The phrase "male, pale and stale" has become a cliché in political discourse, widely used by journalists,
commentators and certain layers of activists. Indeed, it is now commonly heard inside the Green Party.
Yet "male, pale, and stale" is actually a very pejorative label, negatively stereotyping a whole section of the community.
It crudely assumes that just because people have this or that characteristic, they will therefore have certain views and behaviours. "Male" and "Pale" of course translate into white men with the further suggestion that such people are very likely be "stale".
"Stale" is commonly linked in dictionaries with age, as in something rendered impaired,
unpalatable, or unfit because it has become old, passed its best-before date, and so forth. At other
times, it might be used to imply tedious, perhaps because of overfamiliarity. Synonyms include "arid",
"boring", "stodgy", and "weary". In short, it is a very negative word and, when used in the phrase
"male, pale, and stale", smears a whole generation of white men, implicitly those of older years. It is
reasonable to conclude that its usage is very ageist, whatever the intentions of its users. Many would
be quick to object to a phrase such as "female, black and stupid" ("stupid" being another dictionary
acronym for "stale").
The fact that a term may be in common use does not justify its employment. That it may act
as convenient shorthand similarly provides no justification. All sorts of words and phrases are
commonly used to describe members of BME communities, for example. Many of them are racist and
are rightly not employed by decent people. Similarly, it is sadly easy to think of words used to describe
people with problem such as mental illness but, again, it is right to reject them because of the negative
connotations they carry. The term "ageing society" is very widely used but again it suggests problems
with a growing number of people who are 'past it', a 'burden', no longer 'productive' or 'useful' (which
is why the phrase "a longer living society" is actually better, suggesting, as it does, a positive
achievement).
There is, in fact, no escaping the fact that "male, pale, and stale" is very negative stereotyping.
It insults a large layer of people, many of whom, regardless of age, are active, creative and working
hard for the good of everyone. Just imagine a speaker at a Green Party conference using the phrase.
In the audience, typically there will be a large cohort of white men over the age, say, 55. "Male, pale
and stale" directly insults them. Furthermore, its use outside party events would have same effect on
a large section of society (not the wisest tactic when the average age of men is indeed rising, very
roughly 65+ males being 8% of the population, with above average likelihood of voting in elections).
Power Words
Words are undoubtedly powerful tools. They are not just carriers of communication but also strong
shapers of meanings and likely responses. In politics, all sides routinely try to use words and phrases
that get attention, lodge ideas in the memory, elicit agreement with their users' views and, last but
not least, do damage to what are deemed to be unworthy and other otherwise unacceptable values,
policies and practices.
The greatest challenge today, for example, is undoubted, what is happening to climatic
patterns. It is common practice to talk of "climate change". Yet that term suggests something natural
and normal, not necessarily a bad thing or else something to be accepted even if it causes problems
(which in any cause might 'naturally' be rectified in the normal course of things, as indeed Donald
Trump recently has been claiming).
That is why those who can see the terrible dangers have tried to shift the discourse towards
"climate breakdown" or "climate catastrophe". At the very least, it was necessary to prefix the term
with "anthropogenic" or "human-caused" to underline that what is happening is far from natural or
normal. Indeed, the struggle was very much set back by another phrase, "global warming". It almost
invited people, especially, of course, in more temperate climates, to think of something rather
positive, with pleasantly warmer weather, rather that extinction-threatening global overwarming.
Food production provides more examples. Terms such as 'junk food' have been quite effective
in making the point about unhealthy diets. 'Agribusiness' and the spelling of farming as 'pharming'
similarly spotlight the concentration of farm ownership, the dominance of food conglomerates such
as Unilever, and the dependency on dangerous chemicals (toxic sprays, abuse of antibiotics etc). Yet,
to return to the point of above, it would be untrue and politically counter-productive to tar all farmers
with the same negative brush. There are a good few farmers who employ organic methods and are
developing, to use another powerful word, a "regenerative" agriculture.
Precision and nuance matter!
Distorting Reality
It might be argued that, nonetheless, "male, pale, and stale" not only pictures reality but also promotes
a deeper understanding of our collective problems. Actually, it only paints part of the picture, whilst
actually reducing insight to very crude and deterministic monochrome. Green analysis is gravely
impoverished by use of such terminology, regardless of whether it is convenient or not.
Furthermore, there are plenty of non-pejorative ways of describing a situation where men
numerically dominate, say, a board of directors, a sector of employment, professional body, trade
union committee, parliamentary chamber or political executive. Obviously, one can cite the relevant
statistics and quickly demonstrate that women are under-represented. The same goes for other
groups who may be unfairly marginalised. Simple statements about unfairness and imbalance will
suffice. There is simply no need to indulge in sweeping generalisations about the inherent nature of
this gender or that ethnic group, let alone age band.
It is certainly true that looking at, say, the EU leadership and other such groupings, one tends
to see ranks of older white men clad in the same grey suits. The picture above of the Brexiteer
European Reform Group certainly ticks the 'male' and 'pale' boxes (though 'stale' certainly does not
do justice to their actively toxic and, in some ways, quite novel politics!). Many judges also look rather
similar: they are too of a certain age with a narrow range of backgrounds (public schools etc). In a
somewhat pot-calling-kettle situation, a recent House of Lords report attacked the UK judiciary for
being too dominated by older white men.
Yet institutions do change in terms of composition but that does not necessarily lead to
something better. The 'City' used to be peopled by the rather grey 'bowler-and-brolly' male brigade
Today's 'yuppie' financial wheelers and dealers do look rather different, though there may be a higher
percentage of 'Gordon Gecko 'greed-is-good' plunderers in their modern ranks. Nine out of the ten
top richest people in the world are indeed white men but not necessarily 'old', with the richest, Jeff
Bezos, having been born in 1964). Chrystia Freedland's recent study of the new class of 'plutocrats'
did indeed find few women. But, again, the fundamental issue is the structure of such inequality that
is wrong, not the gender, ethnicity, or age of its personnel per se. The fact that, in 2017, 'Forbes'
magazine felt able to announce a "record-breaking" year for "Self-Made Women Billionaires" is not
exactly real progress from a Green point of view.
Moreover, it is both ignorant and counter-productive to try and promote equality for women
by demeaning men with phrases such as "male, pale, and stale". We should follow the lead of Martin
Luther King who welcomed white Americans into the ranks of the Civil Rights movement. Emphasising
differences, as with 'identity politics', actually weakens the unity we need to defend the sustainable
common good. Furthermore, movements claiming to promote greater rights for identity groups have
at times acted in blocks that reduced the much need unity[i] as well as threatened free speech.[ii]
For Greens, one identity overrides all others, that of co-dependents of a finite planet, one
whose life-support systems are the precondition for whatever policies we seek for greater inclusivity
and fairer representation. Otherwise, all that beckons is the equality of the grave.
Bad Men
The fundamental assumption underpinning much use of the phrase "male, pale, and stale" is, of
course, that of some intrinsic qualities of females compared to their male counterparts. Thus, it is
common to see a linkage of aggressive male machismo with war and more general violence in society.
It is indeed true that men are the overwhelming majority of perpetrators of atrocities from what
Timothy Snyder has called the "bloodlands" of eastern Europe to the horrors of the Bangladesh war
of independence, Rwanda and Darfur.
Similar traits might be linked to what Ulrich Beck has called 'risk society', with its careless
gambling with inherently dangerous technologies such as geo-engineering and much more. With an
equally aggressive will to more power over both other people and the rest of nature, the
precautionary principle is thrown to the wind. Indeed, many 'eco-feminists' such as Carolyn Merchant,
Susan Griffin, Elizabeth Dodson Gray, and Val Plumwood have linked the 'domination of nature' and
general environmental despoliation to 'patriarchy'. In the same vein, a recent article in 'Scientific
American' claimed that "Men Resist Green Behaviour as Unmanly."
Women are correspondingly linked to more nurturing, caring and cooperative capacities.
Thus, there is a quite common argument, one not just made by females, that Parliament would suffer
less from negatively confrontational politics and generally boorish behaviour if there were a much
higher percentage of women in the chamber. Some go even further. According to the title of Caroline
Shearer's book, "women will save the world". Or as another website 'Wise Women' puts it, "the
adversarial, aggressive and competitive nature of patriarchy must be rapidly countered by the
collaborative, compassionate and creative energy of a billion women rising."
The same trope reappears in specific fields. Take the somewhat more mundane matter of the
retail industry. The so-called 'Queen of the Shops' Mary Portas argues women can save the 'High
Street', firmly putting the blame for the current difficulties of stores there on what she calls, in a
variation of the theme, "Dad's Army" ('Independent', 24/11/18). The woes of the High Street stores
are, then, the fault of the uninspired, stick-in-the-mud ageing men who run the sector (not, say,
competition from on-line shopping and the out-of-town megastores with abundant car parking space).
Portas says we "have to understand women", as if all women are the same.
Digging deeper into the 'male and pale' trope, Portas suggests that men are driven by a
"macho, numbers-focused approach" and an "alpha culture", unlike women, who, she further asserts,
are characterised by "creativity, empathy, instinct, collaboration and trust". Yet it is not clear that the
needs of bus travellers, for example, are better served by Ann Gloag than her brother Brian Souter of
the ruthless Stagecoach bus empire.
It is equally unclear that real human needs are being met by wellness gurus Gwyneth Paltrow
and her company Goop. Baroness Brady, once called by 'Cosmo' magazine the "Woman Who Has
Changed the World", was not short of some old macho, cutting her way through the business world.
Her promotion as the government's "Small Business Ambassador" perhaps did not alter the realities
of the 'market', economic structures she strongly upholds.
Selfish Old (Male) Gits?
Older men particularly take the flak. For example, the Football Association has been accused of being
outdated, held back by "elderly white men", say five former executives of the governing body (the
utterly rotten FIFA is actually more diverse than the FA). Ageing males are of course blamed for the
election of Donald Trump, the vote for Brexit and more. Along with ageing women, also of the Baby
Boomer generation, they stand accused of living a life of Riley at the expense of the young (job
opportunities, housing ladder, debts, etc).
Again, we have a crude caricature. In reality, it is daft to treat any generation as if it were
homogenous, with no diversity of experience either in its youth (the 60s, for example were not
'swinging' for many young people at the time or later in life). Some older people are not too badly off
if they have both state and occupational pensions (plus, perhaps, a house inherited from their parents)
but problems such as fuel poverty amongst pensioners, loneliness in old age, and so forth are also part
of the experience of now ageing baby boomers (some 50% of all pensioners in the UK have an income
of less than £12,000 a year, with Age UK estimating in 2016 that there are 1.2 million "chronically
lonely" older people in the UK).
It is simply a crude overgeneralisation to put so much blame on the males of the species and
especially older ones. Before the female side of the story is examined, it might be worth first
considering briefly the age dimension by itself. 'Gerontocracy' is of course, normally a 'boo' word. It
is indeed the case that, for example, that the Soviet Bloc was enfeebled in its later years by the number
of aged politicians who desperately clung to power, resisting necessary change (Brezhnev, Honecker,
Kim Il Sung, etc)
Yet age can also bring the wisdom of long experience and a degree of due caution. Many longlasting
tribal cultures certainly valued the role of elders much more strongly than is the case today. It
is not clear that youth is necessarily more positive. Age can bring the benefits of accumulated
experience. Nor does creativity and effort necessarily decline with years. Several scientists and artists
did their best work later in life.
Consider, for example, the remarkable career of biologist E. O Wilson who published key
works such as 'Biophilia' and 'Half-Earth' at respectively the ages of 55 and 85. At the time of writing
David Attenborough was still going strong at the age of 92 while Paul Ehrlich and Jane Goodall was
still writing and campaigning for the Earth at the ages of respectively 86 and 84. Billionaire
octogenarian George Soros, who has funded democracy projects in former Communist states, is surely
to be preferred to his younger enemies such as Hungarian would-be tyrant Victor Orban (55) and our
own enemy of democracy and public welfare Aaron Banks (51). British politics would certainly not be
improved if there were more young men such as Milo Yiannopoulos in power.
Conversely, youth can be 'green', but not in the political sense. Indeed, it is sometimes linked
to youthful excess and general volatility. The average age of the Nazi Party (29) was younger than rival
parties. To be fair, the Nazis received a lot of votes from older parts of the electorate, especially war
veterans, which perhaps ought to remind us of the range of factors at work at any time.
There are indeed many examples of need to avoid any fetish of youthfulness. The Chinese Red
Guards of the repressive and economically destructive Cultural Revolution were of course 'enfants
terribles' indeed. Terrorist groups, for instance, often get most of their recruits from the young. In an
article in 'The Observer' (25/1//18), investigate journalist Carole Cadwalladr notes that former UKIP
leader Nigel Farage on tour in Australia attracted a crowd that was "overwhelmingly male" but also,
she adds, "surprisingly young".
In conventional politics, 'Young Turks' do not necessarily change things for the better. Tony
Blair springs to mind. If we have to have a Tory Prime Minister, it is doubtful that 44-year-old Dominic
Rabb would be better than 78-year-old Kenneth Clarke. According to the Atlantic magazine, "a lot of
people" want Bernie Sanders to run for President in 2020 (he'll be 79 then). An ill 80 John McCain (80)
still managed to cast a decisive vote in Congress to protect 'Obamacare' which, whatever its failing, is
better than what the likes of comparatively youthful Republican Senator Joe Cotton (41) have to offer.
Apparently, the average age of those who joined Labour in the 'Corbyn' surge was 53 , not quite 'spring
chickens' and a majority were middle class men. [The average of Tory members is thought to be not
much older at 57, though one estimate put it at 72, though its validity has been queried)
Of it is as daft to venerate the young as it is to vilify them just because of their age. The point
again is the danger of crude stereotypes. Some people do suffer from a creeping 'conservatism' as
they grow older but others retain their radical spirit. In some cases, there is a danger of a rose-tinted
nostalgia for a past that actually never existed. This seems to have been one motivation for part of
the Brexit vote.
More positively, being longer in the tooth can also create a sharp awareness of what is being
destroyed in the name of 'progress' and 'development', an insight sometimes lacking amongst those
who have grown up amongst things as they are and have accepted it as 'normal'. Perhaps some young
workers take the so-called 'gig economy' for granted for such reasons. Movements such as 'Fight for
Our Future' and 'Extinction Rebellion' have indeed benefited from a certain youthful vigour. Yet, on
'Remain' and 'Climate' marches, there have been people from all age groups which, of course, is surely
all for the good.
Wonder Women?
But let us look more closely at the argument that greater female representation across society's
institutions would, ipso facto, improve matters. A quick canter through history will confirm the
shallowness of such a view and how other variables must be taken into account. There have been
some awful male leaders and male-dominated movement to be sure but there have been plenty of
women down the ages and across very different societies and economic systems who score badly in
the record books. The trope that "men are from Mars, women from Venus' is a bit simplistic. Indeed,
scientific research shows that, behaviourally, there are no great gaps between the two sexes.[iii]
There have been many cruel as well as incompetent male monarchs, for example. But there
have also been some brutal queens too, ranging from 'Bloody Mary' (Mary 1 of England) and Elizabeth
Báthory, the countess of Hungary, a truly prolific murderer. Similarly, Moors in Spain suffered
grievously at the hands of Isabella I of Castile as did French Huguenots thanks to Catherine de Medici.
Jiang Qing ('Madame Mao') certainly did her bit to intensify the waste, cruelty and destruction in
Maoist China. Filipino Imelda Marcos was not so politically active but excelled in greed and the
amassing of illegal wealth.
There are certainly plenty of greedy male plutocrats in the business world but female faces
pop up here and. BET365 boss Denise Coates paid herself an obscene £265m in 2017. The point is of
course is not to change faces but structures, reducing significantly differentials in wealth, income and
power. In other words, policies such as maximum pay ratios and genuinely progressive taxation are
one such tool, not a greater percentage of female billionaires.
The main difference between male and female guards in the Nazi concentration camps seems
to be that the latter were less likely to shoot inmates. Otherwise, they could be just as violent and
cruel. Indeed, they seems to have adapted alarmingly easy to such behaviour since, unlike the men,
they usually had had no prior training but still made the transition quickly from civilian life to their role
in the hell of the camps. Irma Grese, devoted Nazi, nurse and then camp guard at Ravensbrück and
elsewhere was the youngest woman (22) to die judicially under British law.
But such cruelty was not confined to the Nazi social order. Let us look at essentially classless
the first peoples of the current USA. Many accounts rate the Comanche as the most aggressive and
violent tribe. In his study 'Empire of the Summer Moon, American historian S. C. Gwynne notes that it
was usually female members who led the cruel torture of any prisoners that were taken. 'Gender
mapping of violence is clearly quite a complicated matter.[iv]
In today's politics it is clear that simple swapping of women for men, young or old, is not
necessarily a straight step forward. The replacement of the ageing Jean-Marie Le Pen by his daughter
Marine Le Pen did not make the French radical right-wing party, the National Rally, any the more
palatable. It is doubtful if Greece's 'Golden Dawn Girls' would be better for the country than current
Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras or the alternative Left Platform leader, the older male Panagiotis
Lafazanis, let alone the still older Giorgos Dimaras of the Ecologist Greens. The Rohinya people of
Burma have not noticeably benefited from the presence of female politician Aung San Suu Kyi in the
government. What ultimately counts is political worldview, not gender.
Let us examine a particularly popular 'male, pale, and stale' trope, namely that the UK
Parliament is stuffed to the gills with clapped out men. There are certainly quite a few such creatures.
Yet little would be improved if the House of Commons were full of Priti Patels, Andrea Leadsoms,
Amber Rudds, and, horror of horrors, born-again Margaret Thatchers. The gender of Kate Hoey does
not necessarily make her any the better than the typical male member of the Opposition. On many
issues, from gun control and fox hunting to Brexit, more women MPs in Kate Hoey's mould would not
necessarily improve the Commons.
Across in the USA, it may be doubted how much would be better if Sarah Palin were President,
not Donald Trump. Similarly, Senate or the House of Representatives would not be much better if
there were more members representing, say, the Independent Woman's Forum or the Concerned
Women of America.[v] Hopefully lawyers and activists such as Phyllis Schlafly and Ann Coulter will never
join Congress. Such people are far from confined to the USA.[vi]
Novelty Value?
Users of 'male, pale, and stale' not surprisingly tend to praise qualities such as dynamism, freshness
and modernity.[vii] Many others follow suit. Thus, the BBC hosts a festival of what it calls 'free thinking',
celebrating openness to new ideas. The magazine and website 'Spiked' (previously known as 'Living
Marxism') demand that we "question everything". Manufacturers and advertisers are always keen to
suggest that their product is the latest, most innovative, and advanced. We will unite all these buzz
words in just one, 'creativity'. Often it has led to something worse, even disastrous. At the very least,
they often run counter to the green 'precautionary principle'.
The argument is not one of opposition to all innovation (who does not want the safest and
most efficient photovoltaic arrays advances in regenerative agriculture, and so forth?). Rather it is
about a recognition of the need for caution and for a society operating well within the boundaries set
by biogeophysical and social limits to growth. One consequence is an emphasis on 'enoughness', not
'moreness, and a very sober stance regarding the efficacy of assorted 'technofixes' (innovative geoengineering
for climate control, fresh waves of bioengineering for greater food production, 'new
generation' nuclear reactors to fix the problems of old ones, etc).
There are plenty of examples of how 'creativity' (in broad senses used above) has been
thoroughly problematic, if not downright dangerous. The then creative thinking associated with the
likes of Bacon, Newton and Descartes led to a very mechanistic and reductionist worldview. In turn, it
fed what Carolyn Merchant and others have called a 'disenchantment of nature'. The fresh thinkers
of the age proclaimed that humans were above and apart from the rest of nature. In the new thinking,
Mother Earth became some treacherous bitch, to be tamed and made to serve open-ended and
indiscriminate human demands. Similarly, the mind became separated from the body, one
consequence being medical practices that did not really see the patient as a whole person and indeed
a person in context.
Other creative thinkers were to be found in the new schools of economics. There, economics
was reduced to a simple matter of efficient production and comparative advantage. The market would
cater for whatever personal preferences were expressed through consumer demand, its growth
conjuring up ever more output. Another very creative thinker, Karl Marx, was to celebrate the power
of 'productive forces' to smash apart old social relations. Caution was blown to the wind. Conflict was
the thing, with class struggle predestined to bring about a future of economic cornucopia. All in all,
such thinking was very far from Green.
Other toxic strands of 'creativity' include Social Darwinism and Futurism, the latter a violent
homage to modernity and the destruction of all tradition feeding into fascism. Much later, Margaret
Thatcher presented herself as a fresh and dynamic alternative to what was alleged to be the stale
consensus of Keynesianism and the welfare state. Tony Blair also made much of his modernisation
plans to shake up stale schools and so forth, partly using creative devices such as the Private Finance
Initiatives. Meanwhile, the financial sector had been very dynamic, engaging in all kinds of
unsustainable speculation (sub-prime mortgages, credit default swaps etc).
Of late, the ideologues of Silicon Valley have been preaching the gospel of 'creative
destruction', mindless of what it does to all those stale people who think they should have a well-paid,
secure job or a stable community. There are groups such as the Breakthrough Institute who welcome
the new 'Age of the Anthropocene', hyper keen for humans to become what Mark Lynas has called
the 'God Species', lords of the Earth and perhaps beyond.[viii] They support all sorts of 'innovative'
technologies such as genetic engineering, new generations of nuclear reactors, hyperloops, fleets of
driverless cars, artificial intelligence, nanotechnology, geo-engineering and even space colonisation.
One manifestation is the 'Ecomodernist Manifesto' which on close examination turns out to be the
opposite of really green thinking.
It only remains to be added that possibly the most distinctive and indeed novel thinkers of the
20th century was a woman, the Russian-American writer Ayn Rand. She was also one of the most toxic.
Her so-called philosophy 'objectivism' justified the most selfish and aggressive individualism. Her ideas
influenced several figures in the 'Tea Party movement in the USA and, disastrously, Alan Greenspan,
chair of the Federal Reserve, was also under her influence, promoting the 'laisser-faire' that did so
much to bring about the financial crash of 2008.
It might be noted that diversity is another 'hurrah' word amongst people who talk about
'male, pale, and stale'. Yet it too ought not to be accepted as ipso facto a good thing. The mass
emigration of Europeans to North America and Australasia added to human 'diversity' in those lands,
though it was a total disaster for the tribal peoples already there. The influx of young 'gentrifiers' into
old working class communities also adds to social diversity at the start, even if, at the finish, it often
leads to social cleansing of the original residents. Adding brash new glass-and-concrete buildings to
an old city quarter might increase physical diversity of styles but it wrecks what aesthetically and often
socially hung together.
Similarly, invasive species add to biological diversity but the process has led to ecological
decline in one place after another. The chemical industry has been particularly adding all sorts of new
human-made chemicals to the environment each. Alternatively, naturally occurring chemicals are
used on a scale or in combinations contrary to evolution (asbestos etc). The American Environmental
Protection Agency usually has some 300 new chemicals under review at any time. They certainly add
to diversity sometimes disastrously so (leaded petrol, PCBs, CFCs, synthetic plastics).
Greens do not support diversity in many forms. Indeed, it is usually confused with a very
different idea, that of complexity. The latter may well be less varied in simple numerical terms.
However, it is the product of long-term co-evolution, producing structures in which interactions
between the 'parts' maintain the stability and resilience of the whole. That is why monocultures in
farming and forestry are so vulnerable, regularly needing massive injections of artificial fertilisers and
biocides. In a complex system, there is no random diversity but integration in ways that maintain the
common good (at the most basic, survival).
Looking within human society, it is perhaps not surprising then that the history of
'multiculturalism' has been problematic with segments of the population failing to gel, if not far
worse.[ix] In any case, the Green view of social diversity is different. It is about different groups pulling
together to protect and cherish their shared place. It is a politics of 'home' (biogeophysical identity
where one resides), with other identities accorded due rights but within that overarching framework.[x]
It rejects the bland cosmopolitanism that has created what James Kunstler has called "the geography
of nowhere" and Marc Augé "non-places".[xi] It certainly "thinks globally" ('ecosphere') but it also thinks
and acts with the wellbeing of each and every locality in mind ('bioregion').
'Green culturalism' is about sustainable adaptation to and a cherishing of the specificities of
local weather patterns, landforms, waterways and associated biota as well as what is valuable in
human heritage (local architecture, music, cuisine etc). It celebrates 'place' and seeks to promote the
local over the distant, albeit in the context of good neighbourliness and mutually beneficial exchange
(though, of course, within ecological limits on mass transportation). In this field, there have been some
genuinely innovative thinkers on whose work we can draw. They include Lewis Mumford, Leopold
Kohr, William Whyte, Jane Jacob, Raymond Dasmann, Fritz Schumacher, Ian McHarg, Wendell Berry
and Stan Rowe. But it has been side-lined in the new 'grievance group' politics, a corrosive
sectionalism at odds with sustainable common good.
Yet again, nuance is needed. There are many cases where diversity is good. Vibrant spaces
with varied uses are usually better than homogenous zones (often privatised as well). An economy
with lots of different small-scale enterprises is more likely to be resilient than an economy in which
economic 'eggs' are put into a few baskets and/or where a handful of 'too-big-to-fail' monster
businesses predominate. Most cultures have benefited from an infusion of fresh ideas from outside
(though seldom when imposed). Diversity in human society and in the rest of nature creates a degree
of 'redundancy' so, if one part fails or disappears, alternative options remain. What is wrong is the
mindless chanting of 'diversity' as if no further questions were begged.
In Praise of 'Staleness'
'Stale' is of course used as a term of abuse in the phrase 'male, pale, and stale'. Even here there is the
same deadening puerility. If we take 'stale' in the sense of long-lived, familiar, even humdrum, it is not
always such a bad thing, especially when compared to novelty for its own sake and indiscriminate
innovation as well as a contempt for old things and old people. After all, central to green political
thought is conservation as well as prudence, modesty and a due degree of restraint. Most self-styled
'Conservatives' have actually been non-conserving, trashing environments and tearing up
communities.[xii]
Actually, the core of green thinking goes back a very long way. Elements has long been present
in the (unchanging) worldview of many tribal peoples. Perhaps the Chinese Taoists first gave it the
first coherent expression. It very much stresses going with the natural flow, rejecting creative
innovation that disrupt the capacities, rhythms and patterns of nature. Stability, balance, prudence,
and frugality, are often seen as virtues whereas in the worldview of modernism they are vices,
restraining open-ended growth and individualistic laissez-faire. The green worldview is also reflected
in age-old proverbs. Examples include: 'better safe than sorry', 'a bird in the hand', 'look before you
leap', 'count your blessings', 'a stitch in time…', 'waste not, want not', 'too much of a good thing' ….
These observations are most certainly not meant to deny the need for (appropriate)
innovation and change, sometimes quite radical and in a growing number of cases, all too urgent.
Indeed, the Green programme proposes root and branch reform in many sectors. It welcomes all sorts
of new technology, from better photovoltaic cells to biodegradable 'plastic'. It favours a radical break
from the dominant tradition of architecture, especially post-war, to very different forms (think of
Gaudi and Hundertwasser).
It further supports large-scale 'rewilding' and ecological rehabilitation programmes, including
'biophilic cities'.[xiii] It envisages new forms of land use planning and ownership.[xiv] It advocates new
economic tools such as land value tax. Indeed, the whole concept of 'degrowth' to a steady-state
economy is the most radical (and only sustainable) option on the proverbial table.
It most certainly advocates radical and comprehensive action on global overwarming and
other forms of ecological meltdown, the sine qua non for all other goals. Yet, even here, Greens
beware 'big bang' fixes, posing of false either-or choices, the danger of unintended consequences and
'rebound' effects. Green radicalism is, then, tempered with due caution, recognising how easily things
misfire.[xv] Things do bite back. Greens have no time for the Toytown Bolsheviks who call for violent
revolution or mindless calls for general strikes. They are also aware that radical innovations such as
referenda have often produced reactionary results.[xvi]
Caution may indeed seem insipid and rather flat to some, as opposed to the exciting
innovation and daring experiments but often it is the wiser way. But whatever might be thought on
these complicated matters, at least it is not hard to see that use of cheap rhetoric about 'male, place
and stale' can only be a barrier to the precision, nuance and balance needed to answer the age-old
political question: 'what is to be done?'
Older years do not necessarily produce growing staleness!
Endnotes
[i] How America's identity politics went from inclusion to division ;
Why identity politics benefits the right more than the left ;
Against Identitarian and Generational Divide and Rule ;
and
Divided we stand: identity politics and the threat to democracy.
There is an interesting case study here: "Environmental Racism" Divides and Diverts Activists See also: Ecology vs. Social Justice: A Contrived Conflict
As Howard Jacobson put it in the 'Observer': "While Trump and his ilk are busy whipping up hatred and division, the liberal side of the argument has got side-tracked by the endless posturing of identity politics and intersectional victimhood."
[ii] This is a thought-provoking talk on identity politics and the activities of some 'social justice' movements:
Video unavailable (?)
Some of the footage of the events at Evergreen campus is very disturbing: a real threat to free speech but not from the
usual suspects on the Far Right eg
Campus Argument Goes Viral As Evergreen State Is Caught In Racial Turmoil. This threat is raising its ugly head at several places. Read this account, for example:
I got attacked outside the jordan peterson event at queens
or watch:
Jordan Peterson Swarmed by Narcissistic SJW Ideologues after UofT Rally
Chaos (and Order) at McMaster University
For a case study of divisiveness, see:
"Environmental Racism" Divides and Diverts Activists
[iii] Eg The Myth of Mars and Venus ;
Women From Venus? Men From Mars?
[iv] "Hand him over to me and I shall know very well what to do with him": The Gender Map and Ritual Native Female Violence in Early America
[v] Independent Women's Forum or Concerned Women for America
[vi]
On Europe’s Far Right, Female Leaders Look to Female Voters
[vii] For a Green Party example, see: Sian Berry and Jonathan Bartley speech to Green Party Autumn Conference
with the problem posed in terms of a "vapid centrism". Do we want the
'excitement' and of Stalinism, Maoism, Nazism or today's Authoritarian Nationalism (Trump, Orban, Bolsonaro, etc). Such
currents are certainly very 'lively', even if they do cost rather a lot of lives.
[viii] Compare with Aldo Leopold's very green notion of people as "plain citizens of nature"
(see: Aldo Leopold )
[ix] Some challenging questions are raised here in a study that cannot be just dismissed as 'right-wing':
The Poverty of Multiculturalism See also:
A Left Critique of Multiculturalism
and
Political Tribes ~
Group Instinct and the Fate of Nations
How America's identity politics went from inclusion to division
[x]
Home! A Bioregional Reader
[xi]
The Geography of Nowhere and
Non-Places ~ An Introduction to Supermodernity . Note
that Augé links placelessness to the very 'modernity' that enemies of alleged 'staleness' cherish. It is these new
environments that are proving far from stable and resilient (as well as downright boring). John Miller rightly links it to the
intensification of individualism:
Egotopia ~ Narcissism and the New American Landscape.
Alexander Wilson spotlighted the connection to the central technology of 'individuation', the private motor car:
The Culture of Nature North American Landscape From Disney to the Exxon Valdez
[xii] A good example was George Pompidou in France with the ghastly Montparnasse Tower and the 'right bank motorway' in Paris monuments to his contempt for conservation. At one point he also said he was to abolish French cuisine. Need one mention a certain Margaret Thatcher?
[xiii]
Rewildingn ~ It's all about bringing nature back to life and restoring living systems and
Connecting Cities and Nature
[xiv] Eg
Design with Nature ;
An Introduction to A Pattern Language, the Book ;
What is a CLT? Community Land Trusts ;
Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) ;
What is Ecoforestry?
[xv] The Blunders of our Governments by Anthony King and Ivor Crewe – review ;
Techno-Fix ~ Why Technology Won't Save Us or the Environment ;
Why Things Bite Back: Technology and the Revenge of Unintended Consequences
[xvi] Eg
Swiss voters reject ‘fair food’ laws; Oregon Property Land Use, Measure 37; In boost for Renzi, Italy drilling referendum fails to draw quorum; various congestion charge votes (eg Manchester and Bath). Hitler held no fewer than four referenda to consolidate his rule. See also:
Read the most robust Brexit coverage and
Referendums are bad.
|
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Sandy Irvine has been politically active since 1966. He is currently a member of Newcastle Green Party in north-east England, having originally joined the then Ecology Party back in the early 1980s. He is at the moment one of the two representatives from the region on the party's Regional Council, a national body charged with general oversight, strategic planning and the 'signing off' of General Election manifestos. He was a member of the Ecologist magazine editorial board for many years. He is also a member of the national charity Population Matters. Amongst other published work, he co-authored the book A Green Manifesto for McDonalds Optima and a pamphlet Beyond Green Consumerism for Friends of the Earth. Prior to retirement, he worked in a local Further Education college where his specialism was Film Studies. He also spent a year on secondment at Northumbria University as an environmental policy advisor. His MSc was a thesis on reforesting the uplands. Recently he has been very active in local land use battles triggered by the pro-growth strategies of local and national government which, amongst other things, severely threaten wildlife and green spaces in the area. He is married with two grown-up children.
|
![[groups_small]](groups_small.gif)