Ecofascism and “lifeboat ethics”

I saw a post here on smol.pub¹ advocating for an organization that seeks to “raise awareness” about “demographic decline” and “the environmental impact of mass immigration”.

I write about the environment a lot, so I want to be unequivocal in my opposition to rhetoric such as this.

The Out of the Woods Collective has already offered a thorough critique of this philosophy², and I won’t repeat their points here.

Instead I want to remind folks that, all things being equal, most people are happy to live in the same place that they grew up (and the few people who are interested in setting out to explore the world are the exact sort of creative and interesting people you want to come live next to you). But all things are not equal. When “mass migration” occurs, it is always the result of violent displacement. Raising concerns about the “environmental impact” of displaced people isn’t just heartless and cruel, it’s also illogical: the environment is in crisis because of the actions of the wealthiest people and nations in the world, but migrants are almost always come from the poorest places. In the 21st century, many migrants are themselves among the first real victims of climate change.

As the effects of climate change become more apparent in the daily lives of those of us in “the global north”, we will see a rise in fascism wrapped in green, and well-meaning but naive people will get pulled in by its propaganda. This is why it’s important to vocally oppose these talking points now. There’s plenty of everything to go around, we just need to make sure it’s shared.

¹ I won’t be linking it — I’m not looking to start an internet fight.

² The Dangers of Reactionary Ecology, by the Out of the Woods Collective