Review of Deep Ecology for the 21st Century: Reading on the Philosophy and Practice of the New Environmentalism - Edited by George Session (Shambhala Press, 1995), a series of 39 readings from some 20 authors illustrating the range of thought in the Deep Ecology movement. 
By Bruce Shields 

I apologize for this review coming so soon after "Two Paths."  However, the Deep Ecology movement lies behind much of the motivation for the two paths suggested in the prior book.  I have previously given some impressions from my reading of the first half of this book.  From the second half, which includes a number of forecasts, here are some more somewhat random observations.

First, the Deep Ecology movement claims to be the primary motivating power behind much of the thinking which opposes the timber industry in Vermont and elsewhere.  Our philosophy is dismissed as "the wise use" movement, with the explanation that giant multinational corporations pour money into fraudulently populist front organizations (such as VFPA) which are in fact lavishly bankrolled by the big players.  Where is our check?  That is one of the urban myths [urban myths are stories such as the alligators supposedly living in the New York sewers] endlessly repeated by the environmentalists.  It explains the wild ranting of Ted Williams (writer for Audubon, Sierra, and other enviro magazines) whenever the name Bruce Shields crops up, a known anti-environmentalist in the employ of dark corporations -- again, where is my check?  According to the Deep Ecologists, the Wildlands Project was created when the most creative minds in Earth First! broke ranks with the wacko tree spikers to form a partnership with the organizers of the great land trusts to form a vast ecosystem restoration using corporate money.  And according to the Deep Ecologists, Earth First! was the first American environmental organization to embrace the Deep Ecology philosophy.   From the Deep Ecology movement comes the doctrine of core areas comprising a minimum of 10% of land-scape or watershed scale tracts having a minumum area of 50,000 acres, preferably 150,000 acres.  We all knew, from the West Mountain fracas, that the 10% core area was an article of some faith -- we were simply not aware from what religion that text was being quoted.

Second, Deep Ecology envisions a three fold political movement, uniting Ecology, the Peace Movement, and Social Justice movements.  The basis of the political movement is the forthcoming environmental collapse.  The doctrine of environmental catastrophe is not optional for this movement: it is central.  Arne Naess, the Pope of Deep Ecologists, states that humans are in an ever tightening death spiral in which fisheries, agriculture, energy, atmosphere, the ozone layer, weather, and every other element of our world environment is trembling on the edge of total and irreversible collapse.  That explains the frantic and volcanic reaction of ecologists to Bjørn Lomborg’s book, The Skeptical Environmentalist, which exposed some of the lunatic ravings of the catastrophists, or the scathing reviews to which Michael Crichton’s thriller novel State of Fear was subjected.  It also explains why our own Vermont academics persist in attributing the deforestation of Vermont prior to the Civil War to greedy loggers, and the reforestation since the Civil War to enlightened environmentalists.  In any case, writer after writer in Sessions’s selections attacks the world wide Bourgeosie for consumerism and consumptionism, urging some form of centralized planning to reduce the use of most consumer products, and advocating that the 1st World countries simply legislate a denial of economic development for 3d World countries (as opposed to the World Bank policies, which are uniformly viewed as the real enemy).  Obviously this was all written before 9/11/2001, and before the upsurge of China and India.  I can’t even imagine some of the blathering in this vein being written by any serious person now.  But the raving of the Anti-Globalization group shows that Deep Ecology will not be deterred by reality.

Third, many Deep Ecologists espouse an end to the Western religious tradition with its emphasis on revelation, Truth, and reason.  Several articles praise shamanism, paganism, animism, wiccan, Druid, and other form of religious experience.  Gary Snyder especially praises Buddhist thought for providing a world view in which there is no mind at work, no one in charge, and all elements of the world are completely equivalent, eating and being eaten.  Humans play no greater role in the eternal scheme of things than the lowest bacteria.  That accords with my debate with some Forest Watch people one day when I was told that moving a rotting log to create a skid trail was equivalent to mass murder, because billions of microbes were sheltered in the soil under it.  We do not have an easy task to counteract this movement simply because almost everything that we are, believe, or do is subject to attack by the Deep Ecologists.

Fourth, the Deep Ecologists as a group hold that a radical restructuring of society is required.  They embrace the radical feminists, the First Nations, the structuralists, and many other radical and Left aligned movements as valuable fellow workers.  Arne Naess states that the polarity of Red and Blue (which in European parliaments actually has some similarity to our current habit of describing Red states and Blue states, except that the political meaning of the colors is reversed) will be replaced by a triangle, with Red, Green, Blue as the points.  He of course believes that Green will be on top.   The National (or preferably for Naess and others, International) government will ban large corporations, take complete charge of economic, environmental, and transportation matters, eliminate war and poverty, bring in affordable alternative health care, end factory farming, and in general yield a perfect government.  There will be no more war, no more oppression of women or native peoples, no world trade, no Walmarts, many fewer people, and no more disease.  It truly sounds wonderful!

In any case, after reading through this very dense collection, I am confirmed that we really have nothing to compromise with these people.  I believe that all we can do is to expose them.  We need to press TNC on how they intend to reconcile their stated intention to promote Sustainable Development with their Conservation Biology partners who state that the concept of Sustainability is anathema.  We need to expose the anti-human bias of most Deep Ecologists (Arne Naess argues, in what is a familiar refrain in Vermont, that Quality of Life yields a life far more deeply satisfying than a life with a "lot of stuff.")  Most of all, we need to show how the bias against economic uses of natural resources will result in an increase, not a decrease, in poverty and oppression.

Excelsior!
 

Bruce Shields has retired from three professions; college English teacher, sawmiller and executive of the Vermont Forest Products Association, and operator of a farm supply store.  In retirement, he works his woodlot and maple sugar place, sits on the boards of several statewide organizations related to natural resources, and serves as Lister in the town of Eden, VT.