Who are the "Deep Greens"?

Question

I have heard this terminology concerning global warming and certain environmentalists. I was wondering if anyone has more information about this group of class of people.

Answer 1

"Deep ecologists" are people whose mission is to see that mankind lives in a closely meshing harmony with the natural world, affecting it as little as possible.

Extreme deep ecologists are often a target for anti-environmentalists, and an easy one, since they have a great suspicion of most any technology.

More thoughtful ones, like the website cited above, struggle from dealing with that stigma.  Their purpose is simply that we examine carefully what we're doing, and choose paths of least impact.  It's still a tough sell to a spoiled world that believes in man's right to simply use the Earth as he sees fit.

Answer 2

Deep Greens are usually Deep Ecologists:

See the Wiki entry here which is very good.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_ecolog...

Note the principles (quoted)

1. The well-being and flourishing of human and nonhuman life on Earth have value in themselves (synonyms: intrinsic value, inherent value). These values are independent of the usefulness of the nonhuman world for human purposes.

2. Richness and diversity of life forms contribute to the realization of these values and are also values in themselves.

3. Humans have no right to reduce this richness and diversity except to satisfy vital human needs.

4. The flourishing of human life and cultures is compatible with a substantial decrease of the human population. The flourishing of nonhuman life requires such a decrease.

5. Present human interference with the nonhuman world is excessive, and the situation is rapidly worsening.

6. Policies must therefore be changed. These policies affect basic economic, technological, and ideological structures. The resulting state of affairs will be deeply different from the present.

7. The ideological change is mainly that of appreciating life quality (dwelling in situations of inherent value) rather than adhering to an increasingly higher standard of living. There will be a profound awareness of the difference between big and great.

8. Those who subscribe to the foregoing points have an obligation directly or indirectly to try to implement the necessary changes.

A simple but good explanation given here in a similar question I asked 6 months ago.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...

Edit: Little Robber Girl Nice Answer. Joanna Macy is a Deep Ecologist.

Answer 3

inflation will force consumers to conserve energy

Answer 4

me

very deep

http://byderule.multiply.com/journal/ite...

Belladonnadeadlynightshade or Permaculturebella is very deep

So is Bohemian

Hash cookies Bushy

Hash cookies

don`t know about sam but the rest above are good deep fiends

Up the deep

Answer 5

The answer to this is not as clear cut as other answerers have made it seem. The distinctions are blurred, it is a continuum. What the other answerers have recognized is the significant delineation between Deep Ecology and Social Ecology.

An easy way to understand this is in Social Ecology (or sometimes known as shallow ecology) man is central, nature is hierarchical, Man is at the top. Man sees his role as steward of the Earth, takes care of it for his own benefit and that of future human generations.

Deep Ecology recognizes that all things are interdependent and conditional upon each other. That man is a part of, an equal to, all other living and non living things. Each element has intrinsic value for just being as is; A Panda has intrinsic value for being a Panda, that is all it needs to be. A Social/Shallow Ecology approach would be 'what can a Panda provide for us?'

That is the easy bit! Dark Greens get their ideas from many sources, Deep Ecology is one of them as is Holism, Post-materialism, James Lovelock's Gaia Theory and  Fritjof Capra's theories among others.  For example Buddhism which Deep Ecology borrowed many ideas from. It still is not that simple though there are further distinctions. For example what about Environmental Activists? And within the Deep

Ecology movement there are massive differences in views, for example some supporting ideas which could be seen as anthropocentric (man's need is central) rather than Deep Ecology, yet their supporters are clearly Deep Ecologists in all of their other writing and actions.

This is further complicated by the fact that Deep Ecologists have one foot in between two camps Libertarian Extension and Ecological Extension. Libertarian Extension sees all elements within the biosphere as having equal rights, humans, animals, plants and non living systems are equal in status.  Ecological Extension discounts 'rights' focusing instead on the fundamental interdependence and diversity

(Marshall) of all elements within the biosphere, or it's oneness (like in Buddhism). James Lovelock's Gaia theory is  probably the most well known Ecological Extension theory.

If you are talking about who is the Deepest Deep Green, then it has to be Ecological Extensionists, rather than Libertarian Extensionists, (Deep Ecologists have more features of Libertarian Extensionists than Ecological Extensionists, in my opinion, because their view is on Libertarian principles ('law' dictates that EQUAL RIGHTS are extended to all living and non living entities) as opposed to a 'Oneness' as in Buddhism and the Gaia Theory.  

Comment on Byderule's Answer: Byderule, Boho Garnet and I are Permaculturists (among others on this site). We have our own set of Ethics (Earth Care, People Care, Fair Shares) these may be viewed through either a shallow ecology lens (Byderule and Boho's view) or a Deep Ecology lens (the view I am developing). The only person I am aware of who answers on this site who is a Deep Ecologist is Grizzbr1. There are others who have some views which support Deep Ecology, but not fully from what I have seen, but that is a personal judgment and remember it is a continuum! Lol.

http://www.cep.unt.edu/novice.html

http://www.erica.demon.co.uk/EV/EV1.html

http://online.sfsu.edu/~rone/Environ/Env...

Answer 6

changing the way we think as essential to changing the way we behave.

this woman teaches a lot of the psychology and principles;

http://www.joannamacy.net/

deep ecology links;

http://www.greatturningtimes.org/links.a...

edit; byde - lol! 'good deep fiends' that's me alright ;-)

Answer 7

Deep Greens are the elves that make cookies...  Due to global warming they have moved out of their trees and dug DEEP into the underworld....

Answer 8

You may be referring to Deep Ecology. From the site below:

"The distinguishing and original characteristics of the deep ecology movement were its recognition of the inherent value of all living beings and the use of this view in shaping environmental policies."

This approach is either likely to become more popular in todays times, or fade further into the background.  A new book by Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger, "Breakthrough: From the Death of Environmentalism to the Politics of Possibility," argues essentially that although environmentalism isn't dead, it ought to die.

I think it needs to evolve, and an evolution towards the Deep Ecology approach would be a pretty good way to go.

Answer 9

The pejorative term is radical environmentalist.  

This is the new term created by environmentalists to distinguish those who believe human ingenuity can solve this problem (light greens) and those who believe only a fundamental shift in the very way we conceive of ourselves will solve it; and that anything less will fail and is unacceptable because 1) it delays the inevitable and 2) every bit of ecosystem lost is for all practical purposes irrecoverable.

Deep Greens think like this:

We have met the enemy and he is us.

The sheer scale of our mass delusion is staggering.

When the environment gets used up we shall be awakened from this dream and the folly will come to an end very quickly.

It's about facing the truth.

Answer 10

I've never heard the term.  Sounds like intellectual vegitarians.

In general labels are a crude attempt to classify large groups of people, often for the purpose of mischaracterizing their views.  I would view anyone who used an extreme label like that with extreme suspicion.  

Do the professional propaganda jerks really think that we haven't caught on to their tactics?