1
E.2 What do eco-anarchists propose instead of capitalism?
3
Given what eco-anarchists consider to be the root cause of our
4
ecological problems (as discussed in the [1]last section), it should
5
come as no surprise that they think that the current ecological crisis
6
can only be really solved by eliminating those root causes, namely by
7
ending domination within humanity and creating an anarchist society. So
8
here we will summarise the vision of the free society eco-anarchists
9
advocate before discussing the limitations of various non-anarchist
10
proposals to solve environmental problems in subsequent sections.
12
However, before so doing it is important to stress that eco-anarchists
13
consider it important to fight against ecological and social problems
14
today. Like all anarchists, they argue for direct action and solidarity
15
to struggle for improvements and reforms under the current system. This
16
means that eco-anarchism "supports every effort to conserve the
17
environment" in the here and now. The key difference between them and
18
environmentalists is that eco-anarchists place such partial struggles
19
within a larger context of changing society as a whole. The former is
20
part of "waging a delaying action against the rampant destruction of
21
the environment" the other is "a create movement to totally
22
revolutionise the social relations of humans to each other and of
23
humanity to nature." [Murray Bookchin, Toward an Ecological Society, p.
24
43] This is one of the key differences between an ecological
25
perspective and an environmental one (a difference discussed in
26
[2]section E.1.2). Finding ways to resist capitalism's reduction of the
27
living world to resources and commodities and its plunder of the
28
planet, our resistance to specific aspects of an eco-cidal system, are
29
merely a starting point in the critique of the whole system and of a
30
wider struggle for a better society. As such, our outline of an
31
ecological society (or ecotopia) is not meant to suggest an
32
indifference to partial struggles and reforms within capitalism. It is
33
simply to indicate why anarchists are confident that ending capitalism
34
and the state will create the necessary preconditions for a free and
35
ecologically viable society.
37
This perspective flows from the basic insight of eco-anarchism, namely
38
that ecological problems are not separate from social ones. As we are
39
part of nature, it means that how we interact and shape with it will be
40
influenced by how we interact and shape ourselves. As Reclus put it
41
"every people gives, so to speak, new clothing to the surrounding
42
nature. By means of its fields and roads, by its dwelling and every
43
manner of construction, by the way it arranges the trees and the
44
landscape in general, the populace expresses the character of its own
45
ideals. If it really has a feeling for beauty, it will make nature more
46
beautiful. If, on the other hand, the great mass of humanity should
47
remain as it is today, crude, egoistic and inauthentic, it will
48
continue to mark the face of the earth with its wretched traces. Thus
49
will the poet's cry of desperation become a reality: 'Where can I flee?
50
Nature itself has become hideous.'" In order to transform how we
51
interact with nature, we need to transform how we interact with each
52
other. "Fortunately," Reclus notes, "a complete alliance of the
53
beautiful and the useful is possible." [quoted by Clark and Martin
54
(eds.) , Anarchy, Geography, Modernity, p. 125 and p. 28]
56
Over a century later, Murray Bookchin echoed this insight:
58
"The views advanced by anarchists were deliberately called social
59
ecology to emphasise that major ecological problems have their roots
60
in social problems -- problems that go back to the very beginnings
61
of patricentric culture itself. The rise of capitalism, with a law
62
of life based on competition, capital accumulation, and limitless
63
growth, brought these problems -- ecological and social -- to an
64
acute point; indeed, one that was unprecedented in any prior epoch
65
of human development. Capitalist society, by recycling the organise
66
world into an increasingly inanimate, inorganic assemblage of
67
commodities, was destined to simplify the biosphere, thereby cutting
68
across the grain of natural evolution with its ages-long thrust
69
towards differentiation and diversity.
71
"To reverse this trend, capitalism had to be replaced by an
72
ecological society based on non-hierarchical relationships,
73
decentralised communities, eco-technologies like solar power,
74
organic agriculture, and humanly scaled industries -- in short, by
75
face-to-face democratic forms of settlement economically and
76
structurally tailored to the ecosystems in which they were located."
77
[Remaking Society, pp. 154-5]
79
The vision of an ecological society rests on the obvious fact that
80
people can have both positive and negative impacts on the environment.
81
In current society, there are vast differences and antagonisms between
82
privileged whites and people of colour, men and women, rich and poor,
83
oppressor and oppressed. Remove those differences and antagonisms and
84
our interactions with ourselves and nature change radically. In other
85
words, there is a vast difference between free, non-hierarchical,
86
class, and stateless societies on the one hand, and hierarchical,
87
class-ridden, statist, and authoritarian ones and how they interact
90
Given the nature of ecology, it should come as no surprise that social
91
anarchists have been at the forefront of eco-anarchist theory and
92
activism. It would be fair to say that most eco-anarchists, like most
93
anarchists in general, envision an ecotopia based on
94
communist-anarchist principles. This does not mean that individualist
95
anarchists are indifferent to environmental issues, simply that most
96
anarchists are unconvinced that such solutions will actually end the
97
ecological crisis we face. Certain of the proposals in this section are
98
applicable to individualist anarchism (for example, the arguments that
99
co-operatives will produce less growth and be less likely to pollute).
100
However, others are not. Most obviously, arguments in favour of common
101
ownership and against the price mechanism are not applicable to the
102
market based solutions of individualist anarchism. It should also be
103
pointed out, that much of the eco-anarchist critique of capitalist
104
approaches to ecological problems are also applicable to individualist
105
and mutualist anarchism as well (particularly the former, as the latter
106
does recognise the need to regulate the market). While certain aspects
107
of capitalism would be removed in an individualist anarchism (such as
108
massive inequalities of wealth, capitalist property rights as well as
109
direct and indirect subsidies to big business), it is still has the
110
informational problems associated with markets as well as a growth
113
Here we discuss the typical eco-anarchist view of a free ecological
114
society, namely one rooted in social anarchist principles.
115
Eco-anarchists, like all consistent anarchists advocate workers'
116
self-management of the economy as a necessary component of an
117
ecologically sustainable society. This usually means society-wide
118
ownership of the means of production and all productive enterprises
119
self-managed by their workers (as described further in [3]section I.3).
120
This is a key aspect of making a truly ecological society. Most greens,
121
even if they are not anarchists, recognise the pernicious ecological
122
effects of the capitalist "grow or die" principle; but unless they are
123
also anarchists, they usually fail to make the connection between that
124
principle and the hierarchical form of the typical capitalist
125
corporation. The capitalist firm, like the state, is centralised,
126
top-down and autocratic. These are the opposite of what an ecological
127
ethos would suggest. In contrast, eco-anarchists emphasise the need for
128
socially owned and worker self-managed firms.
130
This vision of co-operative rather than hierarchical production is a
131
common position for almost all anarchists. Communist and non-communist
132
social anarchists, like mutualists and collectivists, propose
133
co-operative workplaces but differ in how best to distribute the
134
products produced. The former urge the abolition of money and sharing
135
according to need while the latter see income related to work and
136
surpluses are shared equally among all members. Both of these systems
137
would produce workplaces which would be under far less pressure toward
138
rapid expansion than the traditional capitalist firm (as individualist
139
anarchism aims for the abolition of rent, profit and interest it, too,
140
will have less expansive workplaces).
142
The slower growth rate of co-operatives has been documented in a number
143
of studies, which show that in the traditional capitalist firm, owners'
144
and executives' percentage share of profits greatly increases as more
145
employees are added to the payroll. This is because the corporate
146
hierarchy is designed to facilitate exploitation by funnelling a
147
disproportionate share of the surplus value produced by workers to
148
those at the top of the pyramid (see [4]section C.2) Such a design
149
gives ownership and management a very strong incentive to expand,
150
since, other things being equal, their income rises with every new
151
employee hired. [David Schweickart, Against Capitalism, pp. 153-4]
152
Hence the hierarchical form of the capitalist corporation is one of the
153
main causes of runaway growth as well as social inequality and the rise
154
of big business and oligopoly in the so-called "free" market.
156
By contrast, in an equal-share worker co-operative, the addition of
157
more members simply means more people with whom the available pie will
158
have to be equally divided -- a situation that immensely reduces the
159
incentive to expand. Thus a libertarian-socialist economy will not be
160
under the same pressure to grow. Moreover, when introducing
161
technological innovations or facing declining decline for goods, a
162
self-managed workplace would be more likely to increase leisure time
163
among producers rather than increase workloads or reduce numbers of
166
This means that rather than produce a few big firms, a
167
worker-controlled economy would tend to create an economy with more
168
small and medium sized workplaces. This would make integrating them
169
into local communities and eco-systems far easier as well as making
170
them more easily dependent on green sources of energy. Then there are
171
the other ecological advantages to workers' self-management beyond the
172
relative lack of expansion of specific workplaces and the
173
decentralisation this implies. These are explained well by market
174
socialist David Schweickart:
176
"To the extent that emissions affect the workers directly on the job
177
(as they often do), we can expect a self-managed firm to pollute
178
less. Workers will control the technology; it will not be imposed on
181
"To the extent that emissions affect the local community, they are
182
likely to be less severe, for two reasons. Firstly, workers (unlike
183
capitalist owners) will necessarily live nearby, and so the
184
decision-makers will bear more of the environmental costs directly.
185
Second . . . a self-managed firm will not be able to avoid local
186
regulation by running away (or threatening to do so). The great
187
stick that a capitalist firm holds over the head of a local
188
community will be absent. Hence absent will be the macrophenomenon
189
of various regions of the country trying to compete for firms by
190
offering a 'better business climate' (i.e. fewer environmental
194
For an ecological society to work, it requires the active participation
195
of those doing productive activity. They are often the first to be
196
affected by industrial pollution and have the best knowledge of how to
197
stop it happening. As such, workplace self-management is an essential
198
requirement for a society which aims to life in harmony with its
199
surrounds (and with itself, as a key aspect of social unfreedom would
200
be eliminated in the form of wage slavery).
202
For these reasons, libertarian socialism based on producer
203
co-operatives is essential for the type of economy necessary to solve
204
the ecological crisis. These all feed directly into the green vision as
205
"ecology points to the necessity of decentralisation, diversity in
206
natural and social systems, human-scale technology, and an end to the
207
exploitation of nature." [John Clark, The Anarchist Moment, p. 115]
208
This can only be achieved on a society which bases itself on workers'
209
self-management as this would facilitate the decentralisation of
210
industries in ways which are harmonious with nature.
212
So far, all forms of social anarchism are in agreement. However,
213
eco-anarchists tend to be communist-anarchists and oppose both
214
mutualism and collectivism. This is because workers' ownership and
215
self-management places the workers of an enterprise in a position where
216
they can become a particularistic interest within their community. This
217
may lead to these firms acting purely in their own narrow interests and
218
against the local community. They would be, in other words, outside of
219
community input and be solely accountable to themselves. This could
220
lead to a situation where they become "collective capitalists" with a
221
common interest in expanding their enterprises, increasing their
222
"profits" and even subjecting themselves to irrational practices to
223
survive in the market (i.e., harming their own wider and long-term
224
interests as market pressures have a distinct tendency to produce a
225
race to the bottom -- see [5]section I.1.3 for more discussion). This
226
leads most eco-anarchists to call for a confederal economy and society
227
in which communities will be decentralised and freely give of their
228
resources without the use of money.
230
As a natural compliment to workplace self-management, eco-anarchists
231
propose communal self-management. So, although it may have appeared
232
that we focus our attention on the economic aspects of the ecological
233
crisis and its solution, this is not the case. It should always be kept
234
in mind that all anarchists see that a complete solution to our many
235
ecological and social problems must be multi-dimensional, addressing
236
all aspects of the total system of hierarchy and domination. This means
237
that only anarchism, with its emphasis on the elimination of authority
238
in all areas of life, goes to the fundamental root of the ecological
241
The eco-anarchist argument for direct (participatory) democracy is that
242
effective protection of the planet's ecosystems requires that all
243
people are able to take part at the grassroots level in decision-making
244
that affects their environment, since they are more aware of their
245
immediate eco-systems and more likely to favour stringent environmental
246
safeguards than politicians, state bureaucrats and the large, polluting
247
special interests that now dominate the "representative" system of
248
government. Moreover, real change must come from below, not from above
249
as this is the very source of the social and ecological problems that
250
we face as it divests individuals, communities and society as a whole
251
of their power, indeed right, to shape their own destinies as well as
252
draining them of their material and "spiritual" resources (i.e., the
253
thoughts, hopes and dreams of people).
255
Simply put, it should be hardly necessary to explore in any great depth
256
the sound ecological and social reasons for decentralising decision
257
making power to the grassroots of society, i.e. to the people who have
258
to live with the decisions being reached. The decentralised nature of
259
anarchism would mean that any new investments and proposed solutions to
260
existing problems would be tailored to local conditions. Due to the
261
mobility of capital, laws passed under capitalism to protect the
262
environment have to be created and implemented by the central
263
government to be effective. Yet the state, as discussed in [6]section
264
E.1, is a centralised structure unsuited to the task of collecting and
265
processing the information and knowledge required to customise
266
decisions to local ecological and social circumstances. This means that
267
legislation, precisely due to its scope, cannot be finely tuned to
268
local conditions (and so can generate local opposition, particularly if
269
whipped up by corporate front organisations). In an eco-anarchist
270
society, decentralisation would not have the threat of economic power
271
hanging over it and so decisions would be reached which reflected the
272
actual local needs of the population. As they would be unlikely to want
273
to pollute themselves or their neighbours, eco-anarchists are confident
274
that such local empowerment will produce a society which lives with,
275
rather than upon, the environment.
277
Thus eco-communities (or eco-communes) are a key aspect of an ecotopia.
278
Eco-communes, Bookchin argued, will be "networked confederally through
279
ecosystems, bioregions, and biomes" and be "artistically tailored to
280
their naturally surrounding. We can envision that their squares will be
281
interlaced by streams, their places of assembly surrounded by groves,
282
their physical contours respected and tastefully landscaped, their
283
soils nurtured caringly to foster plant variety for ourselves, our
284
domestic animals, and wherever possible the wildlife they may support
285
on their fringes." They would be decentralised and "scaled to human
286
dimensions," using recycling as well as integrating "solar, wind,
287
hydraulic, and methane-producing installations into a highly variegated
288
pattern for producing power. Agriculture, aquaculture, stockraising,
289
and hunting would be regarded as crafts -- an orientation that we hope
290
would be extended as much as possible to the fabrication of use-values
291
of nearly all kinds. The need to mass-produce goods in highly
292
mechanised installations would be vastly diminished by the communities'
293
overwhelming emphasis on quality and permanence." [The Ecology of
296
This means that local communities will generate social and economic
297
policies tailored to their own unique ecological circumstances, in
298
co-operation with others (it is important stress that eco-communes do
299
not imply supporting local self-sufficiency and economic autarchy as
300
values in themselves). Decisions that have regional impact are worked
301
out by confederations of local assemblies, so that everybody affected
302
by a decision can participate in making it. Such a system would be
303
self-sufficient as workplace and community participation would foster
304
creativity, spontaneity, responsibility, independence, and respect for
305
individuality -- the qualities needed for a self-management to function
306
effectively. Just as hierarchy shapes those subject to it in negative
307
ways, participation would shape us in positive ways which would
308
strengthen our individuality and enrich our freedom and interaction
309
with others and nature.
311
That is not all. The communal framework would also impact on how
312
industry would develop. It would allow eco-technologies to be
313
prioritised in terms of R&D and subsidised in terms of consumption. No
314
more would green alternatives and eco-technologies be left unused
315
simply because most people cannot afford to buy them nor would their
316
development be under-funded simply because a capitalist sees little
317
profit form it or a politician cannot see any benefit from it. It also
318
means that the broad outlines of production are established at the
319
community assembly level while they are implemented in practice by
320
smaller collective bodies which also operate on an egalitarian,
321
participatory, and democratic basis. Co-operative workplaces form an
322
integral part of this process, having control over the production
323
process and the best way to implement any general outlines.
325
It is for these reasons that anarchists argue that common ownership
326
combined with a use-rights based system of possession is better for the
327
environment as it allows everyone the right to take action to stop
328
pollution, not simply those who are directly affected by it. As a
329
framework for ecological ethics, the communal system envisioned by
330
social anarchists would be far better than private property and markets
331
in protecting the environment. This is because the pressures that
332
markets exert on their members would not exist, as would the perverse
333
incentives which reward anti-social and anti-ecological practices.
334
Equally, the anti-ecological centralisation and hierarchy of the state
335
would be ended and replaced with a participatory system which can take
336
into account the needs of the local environment and utilise the local
337
knowledge and information that both the state and capitalism
340
Thus a genuine solution to the ecological crisis presupposes communes,
341
i.e. participatory democracy in the social sphere. This is a
342
transformation that would amount to a political revolution. However, as
343
Bakunin continually emphasised, a political revolution of this nature
344
cannot be envisioned without a socio-economic revolution based on
345
workers' self-management. This is because the daily experience of
346
participatory decision-making, non-authoritarian modes of organisation,
347
and personalistic human relationships would not survive if those values
348
were denied during working hours. Moreover, as mentioned above,
349
participatory communities would be hard pressed to survive the pressure
350
that big business would subject them to.
352
Needless to say, the economic and social aspects of life cannot be
353
considered in isolation. For example, the negative results of workplace
354
hierarchy and its master-servant dynamic will hardly remain there.
355
Given the amount of time that most people spend working, the political
356
importance of turning it into a training ground for the development of
357
libertarian values can scarcely be overstated. As history has
358
demonstrated, political revolutions that are not based upon social
359
changes and mass psychological transformation -- that is, by a
360
deconditioning from the master/slave attitudes absorbed from the
361
current system -- result only in the substitution of new ruling elites
362
for the old ones (e.g. Lenin becoming the new "Tsar" and Communist
363
Party aparatchiks becoming the new "aristocracy"). Therefore, besides
364
having a slower growth rate, worker co-operatives with democratic
365
self-management would lay the psychological foundations for the kind of
366
directly democratic political system necessary to protect the
367
biosphere. Thus "green" libertarian socialism is the only proposal
368
radical enough to solve the ecological crisis.
370
Ecological crises become possible only within the context of social
371
relations which weaken people's capacities to fight an organised
372
defence of the planet's ecology and their own environment. This means
373
that the restriction of participation in decision-making processes
374
within hierarchical organisations such as the state and capitalism
375
firms help create environmental along with social problems by denying
376
those most affected by a problem the means of fixing it. Needless to
377
say, hierarchy within the workplace is a prerequisite to accumulation
378
and so growth while hierarchy within a community is a prerequisite to
379
defend economic and social inequality as well as minority rule as the
380
disempowered become indifferent to community and social issues they
381
have little or no say in. Both combine to create the basis of our
382
current ecological crisis and both need to be ended.
384
Ultimately, a free nature can only begin to emerge when we live in a
385
fully participatory society which itself is free of oppression,
386
domination and exploitation. Only then will we be able to rid ourselves
387
of the idea of dominating nature and fulfil our potential as
388
individuals and be a creative force in natural as well social
389
evolution. That means replacing the current system with one based on
390
freedom, equality and solidarity. Once this is achieved, "social life
391
will yield a sensitive development of human and natural diversity,
392
falling together into a well balanced harmonious whole. Ranging from
393
community through region to entire continents, we will see a colourful
394
differentiation of human groups and ecosystems, each developing its
395
unique potentialities and exposing members of the community to a wide
396
spectrum of economic, cultural and behavioural stimuli. Falling within
397
our purview will be an exciting, often dramatic, variety of communal
398
forms -- here marked by architectural and industrial adaptations to
399
semi-arid ecosystems, there to grasslands, elsewhere by adaptation to
400
forested areas. We will witness a creative interplay between individual
401
and group, community and environment, humanity and nature." [Bookchin,
402
Post-Scarcity Anarchism, p. 39]
404
So, to conclude, in place of capitalism eco-anarchists favour
405
ecologically responsible forms of libertarian socialism, with an
406
economy based on the principles of complementarily with nature;
407
decentralisation (where possible and desirable) of large-scale
408
industries, reskilling of workers, and a return to more artisan-like
409
modes of production; the use of eco-technologies and ecologically
410
friendly energy sources to create green products; the use of recycled
411
and recyclable raw materials and renewable resources; the integration
412
of town and country, industry and agriculture; the creation of
413
self-managed eco-communities which exist in harmony with their
414
surroundings; and self-managed workplaces responsive to the wishes of
415
local community assemblies and labour councils in which decisions are
416
made by direct democracy and co-ordinated (where appropriate and
417
applicable) from the bottom-up in a free federation. Such a society
418
would aim to develop the individuality and freedom of all its members
419
in order to ensure that we end the domination of nature by humanity by
420
ending domination within humanity itself.
422
This is the vision of a green society put forth by Murray Bookchin. To
425
"We must create an ecological society -- not merely because such a
426
society is desirable but because it is direly necessary. We must
427
begin to live in order to survive. Such a society involves a
428
fundamental reversal of all the trends that mark the historic
429
development of capitalist technology and bourgeois society -- the
430
minute specialisation or machines and labour, the concentration of
431
resources and people in gigantic industrial enterprises and urban
432
entities, the stratification and bureaucratisation of life, the
433
divorce of town from country, the objectification of nature and
434
human beings. In my view, this sweeping reversal means that we must
435
begin to decentralise our cities and establish entirely new
436
eco-communities that are artistically moulded to the ecosystems in
437
which they are located . . .
439
"Such an eco-community . . . would heal the split between town and
440
country, indeed, between mind and body by fusing intellectual with
441
physical work, industry with agriculture in a rotation or
442
diversification of vocational tasks. An eco-community would be
443
supported by a new kind of technology -- or eco-technology -- one
444
composed of flexible, versatile machinery whose productive
445
applications would emphasise durability and quality . . ."
446
[Toward an Ecological Society, pp. 68-9]
448
Lastly, we need to quickly sketch out how anarchists see the change to
449
an ecological society happening as there is little point having an aim
450
if you have no idea how to achieve it.
452
As noted above, eco-anarchists (like all anarchists) do not
453
counterpoise an ideal utopia to existing society but rather participate
454
in current ecological struggles. Moreover, we see that struggle itself
455
as the link between what is and what could be. This implies, at
456
minimum, a two pronged strategy of neighbourhood movements and
457
workplace organising as a means of both fighting and abolishing
458
capitalism. These would work together, with the former targeting, say,
459
the disposal of toxic wastes and the latter stopping the production of
460
toxins in the first place. Only when workers are in a position to
461
refuse to engage in destructive practices or produce destructive goods
462
can lasting ecological change emerge. Unsurprisingly, modern anarchists
463
and anarcho-syndicalists have been keen to stress the need for a green
464
syndicalism which addresses ecological as well as economical
465
exploitation. The ideas of community and industrial unionism are
466
discussed in more detail in [7]section J.5 along with other anarchist
467
tactics for social change. Needless to say, such organisations would
468
use direct action as their means of achieving their goals (see
469
[8]section J.2). It should be noted that some of Bookchin's social
470
ecologist followers advocate, like him, greens standing in local
471
elections as a means to create a counter-power to the state. As we
472
discuss in [9]section J.5.14, this strategy (called Libertarian
473
Municipalism) finds few supporters in the wider anarchist movement.
475
This strategy flows, of course, into the structures of an ecological
476
society. As we discuss in [10]section I.2.3, anarchists argue that the
477
framework of a free society will be created in the process of fighting
478
the existing one. Thus the structures of an eco-anarchist society (i.e.
479
eco-communes and self-managed workplaces) will be created by fighting
480
the ecocidal tendencies of the current system. In other words, like all
481
anarchists eco-anarchists seek to create the new world while fighting
482
the old one. This means what we do now is, however imperfect, an
483
example of what we propose instead of capitalism. That means we act in
484
an ecological fashion today in order to ensure that we can create an
485
ecological society tomorrow.
487
For more discussion of how an anarchist society would work, see
488
[11]section I. We will discuss the limitations of various proposed
489
solutions to the environmental crisis in the following sections.
493
1. file://localhost/home/mauro/baku/debianize/maint/anarchy/secE1.html
494
2. file://localhost/home/mauro/baku/debianize/maint/anarchy/secE1.html#sece12
495
3. file://localhost/home/mauro/baku/debianize/maint/anarchy/secI3.html
496
4. file://localhost/home/mauro/baku/debianize/maint/anarchy/secC2.html
497
5. file://localhost/home/mauro/baku/debianize/maint/anarchy/secI1.html#seci13
498
6. file://localhost/home/mauro/baku/debianize/maint/anarchy/secE1.html
499
7. file://localhost/home/mauro/baku/debianize/maint/anarchy/secJ5.html
500
8. file://localhost/home/mauro/baku/debianize/maint/anarchy/secJ2.html
501
9. file://localhost/home/mauro/baku/debianize/maint/anarchy/secJ5.html#secj514
502
10. file://localhost/home/mauro/baku/debianize/maint/anarchy/secI2.html#seci23
503
11. file://localhost/home/mauro/baku/debianize/maint/anarchy/secIcon.html
added
removed
txt/secE2.txt
