406 words
Today is Earth Day, which has been an occasion to call for conservationism and environmental protection since it was first celebrated in America with bipartisan support in 1970, in response to the Santa Barbara oil spill of 1969. Although in recent decades, environmentalism has come to be identified with the political Left, taking stewardship of the Earth and seeking harmony in the relationship between man and nature has traditionally been an issue of the Right. Progressives, on the other hand, especially as manifested in Communism, have historically been proponents of mass industrialization, believing that it is as possible to transform the planet into a technological utopia as they consider it possible to alter human nature itself, and exhibited complete disregard for the destructive impact their projects had on the natural world.
Today, of course, despite some differences in their surface rhetoric, the mainstream Left and Right are united in viewing the Earth as nothing more than a resource to be exploited for economic growth, differing only in the details. But the True Right has always recognized that man must be understood within the context of the natural order as a whole, and that it is only by understanding and respecting our place within it that societies and individuals can truly grow and prosper without sacrificing their children’s futures.
We would like to draw your attention to the following articles which deal with these themes:
- Robert Stark Interviews Greg Johnson on Eco-Fascism (French version here, Czech version here)
- Howe Abbott-Hiss, “Beaver Mindset“
- Aquilonius, “The Problem with Foodie Cosmopolitanism“
- Algis Avizieni, “The Promise and the Reality of Globalization“
- Winston E. Bakewell, “Liberty and Justice for All: The Case for Canine Suffrage“
- Winston E. Bakewell, “The Real Cost of a Traffic Jam“
- Jim Baumer, “When Your Child Dies for a Cause“
- Jonathan Bowden, “The E Word: Eugenics & Environmentalism, Madison Grant & Lothrop Stoddard“
- Hubert Collins, “Ten Questions for Radical Environmentalist Derrick Jensen,” Part 1, Part 2
- Mark Deavin, “Henry Williamson: Nature’s Visionary“
- Diord Fionn, “Pentti Linkola’s Can Life Prevail?“
- Thomas Goodrich, “Peaceful, Pastoral, Philosophical: The American Indian as Naked Naturalist“
- Alex Graham, “Jorian Jenks: Farmer & Fascist“
- Alex Graham, “Profiles of Early Conservationists“
- Timo Hännikäinen, “Remembering Pentti Linkola“
- Richard Houck, “Greta and Left vs. Right Environmentalism“
- Buck Hunter, “The Great White Hunter“
- Greg Johnson, “Animal Justice?“
- Greg Johnson, “Heidegger & Ethnic Nationalism,” Part 1, Part 2
- Greg Johnson, “Savitri Devi, Traditionalism, and Nature Religion“
- Greg Johnson, “Toward a Right-Wing Environmentalism“
- Greg Johnson, “West-Coast White Nationalism“
- Greg Johnson, “Why Environmentalists Should Have Large Families” (Czech version here, French version here)
- Ted Kaczynski, “Ted Kaczynski’s ‘Ship of Fools’” (German version here)
- Jackson Klott, “Asleep at the Wheel of a Bulldozer“
- Pentti Linkola, “Bull’s Eye“
- Pentti Linkola, “Humanflood“
- Pentti Linkola, “Pentti Linkola : citations choisies“
- Matt Parrott, “Ship of Fools“
- J. J. Przybylski, “Butchering Cultured Meat“
- Savitri Devi, “Race, Economics, & Kindness: The Ideal World“
- Nicholas Slattery, “The Fundamental Trinity“
- Mitch Smith, “Being Bill McKibben“
- George P. Stimson, Jr., “Dimming Down America“
- George P. Stimson, Jr., “Living with Predators“
- George P. Stimson, Jr., “Open Season on Poachers“
- George P. Stimson, Jr., “Paper or Plastic? Neither.“
- George P. Stimson, Jr., “Radical Naturalism“
- William de Vere, “Ecofascism Resurgent“
- William de Vere, “Ecology Viewed from the Right“
- William de Vere, “The Great Replacement and the Great Outdoors: Demographic Change and the Future of American Wilderness“
- William de Vere, “Leftward Drift and Radical Ecology: The Tragedy of Earth First!” Part 1, Part 2
- William de Vere, “Living Monuments“
- William de Vere, “The Metaphysics of Integral Ecology” (French version here)
- William de Vere, “Midsummer“
- William de Vere, “The Politics of Meat: An Ecofascist Perspective“
- William de Vere, “The Purgative Fantasy“
- William de Vere, “The WASP in the Wilderness“
- Michael Walker, “Environmentalism & White Nationalism: A Shared Destiny“
- Michael Walker, “The Spotted Owl & the Elephant in the Room“
* * *
Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate $120 or more per year.
- First, donor comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
- Second, donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Non-donors will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days.
To get full access to all content behind the paywall, sign up here:
Paywall Gift Subscriptions
If you are already behind the paywall and want to share the benefits, Counter-Currents also offers paywall gift subscriptions. We need just five things from you:
- your payment
- the recipient’s name
- the recipient’s email address
- your name
- your email address
To register, just fill out this form and we will walk you through the payment and registration process. There are a number of different payment options.
7 comments
The fastest way to get into the environmental world is to simply feed birds in your backyard and/or an apartment balcony. Even if you’re high up, it only takes one bird to sample the seeds and start chirping — thus attracting others. Put a few potted plants on the balcony to be welcoming to birds. If you have a home with any amount of ‘dirt’, try to plant trees as well. Trees are the main source of oxygen on the planet (as are the seaweeds in the oceans), so do your part to add to it. Don’t be opposed to trees because they are a ‘mess to sweep under’, etc. You create quite a lot of messes for the world as well — clean it up! Adding any ‘green stuff” and more chirping birds will make you a true environmentalist, without having to join the shrieking crowds opposed to cars, oil and gas and coal, etc. Big green trees and cheeping birds are your ‘street creds’.
Advice I have followed, way before any serious environmental movement got started. The thing that bothers me in the area I live, is that people are on some kind of “kick” involving the removal of classic old shade trees and replacing them with almost exclusively with lousy rat infested palm trees.
Replacing any leafy shade tree, and replacing it with a palm, is an environmental mistake always. It’s true that shade trees need more water, but humans need more oxygen! A small palm in a landscape is OK, as long as it does not replace a shade tree. I was outraged seeing a large old Oak tree in Pasadena be cut down next door to a friend’s house, and then the entire lot was used to build ‘housing for the homeless’, which took up the whole lot and left no room for trees at all. Now, that’s a sin in my humble world.
I have 5 or 6 huge Ash trees in my yard in Southern California, and I offered to give seeds to the neighbors when they cut down several old pines. They said “No, thanks, they drop their leaves and seeds and are a mess to sweep up. ” The wife is Chinese, and they want everything to be pristine and super-neat. Well, nature ain’t neat! My trees are gorgeous, and their leaves on the ground hold in moisture. Oh, well — preaching to a wall again.
Well said, John Morgan.
Ecologism is a natural adjunct to the Right in all its forms except libertarianism, and especially, neoliberal capitalist ‘growth’ fanaticism. But it also poses challenges, conceptual as well as pragmatic. Our Right is tribalist, which likewise arises out of our understanding of man’s embeddedness in nature. One element of ideological tribalism is its recognition not merely of the truth of genetic similarity theory, but also of what can be called “genetic conflict theory”. Genetically/racially diverse societies will always be less cohesive and thus more conflict-ridden than homogeneous ones.
But while this commonsense notion obviously applies intranationally (and so is a bedrock reason for our belief in universal ethnonational separation and political self-determination), it also applies internationally, when considering diversity in the context of the whole planet. Even in a world of universal racio-national homogeneity, there will still be conflicts, including ones over global environmental management. We white nationalists wish to ensure that a) our race survives these likely future conflicts, and that b) insofar as we are the world’s most virtuous race, including the one easily documented as being the most committed to environmental good stewardship, our race should always be the most militarily powerful, or at least disproportionately powerful. It may well be that the very survival of life on Earth is contingent upon white power sufficient to impose and enforce some minimum of global environmental preservation.
The paradox wrt rightist ecology is that military power ultimately depends upon economic productivity, including continuous technological creativity, and such productivity can be demonstrated, both deductively and empirically, to be maximized by (and perhaps even dependent upon) a capitalist economy. We must ‘thread the needle’, developing a “econational capitalism”, one which best balances capitalist incentives to new wealth creation (so as to fund our military power, which is fundamentally nothing more than a subset applicable to homo sapiens of the yet larger, neverending “evolutionary arms race”) while minimizing ecological degradation.
I can’t believe that as recently as 10 years ago I would listen to talk radio and the likes of Mark Levin. That shrill creep seemed obsessed with the EPA’s rules about wetlands. The jerk apparently thought “liberty” meant being allowed to fill in all wetlands on your property. What’s so bad about wetlands, as opposed to your preferred desert, you shrieking @#$%?
I liked Mark Levin until last Sunday’s (4/24/22) rant against the word “Nationalism”. I didn’t get to hear all of it because guests arrived, so if someone else heard it, let’s put it out for discussion. Overall, he has a lot of good ideas, but that really shocked me. I’m waiting to hear clarification.
The jerk apparently thought “liberty” meant being allowed to fill in all wetlands on your property.
That is exactly what LIBERTY and PROPERTY mean (I would argue objectively, but undeniably within the historic American tradition of law and property rights). What don’t you understand about that?
“Wetlands” is an excuse ecosocialists use to steal people’s hard-earned property. Happens all the time in this corrupt country. You want to protect (yet more) “wetlands”? Declare an area a new National Park (and if taking people’s property to do so, compensate them at fair market value). EPA doesn’t want to pay, so they just go ahead and steal the value (if not title) of your property.
I dislike Levin’s nonstop shilling for Zionism, but good for him on issues like this.
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.