You are here

Welcome to Seattle, WTO: Judi Bari debates Karl Marx

By Walt Sheasby, November 28, 1999

The following "debate" is actually a composite of quotations by Judi Bari from Revolutionary Ecology and Karl Marx from various sources cut and pasted into what appears to be a dialog. While it's impossible to say whether or not Marx and Bari would have ever debated or dialogued thusly, it is likely the two would have agreed on much, as they seem to do here.  

Moderator: Welcome to our dialogue. Today our guests are the very respected Judi Bari, who lived from Nov. 7, 1949 to March 2, 1997, and Karl Marx, whose lifetime began May 5, 1818 and ended on March 13, 1883. Ms. Bari was an ecological activist in the Earth First! organization and because of that her life was almost ended by a bomb attack. She survived that, but later died at age 48 of breast cancer. Dr. Marx is easily recognized as one of the most important figures in the history of economics and socialism, although many of his ideas remain unknown, particularly in the area of political ecology, as distinguished from political economy.

Our topic for this dialogue today is, in fact, Revolutionary Ecology, and we will allow our guests to explain in their own words how they understand this approach, and where they might agree or disagree. My own role will be only to pose some questions and give each the opportunity to respond.

To begin, Judi Bari, can you tell us about the terms you use in describing your philosophy? There seem to be a number of concepts that are often counterposed, like Deep Ecology versus Eco-socialism, or Naturalism/Humanism versus Biocentrism. Can you clarify your own orientation?

Judi Bari: Deep ecology, or biocentrism, is the belief that nature does not exist to serve humans. Rather, humans are part of nature, one species among many. All species have a right to exist for their own sake, regardless of their usefulness to humans. And biodiversity is a value in itself, essential for the flourishing of both human and non-human life. (1)

Moderator: Dr. Marx, you've also stressed that humans are part of nature and that this totality is constantly being transformed by interaction that you call 'Metabolism.' What do you mean by that?

Karl Marx: The labour the necessary condition for effective exchange of matter between man and Nature; it is the ever-lasting Nature-imposed condition of human existence. (2) The great majority of things regarded as products of nature, e.g. plants and animals, are the result in the form in which they are now utilized by human beings and produced anew, of a previous transformation effected by means of human labour over many generations under human control, during which their form and substance have changed. (3)

Moderator: Well, I take it that would even apply to hunting and gathering societies, with their tool-making, reworking of stone knives, or weaving of straw baskets, all the way to modern technology.

Karl Marx: The development of human labour capacity is displayed in particular in the development of the 'means of labour' or 'instruments of production.' It displays, namely, the degree to which man has heightened the impact of his direct labour on the natural world through the interposition for his working purposes of a nature already ordered, regulated and subjected to his will as a conductor. (4)

Therefore, when alienated labour tears from man the object of his production,, it also tears from him his species-life, the real objectivity of his species and turns the advantage he has over animals into a disadvantage in that his inorganic body, nature, is torn from him....It alienates man from his own body, nature exterior to him, and his intellectual being, his human essence. (5)

Moderator: I take it that this concept of nature as our inorganic body and the idea of an alienation of labor and nature are starting points for your very elaborate critique of political economy, which extends to ten or more volumes covering thousands of pages. Such a life's work is quite an accomplishment.

Karl Marx: ''Grau, teurer Freund, ist alle Theorie, Und gruen des Lebens goldner Baum.'' (6)

Moderator: I recognize that verse from Goethe's Faust, one of your favorite lines, as it was Hegel's also: ''My friend, all theory is gray, and only the golden tree of life is green. '' (7)

But let me ask Judi Bari how she describes the theoretical character of biocentric ecology. Despite Goethe, can theory be called green?

Judi Bari: These principles, I believe, are not just another political theory. Biocentrism is a law of nature that exists independently of whether humans recognize it or not. It doesn't matter whether we view the world in a human-centered way. Nature still operates in a biocentric way. And the failure of modern society to acknowledge this -as we attempt to subordinate all of nature to human use -has led us to the brink of collapse of the earth's life support systems.

Karl Marx: No natural laws can be done away with. What can change in historically different circumstances is only the form in which these laws assert themselves. (8)

Moderator: Judi, the Norwegian philosopher Arne Naess is credited with making a distinction twenty-five years ago between what he called the Shallow and the Deep views of Ecology. It's been called one of the first major papers on environmental ethics. What is your view? (9)

Judi Bari: Biocentrism is not a new theory, and it wasn't invented by Arne Naess. It is ancient wisdom, expressed in such sayings as 'the earth does not belong to us: we belong to the earth.' But in the context of today's industrial society, biocentrism is profoundly revolutionary, challenging the system to its core.

Moderator: In 1854 when Si'al, who is known as Sealth, Chief Seattle, suggested that reverence, he was, he said, expressing a traditional belief, one that has often been paraphrased since it was made known in 1887: ''Whatever befalls the earth befalls the sons of the earth. If men spit upon the ground, they spit on themselves. This we know -the earth does not belong to man, man belongs to the earth. All things are connected like the blood which unites one family....Man did not weave the web of life; he is merely a strand in it. Whatever he does to the web, he does to himself.'' (10) As we learn more about that communal, ecological wisdom, the implications seem profoundly revolutionary.

Judi, in your view, how do you feel biocentrism contradicts capitalism?

Judi Bari: The capitalist system is in direct conflict with the natural laws of biocentrism. Capitalism, first of all, is based on the principle of private property -of certain humans 'owning' the earth for the purpose of exploiting it for profit. At an earlier stage, capitalists even believed they could own other humans. But just as slavery has been discredited in the mores of today's dominant worldview, so do the principles of biocentrism discredit the concept that humans can own the earth.

Moderator: This moral principle, often called a ''Land Ethic,'' has been an axiom of the ecological vision for half a century, ever since Aldo Leopold's Sand County Almanac in 1949. (11)

What is your view, Dr. Marx? Do you agree with that basic ecological vison?

Karl Marx: From the standpoint of a higher socio-economic formation, the private property of particular individuals in the earth will appear just as absurd as the property of one man in other men. Even an entire society, a nation, or all simultaneously existing societies taken together, are not the owner of the earth. They are simply its possessor, its beneficiaries, and have to bequeath it in an improved state to succeeding generations, as 'good heads of the household.' (12)

Moderator: One of the ramifications of treating the bounty of Nature as merely so many commodities is that there is no real social control, whether it is a state bureaucracy or a giant corporation that has concentrated control. For instance, a huge holding company based on Wall Street, Maxxam Corp., can enforce its right to log off the last remaining giant trees that have not been preserved.

Judi Bari: How can corporate raider Charles Hurwitz claim to 'own' the 2000-year old redwoods of Headwaters Forest, just because he shuffled a few papers and traded them for a junk bond debt? This concept is absurd. Hurwitz is a mere blip in the lives of these ancient trees. Although he may have the power to destroy them, he does not have the right.

Karl Marx: This power of the Egyptian and Asiatic kings and priests or the Etruscan theocrats in the ancient world has in bourgeois society passed to capital and therewith to the capitalists. (13)

''Apres moi le deluge!'' is the watchword of every capitalist and of every capitalist nation. (14)

Moderator: I understand that two of the tall Sequoia Gigantea trees were named after Karl Marx and Frederick Engels by the Kaweah utopian colony in 1885, although later they were officially renamed for Generals Sherman and Grant. (15)

And John Muir had been so inspired by the Sequoias in Autumn 1875 he said, ''Talk of immortality!'' and wondered, ''what man will do with the mountains...Will he cut down all the trees to make ships and houses?'' (16) Environmentalists, of course, were able to preserve some of the big trees through nationalization and a park system.

But let me ask Judi Bari, what is the legal basis being used now for challenging the timber companies who are logging the remaining privately-owned ancient forests?

Judi Bari: One of the best weapons of U.S. environmentalists in our battle to save places like Headwaters Forest is the (now itself endangered) Endangered Species Act. This law, and other laws that recognize public trust values such as clean air, clean water, and protection of threatened species, are essentially an admission that the laws of private property do not correspond to the laws of nature. You cannot do whatever you want on your own property without affecting surrounding areas, because the earth is interconnected, and nature does not recognize human boundaries. Seal off the borders? What borders?

Moderator: Well, Dr. Marx, do you see nationalization of natural resources as the answer?

Karl Marx: Where the state is itself a capitalist producer, as in the exploitation of mines, forests, etc., its product is a 'commodity' and hence possesses the specific character of every other commodity. (17)

The development of civilization and industry in general has always shown itself so active in the destruction of forests that everything that has been done for their conservation and production is completely insignificant in comparison. (18)

Judi Bari: Even beyond private property, though, capitalism conflicts with biocentrism around the very concept of profit. Profit consists of taking out more than you put in. This is certainly contrary to the fertility cycles of nature, which depend on a balance of give and take. But more important is the question of where this profit is actually taken from.

Karl Marx: In fact the rule of the capitalist over the worker is nothing but the rule of the independent 'conditions of labour' over the worker, conditions that have made themselves independent of him. (19)

Judi Bari: According to Marxist theory, profit is stolen from the workers when the capitalists pay them less than the value of what they produce. The portion of the value of the product that the capitalist keeps, rather than pay to the workers, is called surplus value. The amount of surplus value that the capitalist can keep varies with the organization of the workers, and with the level of their privilege within the world laborpool. But the working class can never be paid the full value of their labor under capitalism, because the capitalist class exists by extracting surplus value from the products of their labor.

Karl Marx: In fact, these bourgeois economists instinctively and rightly saw that it was very dangerous to penetrate too deeply into the burning question of the origin of surplus value. (20)

Judi Bari: Although I basically agree with this analysis, I think there is one big thing missing. I believe that part of the value of a product comes not just from the labor put into it, but also from the natural resources used to make the product. And I believe that surplus value (i.e., profit) is not just stolen from the workers, but also from the earth itself.

Karl Marx: Labour is NOT THE SOURCE of all wealth. Nature is just as much the source of use-values (and it is surely of such that material wealth consists!) as labour, which itself is only the manifestation of a force of nature, human labour power. (21)

When man engages in production, he can only proceed as nature does herself, i.e. he can only change the form of the materials. Furthermore, even in this work of modification he is constantly helped by natural forces. Labour is therefore not the only source of material wealth, i.e. of the use values it produces. As William Petty says, labour is the father of material wealth, the earth is its mother. (22)

Judi Bari: A value has been extracted. If human production and consumption is done within the natural limits of the earth's fertility, then the supply is indeed endless. But that cannot happen under capitalism, because the capitalist class exists by extracting profit not only from the workers, but also from the earth.

Karl Marx: Moreover, all progress of capitalist agriculture is a progress in the art, not only of robbing the worker, but of robbing the soil; all progress in increasing the fertility of the soil for a given time is a progress toward ruining the more long-lasting sources of that fertility. (23)

The first effects of cultivation are useful, but in the end it lays the land waste owing to deforestation, etc.

The conclusion is that cultivation when it progresses spontaneously and is not 'consciously controlled' ...leaves deserts behind it Persia, Mesopotamia, Greece. (22)

Moderator: One could cite many other examples of climate change resulting from the destruction of rainforests even in modern times.

Judi, in regard to environmental degradation, what do you view as the most important source today?

Judi Bari: Modern day corporations are the very worst manifestation of this sickness. A small business may survive on profits, but at least its basic purpose is to provide sustenance for the owners, who are human beings with a sense of place in their communities. But a corporation has no purpose for its existence nor any moral guide to its behavior, other than to make profits. And to-day's global corporations are beyond the control of any nation or government. In fact, the government is in the service of the corporation, its armies poised to defend their profits around the world, and its secret police ready to infiltrate and disrupt any serious resistance at home.

Karl Marx: Thus, ''tout est pour le mieux dans le meilleur des mondes possibles.'' (25)

Moderator: Voltaire's 'Candide,' a motto for the new global age: ''Everything for the best in the best of all possible worlds.'' (26)

Judi, let me ask your view of free enterprise defenders who sell a lot of books using the word ecology, like Paul Hawken, who has written a best-seller on 'The Ecology of Commerce.' And of course, you must run into many people who think all the answers are in books like Albert Gore's 'Earth in the Balance.' You have said that you stand for a 'revolutionary ecology,' not a piecemeal change within the system. Why?

Judi Bari: In other words, this system cannot be reformed. It is based on the destruction of the earth and the exploitation of the people. There is no such thing as green capitalism, and marketing cutesy rainforest products will not bring back the ecosystems that capitalism must destroy to make its profits. This is why I believe that ecologists must be revolutionaries.

Karl Marx: Just as plants live from the earth, and animals live from the plants or plant-eating animals, so does the part of society which possesses free time, DISPOSABLE time not absorbed in the direct production of subsistence, live from the surplus labour of the workers. Wealth is therefore DISPOSABLE time. (27)

The political economists like to conceive this relation as a ''natural relation'' or a ''divine institution.'' (28)

The essence of bourgeois society consists precisely in this, that a priori there is no conscious social regulation of production. (29)

Moderator: Let me pose the question that seems to many as selfevident: Does biocentrism contradict communism? It seems, regardless of what Dr. Marx said or wrote on the subject, there is a lengthy period in the 20th Century when the idea of biocentrism was directly violated by so-called 'Communism' in its drive to build an industrial-military machine under totalitarian control. And these political rulers did call themselves 'Marxists.'

Karl Marx: Devil take them! (30)

Judi Bari: As you can probably tell, my background in revolutionary theory comes from Marxism, which I consider to be a brilliant critique of capitalism. But as to what should be implemented in capitalism's place, I don't think Marxism has shown us the answer. One of the reasons for this, I believe, is that communism, socialism, and all other leftist ideologies that I know of speak only about redistributing the spoils of the earth more evenly among classes of humans. They do not even address the relationship of the society to the earth. Or rather, they assume that it will stay the same as it is under capitalism -that of a gluttonous consumer -and that the purpose of the revolution is to find a more efficient and egalitarian way to produce and distribute consumer goods.

Moderator: To those of us approaching the turn of the century, it would seem that the so-called Marxist regimes paid scant attention to Marx's concern with nature.

Judi Bari: This total disregard of nature as a life force, rather than just a source of raw materials, allowed Marxist states to rush to industrialize without even the most meager environmental safeguards.

Karl Marx: Tout ce que se sais, c'est que je ne pas Marxiste, moi! (31)

Moderator: I understand Dr. Marx. What is quite certain is that you are not a Marxist.!

But, Judi Bari, what do you think was the consequence of the attitude that supposed followers of Marx took to nature in places like Russia and Eastern Europe?

Judi Bari: This has resulted in such noted disasters as the meltdown of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant, the oil spill in the Arctic Ocean, and the ongoing liquidation of the fragile forests of Siberia. It has left parts of Russia and Eastern Europe with such a toxic legacy that even the rate of human fertility has slowed.

Moderator: Let me ask both of you, since many ecological socialists today, following the work of James O'Connor, distinguish, in a dialectical sense, a first contradiction between capital and labor (even under the statist systems as well as private capital), and a second contradiction between capital and nature in today's world. (32)

What do you each think of this distinction?

Judi Bari: Marx stated that the primary contradiction in industrial society is the contradiction between capital and labor. I believe these disasters show the primary contradiction is between industrial society and the earth.

Karl Marx: We have considered the act of estranging practical activity, labour, in two of its aspects.

(1) The relation of the worker to the 'product of labour' as an alien object exercising power over him.

This relation is at the same time the relation to the sensuous external world, to the objects of nature, as an alien world inimically opposed to him.

(2) The relation of labour to the 'act of production' within the labour process....Here we have 'self-estrangement' as previously we had the estrangement of the 'thing.' (33)

Moderator: It would appear, Dr. Marx, that this consideration has not been a prominent element in the socialism of the generations that followed you, with perhaps a few exceptions.

Karl Marx: ''J'ai seme' des dragons et j'ai recolte' des puces!'' (34)

Moderator: Ouch! Your verdict on your imitators echoes your poet friend Heinrich Heine's exasperation: ''I have sown Dragon's teeth and reaped only fleas!''

Judi Bari: But even though socialism has so far failed to take ecology into account, I do not think it is beyond reform, as is capitalism. One of the principles of socialism is 'production for use, not for profit.' Therefore, the imbalance is not as built in under socialism as it is under capitalism, and I could envision a form of socialism that would not destroy the earth. But it would be unlike Marx's industrial model. Ecological socialism, among other things, would have to deal with the issue of centralism.

Moderator: Dr. Marx, you have written extensively about the metabolism of society and the earth, and the negative effects of urban capitalism and industrial agriculture on both the human and physical environment. The antagonism of urban and rural development seems the most corrosive element.

Karl Marx: The foundation of every division of labour which has attained a certain degree of development, and has been brought about by the exchange of commodities, is the separation of town from country.

The capitalist mode of production completes the disintegration of the primitive familial union which bound agriculture and manufacture together when they were both at an undeveloped and childlike stage. But at the same time it creates the material conditions for a new and higher synthesis.... Capitalist production collects the population together in great disturbs the metabolic interaction between man and the earth....But by destroying the circumstances surrounding that compels its systematic restoration as a regulative law of social production, and in a form adequate to the full development of the human race.

It is very characteristic that the enthusiastic apologists of the factory system have nothing more damning to urge against a general organization of labour in society than that it would turn the whole of society into a factory. (35)

Judi Bari: The Marxist idea of a huge body politic relating to some central planning authority presupposes (1) authoritarianism of some sort, and (2) the use of mass production technologies that are inherently destructive to the earth and corrosive to t he human spirit.

Moderator: Dr. Marx, what was it you wrote about the Communard government in France in 1871?

Karl Marx: Not only municipal administration, but the whole initiative hitherto exercised by the state was laid into the hands of the commune.

Instead of deciding once in three or five years which members of the ruling class were to misrepresent the people in Parliament, universal suffrage was to serve the people, constituted in Communes.... (36)

Moderator: Dr. Marx, despite your opposition to the state, it does seem that a repressive bureaucracy and top-down command economy became quite extreme and widespread about fifty years after your death. Is the statist machine a threat as it was in the past? In your time, you discussed Bonapartism, in which, well, how did you put it?

Karl Marx: The struggle seems to be settled in such a way that all classes, equally impotent and equally mute, fall on their knees before the rifle butt....All revolutions perfected this machine instead of smashing it. (37)

Moderator: Is there an alternative, in your view, Judi Bari?

Judi Bari: Ecological socialism would mean organizing human societies in a manner that is compatible with the way nature is organized. And I believe the natural order of the world is bioregionalism, not statism.

Karl Marx: It is by no means the aim of the workers, who have got rid of the narrow mentality of humble subjects, to set the state free.

Freedom consists in converting the state from an organ superimposed upon society into one completely subordinate to it, and today, too, the forms of state are more or less free to the extent that they restrict the ''freedom of the state.'' (38)

Moderator: More and more people are beginning to see that a life driven by commodity consumption and advertising is not a prescription for a satisfying future or individual development. How do each of you assess this stimulation of wants beyond real needs?

Judi Bari: Modern industrial society robs us of community with one another and community with the earth. This creates a great longing within us, which we are taught to fill with consumer goods. But consumer goods, beyond those needed for basic comfort and survival, are not really what we crave. So our appetite is insatiable, and we turn to more and more efficient and dehumanizing methods of production to make more and more goods that do not satisfy us.

Karl Marx: Incidentally...although every capitalist demands that his workers should save, he means only his own workers, because they relate to him as workers; and by no means does this apply to the remainder of workers, because these relate to him as consumers. In spite of all the pious talk of frugality, he therefore searches for all possible ways of stimulating them to consume, by making his commodities more attractive, by filling their ears with babble about new needs. (39)

Judi Bari: If workers really had control of the factories (and I say this as a former factory worker), they would start by smashing the machines and finding a more human way to decide what we need and how to produce it. So to the credo 'production for use, not for profit,' ecological socialism would add, 'production for need, not for greed.'

Moderator: Judi, what does this mean for the movement?

Judi Bari: The fact that deep ecology is a revolutionary philosophy is one of the reasons Earth First! was targeted for disruption and annihilation by the FBI. The fact that we did not recognize it as revolutionary is one of the reasons we were so unprepared for the magnitude of the attack. If we are to continue, not just Earth First!, but the entire ecology movement must adjust to the profound changes that are needed to bring society into balance with nature.

Karl Marx: Someday the worker must sieze political power...if he is not to lose heaven on earth, like the old Christians who neglected and despised politics. But we have not asserted that the ways to achieve the goal are everywhere the same. You know that the institutions, mores, and traditions of various countries must be taken into consideration.... (40)

Moderator: How can the struggle be made more effective, Judi?

Judi Bari: One way we can do this is to broaden our focus. Of course, sacred places must be preserved, and it is entirely appropriate for an ecology movement to center on protecting irreplaceable wilderness areas. But to define our movement as being concerned with 'wilderness only,' as Earth First did in the 1980's, is self defeating. You cannot seriously address the destruction of wilderness without addressing the society that is destroying it. It's about time for the ecology movement (and I'm not just talking about Earth First! here) stop considering itself as separate from the social justice movement. The same power that manifests itself as resource extraction in the countryside manifests itself as racism, classism, and human exploitation in the city. The ecology movement must recognize that we are just one front in a long, proud history of resistance.

Moderator: Judi, there are some green groups that either deny they are historically rooted in the Left or consider labor struggles as part of the ''old paradigm.'' What is your outlook?

Judi Bari: A revolutionary ecology movement must also organize among poor and working people. With the exception of the toxics movement and the native land rights movement, most U.S. environmentalists are white and privileged. This group is too invested in the system to pose it much of a threat. A revolutionary ideology in the hands of privileged people can indeed bring about some destruction and change in the system.

But a revolutionary ideology in the hands of working people can bring that system to a halt. For it is the working people who have their hands on the machinery. And only by stopping the machinery of destruction can we ever hope to stop this madness.

Moderator: Judi, you clearly view the working class as potentially a revolutionary subject, unlike the theorists rooted in the New Left, like Murray Bookchin, who think this is mythology, a ''gross misjudgment of the proletariat's destiny.'' (41)

Judi Bari: How can it be that we have neighborhood movements foused on the disposal of toxic wastes, for example, but we don't have a workers' movement to stop the production of toxics? It is only when the factory workers refuse to make the stuff, it is only when the loggers refuse to cut the ancient trees, that we can ever hope for real and lasting change. This system cannot be stopped by force. It is violent and ruthless beyond the capacity of any people's resistance movement. The only way I can even imagine stopping it is through massive noncooperation.

Karl Marx: Citizens, let us think of the basic principle of the International: Solidarity. Only when we have established this life-giving principle on a sound basis among the numerous workers of all countries will we attain the great final goal which we have set ourselves. (42)

Judi Bari: So let's keep blocking those bulldozers and hugging those trees. And let's focus our campaign on the global corporations that are really at fault. But we have to begin placing our actions in a larger context. And we must continue this discussion to develop a workable theory of revolutionary ecology.

Karl Marx: We do recognize our brave friend, Robin Goodfellow, the old mole that can work in the earth so fast, that worthy pioneer the Revolution. (43)

Moderator: Well, the good fellow I recognize as that ''shrewd and knavish sprite'' called Puck in William Shakespeare's 'A Midsummer Night's Dream,' and the old mole from 'Hamlet' could well serve as symbol of the 'radicalism' you both express, since that word means 'going to the roots' of the problem. But let me remind you two about Hamlet's next verse: ''There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.'' (44)

This has been a most enlightening talk between the two of you. Do you want to leave one last word?

Judi Bari: Stand strong and keep up the fight. Don't let the bastards get you down! (45)

Karl Marx: When the International was formed we expressly formulated the battle cry: 'The emancipation of the working classes must be achieved by the working classes themselves.' (46) They have a world to win. Workers, of the world, unite! (47)


1. Judi Bari (1997) 'Revolutionary Ecology,' from Capitalism, Nature, Socialism: A Journal of Socialist Ecology (Vol 8, No. 2, Issue Thirty, June 1997), pp. 145-149. All but the last quotation are taken in existing order from this article.

2. Karl Marx (1977) Selected Writings, edited and translated by David McLellan, Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 460. Hereafter referred to as SW.

3. Karl Marx, Frederick Engels: Collected Works, New York, International Publishers: Vol. 30 (1988) p. 57. Hererafter cited as CW followed by volume and page number. Compare also SW, p. 458.

4. CW, Vol. 30 (1988) p. 56

5. SW, pp. 82-83.

6. Johann Wolgang Von Goethe (n.d.) Faust: Eine Tragoedie von Goethe, Erster Teil, Leipzig, Druck and Verlag von Philipp Reclam jun., p. 57.

7. Johann Wolgang Von Goethe (1957) Faust: Part I, New York: New Drections Paperbook, p. 64.

8. Marx to Kugelman, July 11, 1868, in SW, p. 524.

9. Arne Naess (1973) ''The Shallow and the Deep, Long Range Ecology Movement,'' Inquiry (Oslo, Norway) 16: pp. 95-100, in George Sessions, Editor, (1995) Deep Ecology for the 21st Century, Boston and London: Shambhala, pp. 151-56.

10. Chief Seattle, paraphrased in Dr. Norman Myers (1984) Gaia: An Atlas of Planet Management, Anchor Press Doubleday & Co., Garden City, New York, p. 159,

11. Aldo Leopold (1968) A Sand County Almanac, London, Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 201-225. ''We abuse land because we regard it as a commodity belonging to us. When we see land as a community to which we belong, we may begin to use it with love and respect. There is no other way for land to survive the impact of mechanized man, nor for us to reap from it the esthetic harvest it is capable, under science, of contributing to culture.'' (p. viii)

12. Karl Marx (1976 ) Capital: A Critique of Political Economy, Vol. 3, London, Penguin Books. Hereafter referred to as C, followed by volume and page number. Vol. 3 p. 910.

13. CW, Vol. 30, p. 260.

14. C, Vol. 1, p. 381.

15. Robert V, Hine (1983 California's Utopian Colonies, Berkeley: University of California Press, pp. 84, 90.

16. Frederick Turner (1985) Rediscovering America: John Muir in His Time and Ours, San Francisco: Sierra Club Books, p. 232. 13. CW, Vol. 30, p. 260.

17. Karl Marx (1972) ''Marginal Notes on Adolph Wagner's Lehrbuch der politischen Oekonomie,'' Theoretical Practice, No. 4 (Spring 1972), p. 51.

18. C, Vol. 2, p. 322.

19. Appendix: Results of the Immediate Process of Production in C, Vol 1, p. 989.

20. C. Vol. 1, pp. 651-52

21. Karl Marx And Friedrich Engels: Basic Writings on Politics & Philosophy (1959), Edited by Lewis S. Feuer, Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Co. Anchor Books, p. 112.

21. SW, p. 427; C, Vol. 1, pp. 133-34.

22. C, Vol. 1, p. 638

23. Letter, Marx to Engels, March 25, 1868, CW, Vol. 42, p. 358

25. SW, p. 468.

26. Ray Redman, Editor (1977) The Portable Voltaire, New York: Penguin Books, p. 252.

27. CW, Vol. 30, p. 192.

28. Ibid., p. 205.

29. Marx to Kugelman, July 11, 1868, in SW, p. 525.

30. Marx to Engels, in David McLellan, (1973) Karl Karl Marx: His Life and Thought, New York: Harper & Row, p. 443.

31. Quoted in Frederick Engels to Paul and Laura Lafargue, Aug. 27, 1890, Correspondance, II, Paris, Editions Sociales, 1956, p. 407. Hereafter cited as Correspondance, II.

32. James O'Connor (1998) Natural Causes: Essays in Ecological Marxism, New York and London: The Guilford Press, pp. 158-77. Also ''The Second Contradiction of Capitalism," Capitalism, Nature, Socialism, Issue 1, October 1988.

33. CW, Vol. 3, p. 275.

34. Correspondance, II, p. 407.

35. C, Vol. 1, p. 472; pp. 637-38, p. 477.

36. SW, p. 542-43.

37. SW, pp. 315-16.

38. SW, p. 564.

39. Karl Marx (1973) Grundrisse: Foundations of the Critique of Political Economy (Rough Draft), Middlesex, Eng., Penguin Books, Ltd. (Hereafter referred to as G), p. 287.

40. 42. Karl Marx (1971) On Revolution, Edited by Saul K. Padover, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., p 64.

41. Murray Bookchin (1980) Toward an Ecological Society, Montreal: Black Rose Books, p. 124. See Alan Rudy and Andrew Light (1996) ''Social Ecology and Social Labor: A Consideration and Critique of Murray Bookchin,'' in David Macauley, Ed., Minding Nature: The Philosophers of Ecology, New York and London: The Guilford Press, 1996, pp. 318-42

42. Karl Marx (1971) On Revolution, op. cit., p 65.

43. SW, p. 339.

44. William Shakespeare (1977) A Midsummer's Night Dream, New York, The Viking Press, p. 24; Hamlet, New York, W.W. Norton & Co, Inc., p. 24.

45. Judi Bari to Dennis Bernstein at KPFA, March 1, 1997.

46. CW, Vol. 45, p. 408. Marx and Engels to Bebel and others (circular letter) September 17-18, 1879. Marx Engels, Selected Correspondence (1975) Moscow, Progress Publishers.

47. SW, p. 246.

The Fine Print I:

Disclaimer: The views expressed on this site are not the official position of the IWW (or even the IWW’s EUC) unless otherwise indicated and do not necessarily represent the views of anyone but the author’s, nor should it be assumed that any of these authors automatically support the IWW or endorse any of its positions.

Further: the inclusion of a link on our site (other than the link to the main IWW site) does not imply endorsement by or an alliance with the IWW. These sites have been chosen by our members due to their perceived relevance to the IWW EUC and are included here for informational purposes only. If you have any suggestions or comments on any of the links included (or not included) above, please contact us.

The Fine Print II:

Fair Use Notice: The material on this site is provided for educational and informational purposes. It may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. It is being made available in an effort to advance the understanding of scientific, environmental, economic, social justice and human rights issues etc.

It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have an interest in using the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. The information on this site does not constitute legal or technical advice.