Environmentalism, Neo-Malthusianism, Anarchism, and Sexuality

Europe, as well as the rest of the world is currently in the state of Environmental Transition (The Green Economy Transition). Mapping the connection between the current environmentalism and issues examined in sexology is the main objective of this study. At the start, it should be stated that environmentalism connects to sexology issues via two links: the Neo-Malthusian movement and the anarchist movement. Neo-Malthusianism and anarchism are both complex and ever evolving historical phenomena. It is also necessary to note that environmentalism is a recent movement, and this does not allow for sufficient historical distance. In addition, environmentalism is subject to highly dynamic development. Neo- Malthusianism represents a contradictory historical phenomenon, on one hand courageously focusing on the most pressing issues decisive for the fate of humanity, while unavoidably wading through the darkness enclosing the existence of humanity on the other hand. However, anarchism is no easier than Neo-Malthusianism. The attitude of anarchism to sexuality is a key methodological issue for this study.

Let’s start with the so-called feminist issue. For example, in the context of Czech anarchism, although this applies universally, the necessity of equality between men and women is recognised in all aspects: in education, in political and work rights, the society’s hypocrisy concerning female sexuality is to be eliminated. While the problem is defined, it is not addressed in its entirety or the solution is postponed to unspecified future, when the feminist issue is automatically resolved as part of implementation of the anarchist utopia. This is characterised by the following features: abolition of the state and private property, collective use of assets, abolition of family and collective upbringing of children. Anarchism is as varied as its attitudes towards definition of the anarchist utopia. However, the features listed above appear in most of the concepts. However, implementation of the anarchist utopia is nowhere in sight, at least not in the 19th century and between the 19th and the 20^th century, yet the concept of free love seems to be present already during this era. This study presents the following hypothesis: it is rather difficult for an independent observer to retrospectively determine the basic proportionality expressing how important the issues of sexuality actually were for anarchism of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20^th century.

The extensive literature on anarchism applies the historical, Polito logical, philosophical, sociological or artistic perspective, but sexology issues only appear sporadically. To continue in the initial contemplation: the fact that sexual topics are rather sparse in literature on anarchism may suggest that these issues were key to anarchism, yet anarchism prefers to avoid them. This is why the author of this study considers anarchism to be an initially hedonistic movement; sexual hedonism is a key motif of anarchism, which was later suppressed and forgotten. Naturally, sexual hedonism is not the only aspect of anarchism, as the anarchist movement strived to address many pressing social and cultural issues of the time. In this context, it is interesting to briefly analyse the life story of Stanislav Kostka Neumann, which is a model, yet unique story of an anarchist living through the turbulent times at the end of the 19th century and the first half of the 20^th century. S. K. Neumann was an individualist, aesthete and poet with strong social awareness. Quite logically, this type of personality must be attracted by anarchism. He considered himself to be a decadent artist and an eminent writer and lived according to the principles of free love. Free love seemed to be his way of intentionally pursuing free sexuality without hypocrisy, outside the limiting bonds of marriage and outside the publicly tolerated system of prostitution.

As an influential member of the anarchist movement, Neumann was involved in the efforts to interconnect the anarcho-syndicalism working class with the anarchist intelligentsia. World War I must have been a massive shock to the decadent poet and individualist anarchist with strong social awareness and the foresighted organiser, as he hailed the soviet revolution with almost religious confidence and joined the communist movement. He died in 1947 subsequently became an icon in the socialist Czechoslovakia; for example, nationalised industrial enterprises bore his name. This is a story of sexual hedonism as the initial source of anarchism and at the same time of the potential for surpassing this aspect. Sexuality is redirected towards showcasing and implementing the social ideal, which is seen as unavoidable.

The study strives to mainly apply the autobiographic approach, as historical personalities represent unique opportunity for synthesis of ideas.

The author of this study touched on the relationship between Neo-Malthusianism and anarchism in his paper entitled On Phenomenology of Neo-Malthusianism Primarily in the Aspect of Birth Rate Control Issues. To quote: “The second paradox of the Neo-Malthusianism is that the movement was haunted by misunderstanding manifested in judicial disputes and scandals throughout its rather tumultuous existence, yet from the modern perspective, it started in the first half of the 19^th century as a socially useful and generally supportable activity from the viewpoint of all social classes. Healthcare workers aimed to eliminate criminal abortions and high morbidity and mortality rate among mothers due to their previous abortions by methodical application of contraception. The question of this attempt being pronatalist or antinatalism is of no great significance. This pragmatic and restrained character of Neo-Malthusianism also suffered by the fact that additional streams used the medical basis of the movement as their starting point. This was, for example, the case of anarchists, who wanted to use contraception for their vision of free love and destruction of the traditional family as a bourgeois anachronism. Perhaps any movement striving to control birth rate with contraception risks to be abused by hedonist anarchism” [1].

Anarchists stress the need for education of young generation being no longer in hands of the state and church. In the Manifest of Czech Anarchists written by Antonín Pravoslav Kalina in 1896, anarchism speaks of itself as follows: “In education, we recognise the need to alter the process to produce strong, invincible personalities with individual independence to prevent occurrence of dependency on the authority caused by mental weakness of oppressed individuals” [2]. The manifest of Czech Anarchists clearly reflects strong influence of the individualists Max Stirner and Friedrich Nietzsche. Similar synthesis of Neo-Malthusianism and anarchism can be observed in the life and work of the unjustly ignored thinker and organiser Paul Robin, who supported the attitudes of M. Bakunin in his disputes with K. Marx in the context of the First International, and therefore was a clear opponent of state socialism. He was the director of the orphanage ad school in Cempuis, France between 1880-1894. As a reformer of the school system, he eliminated religious lessons, supported coeducation and viewed school as a way of achieving spiritual and physical improvement.

From the perspective of the author of this study, his activities were affected by a slight extreme – educating children in handling weapons – although the significance of this aspect cannot be evaluated retrospectively. It is necessary to point out in this regard that anarchism presented itself as an antimilitarist movement. Perhaps teaching children how to handle weapons strengthens the children’s character, as asserted in the Manifest of Czech Anarchists. On the other hand, Paul Robin systematically defended Neo-Malthusian ideas of birth control using the available means of contraception. The aim was to reduce the size of working-class families and thus reduce neglect of children [3]. The life story of Paul Robin shows how Neo-Malthusianism and anarchism may practically complement each other in the effort to address social problems. Anarchism strived to achieve the anarchist utopia, which is believed to eliminate the underlying causes of human poverty, while Neo-Malthusianism attempted to gradually resolve the most pressing consequences of these issues.

The fact that anarchism and Neo-Malthusianism are opposites from the long-term perspective is of little significance in this case. Anarchism assumed that improvement of the society is achievable, while Neo-Malthusianism perceived social suffering as something that needs to be fought against with utmost effort, yet at the same time something that cannot be ultimately resolved.

Women played a very important role in Neo-Malthusianism and their role was so significant that the movement was considered to have a feminist character. Emma Goldman was a trained nurse (she also wrote books about contemporary theatre) and also focused on expressly Neo-Malthusian topics in her lectures. However, she was mainly an iconic personality of the anarchist and feminist movement at the end of the 19th century and in the first half of the 20th century. Her personal stance in many social fights of the time was undoubtedly courageous. Unlike the vast majority of anarchists, she strongly criticised the strategy and practices of the Bolsheviks in the soviet Russia. As Emma Goldman focused on the deformed expressions of the first wave of feminism, her defence of the women’s rights is specific and does not focus on as much the formal rights of women, including the right to vote. To quote: “According to Emma Goldman, the requirement for equal civil rights or the right to vote is important, but the ‘true emancipation does not start at the ballot box or before the court. It starts in the woman’s heart. It is essential that a woman understands this and recognises that her freedom may reach as far as does her strength to achieve this freedom.

The requirement of equal rights is justified and honourable; yet the most important right is the right to love and the right to be loved” [4]. It can be concluded that Emma Goldman was the proponent of sexual revolution in the sense of free love from the women’s point of view. The second wave of feminism and anarcho-feminism reflected her opinions in the 1960s. Goldman was particularly critical of the original puritan moral basis of the United States. Puritanism applies the double standard to the judgement of male and female sexuality: what is allowed to men is forbidden to women. At the same time, a woman is judged mainly as a sexual object; therefore, she is not assessed according to her work, but according to her social role determined by her gender. In this atmosphere of puritan hypocrisy, marriage binds rather than expresses love. Prostitution therefore is only a more radical form of marriage, as a woman sells herself to one man in marriage and she sells herself to multiple men in prostitution. According to Goldman, the concept of free love is the solution to this issue, although free love does not equal promiscuity.

As regards anarchism in the Czech lands of the time, the key motifs of anarchism were also asserted here. These were negation of authority, i.e. anti-statism, rigorous anti-parliamentarism, antimilitarism, anticlericalism as the general idea of anarchism and a major differentiating feature setting apart anarchism from social democracy, as social democracy considered religious faith to be a purely private issue. From the psychological point of view, anarchy was defined as a complete absence of offensive violence also in the Czech lands at the time. Czech anarchism expressed a certain degree of inclination towards Neo-Malthusianism. This can be seen, for example in the magazine Nový kult (New Cult) in 1904. To quote: “It does not interfere with the organisation of the movement and the notion of delivering the greatest possible benefit to the working class at this time is exercised in the promotion of Neo-Malthusianism and particularly ‘provident reproduction’. This 7th volume is mostly filled with articles on the specified topics; this is motivated by the fact that a worker who is subject to social oppression and has many children deteriorates his position and the position of his entire family and children in particular: by doing so, he voluntarily endures greater suffering than he would have endured with fewer children” [5].

Czech anarchism or specifically its decadent literary line was an ideological basis for the description of the anarchist sexual revolution from the male point of view. Czech anarchism as a whole was spiritually unique in a certain sense: it originated in the Czech lands of the time, which were the most important industrial part of the former Austro-Hungarian Empire and participated significantly in international activities of the anarchist movement. It is rather surprising how much space the classical anarchist author, Michail Bakunin dedicated to the description of the Czech revolutionary context during 1848-1849 in his work [6]. The following needs to be stressed out initially: the anarchist sexual revolution from the male point of view did not build on the criticism of religious conservatism, as in the case of women. The basis of sex education and the difference between the sexual roles of men and women were not criticised. The anarchist sexual revolution from the male point of view built on the increasing individualism, the sense of doom of the old times and the hazy outlook for future. All this was expressed in the decadence of the Art Nouveau period.

The vision of male anarchists regarding the assertion of female emancipation, which is a constitutive program element in anarchism and anarcho-syndicalism, is not part of this sexual revolution from the male point of view. Instead, it runs in parallel as part of the overall emancipation purpose of anarchism. Vjekoslav Haber in his text On Decadence looks beyond the horizon with the endless sight of art: “Decadence culminates in the high aristocratism of the spirit. It is a gentle, gloomy sound disseminating the pure scent of the Art… A direction in literature, which is purely individualist, anarchist, free of gods, literary tyrants, a direction not knowing or wanting any laws of literary tendency, a direction denying all tuberculous and scrofulous morality of bourgeois literature. A great, new direction, merry in the gloomy mood” [7]. However, it is important to return to the role Neo-Malthusianism played in the mystical individualist anarchism of Art Nouveau, as this will help us fully understand the anarchist sexual revolution from the male point of view.

For example, S. K Neumann placed the anarchist physical love free of any presumptions, the anarchist questioning of the existing institute of marriage and the Neo-Malthusian concept of limiting birth rate with contraception alongside each other. To quote: “Free love is defined here as a ‘silent contract’ that can be concluded or cancelled according to the circumstances and ‘at one’s discretion’, one in which a person may ‘stay for one hour or for a lifetime’. As regards women, their emancipation and freedom are a combination of economic independence and free maternity, when a woman is in control of conception and pregnancy. As regards men, they should have the option to build a family with a like-minded woman, instead of continuing in the practice of marrying due to inadvertently produced children during more or less random sex. According to Neumann, the control of conception should also improve the mankind, ‘as a gardener selects plants to make them more and more beautiful’ [8].

The issue of prostitution from the anarchist point of view is problematic. The following two aspects are essential for this study: The Nový Kult magazine of individualist anarchism under the leadership of S. K. Neumann explicitly criticises prostitution, referring to it as to a socially existential disease. Prostitution will automatically cease to exist in the anarchist utopia – the realm of truth without pretence.

Neo-Malthusianism assumed that uncontrolled demographic growth could not be combated by changes in the society, for example by abolishing classes. This approach claimed not to actually know the truth of the nature of demographic changes as the key characteristics of the development of humanity. Demographic changes were only known to come from the nature, from biological and civilizational rhythms. The approaches of Neo-Malthusianism were pragmatic and instrumental: to maintain proportionality between demographic growth and consumption of natural resources, humanity must intentionally control demographic growth with consistency reflecting the strictness of these biological and civilizational rhythms to achieve the lowest possible growth in particular in the poorest population. The movement thus strived to eliminate poverty indirectly. The feminism of Landová-Štychová is both, anarchist and Neo-Malthusian. It contains anarchist freedom, as well as Neo-Malthusian necessity. Women is not a machine producing children, the right to abortion is a woman’s authentic right and love as such is not important, whether as free love or as motherly love.

Objective non-parental collective provision of optimal conditions in reproduction and in education of the next generations is the only key issue. Where elimination of prostitution in the ideal anarchist utopia was a peak of the anarchist social idealism in the sexual aspects from the male perspective, the female element of anarchism made the anarchist utopia present through gradual Neo- Malthusian focus on controlling birth rate using contraception. A male anarchist and an occasional Neo-Malthusian yearned for utopia and mentioned a condom, while a female anarchist and a spontaneous Neo-Malthusian saw small utopias within reach through a cervical cap. To quote: “Landová-Štychová counters the image of hungry and impoverished proletarian masses, who are to overthrow capitalism with the humanist and eugenic image in which ‘physically valuable human units may only arise from passionate and loving embraces of young, beautiful and logically and emotionally intelligent people and these human beings can then prevent any abuse and perversion of socialist ideas owing to their fine skills.’ A society that takes delivery of children seriously values every human and their life. Societies that do not control reproduction produce inhumane suggestions, such as killing of the old and sick or satisfaction over the population being regulated by wars”.

This chapter is a partially rephrased part of the study entitled On Phenomenology of Neo-Malthusianism Primarily in the Aspect of Birth Rate Control Issues.

Auguste Comte, the founder of positivism, considered the society to be an organic unit subject to historical principles. Herbert Spencer elaborated on this idea, including demographic topics. Spencer believed that the human society is similar to a biological organism and therefore is subject to self-regulation. Spencer’s approach consequentially opposed the Malthusian and Neo-Malthusian catastrophism, claiming that self-regulation in the sense of reducing birth rate, especially in higher social classes, prevents catastrophes from unfolding as a demographic solution to absolute overpopulation. At the same time, Spencer rides the same wave with Neo-Malthusianism: changes in birth rate and death rate are a dynamic factor continuously modulating demographic growth to ensure that it never grows into autonomous escalation. Spencer was of the opinion that the more complicated an organism is, the more energy it is forced to dedicate to its self-preservation and the less energy remains for multiplication. “Each kind multiplies until it reaches a threshold, where death rate from all causes matches birth rate.

If death rate is reduced by eliminating or mitigating some of these causes, the number of new beings will naturally grow until death rate and birth rate are in balance again.” Perhaps the definition of rationality by Herbert Spencer best describes the rationality of Neo-Malthusianism. Spencer states: “The rational commandment is: live for yourself and for others.” The unusual bipolarity that does not state what being is and how being is, instead refers to the unity of the world and an organism is typical for all organicist approaches. Spencer’s rationalism and therefore Neo-Malthusian rationalism is based on the dialectics of the key term of balance or homeostasis of the natural environment in the intertwined structure of natural and social sciences: “Because if biology is related to sociology indirectly as result of certain parallelism of the studied groups of phenomena, it relates to sociology directly by studying living conditions of a being whose characteristics are the source and stimulus of social development. A human being is at the same time the final problem for biology and the starting impulse for sociology” [9].

If a society can be perceived as a certain kind of a biological organism, it must be subject to the laws of evolution, which Charles Darwin strived to study and describe. On the one hand, Darwin applied directly Malthus’ assumptions of multiplication of species in geometric progression. On the other hand, he weakened the Malthusian catastrophism with the principle of continuous effect of natural selection against the background of summation of minor positive deviations in evolution and their transfer to the subsequent generation through the principle of material heredity. Darwin’s theories of natural and sexual selection [10,11] significantly contributed to the decisive impact of evolutionism and anticreationism during the last decades of the 19th century in natural and social sciences alike. For the sake of understanding the roots of ecology as a strictly scientific field, it is worth mentioning, for example, the geographic school, which was influenced greatly by evolutionism of the 19th century. “In the science of the environment, the part focusing on the impact of the geographic environment called anthropogeography was elaborated on in the greatest detail.

Its application was completed by the German ethnographer, geographer and a professor at the Leipzig university, Friedrich Ratzel (1844-1904). Ratzel considered anthropogeography to be a special branch of biogeography, i.e. the science of the spread of beings throughout the world and any associated issues” [12]. This is where the term biocenosis or ecosystem appeared as the key methodological approach of environmentalism to nature. A biocenosis or ecosystem is a natural unit of various sizes surrounding the man, with which the man interacts and which the man has to protect as an irreplaceable resource.

Modern environmentalism built on the ideological foundations of Malthusianism and Neo-Malthusianism, assuming elements of pessimism and catastrophism arising from the fatal link between the growth of population and limited natural resources. However, the moral ethos of environmentalism gradually deviated from the Malthusian and Neo-Malthusian pessimism and created a new type of optimistic engagement in the society, which strived to transform the traditional antagonisms between all biological and all civilizational into new synthesis. Compared to Malthusianism and Neo-Malthusianism, environmentalism is anti-catastrophic; The topic of catastrophe is present in environmentalism, but not as something unavoidable. Limits to Growth is a globally renowned work, in which the authors responded to the concerns of the socalled Club of Rome, an international group of entrepreneurs, politicians and scientists, regarding the topic of the growth of the world’s population and the consequences of this growth for the planet’s natural resources. When quoting the first summarising conclusion of this book, one cannot but notice its clearly Malthusian or Neo-Malthusian character: “Should the current trend of growth of the world’s population, industrialisation, pollution, food production and depletion of natural resources continue, the limits to growth will be achieved on this planet within the next hundred years.

This will most probably lead to sudden and uncontrollable decline in population and industrial capacity”. Twenty years later, i.e. in 1991, the authors of The Limits to Growth reviewed the validity of their conclusion, arriving at the opinion that the limits to growth have been exceeded in a number of aspects. However, the formulation of the conclusions differs from The Limits to Growth slightly, as they focus primarily on the environment. Therefore, they literally copied Malthusianism and Neo-Malthusianism by stressing the link between demography and economic growth, yet at the same time moved away from the Malthusian and Neo- Malthusian demographic alarmism step by step. The updated first summarising conclusion reads: “The usage of vital natural resources and production of many types of pollutants by humans have already exceeded the physically sustainable limit. If the flow of material and energy is not limited significantly, the upcoming decades will see uncontrolled decline in food production, energy usage and industrial production per person”.

The waning of demographic alarmism within environmentalism may have also been caused by the global demographic transition. Until 1970, death rate declined faster than birth rate, but since 1970 birth rate has been declining somewhat faster than death rate. While the growth of the global population remained exponential, the rate of the growth would be reduced. Therefore, the topic of population only appeared in the second summarising conclusion: “This decline is not unavoidable. To changes are needed to avoid this. Firstly, it is comprehensive review of policies and practices leading to permanent growth of material consumption and population. Secondly, it is prompt and drastic increase in the effectiveness and material and energy usage” [13]. While Malthusian pessimism is not one-sided either, it only offers one alternative – population oscillating near the minimum level of living, provided that drastic measures are applied with regard to population and that the humankind essentially annuls the biblical ideas of the sanctity of multiplication of humanity.

However, exceeding the limits is more optimistic than realistic, as it is in Malthusianism. T. R. Malthus would ask about the metaphysical and ethical reservoir giving rise to the option of permanently sustainable development, which is higher than the poor and miserable level dedicated to humans. Where does the optimistic vision of exceeding the limits draw its confidence and belief that exceeding the limits to growth does not necessarily lead to collapse?

Similar to any other large movement, modern environmentalism also has its prehistoric era, its history, topology of the prehistoric era and topology of history. All these stages defined in time and space can be studied from the perspective of growing historical optimism at the expense of the Malthusian pessimism forming the foundations of environmentalism. Rachel Carson in her work entitled Silent Spring pointed to the grave problem of chemigation of the environment. From the outer perspective, the work seems to be alarmist and catastrophist in line with the Malthusian approach. However, complete departure from Malthusianism is declared beneath the surface. As regards the logical sequence of contemplations presented by Rachel Carson in her work, the following idea is crucial: “The entire process of spraying is essentially a vicious circle. As soon as dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) was released for civilian use, the chase to identify increasingly poisonous substances began. Insects triumphantly demonstrating Darwin’s principle of survival of the fittest develop and only superior individuals immune to any new pesticide survive”.

However, what can change the practice of predominantly industrial humanity to halt on the path of chemigation, given that the humanity cannot be anything but industrial? While Malthusianism is clueless when faced with this dilemma, Carson outlines a path subsequently followed by environmentalism, aiming at environmental biocentrism. This is something different from hylozoism in the sense of the ancient Greek philosophy, where everything is living, including minerals. Environmentalist biocentrism seems to be a kind of traditional anthropocentrism referring to nature. According to environmentalist biocentrism, nature has the moral qualities the humanity lacks. Nature has such inherent moral qualities that one can learn from nature and thus eliminate traditional antagonisms arising from the traditional anthropocentrism. The human morality is to be absorbed by the adopted morality of nature. Environmentalist biocentrism is the source of environmentalist optimism, and this means that it not only surpassed Malthusianism, but also almost completely disassociated from Malthusianism.

The pessimistic Malthusianism is inherently anthropocentric. This is different, for example, from the following contemplation by Rachel Carson, which is the essence of biocentric approach: “One common theme appears across all these new, sophisticated and creative approaches to the issue of sharing the Earth with other creatures. This is the awareness that we are dealing with living creatures – with populations of organisms, their pressure and counter pressure, their growth and decline. We can only find rational balance between our species and hordes of insects if we bear in mind the aspects of life referred to above and if we guide them carefully in a manner bringing benefit for us” [14]. Biocentrism became an essential category of ecological ethics and great attention was paid to its description [15].

Anarchism calling for freedom without authorities cannot avoid the influence of a special type of conservatism, which permeated the entire 19th century. It is conservatism of the return to the past, including the natural past of humanity. Anarchism was, inter alia, the consequence of the rapid development of the technical civilisation in the 19th century; the calling for freedom is the reaction of humanity being bound by its own technical creations. The calling for freedom grew in strength with the increasing ability of technical inventions to let the calling be heard in great distance. Anarchism compensates the new situation of humanity: in this context, anarchism is full of protective psychological reactions, as well as acute observations, which, on the other hand, border on illusions. Petr Kropotkin as one of the classic writers on traditional anarchism and a renowned geographer refers to biocentrism in his work, and biocentrism – as mentioned previously – subsequently becomes the ideological basis for environmentalism. While Kropotkin had a promising social and military career within reach, he opted for a periphery, the nature of Siberia, which directed him towards unique fate [16]. The classic anarchist authors seemed to be moving along curious circles between nature and civilisation, returning back to nature against the backdrop of industrialisation of the humanity. Élisée Reclus, frequently mentioned in the Czech lands for example by S. K. Neumann, was another major anarchist author, who interconnected anarchism with the issues of nature.

It is essential to stress out once more that this study perceives personality as a historically unique constellation of ideological synthesis. This also applies to Colin Ward. However, does he belong to the environmentalist movement? This study believes so. Initially, it should be stated that the ideological and practically political profile of Colin Ward seems to spread between two opposing polarities: curious radical restriction of anarcho-environmental pragmatism, yet an extreme in topics belonging to sexology. This issue points to the serious problem of comparison of social conformism in the 19th century, i.e. the century of hierarchical monarchies and at the same time anarchist rebels, revolutionaries and assassins, against the social conformism during the period after World War II. This is an opportunity to compare the inner freedoms in the societies of the 19th century, which were poor in formal freedoms, against the inner social freedoms of societies after World War II, which strived to achieve a deliberate goal of maximum provision of formal freedoms and were rather successful in this effort.

Considering the psychology of the character, Colin Ward clearly had the courage typical for the traditions of anarchism in the 19th century represented by M. Bakunin, P. Kropotkin, Joseph Jacque, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, Francesco Ferrer, Gustav Landauer and others. Colin Ward described himself as an anarcho-communist in the Kropotkin tradition. For example, in 1945 his name appeared in a court process regarding provoking soldiers to be disloyal, although he was only included as a witness in this case. As former military bases were occupied by homeless people during the years following the end of the war, Colin Ward defended this squatting as an example of cooperative self-help. This is an example of a courageous stance in the time immediately following a global war. In general, Colin Ward’s profile reflected the traditional British social empiricism, and he intentionally sought compromise and gradual steps forward. Environmental or socially environmental topics presented and addressed by Ward seemed to be small, concerning the ecology of cities or urban planning: the social issues of housing, playgrounds for children, holiday camps, cottagers and campers, gardening colonies.

It is interesting to compare this socially ecological close-up of urban ecology against, for example, the more generous Ethics of the Earth by the American forester and founder of the ethics of nature protection, Aldo Leopold from the first half of the 20th century, which resembles the approach of the previously mentioned Rachel Carson based on emerging environmentalist biocentrism. Aldo Leopold states: “The fact that the man is only a member of a biotic team is evident in the ecology-oriented interpretation of history. Many historical events, which have been so far interpreted purely based on human intentions, were in fact biological interactions between humans and the earth. The face of the earth determined the facts as strongly as the people living on this earth” [17]. The radicalism asserted by Ward in the issues of sexuality is all the more surprising, at least for the purposes of this study. This returns us once more to one of the most important issues – how significant the issue of freedom in sexuality is for anarchism and whether it may be the most important freedom in the hierarchy of anarchist freedoms, although anarchism does not admit this even to itself.

When a decadent artist calls for abolition of the idea of the traditional monogamous sexual partnership and family as he paints the image of the anarchist utopia, it is understandable. However, when the inherently pragmatic social eco-anarchist Ward welcomes the decline of the traditional family, the situation is harder to comprehend, in particular since the nature prefers stability of partners in order to take care of offspring, and environmentalist is generally inspired by nature. The communising element in Ward’s thinking is not strong enough, and referring to the idea of kibbutz, as Ward does, is not viable, as this is the exception from the rule and one that is not even in line with the main principles of Judaism. The first question: one needs to ask again whether anarchism including eco-anarchism knows itself and its own hierarchy of values or, alternatively, does this hierarchy of values develop so fast that anarchists themselves do not understand it? The second question: Who is stronger? The undoubtedly honest thinker and individual, Colin Ward, or conformism of his society after World War II?

It would seem that anarchist libertarianism in the 1960s and 1970s redirected its sharpest stance to sexual libertarianism, to the sexual revolution in its negative sense, meaning that no desirable social ideal is presented in sexuality to control asocial and instinctive sexuality. Whether anarchism thus expressed its own intention in this development is another issue. The hasty release of the traditional family without any Neo-Malthusian correction, as in the case of free maternity, which is formulated entirely outside the vision of the anarchist utopia, is a dangerous path leading among other consequences to absolute legalisation and justification of prostitution without any vision for its elimination in the anarchist utopia. In short, Ward was influenced by the conformism of sexual libertarianism, and this was unavoidable, as any inherent freedom of the society was literally non-existent. It is important to stress the following: radical conformism of sexual libertarianism in particular in western societies in the second half of the 20th century is vastly different from the anarchist requirement of sexual revolution from the female perspective, as represented, for example by Emma Goldman, and from the anarchist requirement of sexual revolution from the male perspective, as shown in the example of Czech decadent writers.

While this chapter is difficult to write for the author of this study, it is necessary for the selected topic and the study would not be complete without this part. To begin with, let’s consider the brilliant observation by the philosopher Michel Foucault, who asks whether authoritative power, i.e. the opposite to freedom, comes from institutions, from above, or whether it may be deeply entrenched in relationships among people and therefore comes from below. Foucault rejected any legitimacy of ontological reasoning in the case of anarchist objectives, as he believed that the power of authority comes from below and is inherent in us all. Cancellation of institutional authorities only means cancellation of the derived power and therefore a blind shot. Rejecting authoritative power as such is not possible, as we would therefore reject our anthropological social basis. To continue in this contemplation, it would seem on one hand that the history of anarchism is empty, as it cannot be explained in the ontological sense. However, it is not empty, because the anarchist tactic, which includes direct actions, such as assassinations, brought certain “outcomes”.

The tactic of propaganda of the deed was approved at the anarchist congress in London in 1881, when the international anarchist organisation was renewed as the “Black Internationale”. At the beginning of the 1880s, this deadly series began with the assassination of the Russian ruler, Alexander II. Additional assassinations followed and in general contributed to the fact that anarchism at the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century was associated with individual terror and violence. The anarchist propaganda of the deed promoted mainly by Johann Most, who was active in the USA from the 1880s, resulted in counterterror. The violent clash in Haymarket, Chicago in 1886 resulted in death sentence for five anarchists. One of them committed suicide in the prison and the remaining four were executed. The above-mentioned assassinations happened in the modern era, when getting close to prominent persons was not easy. Each of these actions required very thorough organisation. If anarchism is ontologically empty and its assumptions are as erroneous as asserted by Foucault, the movement should not be capable of good organisation and effective action.

In addition, the bloody tactic of assassinations of leading figures in the society, i.e. a strategy based on decapitation of the society, is in sharp contrast to the requirement of anarchism for elimination of violence and aggression. This means that the empty shell of anarchism, i.e. in the absence of actual ontological assumptions, is inhabited by interests of external power pretending to be anarchism. Logically, these interests are bound to be opposite to the interest of anarchist freedom. Finally, it should be stated that the anarchist movement is easily manipulated due to its character and the movement itself can be simply directed against the anarchist ideas of freedom. Vaclav Tomek, a historian of anarchism provides the following insight concerning unintelligibility of anarchism: “The notion of anarchism, which was attacked from various sides for years and decades, subsequently faded into a simplified idea of conspiracy and terrorism and gradually to silent unintelligibility and desired oblivion in the sense of Orwell’s warning: what is not thought, what is not written, as if was never given and never even existed” [18].

Murray Bookchin wrote his work particularly in the second half of the 20th century. The current global anarchist network refers mainly to his system of categories and values. What is the environmentalist ideal depicted by Bookchin for the world and for the western world in particular, being the iconic author for the western countries? At first, let’s briefly describe the processes taking place in the western world and in a large part of the world directly influenced by the western countries from the 1960s, when the phenomenon of environmentalist movement occurred. This was primarily the time of Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union, and therefore the time of arms race. This required maximum mobilisation of society’s energy for these purposes and this mobilisation was only possible through centralisation and overall increase in the state’s powers. The development of a communication network that can withstand nuclear attack, i.e. the internet, was the critical moment.

On the one hand, the internet is decentralised and renewable, on the other hand it leads to deep centralisation. Another factor – globalisation leads the world through stages of decentralisation towards centralisation and dramatic increase in social differences. According to Bookchin, anarchism and environmentalism work together in three basic topics: “Firstly, it is the emphasis on spontaneity – rather than control, the aim of both approaches is to liberate people and allow them to pursue their own activity. Secondly, it is the emphasis on differentiation – progress as seen by both approaches (whether in nature or in society) lies in variety and diversification, rather than unifying homogeneity, which tends to degenerate. Thirdly, it is the emphasis on decentralisation of collectiveness”. This approach may appear highly philosophical and reflects idealism of its creator. However, a more detailed analysis reveals the following: since the world is quite the opposite, this approach is not idealistic at all.

It would be idealistic if there was at least a slight chance to implement any of its aspects in the real world. True idealism is connected at least to small changes in reality, which can be achieved through its ideas. This deeply unrealistic character points to deception and manipulation, despite, for example, decentralisation of the society being the traditional objective of anarchism. Centralisation of the state has progressed to an extreme point. Bookchin channels the dissatisfaction of people into nothingness, where its expression is futile. He suppresses any real change before it can even unfold. For an environmental reform to work effectively against the non-ecological world, it has to be centralised and needs to think pragmatically, politically and effectively. Bookchin introduces a kind of primary lie in environmentalism and this lie flourishes in the movement. This lie effectively joins another lie serving the power that yearns to be even more powerful.

Bookchin most likely could not do anything else, as the society with its poor and ever weakening level of inherent freedom does not allow for anything else than interconnecting environmental objectives with anarcho-capitalism or something that poses as anarcho-capitalism, rather than with the traditional visions of the anarchist utopia. It is as if the game of ideas in the current societies was entirely disconnected from the game of actual relationships of power and interests. This is why the term “anarcho-capitalism” is written in quotation marks. Analysing something that poses as anarcho-capitalism is not the purpose of this study. In addition, it is important to stress out that Bookchin also fails to address the issues of the Global South, or more specifically exploitation of the Global South by the Global North, which allows for the Post-Scarcity Anarchism referred to in the title of his major work.

The contemplation above can be summarised as follows: The global anarchist network after 1990 is a global “anarcho-capitalist” network. It has nothing in common with the history of anarchism in the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century, at least in the sense of the effort to achieve the anarchist ideal and fight for it with the available non-aggressive means. This study considers Johann Most to be a personality that may have not been aware of this, but still presented the first major manipulation of “anarchocapitalism”. His life was extremely dramatic and would be good material for a novel with unbelievable personal tragedies, and he probably believed that his effort was authentic and beneficial to social justice and freedom. However, all this was counterproductive. It may also be due to his faith into individual terror and its ability to change the world. As Walter Block says: “The fact that launching aggression against non-aggressive opponents is not legitimate is the basic principle of libertarianism. Assertiveness, argumentativeness, boldness, competitiveness or antagonism are not considered to be aggression.

Aggression means the use of violence, as in the case of murder, rape, robbery or hijacking. Libertarianism does not imply pacifism. It does not forbid the use of violence in defence or even vengeance against violence. Libertarian philosophy rejects the initiation of violence – the use of violence against a non-violent person or their assets” [19]. Praxeology and the principle of non-aggressiveness are the key principles of true anarcho-capitalism.

Radical queer activism questions any normative aspect of sexual activities. Gender Fuck means, to quote: “to spitefully disturb the traditional perception of gender identities”. As the current global anarchist network is a global “anarcho-capitalist” network, its assertion of freedom in sexuality is assertion of the interests of “anarcho-capitalism” or creation of psychosocial conditions for catering for these interests on a long-term basis. It should be pointed out that the anarchist ideal of free love, which represents a deep enigmatic problem in traditional anarchism, against the backdrop of Queer and Gender Fuck is still a condition with at least certain visible effort in the society to define any ideal in sexuality. Queer and Gender Fuck do not associate with the ideal of free love as the traditionally anarchist criticism of hypocritical bourgeois morals, the same way as the global “anarcho-capitalist” network of today does not relate to, or even negates the efforts of the traditional anarchism, as mentioned before. In Queer and Gender Fuck, the ticking of the civilizational biological clock is audible, as its practical agenda establishes a society without any trace of social responsibility in terms of determining ideal in sexuality. This is why the society is unable to face manipulation.

If we were to measure the distance between Neo-Malthusianism and environmentalism against the distance between traditional anarchism and environmentalism, one would have to state that anarchism is closer to environmentalism. While Neo-Malthusianism shares the topic of limited natural resources against the backdrop of demographic growth with environmentalism, they differ from each other, as Neo-Malthusianism considers the effort to achieve utopia unfeasible, while the anarchist utopia for traditional anarchism is the key, albeit distant aim of its activities. The common bases are less significant than the common goals, especially in the case of highly dynamic historical events. While environmentalism navigates the orbit between the gravitational centres of Neo-Malthusianism and traditional anarchism, the gravitation of traditional anarchism is greater. What does this mean for sexology issues? This study proposes the opinion that environmentalism should not ignore issues associated with reproduction and therefore contraception at a global scale. While their priority does not need to be high, these issues should not be overlooked. Environmentalism in the form of Environmental Transition could possibly turn to global religions with the plea to consider an alternative to the dogmatic insistence on contraception being antireligious. Environmental Transition dares to point out that serving the God within global humanity may mean something different from perceiving contraception as a sin.

Environmental Transition, if it indeed strives to become what it presents to be, should under no circumstances be manipulation of “anarcho-capitalism”. To avoid this, Environmental Transition needs to make use of the natural relationship between environmentalism and anarchism to connect to traditional anarchism and its neverending fight for the objectives of the anarchist utopia. Anarchists criticise the hypocrisy of bourgeois sexuality, which is reflected in its institutional consequences in prostitution and the associated issues. Traditional anarchists assume that prostitution will cease to exist in the anarchist utopia. If Environmental Transition is to penetrate all layers of the current life of the civilisation, it must not omit establishment of the social ideal in sexuality in its efforts and must focus on the issues involved in delegitimization and potential abolition of prostitution in the ideal or better society with implemented Environmental Transition.

None.

No conflict of interest.

1. Tomáš Hájek (2025) On Phenomenology of Neo-Malthusianism Primarily in the Aspect of Birth Rate Control Issues. Current Trends in Clinical & Medical Sciences 4 (1).
2. Václav Tomek (1996) Anarchie jako idea naprosté volnosti - Manifest anarchistů českých z roku 1896. Praha: MANIBUS PROPRIIS PP. 67.
3. Václav Tomek, Ondřej Slačálek (2006) Anarchismus, svoboda proti moci. Praha: Vyšehrad PP. 669.
4. Václav Tomek (2012) Anarchismus v proměnách dvacátého století: vybrané osobnosti aideje. Praha: Filosofický ústav AV ČR PP. 1441.
5. Václav Štěpán (2024) Český anarchismus na přelomu století: Od devadesátých let 19. století do vypuknutí Velké války. Praha: Ústav pro českou literaturu AV ČR a Svobodná knihovna PP. 422.
6. Michail Alexandrovič Bakunin (1996) Zpověď caru Mikuláši I. Translated by Vincenc Charvá Second edition. Praha: Eva Michálková – AURORA PP: 148.
7. Václav Tomek (1996) Český anarchismus 1890-1925. Praha: Filosofia-nakladatelství Filosofického ústavu AV ČR PP. 743.
8. Bob Kuřík, Dagmar Magincová, Ondřej Slačálek a kol (2024) Nečekáme nic od reforem – kapitoly o českém anarchismu. Praha: Herrmann & synové 525.
9. Herbert Spencer (1898) O studiu sociologie. Translated by Josef Pelcl. Praha: Josef Pelcl, společným nákladem Rozhledůa Spolku českých právníků Všehrd PP. 368.
10. Charles Darwin (2005) O pohlavním výbě Translated by Hana Marsault-Rejlková. Praha: Academia, nakladatelství Akademie věd České republiky PP. 470.
11. Charles Darwin (2007) O vzniku druhů přírodním výbě Translated by Emil Hadač a Alena Hadačová. Second revised edition. Praha: Nakladatelství Academia PP. 579.
12. Alena Šubrtová, Jaroslav Purš (1989) Dějiny populačního myšlení a populačních teorií. Praha: Ústav československých a světových dějin ČSAV PP. 691.
13. Donella H Meadowsová, Dennis L Meadows, Jǿrgen Randers (1995) Překročení mezí -konfrontace globálního kolapsu s představou trvale udržitelné Translated by Pavla Polechová a Ladislav Zvolánek. Praha: Argo PP. 319.
14. Rachel Carsonová (1921) Tiché Translated by Filip Drlík. Brno: nakladatelství Host PP. 374.
15. Erazim Kohák (2023) Zelená svatozář - Kapitoly z ekologické etiky -přepracované vydání. Praha: Univerzita Karlova, nakladatelství Karolinum PP. 233.
16. Петр Алексеевич Кропоткин (1992) Дневники разных лет. Москва: издательство PP. 460.
17. Aldo Leopold Obrázky z chatrče a rozmanité poznámky (Sand County Almanac). Translated by Anna Pilátová. Tulčík: Vydavatel’stvo Lesoochranárskeho zoskupenia VLK PP. 269.
18. Václav Tomek (1995) Lide, otevři své oči! - Črty o českém anarchismu; Volk! Öffne Deine Augen! Anarchismus in Tschechien. Wien: Verlag Monte Verita PP. 48-64.
19. Kristopher A Borer (2023) Etika anarchokapitalismu. Translated by Vladimír Krupa. Translation revised by Ján Kární Praha: Dokořán PP. 263.