Forthcoming in Environmental Values. ©2019 the White Horse ... · contestable’ concepts (see Koselleck, 2002), Freeden (2003:51) points to a metaphor of the modular units of furniture

Forthcoming in Environmental Values. ©2019 the White Horse Press www.whpress.co.uk

0

BEYONDECOFASCISM?FARRIGHTECOLOGISM(FRE)ASAFRAMEWORKFOR

FUTUREINQUIRIES

BalšaLubarda

DepartmentofEnvironmentalSciencesandPolicy

CentralEuropeanUniversity

Email:[email protected]

ABSTRACT

Theenduringandconsistentriseofthefarrighthasenableditsrepresentativestoaffect

environmentaldebatesatalargerscale.Althoughsuchincursionsareoftenlabeled‘eco-

fascist',thetermitselftermmaybeinsufficienttoaccountforthecomplexityofthis

intersection.Buildinguponexistingattemptstoorganizesuchdiscoursesinacoherent

sub-ideologicalset,‘farrightecologism’(FRE)issuggestedasanoverarchingnotion,

derivingitsmorphologyfromfascism,conservatism,aswellasnational-populism.

Therefore,valuesemanatingfromthesestrands,suchasnaturalism,spirituality,

mysticism,authority,organicism,autarky,nostalgiaandManicheanism,constituteFRE

asaheuristicdevice.\

KEYWORDS

Farright;ecologism;fascism;conservatism;nationalism

Thetwomanifestosauthoredbytheperpetratorsofrecentterroristattacksin

ChristchurchandElPasorevealedthattheideasof‘ecofascism’remainconspicuousin

thefarright1imaginary.Thismayhavetakenabackthosewhofindtheconcernforthe

1 I use the term ‘far right' to refer to radical and extreme nationalist actors, including (but not limited to) right-wing populists, (neo) Nazis, ethnopluralists, identitarians, white supremacists, alt-right, and clero-fascists. There is a number of works on the far right or its different aspects (to name a few: Eatwell, 1996; Carter, 2005, 2018; Mudde, 1995, 2000, 2011; Rydgren, 2017),


1

naturalenvironment2incompatiblewithsuchworldviews,buttheselinkshavealong

tradition.Althoughitisgenerallycontendedthattheright-wing(includingthefarright)

ishostiletotheenvironmentalagenda(Krange,Kaltenborn,Hultman,2018;Lockwood,

2018;McCrightandDunlap,2000),greenthoughtwasoriginallyimbuedwith

romanticist,conservativeandevennationalisttropes(Ditt,1996:1-28;Dobson,2016).

However,ecofascismitselfmaybeinadequatetocapturethebreadthofdiscourseson

thenaturalenvironmentcomingfromthefarrightactors,rangingfrompopulistto

radicalandextreme.Thenationalistsentimentsinformingfarrightenvironmental

discoursedonotnecessarilyentaileschatologicalfascistinclinationsnordothe

conservativetropesofstewardshipandresponsibility,alsopresentinsomefarright

discourses,pointtoecofascism.Moreover,studiesofthefarrightconvergencewith

ecologicalthoughtaremanifold,goingbeyondecofascism.3

Departingfromthisinsufficiencyofecofascism,bothconceptuallyand

methodologically,Iaskwhether(how)thenexusoffarrightandecologismcanbe

groupedinacoherentframeworkforprospectiveempiricalinquiries.Apartfromits

methodologicalcontribution,thisarticleaimstoelucidateseriousconceptualconcerns

overthe‘unacceptablelackofprecisionwhichmakesecofascisman‘embitteredtaunt’

(Griffin,1991:2).Thisnotwithstanding,discardingthelabel‘ecofascism’as‘the’

signifierforthefarrightdiscursiveengagementwithnaturalenvironmentinthefuture

isstillveryunlikely,givenitspopularityinbroader(particularlynon-scholarly)circles.

Yet,foran(sub)ideologytooccupytherequiredspacebetween‘deductiverationalism

andadhocempiricism’(Freeden,1996:18),itneedstoretainthebalancebetweenits

morphology-internalconsistencyandthedevelopmentsinthesocialworld.Apartfrom

theinterwarera,ecofascismhardlyeverhadanyofthetwo.

2 The terms ‘ecologism’, ‘ecological’ and ‘environmental’ are operationalized in accordance with Dobson’s (1999: 235) distinction, where ecologism refers to an attempt to address the fundamental causes of environmental change through holistic, ideological or value-based underpinnings, whereas ‘environmentalism’ is focused on a rather managerial approach to the problem. Ecologism and ecology are used interchangeably, the former being operationalized as an ideological format of the latter, referring to the abovementioned value-based, holistic, and political positions (as opposed to using the term ‘ecology’ strictly as a branch of biology). 3 Other than eco-fascist forms or ‘right-wing ecology’ (Olsen 1999, 2000a, b) originated in Germany (see Bruggemeier et. al., 2005; Blackbourn, 2006; Geden, 1996; Jahn and Vehling, 1980; Uekoetter, 2006; Woelk, 1992), but also Italy (Armiero, 2014), Portugal (Saraiva, 2016), and United Kingdom (Coupland, 2017, More-Collyer, 2004, Stone, 2004), there are analyses of ‘green nationalism’ in the Baltic countries (Galbreath, 2010; Galbreath and Auers, 2010; Lubarda, 2017), and again the UK (Fowler and Jones, 2005, 2006), as well as ‘white nativist environmentalism’ in the United States (Bhatia, 2004). For a number of cases, see also Forchtner, 2019a.


2

Indeed,farrightvaluesonthenaturalenvironmentcanbeconsidereda

subcomponentofecologism,astheyofferadistinctivesocialimaginary(Taylor,2004),

asubstitutetothecurrent(decaying)order.Intimesofupsurgeoffarrightpartiesand

movements,where“nature”isdiscursivelyassociatedwithissuesofimmigrationand

nationalidentity(Voss,2014),suchnexusesaresalienteventomainstreamactors.For

instance,articulatingnature(e.g.forests)as‘nationaltreasure’canbeenmeshedwith

claimsrelatedtoimmigrationorreligion(IsaevandKorovin,2013),whichisnotrare

evenamongthosewhodonotconsiderthemselvesnationalists.

Iarguethatarticulatingtheessentialfeaturesof‘farrightecologism’requires

lookingatthewiderspectrumofpoliticalthoughtfromwhichitsideasandvaluesare

derived,includingecofascism.Iwilldepartfromtheexistingattemptstoarticulatethe

intersectionsofthefarrightwiththenaturalenvironment(andtheirlimitations),

buildingontheoreticalexplorationsinthefieldofideologystudies.Theseexplorations

willenableofferingasetofcoreandperipheralvaluesofFREbylookingathistorical

overlapsoffascism,conservatism,andnationalpopulism.

InsearchforamorphologyofFRE

Thesubstantiveallureofecofascismasatermisinitslatter,fascistcomponent.

Amidclaimsthatfascismisa‘beehiveofcontradictions’(Eco,2002)ora‘proteanlabel’

(Mann,2004:365)devoidofitsideologicalcore,the‘fascistminimum’–asetof

emblematicfeaturesbelongingtoa(fairly)coherentideologyhaslongbeendefined

(Eatwell,1996).Asamostlyhistoricalphenomenon,generallyassociatedwiththeNazi

regime,ecofascismisparticularlyinterestingfortributariesofBegriffsgeschichte,orthe

conceptualhistory(Koselleck,2002).True,Naziswerenotanentirelyhomogenous

entity,butacomplexandoftendisarrayedassemblageofsub-groups,individuals,

interests,andvalues.Thisexplainsperhapsunimaginableassociationsforopportunistic

purposes,e.g.animalrightsrhetoricandanti-semitism(Uekötter,2005:55),

highlightinganessentialconceptualfeatureofecofascism:inconsistency.Thesamecan

bearguedaboutItalianfascism,withenvironmentally-harmfulpoliciessuchas

“Mussolini’slaw”:thedrainingofthePontineMarshes(Snowden,2006),conjoinedwith


3

aprofoundengagementwith‘reclaiming’ofnaturethrough(sometimesconflicting)

notions,suchasrace,landscape,history,modernityandruralism(Armiero,2014:242).

Inaddition,takinganempiricalperspectiveintoaccount,ecofascismisnota

termusedinself-ascriptions:adherentsofsuchideasgenerally(thoughthe

Christchurchshooterisanexceptiontothisrule)avoidreferringtothemselvesaseco-

fascists,eco-nazisoranysimilarterms.Thisisparticularlythecasewiththefarrightin

thosecountriessuchasPolandinwhichnationalismhasaprofoundantifascist

tradition,andwasjuxtaposedtoGermanexpansionism.Eventhoughsomeauthors

(Olsen,1999;Staudenmaier,2011)useterms‘ecofascism’and‘right-wingecology’

interchangeably,theclearassociationoftheformerwithasubstantiallydiscredited

ideologicalframeworkoffascismposesyetanother,normativeproblem.Referringto

ecofascismmightseemconducivetopreventingtheproponentsofsuchworldviews

frompermeatingthemainstream.However,contemporaryfarrightecologicalvalues

arefarmorecomplexandelusivetobebroughtdownto(neo)fascism.

Notwithstandingthesedeficienciesofecofascism,someauthorshavealready

attemptedtoexpandthisnotionthroughdifferentanalyticalframeworks.Aspreviously

mentioned,JonathanOlsen(1999,2000)suggested‘right-wingecology’,consistingof

eco-naturalism(natureastheblueprintforsocialorder),eco-organicism(natureand

societyviewedasanorganism),andeco-authoritarianism(illiberalpoliticsasthebest

solutiontotheenvironmentalcrisis)asitsfoundationalelements.However,right-wing

ecologyisamisnomer–thethreecategories,aswellasthepartiesanalyzedwithin

Olsen'sframework,allillustratecasesoffarrightenvironmentalisminGermany,

lackingreferencetocountriesoutsideofWesternEurope,ortheconservativepolitical

tradition.

Anotherframework,proposedbyForchtnerandKolvraa(2015),focusedonthe

dimensionsof‘natureinnationalism’:aesthetic,symbolic,andmaterial.Theaesthetic

dimensionentailsideasofpreservationassomethingunspoiledandbeautiful,aswellas

therightorprivilegeofnationalsubjectstoenjoytheircountrysideorlandscape

(ForchtnerandKolvraa,2015:204).Thesymbolicaspectfocusesonabstractvalues,

suchasthenotionofsovereigntyoveraparticularland–culturaldifferentiationfrom

othercommunities(ForchtnerandKolvraa,2015:204-5).Conversely,thematerial

aspectofthenature-nationalismnexusputsanemphasisontherelationshipwith


4

modernityandrationalism:howaneco-nationalistconcerncanbejustifiedinrational

terms–natureasaninstrument,aresource.Whilethethreedimensionscoalescein

manyways,thisframeworkassuchmakesnosubstantialreferencetothesocial

imaginaryofthefarright,withwhichOlsensomewhatengaged–howthesociety

shouldbeorganizedinordertonurtureandprotecttheenvironment,andthevalues

andpositionsitupholds.

Buildingontheseexistingattempts,identifyingpropertiesofanideological

varietysuchas(farright)ecologismrequiresacomprehensivemethodological

roadmap.ThestartingpointforsuchinquiriesistheworkofMichaelFreeden,the

leadingscholarofcontemporaryideologystudies.Movingawayfromapproaches

framingideologiesassolid,manipulativesystemsdeconstructedbyfree-floatingand

detachedanalysts,Freeden(1994,1996)envisagesideologiesasubiquitousyetvolatile

formsofpoliticalthinkingorganizedinconceptualclusterswithadistinguishable

hierarchy.Thisnominalisthierarchyor‘ideologicalmorphology’,consistsofan

ineliminablesetofproperties(Freedendeliberatelyavoidstheterm‘core’),coupled

withadjacentandperipheraldimensionsaccountingforcontextualdifferences.To

explainhisabstractmodelbasedonindeterminacyandambiguityof‘essentially

contestable’concepts(seeKoselleck,2002),Freeden(2003:51)pointstoametaphorof

themodularunitsoffurniture(concepts)assembledinaparticularway.Through

diversearrangementsoffurniture,differentroomscanbecreated.Appliedtogreen

ideologies,holism4representsthecentral‘pieceoffurniture’,whereasbiodiversity,

community,control,decentralization,democracy,development,emancipation,equality,

harmony,organicism,participation,andself-sufficiencystandforadjacentconcepts

(Freeden,1996:529).Togetherwiththeadditionallogicaladjacenciestotheseconcepts

(equilibrium,thestate,bioregionalism,rationality,andplanning),Freeden(1996:545)

identifiesparticular‘culturalconstraints’(e.g.thepreponderanceofagricultureor

culturalromanticism)attheperipherythatmaybeofuseinidentifyingecofascist

utopia.Moreover,theconceptualthicknessaddstothecomplexityofhis

‘morphological’approach.Whileboththickandthinideologieshaveidentifiable

4 Freeden (1996: 527-8) defines holism as “the interdependence or harmony of all forms of life” comprising “organicism, interdependence, and equilibrium as desired ends as well as prerequisites for viable life and for human flourishing”


5

morphology,thelatter(including‘greenideologies’)borrowtheirconceptualcontent

fromsubstantive,thickerideologies(e.g.fascismorsocialism)tosupplanttheir

conceptualambiguities(Humphrey,2001:504)

AlthoughFreedenrightlyrecognizesthefluidityand‘essentialcontestability’asa

definitivefeatureofconcepts,henceideologies,hisinsistenceonthethreefoldvisionof

morphologyappearsneedlesslyrigid.Capturinglogicalorcontextualadjacencies

analyticallyisultimatelyonlyportrayingthepaucityofthe(green)core.The‘thin’

ineliminablesubstanceofanyecologismsusceptibletothickerideologies(includingthe

farright)rendersperipheryasparamount.Sinceclosureisalwaysa‘matterofdegree’

(Freeden,1996:18),insistingondistinctionswithinadjacentandperipheral

dimensionsunderminestheinternalcomplexityanddynamismofthemorphology

itself.Representingcontextasadjacentorperipheraltacitlyassumesimaginedheuristic

andevenontologicalorder.However,conceptsandvaluesacquiretheirmeaning

throughhistoricallytransferredandcontextuallymoldeddiscursivetraditions

(Freeden,1996:54).Thus,Iwillexaminethewiderpoolofright-wingideologies

informingfarrightenvironmentalimaginary.Thesuggested,substantivemorphologyof

FREconsistsofasetofprincipalfeaturessupplantingholism,derivedfromecofascism

(butpresentinbroaderright-wingthought),witha‘greenperimeter’(adjacentand

peripheralconcepts)articulatedinconservativeandnationalistwritings.Without

exploringthewiderideationalclusterfromwhichmostofthefarrightargumentsin

relationtoenvironmentemanated,prospectiveempiricalcasesmaybedevoidof

nuancedanalysisduetotheconceptualshort-sightednessandlackofclarity.

FromBloodandSoiltospirituality,organicism,andnaturalism:carvingoutthe

keyelementsofFRE

Historically,thefirstassociationthatcomestomindwithecofascism(andfar

right)conceptuallyisthenotionofBloodandsoil(BlutundBoden)(Bramwell,1985,

Bassin,2005).EmergedinthewritingsofWaltherDarré,thisideaisatthecoreofFRE,

outliningaholisticworldviewthroughthreefundamentalelements:spirituality,

organicismandnaturalism.Rootedinpaganisticinterpretationsand‘strongspiritual

readiness’intheNaziGermany(BruggemeierandZioc,2005:7),ecofascismreliesonits


6

mythicsubstance.5Althoughthespiritualcomponentisnotonlyimmanentto

ecofascism,asthesubstantialimpactofBuddhismandTaoismoncontemporary

environmentalthoughthasbeennotedbymany(Cheng,1986:351-70;Goodman,1980:

73-80;Nash,1992:113–16;Nelson,2009),farrightmysticismstandsoutwhen

comparedtootherformsofecologicalthinking(Biehl,1995:134).Thisspiritual

elementofthefarrightimaginaryconformstoecocentrism(Wall,2006),servingthe

caseofcritics,mostlytributariesofsocialecology(seeZeegers,2002),toassume

commonontologicalgroundingsofdeepecologyandfascism(BiehlandStaudenmeier,

1995),thoughfailingtorecognizeastrongorganicistbentatthecoreofsuchclaims.

Thespirituality-organicismnexuspromptsexplorationsonthevalueof

‘rootedness’infarrightimaginary.Theideaofrootedbeingsassumesanindivisible

unityoflivingcreaturesandtheenvironmentinwhichtheydwell(orofthebloodand

soil),forgedundertheinfluenceoftheanti-enlightenmenttraditionalism,disparaging

Christianity,capitalism,economicutilitarianism,hyper-consumptionandrampant

tourism(Staudenmeier,2011:5-6).Rootednessisnotonlyimmanenttofarrightvision

ofecologicalpolity:itcanbefoundine.g.bioregionalism.Conceptionsofaregionas

one'shomelandcanresemblenationalistregionalismwhenaregion'straditionsand

languagearespirituallytiedtoan'ancestral'landscape(Biehl,1995:34).Certainly,the

devotionofbioregionaliststodemocraticprinciplesandnotidentifyingbioregional

communitieswithanation-stateornationalbordersrenderstheminapplicableto

nationaliststandards(Olsen,2000:75),butorganicismisanoverarchingvalueacross

differentideologicaldomains.

Theholisticoutlookreflectedinspiritualityandorganicismimplicitlyassumes

theunityofnaturalandsocialworld,pointingtothecentralityof(social)naturalism.By

thinkingofhumanculturesasrootedinlandscapes,theaimofnaturalistsistoprotect

theintegrityofbothhumanandnon-humanagents,realigningthetraditional,

Enlightenmentarticulationofhumanrationality(SommersandBlock,2014:8).The

‘natural’worldbecomestheblueprintforsocialworld,eradicatingtheartificial

distinctionbetweenthetwo.Inethnopluralistview,thepresumedwholeness

5 The relationship between fascism and religion is a complex one, ranging from "cosmotheism" of William Pierce's National Alliance, to clero-fascism (e.g. in Croatia): including everything in between (see more Griffin, 2005).


7

(organicism),articulatesculturesasseparablecontainers(deBenoist,1980),indicating

thatsomecultures,alientothehabitat,areincompetentforprotectingtheenvironment.

Hence,thefarrightutilizesthelogicofsocialnaturalismtoadvocatefortheexpulsionof

foreignspecies,e.g.anti-immigrationpolicies(Neumayer,2006)tomaintainthe

compositionalequilibrium.However,thecentralproblemofnaturalismisits

incompatibilitywithChristianity’sideaofhumanbeingsasdominant,stewardsof

nature.TheChristiantradition,supplantingmostofthe(particularlyEuropean)far

rightthought,isatoddswithecocentricandnaturalisticstandpoints,causingmajor

inconsistenciesinfarrightenvironmentalthinking.

Anapt(albeitextraordinarilyrare)exampleofecocentric,eco-fascistfarright

organizationisGreenlineFront,aninitiativeemanatedinUkraine,endorsingdeep

ecologistsbutalsovölkischwriters.GreenlineFrontfosterscontemporaryeco-fascist

mysticism,withtheirfundamentalgoalofpromotingan“ecologicalwayofthinking”,

and“comprehensionofthefactEarth'sbeingnotjustalifelesspieceofstone,butthe

Motherofeverycreaturealive,motherofhumanity,aswell."(GreenlineFrontOfficial

Blog,2019).

However,thisdistinctivespiritualityandmysticismarenotonlyimmanentto

(eco)fascism,assuchvaluescanbefoundacrosstheChristiansideofthefarright

spectrum:forinstance,intheirenvironmentalprogram,entitled"InHarmonywith

Nature",Jobbik,theHungarianfarrightparty,arguedthatitsgoalis:

…strengtheningtheroleofcommunitiesthatarelivinginharmonywiththeir

surroundings,thataremoreandmoreself-sufficientintermsofenergyandfood,and

thatarestrong,andrich,bothmateriallyandspiritually.

(Jobbik,2010:23,inKyriazi,2019:7)

Thisquoteintroducesanother,rather(logically)adjacentelementtothe

morphologyofFRE:thatofautarky.Toexploreandunderstandvaluesthatcouldbe

consideredadjacenttothecorevaluesofspirituality,organicism,andnaturalism,itis

necessarytoexpandthescopebylookingatother,conservativeandnationalist

interventionsinecologicalthought.

ThegreenperimeterofFRE:utilizingthewiderideologicalscope


8

AutarkyisnotanineliminablevalueofFRE,asitreferstopredominantly

economicsetofarguments,adjacenttoenvironmentalimaginary.Commonlyassociated

withthemoralsuperiorityofpeasantproduction,autarkyisenvisagedasthepathway

totherevitalizationofboththeeconomyandthenationalpride.Manyconservative6

intellectualssincethe18thcenturyidealizedthepristine,self-sufficientandvirtuous

ruralworldasopposedtoongoingindustrializationandculturaldecadence.Infact,the

fundamentalsetofstatementsuponwhichpioneereco-philosophyemanatedcomes

fromaconservativepoliticaltradition,criticalofmodernity,Enlightenmentand

rationalism.Autarkybuildsonthe‘rootedness’principle,recallingaprofound

relationshipbetweenthepeopleandthelandinwhichtheylive.

Theautarkicelementalsobearsanaestheticstylizationofwhatwasperceivedas

naturalbeautyintoacharacteristicofaregionor'tribe',oreventuallythenational

culturalheritage(Ditt,2000:13-24).Essentiallyderivedfromromanticism,itenvisages

atomized,self-sustainablecommunities,the‘caretakers’ofthelandincontroloflocal

resources.Thisistiedtoanaturalist(andnationalist)viewofculturesinherently

soakedinthelandscape,the‘ethnoscape’(Smith,2009).Sincelandissymbolically

weddedtotheideaofhome,itappearsnaturalforonetohaveprofoundfeelings

towardsit,formingalogical,albeitsymboliclinkbetweenthepast,presentandthe

future(Palmer,1998).This‘nationalizationofnature’highlightsthe‘passiverolethat

natureplaysinthisfamiliarizedconceptionoflandscape’(Kaufmann,1998:667).The

‘nationalized’Naturecanalsobearticulatedaswildanduntamed,nostalgicallyharking

backtothespiritualnostalgiaofvastanduntouchedlandscapes–natureasthe“symbol

ofhome,ofsacredfatherland,andtheidyllicpast.”(Hunka,deGroot,andBiela,2009:

432).

Apartfromthenostalgiaforautarkiccommunities,theideaofstewardship

logicallystemsoutofistheconservativeappreciationofresponsibility,restingonan

assumptionthatanoptimalstateforconservingnatureandnurturingtheloveforone’s

homeisahomeostaticsystem(Scruton,2013).Toelaboratethisorganicistidea,

6 There have been plenty of works on conservative political tradition and philosophy (writings of Edmund Burke, Michael Oakeshott). Here, I operationalize conservatism mainly from the writings of classical conservative writers (with an exception of Roger Scruton), as an ideology that advocates for autonomy, hierarchy, traditional social institutions, and property rights.


9

Scruton(2012:227)usestheconceptofoikophilia–theloveoftheoikos,notonlythe

homebutthepeoplecontainedinit,thesurroundingsettlementsthatendowthathome;

‘Theplacewhichisours,where“italltakesplace”’.Again,commercializingheritageis

deplored,asoikophiliaisalivinginheritance,towards‘embellishmentandrenewalof

theplotoftheearthtowhichoneisattached’(Scruton,2012:412).Goingbackin

history,thesocialcomponentofstewardship(oikophilia)isembodiedinSirArthur

Tansley’spost-warideaoftrusteeshipforlandsandindividualsincapableofself-

preservationbydesigning‘homeregions'inordertoinstillthesenseofcareamong

thosewhoweredisplacedduringtheSecondWorldWar.Inthisway,thepeople

inhabitingtheareaneartothenationalparkwouldberesponsiblefornature

conservation,whichwouldsimultaneouslyprovideasenseofhomeandanopportunity

forarenewalofculturalvalues(Anker,2001:227).

Suchideationsare,inFreeden’sterms,culturallyadjacent–framinglandowners

as‘caretakers’ofthelandandtheancestry,virtues,andtraditionsofthelandis

particularlypopularinsocieties(suchastheEnglish)whereaconsiderablecultural

valueisplaceduponthelandscapes,butalsothegenerationalbondsassociatedwiththe

land(Hay,2002:180).Thus,itisnowonderthatScruton’swritingsonstewardshipand

thelogicof‘responsibleToryism’intheenvironmentalspherehaveproliferatedinsuch

settings.

Theautarkiccommunityresembledintheideaofstewardshipposesaquestion

abouttheroleandnatureofauthoritywithinthefarrightimaginary.Ononehand,a

numberofgreennationalanarchistgroups,particularlythoseassociatedwiththealt-

rightintheUS,disparagestatistconnotations,insteadadvocatingforadecentralized,

racializedconceptionofsocialism(Taylor,2019:12).Ontheotherhand,returningto

theconservativepoliticalthought,eco-authoritarianismhasbeenassociatedwiththe

neo-Malthussianthinking,championedbysomepoliticalconservativesandnature

conservationists,integratedwithinthecontemporaryenvironmentalmovementsince

the1960s.7

7 The role of influential conservatives in the development of green parties should also not be ignored: from figures such as Herbert Gruhl in Germany to Pennti Linkola in Finland, or the interesting case of Brice Lalonde in France, who only later turned towards more conservative ideological positions. While these generally remained on the fringe of the wider movement, many conservative thinkers, such as Edward Goldsmith, found themselves to be supporters of neo-Malthusian thinking, now one of the key elements of far right discourse.


10

Thefundamentalcontentionofneo-Malthusiandoomsdayersistoarguethat

liberaldemocracy,duetoitsbrokeragebetweencompetinginterests,isunfittoaddress

theimminent,ecologicallywroughtdisaster.Thedireprescriptionsofsuchauthors

revealedaconspicuousdistrustofhumannature,arguingfordraconian,authoritarian

frugalityinsolvingtheenvironmentalproblem(Goldsmith,1972:277-90;Hardin,1968;

Heilbroner,1974).Althoughclaimingthatsuchthinkerswereinnatelyconservative

wouldbeanoverstatement,thesharedskepticismofthecapabilityofordinarypeople

tosolvethe‘environmentalriddle'isvivid.Eventhoughthisenthusiasmof

conservativesfortheprotectionoftheenvironmenthasgenerallyfadednowadays,itis

oftenforgottenthatmanyAmericanconservativepoliticiansandthinkers(Buckley,

Goldwater)untilthe1980swereenvironmentalists(Farber,2017).

However,itisworthnotingthattoday,proponentsofthe‘neo-con’position

argueforafree-marketresolutiontotheenvironmentalcrisis,whichisfundamentally

atoddswiththevaluesupheldbythefarright(AndersonandLeal,2006;Austinand

Phoenix,2005;BennettandBlock,1991;Jacques,Dunlap,andFreeman,2008;Tranter,

2017).Conversely,traditionalconservatives,basedontheworksofBurkeand

Oakeshott,promoteasocietybuiltonresponsibilityandcontinuitythroughthe

stewardshipoftheenvironment(Ujj,2013).Itsoppositiontosocialandpolitical

experimentationanditsendorsementofhierarchicalauthorityputsconservatismat

considerableoddswiththetypologypresentedbyHumphrey(2002:504)(namelythe

‘radicaldemocratization’component).Althoughinstarkoppositiontotheideasof

fascism,conservatismremainsopentointerpretationsofitsconnectionwiththeland.

Thepresenceofsurvivalistandneo-Malthusiantraditionsinecopoliticalthought

capitalizingonideassuchasoikophiliamakestheseconservativevaluessusceptibleto

farright,illiberalmomentumconcealedbehindnationalist,right-wingpopulism.

Unlikefascismandconservatism,seenas‘thick’right-wingideologieswith

illustrativefeatures(Rydgren,2017),theconceptualobscurityofpopulismand

nationalismas‘thin-centered’ideologies(Mudde,2004)convolutesarticulatingcore

valuesofthesecategories.However,theabilitytoemployManichean,binary

representationsinpolicydebatesallowsright-wing,nationalpopuliststoengagewith

environmentaltopics(CapstickandPidgeon,2014;Carvalho,2007;Farstad,2017;

Forchtneret.al.2018;FrauneandKnodt,2018).Therefore,notallright-wingpopulists


11

are‘anti-environmental’:MatteoSalvini,theinfamousleaderofLegaNordandthe

MinisterofInternalAffairsintheItalianGovernment,spokeabout“defendingourseas,

ourmountains,ourlakes,ourrivers,ourseas”(Italiambiente,2018),alludingtoa

paramountsignificanceofspacefornationalistrhetoric.Landscapeisaplacefor

contestedidentitiesandnostalgia,butalsoforinsider/outsidertropes–itisthrough

thelossofaccesstotheland,throughitsabsence,thattheplacegainsitsspecialvalue

(CederlofandSivaramakrishnan,2011:9).Therelationshipbetweennationalismand

theland(Motherland,HomeCountry,orNativeSoil)becomesmediatedthrough

connectingdistinctpeoplesindistinctspaces,articulatingthelatteras‘sacred’(Smith,

1991).Amidclaimsthatenvironmentalistnationalismisaprerequisiteforan

emancipatorymoveagainstcapitalism(Gare,1995:144),thenostalgicelementmakes

environmentalismandnationalismoddbedfellows.Nationalisthistoricalendorsement

ofruralismhampersendeavorstomakeenvironmentalismmoreappealingtoawider,

urbanaudience(de-Shalit,1996:82).

BasedontheempiricalcasesofTrumporBolsonaro,populisteco-nationalism

doesnotseemplausible,norarethosewhoconsiderthemselveseco-fascistsinterested

inobtainingsupportofthemasseslikepopulists.Theallegedeco-centrismof

ecofascismishardlyapplicabletonationalist,evenlesspopulistanthropocentric

postulates:the‘people’aretheonesindanger,theonesthataregivenpriority.Still,

therearecasesofright-wingpopulistparties:JobbikandMiHazánkinHungary,orthe

LatvianNationalAlliance,offarrightanthropocentricenvironmentalism:promoting

common-senseresponsibilityforthehomelandincludingcirculareconomy,organic

farming,andclimateaction.Departingfromtheconceptualexplorationacrossthe

‘green’elementsoffascism,conservatism,andnationalpopulism,itwillbepossibleto

illuminatewhatthecontemporaryfarrighthastakenupfromtheseideologiesin

construingitsownecologicalstandpoint.

ThemorphologyofFRE:essentialcontestabilityatthecore

Theongoingstrugglefordominatingthediscourseontheenvironmentby

assertingthevalueslinkedtoheritagesymbolismand/ornationalidentityhas

attendantimplicationsforprospectiveempiricalinquiries.Notwithstandingtheoften-

eclecticnatureofthefarright(suchastheproblemsregardingself-ascription),an

additionalobstacleinassemblingthevaluesoftheexaminedideologicalstrandsare


12

contradictionsvisibleinspecificenvironmentaldebates

(anthropocentrism/ecocentrism,animalwelfareandhunting).Forinstance,thefar

rightusuallyutilizestwomajorargumentsformoraljustificationofhuntingderived

fromecologicalethics:a)thathuntingisusefulasawildlifemanagementtool;b)it

induceslessdamagethanfarming(fordetails,seeCahoone,2009).However,someeco-

fascists,departingfromantimodernistandevenmore,anticapitalistconvictionsare

stronglyagainsthuntingandcarnivorediet,since“…vegandietisawaytoopposethe

animalindustry,fullofimmensesufferingandpromoterofthedestructionoftheplanet,

alsoraisingthisdietasameansofpurificationandphysical-spiritualascent.”(Greenline

Front,Blog,2019).

Inspiteofthesevariations,themorphologyofFREcanstillbeconsideredan

ideal-typebecauseitassistsinterpretationsoffarrightsupportforenvironmentally-

friendlypolicies.Suchanundertakingisinevitablyarbitrary,sinceanyheuristicdevice

requiresappendingdiscerniblefeaturesanddisregardingotherpotentiallypresent

elements.Thefarright,regardlessofitsvariegatedmodality,almostunanimously

departsfromradicalnationalistpositions,whichultimatelymolditsecologicalagenda.

Thismanifestsinthecallsfor‘rerooting’ofnationinnature(Voss2014:53),asserting

theintimateandintricatevalueofplaceandnatureoverall,originatedinromanticist

writings(seeHinchmanandHinchman,2007).Moreover,thisprofoundnessappealsto

theoikophillicsenseofresponsibilityforfuturegenerations.Forinstance,theFreedom

PartyofAustria,initspoliticalprogramsuggeststhisdutycuttingacrossdifferent

generations:"Weareawareofourattachmenttoourforefathersandourresponsibility

toourdescendants,andwanttopreserveahomelandforfuturegenerationsthat

facilitatesautonomouslivinginanintactenvironment…"(FreedomPartyofAustria–

PartyProgram,2011).Torecapitulate,FREbringstogethervaluespresentedacrossthe

ideologicaldomainsoutlinedinthisarticle,namely:naturalism,spirituality,mysticism,

authority,organicism,autarky,nostalgia,andManicheanism.

Naturalism.Thefarrightpositionsonbiodiversityareultimatelyshapedbythe

ideaofa“nationalecosystem”(Forchtner,2019c)–sharingthenaturalistpostulatesof

thenationasindivisiblefromnaturallaws.Thisservestopointtothosewhoresemble

out-of-place,invasive,evenexoticspecies(seePeretti,1998,andHettinger,2001for

debatesonbiologicalnativism),whichinasociobiologicalsense,justifiestheexclusion


13

ofnon-nationals.Yearningfor‘natural’borders,referringtogeographicalunities(such

asbasins)imbuedwithnostalgiaforlong-lostterritories,isanotherexampleofthe

synthesisofnaturalismandnationalism.Thus,respectforeverything“natural”arises

fromintrinsicqualitiesofnatureratherthanamoralduty.However,thehierarchy

withintheman-nation-naturerelationisnotfirm,asitdiffersacrossthefarright

spectrum:thepopulistradicalrightbeingusuallyanthropocentric,whilethemore

extremeelementspurporttheeternalbondbetweentheseoverlappingentities,

veneratingnatureforitspowerandauthenticityinrelationtofrailtyofnation-states.

Spiritualityandmysticism.Eventhoughitisdifficulttoaccountforauniversal

religiouspositionofthecontemporaryfarrightgivenitspatchynature,farright

ecologismindisputablyrestsonsomeformofspirituality.Forthosebelongingtothese

groupsincountrieswithaChristianmajority,natureisa"God-givengift",andthus

responsibilityforitsprotectionliesuponhumanbeings.Thiscanbeseenasconflicting

withtheeco-centricnaturalistpostulate,sometimesreflectedinthefarrightecological

activism,asariftbetweendynamismandfatalism.Forinstance,somefarright

organizationsbelongingtowidercirclesofaccelerationismandfuturism,advocatefora

hypermoderntechnologicalsolutionstoproblemscreatedbyunenlightenedmasses

(Taylor,2004:17).Tothefarright,environmentaldegradationisasymptomofa

“spiritualdeficit”,inducedbymodern“ideologiesofprogress”.ThisinvokesDurkheim’s

ideaofanomie,asenseofagonizingrootlessnesspermeatingrationalizedhumanity,

devoidofitsperennialcravingfornatureastheatavisticsourceofstabilityin

tumultuoustimes.Becauseofthisspiritualerosion,eventhosewhoconsider

themselvesasgreenstoday‘nolongerfeelamysticalconnectionwithnature,withthe

earth,withtheirhomeland,withthenation.’(Koziel,1991).

Organicismandautarky.Regardlessofinnertensionswithinthefarright,

fosteringcommunalresponsibilityforenvironmentalcareisnottobetakenasasimple

sumofindividualresponsibilities.Evenifideallyautarkicandself-sustainable,aself-

reliantindividualisultimatelyembeddedinthe(national)community.Eachhuman

communityandcultureisuniqueandauthentic,formingacommoneco-system,abiome

withotherorganicandinorganicelements,fromwhichkinshiptieswithothercreatures

areextrapolated.Inthisholisticyetcyclicalimageryofboomsandbusts,nationsand

theirnaturedevelop,degenerate,andfinallyfadeaway.AsFriedrichRatzel,oneofthe


14

foundingfathersof(German)geopoliticsreportedlyargued,“[t]heunionbetweenman

andtheearthisanorganicbond;notmerelyananalogy,asinthevariousbiological

organictheoriesofsociety,butasarealunion,ascientifictruth.”(Ratzel,1911:2,in

Neumann,1966:39).Thosewhoarerootedinthesoilaremoreself-dependent,butalso

morecognizantoftheprofoundnessoftherelationbetweenamanandtheland,as

opposedtonomadic–uncivilized,feralorcosmopolitanlifestyles.

Authority.Thefarrightholdsaprofoundcontempttowardsdemocracybutalso

pointstowardsthemorefundamentalissueofconsistencybetween

nonanthropocentrismanddemocracy(seeMichael,2019).Itssociallyconservativeand

“anti-globalist”natureconditionsthecallsforlocal-basedinitiatives.Duetothe

imminentnatureofthethreat,thismulti-leveledchangehastobeanti-democraticand

instigatedbyacentralauthority–forPenttiLinkola,aFinnishdeepecologistmuch

admiredbythefarright,evenanincompetentdictatorhastobesmarterthanthewillof

themajority(PenttiLinkolaWebsite).Eco-authoritarianismisnotanovelty:notonly

that(togetherwithnaturalism),itwasusedbyOlseninhisframeworkofright-wing

ecology,butithasalsobeenlongobservedinenvironmentalthought(seeHay2002:

184).However,thenatureofthatauthorityisunclearandhasnotbeenadequately

problematizedinpreviousframeworks.Whileauthoritariantendenciesin

environmentalthoughtarenotexclusivelytiedtothefarright8,theycansometimesbe

relinquishedbyeco-fascistsorthealt-right,asseeninthecaseofthedecentralized

GreenlineFrontorNationalAnarchists.Intheserenderings,theideaofauthorityis

oftentransposedtoanon-anthropomorphicentity.Thisisoftenjustifiedthroughthe

ineptnessofhumanleadershiptoadapttotheprospectiveecologicalchange–implying

thesupremevalueofspirituality.

NostalgiaandManicheanism.Thefarrightissituatedin-betweenthethrustfor

rebirthandtheessentiallyconservativeappreciationofnatureandtraditional

livelihoodslosttothealienencroachmentsonthenationalbeing.Thisdegreeof

confusiontraversesacrossthefarrightdiscourse:althoughnostalgiaisusually

articulatedinimagesofpristinenatureandidylliccountryside,italso‘potentiates

8 Shahar (2015) mentions the example of the Soviet Union or the socialist China as the applications of distinct forms of eco-authoritarianism.


15

attainablefuture’(SedikidesandWildschut,2016,p.319).Thus,movingbeyondmere

escapism,nostalgiaisaproactivenotion,deployedinvariousdimensionsof

environmentalgovernance(Howell,Kitson,andClowney,2019).Promotingorganic,

family-farmingasameansforrevivingtraditionalvaluesisanexampleofhowthese

valuescanberealized.Thepersistentanti-cosmopolitansentimentbringsabout

absolutedistinctionsandpopulistManicheanisminadvocatingtheradicalchange(and

appealingtoauthority).Theclaritythroughwhichthefarrightrenderstheworld

separatesregressiveforcesofenvironmentalismtermedas‘liberal’or‘globalist’

(internationalorganizationsincluded),fromtheauthenticnationalistcarefornature.

Theabovementionedfeaturesoffarrightecologismasaconceptareallderived

fromthebroaderstrandsinformingfarrightthought.Still,itisimportanttonotethat

ideologiesandsub-ideologicalconcepts(suchasFRE)constitute‘illusionarywholes’

(Freeden,2001:95).SinceFREisanideal-type,itisnotdesignedforbox-tickingof

discoursesontheenvironment.Thepresenceof‘movingparts’withinfarright

ecologicalpositions,suchastheambivalencetowardsanthropocentrism,pointtothe

needforutmostcautionwhenapproachingempiricalcases.Itsmodularstructure

craftedthroughtheoreticalexplorationsultimatelydependsonthepublicperceptionon

howconceptsarebeingdismantledandreassembledbythefarright.Therefore,despite

identifyingtheineliminablecluster(spirituality,organicism,naturalism)derivedfrom

ecofascism,the‘adjacent’andperipheralfeaturesconstitutingthe‘greenperimeter’can

beequallyrelevant.Itisthe‘WolfofContext’(Latour,2005:177),thatdeterminesthe

extenttowhichthesevaluesarepresentorrealizedinfarrightdiscourseandpractice.

AsKoselleck(2001:36)argued,whilethespeechactsandactualacts(Tathandlungen)

areintertwined,thediachronicchangeonthetheoreticallevelmaynotoccuronthe

sametemporallevel.Thus,itisthejobofFREtocapturethischange,afterecofascism

depleteditsmethodological(ifnottheoretical)potential.

Conclusion

Farrightattemptstoinfluenceenvironmentalthoughtandconfigureauthentic

valuesarecomplexandappearinmultifariousways,transcendingmereecofascism.

Valuingtheceaselessencounterofthegenerationsandtheenvironmenttowhichthey


16

areweddedhascomealongway,beginninginthelinkagebetweentheagrarian

imageryandtheethnicsubstanceprovidedby19th-centuryromanticnationalism.9Far

rightecologismalsopointstotheconceptualproblemswithintheideological

morphology,particularlytherelationshipbetweenthecore-periphery.Farfrombeing

marginal,farrightecologismpresentsadistinctivesetofvalues,althoughintertwined

withmoremainstreamgreenideologies.Itsfoundationalelements:spiritualityand

mysticism,organicism,andnaturalism,substitutethevaguenessofFreeden’sholism.

The‘greenperimeter’(althoughthetermisunjustasitisnolessrelevantthanthe

‘core’):autarky,authority,nostalgia,andManicheanworldview,areallpresentinthe

widerright-wingthought,albeitincontrasttotheclimateskepticismoranti-

environmentalmarketfundamentalismalsoassertedbysometributariesof

conservatismorpopulism.Moreover,FREenhancestheexistingframeworks

addressingfarrightvaluesontheenvironmentbypointingtoadistinctivesocial

imaginaryaswellasinconsistencies,notbeenemphasizedinexistinganalyses.Assuch,

FREstandsforanideal-type,aheuristic‘exaggeration’(Weber,quotedinBurger,1976:

127-8),nonethelessimportantforassessinghowthecontemporaryfarrightvaluesthe

naturalenvironment.Normatively,farrightecologismstandsin-betweenitsradical

impetusandnormalizingeco-politicsina‘post-ecologicalsociety’(seeBlühdornand

Welsch,2007).Simultaneously,FREchallengesthewin-winlogicofsustainable

developmentwithindemocratic,consumercapitalism,yetstillverymuchrelyingonthe

‘symbolicindustry’ofBeck’srisksociety.However,thesuggestedcategoriesofFRE

orientthoseundertakingempiricalinquiriestowardstheseinconsistenciesand

ambiguitiesoffarrightdiscourseandvalues,allowingforprospectivetheoreticaland

normativeexplorations.

9 Some authors (see Kaufman, 1998) point to the pre-romanticist tradition of ‘wild landscapes’, to which romanticist political thought is clearly linked.


17

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

IamthankfultoBernhardForchtner,AlanWatt,AlexiosAntypas,MarkoLubarda,and

twoanonymousreviewersfortheirvaluableandcontinuousfeedbackindeveloping

thisarticle.Allmistakes,ofcourse,remainmyown.

REFERENCES

Anderson,T.L.,andD.R.Leal.2006.FreeMarketEnvironmentalism.SanFrancisco,CA:

PacificResearchInstituteforPublicPolicy.

Anker,P.2001.Imperialecology:environmentalorderintheBritishEmpire,1895–1945.

Boston:HarvardUniv.Press.

Armiero,M.2014.‘Introduction:Fascismandnature’,ModernItaly,19(3):Fascismand

nature,(2014),pp.241-245

Austin,A.andL.Phoenix.2005.‘TheNeoconservativeAssaultontheEarth:The

EnvironmentalImperialismoftheBushAdministration’.CapitalismNature

Socialism16(2):25–44.doi:10.1080/10455750500108278

Bassin,M.2005.“BloodorSoil?TheVolkischMovement,TheNazis,andTheLegacyof

Biopolitik,”inF.J.Bruggemeier,M.CiocandT.Zeller(eds)HowGreenWerethe

Nazis?Nature,Environment,andNationintheThirdReich.Athens:Ohio

UniversityPress.

Bennett,J.andW.Block.1991.‘TheEconomicsofProtectingTheOzoneLayer’,In

ReconcilingtheEconomicsandTheEnvironment.Sydney,AustralianInstituteof

PublicPolicy,pp.175-184


18

Bhatia,R.2004.‘GreenorBrown?WhiteNativistEnvironmentalMovements’,inA.

Ferber,(Ed.)Home-GrownHate:GenderandOrganizedRacism.Oxon:Routledge,

2004:194-213.

Biehl,J.1995.‘Ecology”andtheModernizationofFascismintheGermanUltraright’,

SocietyandNature,2(2):130-70

Biehl,J.andP.Staudenmeier.1995.Ecofascism:LessonsfromtheGermanExperience.

Oakland:AKPress.

Blackbourn,D.2006.TheConquestofNature:Water,LandscapeandtheMakingof

ModernGermany.NewYork:W.W.Norton.

Blühdorn,I.,andI.Welsch.2007.Eco-politicsbeyondtheparadigmofsustainability:A

conceptualframeworkandresearchagenda.EnvironmentalPolitics,16(2):185-

205

Block,F,M.Sommers.2014.ThePowerofMarketFundamentalism:KarlPolanyi’s

Critique.Boston:HarvardUniversityPress

Bramwell,A.1985.BloodandSoil:RichardWaltherDarréAndHitler's"GreenParty".

London:KensalPress.

Bruggemeier,F.J.,CiocM.,andZeller,T.(eds).2005.HowGreenWeretheNazis?Nature,

Environment,andNationintheThirdReich.Athens:OhioUniversityPress.

Burger,T.1976.MaxWeber’sTheoryofConceptFormation,History,Laws,andIdeal

Types.Durham,NorthCarolina:DukeUniversityPress.


19

Cahoone,L.2009.‘Huntingasamoralgood.’EnvironmentalValues,18(1):67-89.

Capstick,S.B.,andN.F.Pidgeon.2014.‘Whatisclimatechangescepticism?Examination

oftheconceptusingamixedmethodsstudyoftheUKpublic’.Global

EnvironmentalChange,24:389–401

Carvalho,A.2007.‘Ideologicalculturesandmediadiscoursesonscientificknowledge:

Re-readingnewsonclimatechange’,PublicUnderstandingofScience,16(2):223–

243

Cederlof,G,K.Sivaramarkishnan.2005.EcologicalNationalisms:Nature,Livelihoods,and

IdentitiesinSouthAsia.Washington:UniversityofWashingtonPress.

Cheng,C-Y.1986.‘OntheEnvironmentalEthicsoftheTaoandtheCh’I’,Environmental

Ethics,8:351-70

Coupland,P.2017.Farming,FascismandEcology:AlifeofJorianJenks.Oxon:Routledge.

Ditt,K.1996.‘NatureConservationinEnglandandGermany1900-70:Forerunnerof

EnvironmentalProtection?’,ContemporaryEuropeanHistory,5(1):1-28

2000.‘ThePerceptionandConservationofNatureintheThirdReich’,Planning

Perspectives15:161-87

deBenoist,A.1980.Ledroita`ladiffe´rence.Pourenfiniravectouslestotalitanismes’

[Therighttodifference.Abrogateallthetotalitarianisms.].E´le´ments,33


20

de-Shalit,A.1996.‘Nationalism.’inA.DobsonandR.Eckersley(eds)PoliticalTheory

andtheEcologicalChallenge.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Dobson,A.2016.EnvironmentalPolitics:AVeryShortIntroductionOxford:Oxford

UniversityPress

Eatwell,R.1996.Ondefiningthe‘FascistMinimum’:Thecentralityofideology.Journal

ofPoliticalIdeologies1(3),pp.303-319

Eco,U.2002[1997].FiveMoralPieces.NewYork:Hartcourt.

Farber,D.2017.‘TheConservativeasEnvironmentalist:FromGoldwaterandtheEarly

Reagantothe21stCentury’,Ariz.L.Rev.1005(59):1005-1060

Farstad,F.2017.‘Whatexplainsvariationinparties’climatechangesalience?’,Party

Politics8(2):698-707

Forchtner,B.andC.Kolvraa.2015.‘Thenatureofnationalism:Populistradicalright

partiesoncountrysideandclimate’,Nature&Culture,10(2):199-224.

Forchtner,B.,A.Kroneder,andD.Wetzel,2018.‘BeingSkeptical?ExploringFarright

Climate-ChangeCommunicationinGermany’,EnvironmentalCommunication,

12(5):589-604

Forchtner,B.2019a.Nation,nature,purity:extreme-rightbiodiversity,in:Cultural

ImaginariesoftheExtremeRight.SpecialIssueofPatternsofPrejudice,53(2),

p.11-31


21

(ed.)2019b.TheFarRightandtheEnvironment:Politics,Discourse,

Communication.Oxon:Routledge.

2019c.TheNationalEcosystem:RadicalRightandBiodiversity.FairObserver,

March142019.Availableat

https://www.fairobserver.com/region/europe/radical-right-environmentalism-

national-ecosystem-biodiversity-germany-news-19991/Accessed09/04/2019

Fowler,C,andR.Jones.2005.EnvironmentalismandNationalismintheUK.

EnvironmentalPolitics,14(4):541-545

2006.Canenvironmentalismandnationalismbereconciled?The

PlaidCymru/GreenPartyalliance,1991–95.RegionalandFederalStudies,16(3):

315-331

Fraune,F.,andM.Knodt.2018.‘Sustainableenergytransformationsinanageof

populism,post-truthpolitics,andlocalresistance’,EnergyResearchandSocial

Science,43:1-7

Freeden,M.1996.IdeologiesandPoliticalTheories.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

2003.Ideology:AveryShortIntroduction.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

2017.’AftertheBrexitreferendum:revisitingpopulismasanideology’,

JournalofPoliticalIdeologies,22(1):1-11


22

FreedomPartyofAustria–PartyProgramme(inEnglish).2011.Availableat

https://www.fpoe.at/fileadmin/user_upload/www.fpoe.at/dokumente/2015/2

011_graz_parteiprogramm_englisch_web.pdfAccessed08/04/2019

Galbreath,D.2010(ed.).ContemporaryEnvironmentalismintheBalticStates:From

PhosphateSpringsto'Nordstream'.London:Routledge.

Galbreath,D,andAuers,D.2009.Green,blackandbrown:uncoveringLatvia’s

environmentalpolitics.JournalofBalticStudies,40

Geden,O.1996.RechteÖkologie:UmweltschutzzwischenEmanzipationund

Faschismus[EcologyoftheRight:Environmentalprotectionbetween

EmancipationandFascism].Berlin:ElefantenPress.

Gare,A.1995.PostmodernismandtheEnvironmentalCrisis.London:Routledge.

Goldsmith,E.1972.‘Conclusion:WhatoftheFuture?’,inE.Goldsmith(ed.).CanBritain

Survive?London:Sphere,pp.277–90

Goodman,R.2008.‘TaoismandEcology’,EnvironmentalEthics,2:73-80.

Griffin,R.1991.TheNatureofFascism.London:PintersPublisherLimited.

(ed.)2005.Fascism,totalitarianismandpoliticalreligion.LondonandNewYork:

Routledge.

GreenlineFrontBlog.Publishedhttp://greenlinefront.blogspot.com/Accessed

11/04/2019


23

Hardin,G.1968.‘TheTragedyoftheCommons.’Science,162:1243–248

Hay,P.2002.MaincurrentsinWesternEnvironmentalThought.UniversityofNewSouth

WalesPress,Sydney.

Heilbroner,R.1974.AnInquiryintotheHumanProspect.NewYork:W.W.Norton.

Hettinger,N.2001.‘ExoticSpecies,Naturalisation,andBiologicalNativism.’

EnvironmentalValues,10:193–224.

Hinchman,L.,andS.Hinchman.2007.‘WhatWeOwetheRomantics.’Environmental

Values,16:333-354.

Howell,J.,J.Kitson,andD.Clowney.2019.‘EnvironmentsPast:Nostalgiain

EnvironmentalPolicyandGovernance’.EnvironmentalValues,28(3)

Humphrey,M.2002.GreenIdeologies.inM.Freeden(ed.)TheOxfordHandbookof

PoliticalIdeologies.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress

Hunka,A.,W.DeGroot,andA.Biela.2009.“VisionsofNatureinEasternEurope:A

PolishExample”,EnvironmentalValues,18(4):429-452.

Isaev,A.G.andG.N.Korovin.2013.‘ForestsasanationaltreasureofRussia’,

ContemporaryProblemsofEcology,6(7):677-682.


24

ItaliaAmbiente.2018.Pontida:neldiscorsodiSalvinientrano(troppopoco)l’ambiente

eglianimali[Pontida:Salvini’sdiscourseenters(toolittle)theenvironmentand

animals].Publishedonlinehttps://www.italiaambiente.it/2018/07/01/pontida-

nel-discorso-di-salvini-entrano-troppo-poco-lambiente-e-gli-animali/Accessed

09/03/2019

Jacques,P.,R.Dunlap,andM.Freeman.2008.‘Theorganisationofdenial:Conservative

thinktanksandenvironmentalskepticism’,JournalofEnvironmentalPolitics,

18(3):349-385.Doi:10.1080/09644010802055576

Jahn,T.andWehling,P.1990.Ökologievonrechts:NationalismusundUmweltschutzbei

derNeuenRechtenundden“Republikanern”[EcologyoftheRight:Nationalism

andEnvironmentalprotectionintheNewRightandRepublican’thought].

Frankfurt:Campus.

Kaufmann,E.1998.‘NaturalisingtheNation’:TheRiseofNaturalisticNationalismin

theUnitedStatesandCanada’,ComparativeStudiesinSocietyandHistory,40(4):

666-695

Koselleck,R.2002.Thepracticeofconceptualhistory.PaloAlto:StanfordUnviersity

Press

Koziel,B.1991.EkologiaNarodowa[NationalEcology].GreenOffensive.Availableat

http://www.zb.eco.pl/zb/19/narodowa.htmAccessed09/04/2019

Krange,O.,B.Kaltenborn,andM.Hultman.2018.‘CooldudesinNorway:climatechange

denialamongconservativeNorwegianmen’.EnvironmentalSociology,4.


25

Kyriazi,A.2019.TheenvironmentalcommunicationofJobbik:Betweenstrategyand

ideology.InB.Forcthner(ed.)TheFarRightandtheEnvironment:Politics,

Discourse,Communication.Oxon:Routledge.

Lockwood,M.2018.‘Right-wingpopulismandtheclimatechangeagenda:exploringthe

linkages’,JournalofEnvironmentalPolitics,27(4):712-732.

Lubarda,B.2017.PollutingOutsiders:GreenNationalismasaConcept-CaseStudy:

Latvia.inMuratAydın,NihalŞirinPınarcıoğlu,ÖrgenUğurlı(eds).Current

DebatesinPublicFinance,PublicAdministration,andEnvironmentalStudies.

London:IJOPEC.

Mann,M.2004.Fascists.NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Marshall,T.1996,‘Catalannationalism,theCatalangovernmentandtheenvironment’,

EnvironmentalPolitics,5(3):542-550

McCright,A.M.andR.E.Dunlap.2000.‘ChallengingGlobalWarmingasaSocialproblem:

AnAnalysisoftheConservativeMovement’sCounter-Claims’,SocialProblems47

(4):499–522.

Michael,M.A.2019.Isnon-anthropocentrismanti-democratic?Environmentalvalues

More-Collyer,R.2004.Towards"MotherEarth":JorianJenks,Organicism,theRightand

theBritishUnionofFascists.JournalofContemporaryHistory,393(3):553-571


26

Mudde,C.1995.Right-wingextremismanalyzed:acomparativeanalysisofthe

ideologiesofthreeallegedright-wingextremistparties(NPD,NDP,CP’86).

EuropeanJournalofPoliticalResearch,27(2):203–224

2000.TheIdeologyoftheExtremeRight.Manchester,UK:Manchester

UniversityPress.

2004.‘ThePopulistZeitgeist’,GovernmentandOpposition,39(4):542-563

2011.ThePopulistRadicalRight:Areader.LondonandNewYork:Routledge

Nash,P.1992.TheRightsofNature:AHistoryofEnvironmentalEthics.Leichhardt:

Primavera/TheWildernessSociety.

Nelson,E.S.2009.RespondingwithDao:EarlyDaoistEthicsandTheEnvironment.

PhilosophyEast&West,59(3).

Neumayer,E.2006.‘Theenvironment:Onemorereasontokeepimmigrantsout?’

EcologicalEconomics,59

Olsen,J.1999.NatureandNationalism:Right-WingEcologyandthePoliticsofIdentity

inContemporaryGermany.NewYork:PalgraveMacmillan.

Olsen,J.2000a.‘TheRiseofRight-WingEnvironmentalism.EarthIslandJournal,15(2)

2000b.‘ThePerilsofRootedness:OnBioregionalismandRightWingEcologyin

Germany’.LandscapeJournal,19(1-2):73-83


27

Palmer,M.1998.‘ChineseReligionandEcology’,inD.E.CooperandJ.A.Palmer(eds)

SpiritoftheEnvironment:Religion,ValueandEnvironmentalConcern.London:

Routledge.

Peretti,J.H.1998.‘NativismandNature:RethinkingBiologicalInvasion.’Environmental

ValuesVol.7:183-192.

Ratzel,F.1911.Lebensraum:EinebiograpishheStudie[Livingspace:Abiographical

study].Tubingen.

Rydgren,J.2017.‘Radicalright-wingpartiesinEuropeWhat’spopulismgottodowith

it?’,JournalofLanguageandPolitics,16(4):485-496

Saraiva,T.2016.Fascistmodernistlandscapes:wheat,dams,forests,andthemakingof

thePortugueseNewState,in:EnvironmentalHistory,21(1):54-75.

Shahar,D.C.(2015)RejectingEco-Authoritarianism,Again.EnvironmentalValues,24(3):

345-366

Scruton,R.2012.GreenPhilosophy:HowToThinkSeriouslyAboutThePlanet.London:

AtlanticBooks.

Scruton,R.2013.ConservatismandtheEnvironment.Publishedonline

https://www.roger-scruton.com/articles/281-conservatism-and-the-

environmentAccessed09/02/2019

Smith,A.1991.NationalIdentity.Reno:UniversityofNevadaPress.


28

2009.Ethno-SymbolismandNationalism.Oxon:Routledge.

Snowden,F.M.2006.Theconquestofmalaria:Italy,1900-1962.NewHaven:Yale

UniversityPress.

Staudenmaier,P.2011.‘FascistEcology:The‘GreenWing’oftheNaziPartyandits

HistoricalAntecedents’,inJ.BiehlandP.Staudenmaier(eds).Ecofascism

Revisited:LessonsfromtheGermanExperience.Porsgrunn:NewCompassPress

Stone,D.2004.TheFarRightandtheBack-to-the-LandMovementinJ.GottliebandT.

Linehan(eds.)TheCultureofFascism:VisionsoftheFarRightinBritain.London:

Tauris.

Taylor,B.2019.Alt-rightecology:Ecofascismandfar-rightenvironmentalisminthe

UnitedStates.inB.Forchtner(ed.)TheFarRightandtheEnvironment:Politics,

DiscourseandCommunication.Oxon:Routledge.

Taylor,C.2004.Modernsocialimaginaries.Durham,NC:DukeUniversityPress.

Tranter,B.2017.‘It’sOnlyNatural:ConservativesandClimateChangeinAustralia’

EnvironmentalSociology,3(3):274-285,doi:10.1080/23251042.2017.1310966.

Uekötter,F.2006.TheGreenandTheBrown:AHistoryofConservationinNazi

Germany.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Ujj,O.2013.ConservatismandEcology.MAThesis.CentralEuropeanUniversity,

Budapest.


29

Voss,K.2014.‘Natureandnationinharmony:theecologicalcomponentoffarright

ideology’,PhDThesis,EuropeanUniversityInstitute,Florence.

Wall,D.2006.TheDarkerShadesofGreen.

Publishedonlinehttp://another-green-world.blogspot.com/2006/05/darker-shades-

of-green.html.Accessed09/04/2019

Zeegers,P.2002.TheDarkSideofPoliticalEcology,inCommunalism,publishedonline

http://rivoltaeuropae.blogspot.hu/2006/05/dark-side-of-political-ecology-door.html

Accessed09/04/2019

Documents

Forthcoming in Environmental Values. ©2019 the White Horse ... · contestable’ concepts (see Koselleck, 2002), Freeden (2003:51) points to a metaphor of the modular units of furniture