Ecology is the study of the oikos, man’s dwelling place. In its broadest sense, then, it is a science of the totality, a contemporary iteration of the perennial doctrine of holism. More specifically, as it was coined by Ernest Haeckel in 1973, Ökologie denotes a branch of science dealing with the relationship between living beings and their environments.

As its name suggests, this blog was created with the purpose of evaluating ecological politics and philosophy from the perspective of the traditional Right. It was inspired by Julius Evola’s efforts at assessing and critiquing Fascism from the right, in order to determine what elements might be valuable in the restoration of traditional social order and what needed to be discarded.

However, scientific and philosophical explanations of man’s relation to nature are not themselves sufficient to restore the reign of the natural order in man and society. Hence the concept of Integral Ecology, which – like integral tradition and integral Catholicism – denotes a holistic approach to the subject at hand. Rather than viewing political ecology as an end in itself, I contend that an ecology of the Right (shorn of its modernist heresies) is a necessary component of the reactionary/counter-revolutionary ethos. One cannot exist without the other.

The purpose of this blog is therefore to fill a niche, as it were, in the broader reactosphere, by drawing attention to the ecological dimensions of the traditional society.

This website will examine the links between the ecological worldview and its antecedents in traditional metaphysical doctrines. The political implications of an ecological worldview will also be examined, bearing on such topics as immigration, population, technology, wilderness, democracy, and science. Given that a society committed to ecological integrity will necessarily be a state based upon tradition and authority, this blog will also consider matters not obviously linked to environmental politics and ethics, such as reactionary statecraft, cultural history, economics, and any other subject that suggests itself.

In the broad nexus of anarcho-capitalists, neoreactionaries, ethnonationalists, esoteric national socialists, and integral traditionalists that comprise today’s alternative right, I find myself more aligned with the traditionalist end of the spectrum. Perhaps this is why I emphasize the connection between ecological concerns and the rightist society more strongly than many others within this milieu.

Some vague autobiographical information, for those interested. I grew up on the High Plains and in the American Southwest, and over the course of my childhood rambles cultivated a love for the wild and silent places of the earth. In my youth I viewed such pro-wilderness attitudes as part and parcel of the progressive worldview (which was only natural, given the American political climate) and for a time halfheartedly embraced the dogmas of the left. However, I always knew in some unconscious way that such reverent attitudes towards wild nature are only shared by a minority. Before long I came to realize that the political program of the contemporary left – democracy, globalism, unrestricted immigration, feckless humanitarianism, the desecration of the sacred and the toppling of authority, the promotion of hedonistic individualism, the denigration of truth, beauty, and justice in favor of relativism and artifice – was ultimately incompatible with the survival of the things I cherish most. Within a few years, helped along by Nietzsche, Robinson Jeffers, Evola, and some time living amidst the walled cities of old Europe, I found that I had imperceptibly gravitated towards the Right.