Defending the Earth: A Dialogue Between Murray Bookchin and Dave Foreman

by Murray Bookchin, Dave Foreman, Steve Chase (Editor)

Defending the Earth brings together two of the main protagonists in the heated deep vs. social ecology debate: eco-philosopher Murray Bookchin and Earth First! founder Dave Foreman. Bookchin and Foreman seek common ground and cooperatively explore their differing, though often overlapping, perspectives on a wide variety of issues.

Genres: Environment, Ecology, Politics, Nature, Theory, Nonfiction, Research

147 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1990

About the author

Murray Bookchin was an American libertarian socialist author, orator, and philosopher. A pioneer in the ecology movement, Bookchin was the founder of the social ecology movement within anarchist, libertarian socialist and ecological thought. He was the author of two dozen books on politics, philosophy, history, and urban affairs as well as ecology. In the late 1990s he became disenchanted with the strategy of political Anarchism and founded his own libertarian socialist ideology called Communalism.

Bookchin was an anti-capitalist and vocal advocate of the decentralisation of society along ecological and democratic lines. His writings on libertarian municipalism, a theory of face-to-face, assembly democracy, had an influence on the Green movement and anti-capitalist direct action groups such as Reclaim the Streets.

Reviews

[Dayton Martindale · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fascinating dialogue in response to a debate between radical ecologists of the late 1980s. Basically, Murray Bookchin accused Dave Foreman and co. of being misanthropic, Foreman and co. accused Bookchin of being anthropocentric, then the FBI arrested Foreman and they realized infighting was dumb.

A quick read--I read it in one sitting over about 3-4 hours--but if you're into this type of thing it's a good intro to both "deep ecology" (Foreman) and "social ecology" (Bookchin) ideas. Bookchin is clearly the more politically sophisticated thinker, and insofar as there's a debate he wins (though they mainly just agree on stuff), but I do wonder whether deep ecology brings something to the table that social ecology might not by itself. But Bookchin's thinking is really well developed and specifically addresses many important issues that deep ecologists often gloss over (in particular the place of humans in ecological thought), and I want to read more of his stuff.

On a less substantive note, this was a spoken dialogue before it was a book. I understand they did some editing, but I am left to conclude that both participants are *shockingly* articulate.

[Lori · Rating 4 out of 5]

Before reading this book, and from Murray's critiques of Deep Ecology and Dave Foreman I got the impression that he was an absolute maniac with deeply misanthropic views, and an even indiscriminately genocidal outlook on humanity. I guess I fell into the trap of taking Murray Bookchin's polemical writing a bit too close to heart. This debate was fascinating, it not only showed that Dave Foreman was a reasonable person who can properly react to criticism, internalize it, look into the past and see where his current ideas originate from, but also that he can change. Murray Bookchin, too, while revising, and clarifying his stance on Dave Foreman winds up holding a firm ground against the proclivities of Deep Ecology that Dave might have shed, but that are nonetheless there. Or, put bluntly, Murray is not swayed by the simple arguments of one person, nor can he view the rationality of one person as being a sign of the rationality of an entire movement.

The dialog itself is very polite, and insightful. Ideas explored in contrast with other ones oft time emerge clearer, and better rounded had they been explored in isolation. This book was helpful in clarifying aspects of social ecology that have remained unnoticed by me before.

What I particularly like is that both authors reject environmentalism, and a shallow, "pragmatic" approach to solving the ecological crisis (which has gotten much, much worse since this dialogue took place).

To conclude with a maxim stated by Murray Bookchin, which is in line with social ecological thought : "democratize the republic, radicalize the democracy!"

[Luke · Rating 4 out of 5]

I think I appreciate this most because of how it took a lot of the sense academic terms in which social ecology is usually discussed and laid them out in a very digestible conversational tone as explained by Bookchin himself. I also think there is incredible value in the discussion of what ecologists have in common rather than nitpicking at differences and refusing to even speak to one another as leftist groups are so prone to do. After reading both sides I am still firmly in the social ecology side of things but it was nice to hear Foreman further explain deep ecology and dispel some of the more misanthropic nodes.
Overall this is a really good introduction to two main camps within ecology for anyone interested in seeping their understanding of human/nature relations.

[Grant · Rating 3 out of 5]

This originally came out in 1990, which sort of makes me want to cry. A useful snapshot of where the thinking was at the time though I know it’s progressed far since then. I was very young in 1990 and every adult I knew back then was a fucking idiot.

[axegrinder · Rating 5 out of 5]

It's good.

I have the uncanny feeling that Dave had better arguments nonetheless. I see his approach as down to earth stuff. Let's do this shit; tie ourselves to a tree or put our body between wilderness and the bulldozer.

Murray's framework for social ecology seems more academic and less action focused. The goal is very board in scope and very far, far away; very utopian. Apart from a very theoretical and abstract talk, I feel lack of concrete solution or direction to the problem of environmental struggle here an now. So, I agree with Dave in several aspects of his critique, for example:

"My biggest worry about the limited perspective of a socially-oriented ecology is that it can all too easily become overwhelmingly social and insufficiently ecological. I see this tendency among many social ecologists when they argue that we should “work to reharmonize humanity with nature by reharmonizing the social relationships between human and human.” This strategic axiom appears to emphasize the traditional social concerns of the libertarian left over direct day-today struggles to defend wilderness, foster an ecological sensibility, or reconstruct our society’s interaction with the rest the social relationships between human beings are all resolved, an ecological sensibility will automaticly flower, and appropriate ecological changes in our society’s relationship to nature will be made."

This is a pretty good point. If we just wait until all human inequality is solved then we might wait forever and more. And even that might not even fix the ecological issue.

I also agree with Murray's critique of deep ecology's misanthropy. The contempt for humans is not the way forward.

All in all, both approaches could complement each other as Foreman is primarily a man of action and Murray's social ecology a nice theory for sustainable ecological communities. They are missing a piece and I think I know what that piece is. I think that both deep and social ecology, apart from their comfort zones, could benefit from a dialogue with a recent vegan animal rights movement, in particular with organic farming trend and permaculture that is on the rise. This definitely looks like a way forward, to fix the planet.

[Yoshiko Teraoka · Rating 5 out of 5]

Take note of this, Extinction Rebellion.

[Sydney · Rating 5 out of 5]

This as a good intro to deep ecology and eco-anarchism! I found it surprisingly inspiring; solidarity and collective action towards liberation don’t feel too far-fetched.

[D · Rating 4 out of 5]

Coming from a rural background, I wasn't hip to the history of eco-anarchist divisions, but this book not only helped fill me in, but also helped me clarify a few of my own ideas. Definitely respect both Bookchin and Foreman and would like to follow up more on both of them, though I'm not sure how much time I'll have for the finer points of Bookchin's detailed program.

Obviously the book is a bit dated, but misanthropy and lack of social analysis mentioned in the book are still prevalent, so I'd definitely recommend reading it through.

[Subvert · Rating 2 out of 5]

It's a short read and interesting enough. In a way it functions as a short introduction to social ecology and deep ecology. It kind of clarifies where the disagreements between two perspectives and how it seems to be mostly a matter of what you prioritize (with Foreman obviously focusing on the wilderness). But in the dialogue they mostly seem to agree with each other. Bookchin does obviously come out as the more sophisticated thinker and Foreman said some really stupid misanthropic and Malthusian stuff before the debate for which he apologizes.

[Soph Nova · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was published in 1991, and it feels like a higher level of political discussion and acknowledgement of the need for systemic transformation than most of what I hear in the climate movement in 2016; I just wish it were longer and offered more possibilities for what organizing within the 'unity in diversity' framework could look like.

[Jeff · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm not yet an EarthFirst!er. This was the first Bookchin I read.

[Edward · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very important debate. We need more of these on the left

[Mike · Rating 2 out of 5]

Out-Dated