whichoncebecame dominantdeologynGermany.omeNazithinkersaveemphasized mystic nity etween hepeasant, heforest,nd thenationalpirit. ther azisrailedgainsthe rowthf he ities. n 1 32,thenewspaperfthepartyworriedhat he nfluencefthemetropolishavegrown verwhelminglytrongo much o thattsasphalt ulturewas destroyingeasant hinking,herural ifestyle,nd the national)strength.eadingNaziswereprominentnEnvironmentalauses. ThethenMinister orAgriculturen Nazi Germany, alter arrewas an



14/18

Ecopoliticsnd deology elocating 615enthusiastor rganic arming.nother ermonGoering,econdonlyto AdolfHitlernparty ierarchy,tronglyupportedaturerotection,appointing imselfMaster f theGerman unt s wellas Master f theGermanorests.his pparentffinityetween azism ndgreenhinkinghas led commentatorso claimthat nvironmentalisms conducive oauthoritarianhinkingnd vice versa.HoweverGuhapoints utsomeelementsnNazismthat ontradicthetenets f Green deology. hiscontradictions revealednNazi'sattemptobuild n ndustrialconomyas soon as they ookoverGermany. heyfeverishlyuiltmotor oads,aerodromes,rmamentactories,ortificationstc that s scarcely heagenda of the environmentalists. oreover,theyalso vigorouslypromotedonsumerism,hich nessence sopposed oenvironmentalism(Guha:2000: ppl8-19).The fact owever annothereforee denied atNazism s an ideologywas imbuedwith t least omegreen hemes.The Tradition of Critical Theory

HerbertMarcuse, ssociatedwith heFrankfurtchool, n hisattempto adoptMarxism o thechanging istorical onditions lsoenvisages cologicalthoughtn Marxist radition. arcusewhowasacritic f ndustrialismiffersromMarx rom he uestionf cologyndenvironment.nlikeMarx,Marcuse idnot erceiveman s atool-makinganimal.Thegeneral enor fMarcuses ecopolitical houghtas been acritique f the dominationya traditionallyonceived ndpracticedscience.Marcusenotonly amentedhe"unfreedorrCfman,but alsolamentedhe cientificonquestfman ndnature. e found he ssenceof man n Erosandplayfulctivity. orkosesitspositive ualityn aconsumerulture, hichs the argetf his attack.Marcuse efused oseektechnologicalolutiono theproblemftechnologynddevelopedthe new science'' a newly onceived elationshipf manandnature(De: 1999:pp.50-54)Jrgen abermas, ho s critical f Marcuses 'newsciencedoes not rguefor he resurrectionf fallennature, thats,healingof the rift etweenhumanitynd non- humannature hathas beenbroughtboutbytherationalizationrocess.Habermasnsists hatrational ocietywould continue o apply nstrumentaleasonto ourdealings with the non- humanworld throughhuman workandtechnology.nvironmentalroblem,ccordingohim,must e solved



15/18

TheIndianJournalfPolitical cience 616bythe pplicationfinstrumentaleason ecause thats theonlykindof reason hathe sees tobe efficaciousnman'sdealingswithnaturefrom heir oint fviewofhumanpecies nterestnsurvival. lthoughhe dealswithhe uestionfecology nd nvironment,abermasmakesonly ccasional eferenceothe cological risis nhis xtensive ritings.The ecocentricerspectiveas,therefore,uilt n a similarity,especiallyetweenMarxismndLiberalismhat oth ee thenon- umanworld npurelynstrumentalerms. owever, rommongsthese wostrandsf deologies,he mancipatoryerspectivef copolitics refersMarxism o Liberalism or tscritique fCapitalism s a source ofenvironmentalegradation.III. Conclusion

Althoughhemoderndeologies ave ertain eferencesogreenthemes,heirmagnitudefGreen-nessiffers.llthe hreemajormodernideologies Socialism,Liberalism ndConservatism,espitehavingelements f ecopoliticsn them, ave failed o addressproperlyheproblemsmanatingromhe xploitationsromnvironment.ence, heecological heoristsee the super deology' f industrialism'hich scommonobothMarxismndLiberalism,nd ncompass apitalismndsocialism,Left-Wing and Right-Wing thoughts the"Problem(Heywood:1999:p.275).The failuref moderndeological hinkingoaddress hese nd uch ike uestions as, herefore,ed nthe ast oupleofdecades r o,toproliferationfmovements hose tylenddemandsgo beyond laimsfor ightsr welfare. copolitics,nd for hatmatter,environmentalismepresentsne suchmovementYoung:1998:p.49i).Ecopolitics ndthe environmentalovementas,therefore,ecomeboldlymanifestnly uiterecentlys critiquef themodernityrojectdespitet n tselfeing ertainlyhe roductfmodernociety. lthoughits roots lay scattered n variousmodern deological moorings,ecopoliticsn thepreset ormmerged rimarilys a response o thedestructiveffects fglobal capitalismnly n theaftermathf theSecond WorldWar, ndmore pecifically,n thedecadesof the1960sand the 1970s. The ideologyof the ecopolitical' or 'ecopolitics',commonlyalledtheGreendeology rEcologismwasconspicuousyits absence at thetimewhen themodern deologies emerged nd



16/18

EcopoliticsndIdeology elocating 617developed.But,itgrewwith hemoderndeologiesandthemoderninstitutions,ourishingt n thewombs f themoderndeologies obeborn s an ideologywith differencenthedecades of the1960sand1970s. Therefore,development f ecologism as an ideologyandecopolitics s a disciplines coival with hedevelopmentfcapitalismand themoderntate.Andtherefore,t least s long s thenaturendthe modern tate ive,ecopoliticss here o stay.Howevert s nottosuggesthat hepossible emise fthemoderntatewill nvitehedeathof ecopolitics. Possiblythenmaybegina non-antagonistictrugglebetweenman andnatureREFERENCES :1. Adams, Ian (1993). Political Ideology Today Manchester,Manchester niversityress.2 Baxter, rian 1999). EcologismAnIntroductionEdinburg,Edinburg niversityress.3. BenewickndGreeneds.) 1998). TheRoutledgeictionaryfTwentiethenturyolitical ThinkersLondon,Routledge.4. Blanberg, Sadovsky and Yudin (1977). SystemsTheory:Philosophical and Methodological Problems Moscow,Progress ublishers.5. Bookchin,Murray1996). ThePhilosophy fSocial EcologyNewDelhi,Rawat ublications.6. Conley, . A 1997). Ecopolitics:TheEnvironmentnthe ost-StructuralisthoughtLondon,Routledge.7. Conner, ames ' (1996). "Socialism ndEcology" nCarolynMerchanted) CriticalTheoryEcology NewDelhi,RawatPublications.8. De, Soumitra1999). "Green nRed: Ecopolitical houghtfHerbertMarcuse",JournalofPolitics,Vol.VI, Dibrugarh,Dibrugarh niversity.9. De, SoumitrandK S Bhattacharya1983). "InterdisciplinaryStudies ndPolitical cience:A Search or Perspective",he

IndianJournal fPolitical tudiesJodhpur,ol. 6-7.10. Dobson, Andrew 2000). Green Political ThoughtThirdEdition), ondon, outledge.11. Eckersley,Robyn 1992). Environmentalismnd Political



17/18

TheIndianJournalfPolitical cience 618TheoryTowardsn Ecocentric pproach,ondon,UCL Press.12. Encyclopedia of Knowledge (1993). Encyclopaedia ofKnowledgeVolumes and7,Grolier.13. Engels, rederick1 93 . Dialectics fNatureIndianReprint),Calcutta, ational ookAgency.14. Environmental Encyclopedia (1999). EnvironmentalEncyclopediaSecondEdition, ewDelhi,JaicoPublishers.15. Freeden,Michael 1994). "PoliticalConcepts ndIdeologicalMorphology",heJoural fPolitical hilosophyVol.2,No. 2.16. Freeden, ichael996). deologiesndPolitical heoryOxford,Oxford niversityress.17. Freeden, ichael 1 98)."Is NationalismDistinctdeology?",PoliticalStudies 6.18. Garner, . (1998). Environmentalolitics, ondon,MacmillanPress imited.19. Guha, amachandra2000).Environmentalism:GlobalHistoryNewDelhi,Oxford niversityress.20. Guha, Ramachandra and M Alier (1998). VarietiesofEnvironmentalismEssaysNorthndSouthNewDelhi,OxfordUniversityress.21. Held,David (1990). PoliticalTheory odayLondon,PolityPress.22. Heyhood, ndrew1 98).PoliticaldeologiesAn ntroductionLondon,Macmillan ress.23. Marx, arl 1 93).EconomicndPhilosophic anuscripts-44(IndianReprint),alcutta, ational ookAgency.24. Merchant, arolyn ed) (1996). Key Concepts n CriticalTheory- cology,NewDelhi,Rawat ublications.25. Pepper, avid 1 93).Eco-socialismLondon, outledge.26. Pierson, tanley1979). Britishocialists:TheJourneyromFantasy o PoliticsLondon,Harvard niversityress.27. Shiva, andanandMariaMaes 1 93).EcofeminismNewDelhi,Kali forWomen.28. Stavrakakis,annis 1997). "Green deology:A DiscursiveReading", ournal fPoliticaldeologiesVol.2,No. 329. Stavrakakis,annis2000).On the mergencefGreendeology:



18/18

Ecopoliticsnd deology elocating 619al (eds.) DiscourseTheoryndPoliticalAnalysisManchester,Manchester niversityress.30. Tavolaro,SergioB. F. (2001). Environmental orality ndModernityElements o Think fthe Brazilian Case PaperDeliveredat the2001 Meeting f te LatinAmerican tudiesAssociation,Washington. C. , September-8.31. Williams,G (1995), PoliticalTheorynRetrospectFrom heAncientGreeks o the20th enturyEdwardElgar PublishingHouse,Aldershot, ants.32. Young,. M (1 98). "PoliticalTheory: n Overview"nGoodinandKlingemanneds.)ANew Handbook fPolitical cienceNewYork,Oxford niversityress.

relocating green themes in modern ideological thinking

Documents