Britain’s political system is, to use the tired old oxymoron, a ‘representative democracy’. In the wake of the general election result, this absurd charade is
surely fooling less of the people than has been the case for several generations. Only 21 per cent of the 44 million people eligible to vote in May supported Labour.
Would Rankin’s new party be happy to try to transform society having won an election supported by one in fi ve of the electorate? More pertinently perhaps, could an Ecology Party even begin to put its policies in place faced with likely corporate hostility, widespread apathy
and a populous given to believing that its ‘democratic’ role begins and ends with an infrequent trip to the ballot box?
The ecology movement should not be a political movement at all; it should be a social movement. ‘The tragic reality,’ wrote permaculturist Bill Mollison, ‘is that
very few sustainable systems are designed or applied by those who hold power, and the reason for this is obvious and simple: to let people arrange their own food, energy and shelter is to lose economic and political control over them. We should cease to look to power structures,
hierarchical systems or governments to help us, and devise ways to help ourselves.’ As Kropotkin said more than a century ago, ‘it is becoming evident that it is merely stupid to elect politicians and trust them with the task of making laws’.
Instead of a new political deep ecology, the answer lies in a reinvigorated social ecology. Social ecology does
not demand that people hold this or that philosophical or ideological position; it proceeds on an empirical basis, trying to build appropriate local and bio-regional alternatives using participatory democratic forms. For
decades we have had both highly visible ecological protesters and persistent Green politicians, disasters have been highlighted and lobbying has been ceaseless; but all the while the destruction of the earth has accelerated; the solvent effects of capitalism on society have been largely unchecked; and globalisation has
marched onwards.
The task that faces us is not to mould the existing political and economic system into something more amenable to life on earth; there is absolutely no
evidence that that is even remotely possible. It is passing idiotic to believe that we can take a system based on exploitation, warfare and greed, and, by
using the very political and economic practices that drive it, make it sustainable. No, our task must be to replace the system, to create the alternative society
in its midst; as Bookchin suggests, to hollow out loyalty to the power structures until they collapse. This work, which is also the work of the best permaculturists,
organic growers, community activists and good neighbours worldwide, embodies the creation of a better society without the mediation of politicians or their
new parties. It is positive direct action in communities and workplaces.
Building a new society is a big job, but the short cut to transformation offered by politics is an illusion. Only individuals and communities can create the future we want. It may not be glamorous; it may not involve dreaming of drawing up the first ecological budget or Queen’s Speech, but it is honest work and it is a realistic alternative to passive consumption of green products, green parties, green NGOs and even green magazines. The debate we should be having is how best to make social ecology a reality. To paraphrase a misguided politician: go back to your constituencies and prepare to make the government irrelevant.
