Real Ecology is the real relationship with Nature. It’s not another (new) kind/form of environmentalism, although technically you can call it that. Apart from all the other forms of environmentalism it’s based on: being real, realness and reality.
The main personification of this alternative is simple: the book that represents it is printed on recycled paper.
The whole idea of Real Ecology is based on a few principles: the realness of this alternative, the inhuman state of body and mind (being), being an alternative, inner change and non-contribution. The issues that Nature is dealing with are also defined clearly: overpopulation, evolution and human nature.
# # #
The eBook version can be purchased here
The printed version (printed on recycled paper) can be purchased here
# # #
A few extracts from the text (page numbers correspond with the printed edition): “Is it really that bad? Bad enough that someone needs to kill someone? Or that someone has to die?” In the collective functioning (as apart of globalization) of modern human existence nobody is directly responsible for the ecocide. Everybody contributes to the problem, ignore the problem and therefore everybody is guilty. And as nobody wants to be punished, nobody is. No one to blame.
Real Ecology doesn’t advocate violence and/or killing humans. Simply because anything less than the sudden disappearance/vanishing of the human species (keeping Nature intact at the process) is irrelevant, obsolete, and useless. Futile. Real Ecology is the understanding that this disappearance/vanishing of the human species would really save (!) Nature and that’s not going to happen.
“You see things only from the other (negative) side” or “You see everything black.” Yes, someone has to. Many are humans and see only one side: the human side.
A Real Ecology lecture? Not happening as there is no point; there is no audience.
The example of a Real Ecology lecture/presentation: The hall is full of humans, I hit the stage and start “How many of you have a car and used it to come here? Please leave. How many of you are smokers? Obese, psychoactive drug users? Please leave.” Etc.
Not many will be left in the audience, would they?
Real Ecology on the other hand believes that if some of the other life forms have the means they would probably try to exterminate the human species as a pest.
Why would the ecocide happen in the first place if it wasn’t a result of human stupidity, human nature, greed, and financial profit?
The easiest thing that exists is to turn off the tap. Or in the terms of the ecocide “The easiest thing is to turn on the tap.”
All those life forms are dying so that modern humans can have hedonism, obesity, convenience, and health problems. Human nature will simply not allow us to save anything including ourselves.
Humans will find out that they did something wrong after they cut down the tree. When it’s too late.
The ecocide doesn’t necessary mean reaching the point where the planet becomes uninhabitable by humans. It’s the death of biodiversity, the extermination of most life forms (fauna and flora), complete deforestation, and many more. Any of these or all of them.
The ecocide will not be completed (reach the state of constant pain and suffering) in the life time of all humans living today.
Page 130Humans are used to doing what they want and getting away with it. There was more and there is still more available. It feels like it could go on forever; at least until everybody alive today is dead.
No one is directly responsible for the ecocide. It’s completely improvable. Neither are the workers cutting down trees (deforestation) or the heads of corporations that see the financial profit. Even if someone is responsible; they are in a human fashion: compromise, corruption, and forgiveness. Backed by law, popularity, political correctness, etc. If nobody will arrest, prosecute, jail/execute you (for any reason whatsoever) then you didn’t commit the crime.
1) these humans have human rights: the right to breed and to be this way. They have the right to procreate more humans like themselves.
The most efficient discussion/presentation about the planet/environmentalism/ecology/Nature would be if the attendance would be depraved of air for two minutes (multiple times). Then depraved of water for three days. And food for two weeks. Then the real relationship with Nature and/or the realization of the problem would (probably) have a different meaning. Not sooner. Then perhaps there would be a better perspective of what is at stake. The audience would actually listen and understand what’s being said. Would it create/start ecology after it’s over? Doubtful.
Real Ecology is trying to achieve a very hard thing: understudying that water, air and soil (with many other things) are more important. “More important than humans?” Yes. Especially more important than the ‘humans first’ concept. This understanding doesn’t need more opinions or knowledge, it’s very easy to find out if it’s a fact or not. Death will tell you all about it once you die of thirst. Or maybe try painthat thirst, lack of oxygen and hunger create.
The size of pain that you inflict is irrelevant, that you do isn’t!
Real Ecology (keeping the originally in mind, based on it) doesn’t think that one has a more immediate issue than breathing.
“This has no environmental or even literary value.” No it does not. Ecology, Nature (and its protection) has nothing to do with environmentalism and literacy. Its value have a different form; it’s on a different level than what humans perceive as value (material or human). It’s something higher, hard to understand and feel, especially for modern humans. It’s spiritual.
Humans don’t live, they continue to exist. The main goal is ensuring the continuity: it doesn’t need standard, purpose, worth or quality. It needs continuity and quantity.
Many can say with ease “I never heard Nature complain about the way we treat her, did you?”
Just like with destruction. Until a complete stop (and a few slowing down attempts made by popular environmentalists) the ecocide will be real (and happening). It’s not the size that’s defining its realness: it’s the actual happening, the process. Until not a single human destroys Nature, the ecocide is real/exists.
Most of modern humans literally avoid all kinds of harshness and challenges at any cost.
This is about importance and not popularity.