💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › fire-reclus.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 10:25:11. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

➡️ Next capture (2024-07-09)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Reclus
Author: Fire
Date: Spring/Summer 2007
Language: en
Topics: green anarchy, Green Anarchy #24, Elisée Reclus, progress, enlightenment, domestication
Source: Retrieved on 26 August 2018 from http://greenanarchy.anarchyplanet.org/files/2012/05/greenanarchy24.pdf
Notes: from Green Anarchy #24, Spring/Summer 2007

Fire

Reclus

Elisée Reclus ...

Just as I begin my exploration, a huge periwinkle blue dragonfly enters

my mid-autumn world. Hovering just above the pond a few feet away. I

appreciate its lacy wings that seem so delicate yet are strong enough to

carry the creature great distances. Strong enough to cause ripples

across the water’s surface. What is it doing? Is it looking for

something to eat? What shall I do with it now that it has entered my

world? An infinite number of possibilities exist for me and this unique

creature. I could study the movement of its wings and their effects on

other lives of the pond. I could capture and cage it for further

examination (or to merely admire whenever I wished). Then again, I could

kill it and dissect it to better understand the mechanics of flight. I

wonder if it’s edible? How would it taste? Would it nourish me? A

thousand possibilities, a thousand thoughts flying around inside my

head. Filling the spaces between us...I begin again.

Reclus is …

Sharp and darting movements mark my dragonfly’s maneuvers. Is it

searching for something beneath the water? Is it dancing with its own

reflection? Is it awakening to it’s conscious? Is it... ARGH! I do love

my curious nature, my inquisitive and contemplative mind. But these

qualities keep getting in the way of simply enjoying the dragonfly’s

marvelous presence. Its gift to my day. Why can’t I simply dwell in its

freedom of movement and of time; far more expansive than mine. Or so it

seems from the perspective of a one who is limited by boundaries far

more insidious than of a perceived absence of a proper consciousness or

shorter lifespan or...

Reclus is dead!

And here I am, spending my too-quickly-waning fall days aiding in his

resurrection. Bringing back to life yet another long-departed,

enlightened-European, male anarchist. Beyond the obvious academic

credentialing that his revival has brought, why do we care about the

words and activities of one dead for over a hundred-fifty years? Did he

discover something profound in his world travels as a preeminent

geographer? Can he further clarify our perspective on the current and

potential future of our worlds? Is there anything in his ancient

assessment that remains relevant today given the scale of unpredicted –

and unpredictable – human-directed geographical and social changes

(a.k.a Progress) scraped from our bones since his time?

Humanity is nature becoming self-conscious.

What is this great self-consciousness Reclus insists humankind must

develop and spread? From conscientia, knowledge-with or shared

knowledge, numerous systems of thought have evolved around the notion of

consciousness. Commonalities include subjectivity, self-awareness,

sentience, sapience, and the ability to perceive oneself in relationship

to one’s environment. It is often tied quite closely to conscience – a

moral sensibility.[1] Is it an inherent aspect of higher life forms as

most thinkers suggest? Or does it emerge from human intelligence and its

constructs? Particularly ideology.[2] Over and over Reclus speaks of

humans AND nature, maintaining the artificial separation that continues

to pervade the modern world view where humans are invariably placed

outside of – and most often above – all other life forms. Reclus does

attempt to overcome this hierarchy and concomitant domination through

rhetorical exercises that are wholly unconvincing despite any sincerity

of attempt. What was the state of Reclus’ consciousness when he chose to

explore and map the world and its human inhabitants? Did he, could he,

with his great human intelligence and moral conscious KNOW that his

works would be used by states and empires to conquer and destroy? By the

industrialists he railed against to further exploit the coexisting land

and life? By scientists and technologists to further the reach of human

domination? Reclus suffered, as surely we all do, from a certain

shortness of vision. Our eyes shaded by motivations imposed by society,

by ideological preconceptions and presumptions left unquestioned.

One test for the existence of consciousness is based on the human

observation of animals gazing into a mirror. If said authority deems the

animal has recognized itself, the animal may be conscious. If he could

look in the mirror today, what would Reclus see?

The dragonfly appears to be gazing at its own reflection. Am I

witnessing – or am I influencing – a beginning of self-awareness? Is it

situating a human morality in place of instinct, experience, and

non-linear adaptation? Oh, but wait! Could my dragonfly be giving thanks

and praise to the Buddha cemented into the artificial pond? Can it

absorb Buddha consciousness through a concrete icon? Can you? So many

possibilities. Far more than language, no matter how poetic, can

describe.

Looking through the mirror of history, all sorts of justifications and

rationalizations have been built into our consciousness. Reclus may have

abandoned the official religion of his preacher father, but he held onto

the notion that humanity would be saved by a higher purposed, globalized

morality. A morality that has ALWAYS been used to bend all of life to

others’ wills. That requires someone to determine and enforce it. What

morality and unquestioned rules and judgments frame your reality? What

ideologies underlie your perception of the world, thus consciously

directing your actions? How many and which acts have become quite

unconscious?

I don’t know if other creatures have this thing called consciousness,

but I am disturbed by Reclus’ glorification of a human consciousness

that no matter how one defines it, has brought with it a power so strong

it has overridden all other possibilities of how humans might be truly

of their world.

Is it my particular madness to think I’d be better off with the

consciousness of a dragonfly than of domesticated human?

When the cities grow, humanity progresses and when they shrink the

social body is threatened with regression into barbarism.

Reclus was a great fan of Progress so he did not sufficiently question

the pervasive notion that humans have an innate mandate to advance their

lot through the Sciences and particularly through its materialization in

more and more advanced technology. His dialectical approach to the

question of cities, culture, agriculture, institutions often seems more

an apology than a means of questioning. Cities are an absurdly complex

way of organizing human life. They require authorities and bureaucrats

in institutional settings who know how to keep them going. Cities

require the importation of even the most basic necessities: food and

water. Importation that has always meant and will always mean, theft

from other life outside the city. The city requires massive amounts of

human and non-human energy just to maintain its fragile equilibrium. How

can this mean anything other than a continued exploitive division of

labor as glorified in Reclus’ and others’ worker ? No one has yet

described how cities can continue to exist without more and more

advanced technology. Technology which first enlarges the human impact

then spreads it farther and deeper than humans with only the energy of

their bodies and simple tools in hand could ever accomplish. The polis

exerts a pressure so great upon the land and air and water – on all life

within and without – it has never failed to create an explosive discord.

If Rita had had a human conscious, would it have spared this city on the

edge?

Suddenly, the dragonfly charged right at me, aiming at my head then

quickly disappearing from my view. But, never again from my awareness.

With that single startling act even more thoughts leap into my mind. Was

it drawn to me because of my great human consciousness? Was it as

curious and appreciative of me as I was of it? Could the dragonfly have

known the thousand possibilities of its demise at my hands and so was

warning me away? Or was I just another obstacle to be dodged on its

afternoon free-flight?

Alas, the most horrific thought of all could not fail to enter into the

realm of Fire and dragonfly possibilities: this beautiful creature could

be – if not now, one day all too soon – a replicant, a robot, a spy, or

worse.[3] This thought wrenches me towards a paranoia only possible in a

world where the architects of the future go unopposed as they design the

next, new and improved version of surveillance and killing-technology to

deal with those whose wings (however weakly) send disturbing ripples

across the surface of their artificial landscape.

With this last raging thought, I am finally able to shrug away the

intellectual games and feel the simple pleasure of sharing a warm,

vibrant fall day filled with that moment of beauty, of the wild and

expansive freedom of a dragon-fly dance.

Elisée Reclus is dead, but he is not alone.

In the years since he ceased breathing – and I think it’s time I stopped

breathing for him – countless billions have joined him. The massive

human-caused extinctions that continue to escalate are a direct result

of a refusal to recognize, contemplate, and challenge every new

progressive incursion into our worlds. This is not because we do not

question authority. It is because we do not reject it at base. We rely

on the authority of official thinkers and big S scientists, politicians,

professors, leaders, and thousands of other mediators to tell us what is

right, what will work and what won’t, what makes sense and what will

bring our salvation. Layers of civilized logic have all but severed our

connection to what it is we really need and might expansively desire;

forcing us to see these two as separate far too often. We are even more

removed from how to fulfill our wildest dreams without destroying the

environment that contains it all.

All the world is ours, each one of ours. But we can only know it from

our own center where all we need-want is within our grasp. And we must

take it back from those who wrest it from us daily. Or to whom we give

it up so willingly. To live our own lives as we choose, not in servitude

to others and their ideas, but in impassioned explorations, experiments,

and uncertainties. To take all we want, but with a wholism that includes

a direct, sensual, intellectual, emotional consciousness ; what I have

come to think instinct might actually be. To locate that place where we

cannot fail to heed the warnings of others issued when we go too far;

when we may cause irreparable harm to the world we love and wish to

keep. Can we get back to our selves, those strong and free individuals

who cavort with all the natural wonders that we choose and who choose

us? How do we prepare ourselves to confront the consequences of those

choices?

Reclus was “ahead of his time” and his life’s work added a depth and

breadth in much of the early environmental movement. But we would be

foolish to lay our faith at Reclus’ enlightened feet. Faith in

scientific, technological – that is, Progressive – solutions has led us

directly to the dire straits we find ourselves trying to navigate.

Despite his atheism and break with “conservative” religion; despite his

dedication to an anarchist ideal of liberation, Reclus’ view of the

world was rooted in a belief that humans have a Special place in Nature.

He – like so many – merely exchanged his patriarchal god above for the

equivalent below, a universal morality that does not, cannot, and ought

not exist. His much acclaimed statement, “Humanity is nature becoming

self-conscious”, exemplifies my greatest concern with his legacy.

What need has the free-flying dragonfly for a human consciousness? Where

would the wild river go, once so imbued, that it has otherwise avoided?

The earth and all its inhabitants are reeling from the great human

conscious!

Until each domesticated human grasps the fullness of life in her own

eager hands; feels its possibilities coursing through his veins; screams

their own warnings; and recognizes their individual connection to the

wretched, beautiful whole that Reclus at times so eloquently described,

the “environment”and “nature” will remain separated abstractions shaped

by yet another external authority. An authority that delivers solutions

through the stick of objective universal righteousness and the carrot of

progress. Some, including Reclus, say that primitive humans understood

this symbiotic relationship with life. Perhaps this is true, but we are

here now. Can we create paths to our own liberation and release our

choke hold on all the rest?

Reclus may inspire those who seek refuge in the past. I am most inspired

by those I meet and play with today. Perhaps the whimsical words of one

of my very much alive anarchist friends, Apio, will inspire you to

explore some of the thousands of wild possibilities of being in your own

world:

Sometimes, if I am out on a cloudless night when the moon is full, I

will reach up and grasp the moon between a finger and my thumb. I close

my eyes and pop the moon into my mouth. It leaves a taste on my tongue

that is icy and sweet like wintergreen or mint. But that taste is really

the taste of a star-filled, winter mountain-top sky glowing icily in an

infinite brilliant dance of the darkest night with the exquisite light

of countless stars. I open my eyes with joy at seeing the moon still

dancing before me. It is wonderful to be able to take something so

completely into yourself without losing it, to experience it so

completely.

[1] The French word for conscience and conscious are one and the same –

conscience.

[2] Thomas Aquinas describes the conscientia as the act by which we

apply practical and moral knowledge to our own actions. Descartes

described conscious experience as imaginings and perceptions laid out in

space and time, as viewed from some point. Marx considered that social

relations ontologically preceded individual consciousness, and

criticized the conception of a conscious subject as an ideological

conception on which liberal political thought was founded. Nietzsche was

the first one to make the claim that the modern notion of consciousness

required the modern penal system, which judged a man according to his

“responsibility”. Perhaps the most accurate description of the modern

conscious is W.E.B. Du Bois’ double-consciousness – the awareness of

one’s self as well as how others perceive us, which has led to an

unconscious conformance to their perception.

[3] DARPA is asking scientists to submit design proposals that would

allow implantation of engineered material into insects, such as

dragonflies and moths for surveillance and attack.