And in the US it will take a long time before radicalism loses its connection with the political red-blue axis which now is irrelevant. The deep ecology movement has in common with blue politics its aversion to bureaucracy, its emphasis on personal enterprise and initiative, and a reluctance to take certain green utopias too seriously. Broad ecological sustainability may be compatible with a variety of social and political structures, all pointing towards the green pole. It is not easy to be personally active in more than one of the three grassroots movements, but a cooperation is essential. The ecological threat is not only of wars but also of the immense military operations and connected industrial activity in peace time.
Cooperation has for a long time been excellent.
It has taken longer to establish close cooperation with all the social justice movements. But because care and capacity of identification with other living beings is so prominent in the deep ecology movement, that social initiative is fairly clear. The answer is that whatever the intensity of their fight for animals, or wilderness, they recognize the very special obligations we have for our fellow-humans. What we look for is not a shift of care from humans towards non-humans, but an extension and deepening of care. It is unwarranted to assume that the human potential of care is constant and finite, and that any increase of care for some creatures necessarily reduces care for others.