Suchergebnisse

THE AUTHOR ARGUES THAT ONE OF THE KEY REASONS FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE MONARCHY IN THE AUSTRALIAN CONTEXT IS ITS INSEPARABLE LINKS WITH ENGLISH CONSERVATISM. HE DISCUSSES CERTAIN PRINCIPLES, OR MYTHS, THAT FORM THE DEFINING IDEOLOGY OF CONSERVATISM, SYMBOLIZED MOST PURELY IN THE POWER OF THE MONARCH. THIS CONSERVATIVE MYTHOLOGY IS EXTREMELY POTENT IN AUSTRALIAN CULTURE, AS CONSERVATIVES OCCUPY CENTRAL AND OFTEN MORE PERMANENT POSITIONS OF POWER THAN ELECTED OFFICIALS. THE CENTRAL TENETS OF CONSERVATISM ARE DISCUSSED IN THE AUSTRALIAN CONTEXT, AND SUGGESTIONS ARE MADE AS TO THEIR NEGATIVE AND CONSTRAINING IMPACT UPON THE POTENTIAL FOR AN AUSTRALIAN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC. THE AUTHOR LISTS WAYS IN WHICH DOMINANT MYTHOLOGY IS INCULCATED INTO THE MINDS OF THE MASSES--PRIMARILY THROUGH POPULAR LITERATURE AND RITUALS, THE PLAYING OUT OF THE LESSONS DERIVED FROM THE MYTHOLOGY.

Following criticism from some of its national member organisations that it marginalised Southern agendas, Friends of the Earth International engaged in heated debates in the 2000s which aimed to address its internal political differences. FoEI defined its positions on democracy, capitalism and social transformation, reorienting itself more towards the global South. The centrality to this process of debate about broad political ideas is unusual; well established and mature organizations do not usually change identities fundamentally. In practice, FoEI did not resolve its differences, but came to a political settlement which made those differences manageable. To interpret the changes in FoEI, the concept of agonistic politics developed by Chantal Mouffe and the idea of a modus vivendi associated with so called realist (liberal) critics of 'moralistic liberalism' are employed. A full account of the process nevertheless requires acknowledgement of the positive effect of solidarity as enabling changes in collective identity.

A consistent thread weaves through all the articles in this edition. Each author, in some fashion, reflects upon the dual concepts of a 'global green public sphere' and the 'global governance state', as they intersect with the politics of environmentalism. Indeed, as is evidenced in the preceding pages, the politics of green concern transmute into a myriad of different collective forms. Despite this diversity of responses found within and between environmental groups, we conclude that most greens cross boundaries in a positive fashion. Through the construction of transnational networks of solidarity, movements become global entities, acting in concert to protect ecosystems and emancipate humans and non-humans from degradation and subjugation and expanding the public sphere of green debate transnationally. In certain instances, however, environmentalism is used as a tool for continued conquest and domination. These instances, although not generally reflective of green movements as a whole, are often writ large due to the relative power, in comparative terms, of the proponents. 'Environment', therefore, can be either a symbol for liberation or repression; emancipation or conditionality. It can be used to support democracy or, alternatively, to support authoritarianism; it can be used to attack neoliberalism and corporate-controlled globalisation, and it can be used to support it; it can be used to lionise concepts of 'the local', and it can be utilised to denigrate local systems of meaning in a neocolonial fashion.

This introduction considers three themes that recur across the various contributions to this collection. The first is the nature of borders and how these have been affected by the increase in transnational collective action and the growth in the power of transnational institutions. The second is the distinction between environmental movements and the social movement forms of environmentalism: meaning that not all forms of environmental movement are social movements. The third is the evidence of the diversity of environmentalisms, which leads us to identify three principal kinds of environmental movement, the postmaterial movements strongest in the USA and Australia, the postindustrial movements that are strongest in Europe and the postcolonial movements of the South.