Appreciate the overview and specifics of current trends, and well-researched article with sharp quotes, Max. Capitalism is obviously a major detriment adversely affecting Mother Earth and all, yet also since it is in bed with various global governments and since a root of the Doctrine of Christian Discovery and Domination is religion wielded as a tool of conversion of both land and humans, i think another fair labeling is: theofascism.
`Hi Max. Recently read works of Murray Bookchin (very controversial figure in ecology 1980-2000). He said one thing which made a lot of sense, that Men who wish to dominate nature, first dominate people. Our species has major ecological disregard. Is why the current forms of energy and economy are totally divorced from ecology.
Thanks for sharing, CI. Bookchin has some interesting work - some things are great, some I disagree with, but I haven't studied his work extensively enough to comment in detail on it. But you're right, there's definitely a relationship between the domination of people and of the natural world.
Hi Max. Bookchin is anarco-ecology. We can absorb and or reject many things he envisioned. His arguements stems from, how we were as a species and what we have come to be. He does attack the earth-centric people with as much gusto as the techno-fix people. Also the world he envisioned, was far out, nearly impossible as of now.
To me, the fact that he was systematically censored and black-listed by the left and right, environmentalists, policy makers in America, is the most interesting part.
This is so true. But I think the problem is foundational with the law, it flows from the Roman concept of slavery, and the absolute right of some humans to impose their will on others. This is initially expressed in war, but the impulse is reified in law, thus you will never dismantle the master's house with the master's tools.
So trying to retool the law is a waste of time, because the law is ultimately about compulsion, not negotiation. If you look at the moment in the NT when Jesus was asked to make a judgement about dividing an inheritance and he refuses because one person would lose and the other would win, that's the problem right there.
All that will happen if Client Earth wins a case against a big corporation/government is that the other side will just get better at finding other ways of imposing their will on us. You are not changing their minds and it's a never ending cycle and waste of human energy.
Instead we need to go upstream, change public consciousness, promote the values of interdependence, make people see that ultimately we are all living in the care of each other. Make the law redundant. I know it's a big ask, but that's ultimately the answer....
Thanks for the response, Max. Interesting and thought-provoking. I guess some of the discussion depends on the definitions and labels, so e.g. aside from the strictly religious aspect of Christmas it's a global religio-consumer holiday. How much religious and how much consumer is tough to measure but i guess what am trying to say is that the different strands feed each other. So theofascism entangles mis-appropriated or enforced religions, along with corporate and state; so to extend the example, the consumerism of Christmas is fed by corporations and states abuses of habitats along with the masses of consumers exhibiting "cult of progress" as the latest gadgets are typically fave gifts, from technology to leaf-blowers and such like. Then, as far as "civilization", one defn "to cause to develop out of a primitive state, especially: to bring to a technically advanced and rationally ordered stage of cultural development" speaks to many absurdities including the arrogance and centuries of abuse and domination of Indigenous Peoples and desecration of habitats; plus a word-root of civilize is "city", of course a far cry from living and working with the land, whether farmer or Indigenous. So seems to me that what the "religion of..." all that is would take further work to attempt to label/define. Maybe that people nowadays are less strictly religious, thus the "cult of progress" is accentuated, is what you're alluding to. Also i think the Christian doctrine gives permission for the "cult of progress", as shown with an oft-quoted bit from the papal bull Dum Diversas on 18 June, 1452: "...- to invade, search out, capture, vanquish, and subdue all Saracens and pagans whatsoever, and other enemies of Christ wheresoever placed, and the kingdoms, dukedoms, principalities, dominions, possessions, and all movable and immovable goods whatsoever held and possessed by them and to reduce their persons to perpetual slavery, and to apply and appropriate to himself and his successors the kingdoms, dukedoms, counties, principalities, dominions, possessions, and goods, and to convert them to his and their use and profit –’” The mentions of "possessions, goods and profit" are certainly intertwined with the under-layers of so-called progress. Whatever the case, it's tough to measure, yet each aspect and the combinations are deserving of tactics/efforts to shift consciousness and behaviors away from destruction and toward healing, etc.
Thanks for your comments and Notes, Peter. Definitely interesting, and you're far more of an expert in the legal realm than I will ever be. By fight, I mean take risks. First of all, I think the destruction of the planet is being carried out in specific places by specific activities, and these could be stopped in many different ways through the use of nonviolent force, or even through limited and ethical violence. I plan to write a future piece about "just war doctrine," which will be interesting as both an anti-war activist and someone who believes force is justified in defense of the living planet.
'“Our Children’s Trust,” which is filing lawsuits against the federal government for failing to uphold the “public trust doctrine,” a legal principle that the government is responsible for managing public resources for the benefit of the public.’
The great flaw in this approach is the failure to understand that “public” does not mean people; it means an abstract realm controlled by government … in the name of the people.
Great article, Max. I'm sure you're aware the Our Children Trust Case in Montana only won in district court. The next hurdle is the state supreme court. You are completely right, the legal system isn't going to save us. Even if laws weren't rigged in favor of a property owner's right to trash nature, it works far too slowly given the speed of climate collapse. I tried to celebrate those kids' victory in Montana a little bit. They deserve the encouragement. https://geoffreydeihl.substack.com/p/a-victory-for-a-clean-and-healthful
They definitely do. I've had the pleasure to meet a couple of the young people in the Juliana v. USA case, and liked them. It may be a radicalizing experience for them to see how the process plays out.
Appreciate the overview and specifics of current trends, and well-researched article with sharp quotes, Max. Capitalism is obviously a major detriment adversely affecting Mother Earth and all, yet also since it is in bed with various global governments and since a root of the Doctrine of Christian Discovery and Domination is religion wielded as a tool of conversion of both land and humans, i think another fair labeling is: theofascism.
Definitely, Mankh - although I think the religion of civilization (or, "the cult of progress") goes deeper than Christian doctrine.
`Hi Max. Recently read works of Murray Bookchin (very controversial figure in ecology 1980-2000). He said one thing which made a lot of sense, that Men who wish to dominate nature, first dominate people. Our species has major ecological disregard. Is why the current forms of energy and economy are totally divorced from ecology.
Thanks for sharing, CI. Bookchin has some interesting work - some things are great, some I disagree with, but I haven't studied his work extensively enough to comment in detail on it. But you're right, there's definitely a relationship between the domination of people and of the natural world.
Hi Max. Bookchin is anarco-ecology. We can absorb and or reject many things he envisioned. His arguements stems from, how we were as a species and what we have come to be. He does attack the earth-centric people with as much gusto as the techno-fix people. Also the world he envisioned, was far out, nearly impossible as of now.
To me, the fact that he was systematically censored and black-listed by the left and right, environmentalists, policy makers in America, is the most interesting part.
This is so true. But I think the problem is foundational with the law, it flows from the Roman concept of slavery, and the absolute right of some humans to impose their will on others. This is initially expressed in war, but the impulse is reified in law, thus you will never dismantle the master's house with the master's tools.
So trying to retool the law is a waste of time, because the law is ultimately about compulsion, not negotiation. If you look at the moment in the NT when Jesus was asked to make a judgement about dividing an inheritance and he refuses because one person would lose and the other would win, that's the problem right there.
All that will happen if Client Earth wins a case against a big corporation/government is that the other side will just get better at finding other ways of imposing their will on us. You are not changing their minds and it's a never ending cycle and waste of human energy.
Instead we need to go upstream, change public consciousness, promote the values of interdependence, make people see that ultimately we are all living in the care of each other. Make the law redundant. I know it's a big ask, but that's ultimately the answer....
Broadly speaking, I think you're right.
Thanks for the response, Max. Interesting and thought-provoking. I guess some of the discussion depends on the definitions and labels, so e.g. aside from the strictly religious aspect of Christmas it's a global religio-consumer holiday. How much religious and how much consumer is tough to measure but i guess what am trying to say is that the different strands feed each other. So theofascism entangles mis-appropriated or enforced religions, along with corporate and state; so to extend the example, the consumerism of Christmas is fed by corporations and states abuses of habitats along with the masses of consumers exhibiting "cult of progress" as the latest gadgets are typically fave gifts, from technology to leaf-blowers and such like. Then, as far as "civilization", one defn "to cause to develop out of a primitive state, especially: to bring to a technically advanced and rationally ordered stage of cultural development" speaks to many absurdities including the arrogance and centuries of abuse and domination of Indigenous Peoples and desecration of habitats; plus a word-root of civilize is "city", of course a far cry from living and working with the land, whether farmer or Indigenous. So seems to me that what the "religion of..." all that is would take further work to attempt to label/define. Maybe that people nowadays are less strictly religious, thus the "cult of progress" is accentuated, is what you're alluding to. Also i think the Christian doctrine gives permission for the "cult of progress", as shown with an oft-quoted bit from the papal bull Dum Diversas on 18 June, 1452: "...- to invade, search out, capture, vanquish, and subdue all Saracens and pagans whatsoever, and other enemies of Christ wheresoever placed, and the kingdoms, dukedoms, principalities, dominions, possessions, and all movable and immovable goods whatsoever held and possessed by them and to reduce their persons to perpetual slavery, and to apply and appropriate to himself and his successors the kingdoms, dukedoms, counties, principalities, dominions, possessions, and goods, and to convert them to his and their use and profit –’” The mentions of "possessions, goods and profit" are certainly intertwined with the under-layers of so-called progress. Whatever the case, it's tough to measure, yet each aspect and the combinations are deserving of tactics/efforts to shift consciousness and behaviors away from destruction and toward healing, etc.
I quoted and commented in several Notes… quite a thorough piece here, Max. But I see fundamental obstacles…
Here’s my summing-up Note: https://substack.com/@peterderrico/note/c-42022333
Thanks for your comments and Notes, Peter. Definitely interesting, and you're far more of an expert in the legal realm than I will ever be. By fight, I mean take risks. First of all, I think the destruction of the planet is being carried out in specific places by specific activities, and these could be stopped in many different ways through the use of nonviolent force, or even through limited and ethical violence. I plan to write a future piece about "just war doctrine," which will be interesting as both an anti-war activist and someone who believes force is justified in defense of the living planet.
'“Our Children’s Trust,” which is filing lawsuits against the federal government for failing to uphold the “public trust doctrine,” a legal principle that the government is responsible for managing public resources for the benefit of the public.’
The great flaw in this approach is the failure to understand that “public” does not mean people; it means an abstract realm controlled by government … in the name of the people.
Great article, Max. I'm sure you're aware the Our Children Trust Case in Montana only won in district court. The next hurdle is the state supreme court. You are completely right, the legal system isn't going to save us. Even if laws weren't rigged in favor of a property owner's right to trash nature, it works far too slowly given the speed of climate collapse. I tried to celebrate those kids' victory in Montana a little bit. They deserve the encouragement. https://geoffreydeihl.substack.com/p/a-victory-for-a-clean-and-healthful
They definitely do. I've had the pleasure to meet a couple of the young people in the Juliana v. USA case, and liked them. It may be a radicalizing experience for them to see how the process plays out.