#WORLD #WORLDWIDE #GREECE #THESSALONIK #ANARCHISM #LIBRARY #News #Journal #Update - (en) #anarkismo.net:[#Greece, #Thessaloniki]Libertarian philosophy and education by Mikro Dentro (ca, de, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

 The contribution of libertarian theorists to environmental philosophy and

libertarian education and the attempt to realize their theories in a libertarian
school today.  ---- Few philosophical currents have played such an important role
in the development and formation of the modern environmental movement, but also
in the experimentation on proposals for the reconstruction of society, as the
anarchist and libertarian tradition of social and political thought.
Nevertheless, we find a constant underestimation and neglect of these theories
with the most common excuse being the supposed lack of ideological coherence of
the libertarian and anarchist movement. ---- In contrast to this view we can cite
common ideological principles of this movement, such as the rejection of the
state and power relations for the purpose of social change, the creation of
communities, equality, justice, individual autonomy and freedom. We prefer to
translate the lack of further "coherence" as a fluidity that allows individuals,
depending on the place and time in which they live, to adapt and enrich these
values with the aim of continuous practical and theoretical experimentation,
having as the final goal the, the reconstruction of society.

In this text we will try to make a brief review of the biography of Pyotr
Kropotkin, Elisse Reclus and Colin Ward, important theoretical thinkers of
anarchism. We will focus on the impact their theories have had on the most recent
ecological currents and especially on the development of philosophical thinking
regarding society-nature relations. At the same time, as they themselves
considered anarchist philosophy, ecological thinking and education to be
interconnected, we will investigate their contribution to the movement of
libertarian pedagogy. Finally, we will refer to the common characteristics of
schools that have operated historically and continue to operate by combining and
drawing inspiration from the above theories, concluding with the way in which
these theories are realized by the Little Tree,

E. Reclus (1830 - 1905) - P. Kropotkin (1842 - 1921)

Elisee Reclus and Piotr Kropotkin lived in the late 19th and early 20th centuries
and are two major recognized geographers of that time. They engaged in both
anarchist philosophy and revolutionary activism and the education of children and
adults. They used for the first time the terms "anarcho-communism" and
"libertarian communism", whose theory they formed. Their goal was to establish
anarchism as a science and to introduce into the tradition of anarchist and
libertarian social theory a strong ecological dimension that was not talked about
until then.

Colin Ward (1924 - 2010)

Colin Ward approached anarchism through architecture, urban planning and the
deschooling movement, creating his own stream of idealistic and constructive
radicalism. What we see his main interest in his work is the internal motivations
created in everyday people to participate and reshape their spaces and communities.

Their contribution to environmental philosophy.

In an era long before the environmental movement was created we see Reclus and
Kropotkin writing the first socio-environmental manifestos. The two developed the
concept of "social geography," which laid the foundation for what we now call
social ecology. Social geography explored the relationship of the human
environment with the natural world and exposed the ideologies that distort this
relationship and promote their dualism. It also advanced a comprehensive proposal
for assuming, through a transformed social practice, the broad moral
responsibilities that accompany the critical position of human civilization as
part of the conscious natural environment. In fact, P. Kropotkin was one of the
scientists who first formulated the theory of the changing climate. Their vision
was a free, communal society, in harmony with the natural world. A century ago
these theoretical thinkers attempted to establish a new human morality. Reclus,
through ethical vegetarianism, not a common practice at the time, attempted to
include non-human beings in the subjects that evoked the human feelings of
empathy and compassion. P. Kropotkin made his own attempt to establish a new
ethics, through the highlighting of mutual aid, and not competition, as a key
factor in the evolution of species and especially the human species. not at all a
common practice at the time, he tried to include non-human beings as subjects
that evoked the human feelings of empathy and compassion. P. Kropotkin made his
own attempt to establish a new ethics, through the highlighting of mutual aid,
and not competition, as a key factor in the evolution of species and especially
the human species. not at all a common practice at the time, he tried to include
non-human beings as subjects that evoked the human feelings of empathy and
compassion. P. Kropotkin made his own attempt to establish a new ethics, through
the highlighting of mutual aid, and not competition, as a key factor in the
evolution of species and especially the human species.

After their death and due to their political identity and the radicalism of their
theories, their works were silenced until the birth of the environmental movement
where we see them translated again. Nevertheless, we can trace libertarian
thinkers even before that time, who have their theories as a starting point.

C. Ward, acting half a century later, is inspired by them and updates their work,
describing the problems and distortions of the modern era. At the same time, it
describes the history of the struggles of self-organized environmental movements
and activists against nature-destructive state/capitalist practices. Like Murray
Bookchin, Allan Carter, and other libertarian thinkers, Ward advocates anarchism
as the only political ideology capable of addressing the social and environmental
challenges of the 21st century.

Their proposals for libertarian education

For Reclus and Kropotkin, education is a tool for mass awakening and social
emancipation, as a result of which they consider it an integral part of
libertarian, anarchist and environmental thought. In addition, education for them
is understood as a continuous process and therefore they propose that schools
function as centers of education, open to people of all ages. The ideal of
anarchism, as they said, is that society itself is a great field for mutual
instruction, where everyone will be both student and teacher. They propose a new
education system free from the indoctrination of the state, the church that is
not guided by the laws of the market and enrich the term integral education. This
proposal for education not only combines manual and intellectual work, but also
emphasizes the cognitive, psychological, social and moral development of the
individual. This learning does not only come from books but also from emotions,
practical skills, physical condition, social and moral education as well as from
political activity and participation in the running of the school. Reclus and
Kropotkin were influenced by the Swiss educator Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi and
the New Education movement proposing tools of community and environmental
exploration. More specifically, they proposed the teaching of geography, the
field in which they were involved scientifically,

Colin Ward, inspired by the deschooling movement emerging in the 1970s in the US,
expands libertarian education outside the school building into the city and
countryside. It supports the position of the child in the social becoming and
proposes environmental education, art and design as tools of active observation
and realization of local interventions of exploration and planning. Through
environmental exploration individuals envision change (urban or decentralized)
and are encouraged to participate in building their environment.

Examples of schools that were inspired and put the above theories into practice.

Cempuis (1880-1894)
La Escuela Moderna (1901-1906)
Public School (1945-1955)
Escuela Libre Paideia (1978-...)
The Little Tree (2014-...)

What is not included in most historical and philosophical inquiries into the
relationship between anarchism and education are the contemporary iterations of
the theory, philosophy and practice of individuals and collectives operating in
the 21st century. Although these movements consist of a wide range of interests
and foci, they share a number of common characteristics, principles, strategies
and tactics. Contemporary anarchism represents the revival of anarchist political
thought at the intersection of many other movements, such as radical ecology,
feminism, indigenous, anti-nuclear movements, and libertarian education ventures.
There is no doubt that these modern movements have advanced and reformulated some
of the principles and strategies of traditional anarchism,

Anarchist and libertarian educators, like deschoolers and unschoolers, challenge
entirely the view that meaningful learning is exclusive to the structures and
functions of traditional public education and offer spaces for a fully liberated
educational experience that explores relationships and actions. From a purely
structural perspective, these forms of learning enable all parents, students and
teachers to develop curricula, explore the philosophy of teaching and learning,
and create learning experiences that are more aligned with libertarian and
anarchist values, morals and worldviews. However,

The initial goal of the people, in the schools we mention above, was and
continues to be, to keep out of the schools the nationalist messages of the
state, the impersonal and pedagogically inappropriate exams as well as the gender
division of the wider society. After all, no one and none of the teachers of
these schools believed in the existence of a politically and morally neutral
pedagogy.

As anti-authoritarian and anti-authoritarian schools, they emphasized the dignity
and rights of the child, encouraging warmth, love and affection in place of
conformity and obscurantism. They advocated learning processes that emphasized
self-activity so we see individuals involved in the decision-making process
through assembly and co-decision without authority and separation. They followed
the needs and desires of the students and were able to improvise and experiment
based on the students' chosen path for learning.

The curriculum was geared towards providing space for individuals to develop
skills to critically analyze the processes of their communities and the political
power structures of their country so they had the freedom to pursue different
ways of thinking and explore forms of systematic and ideological oppression.

Children were able to develop the potential of their whole being, not just their
cognitive, intellectual or vocational interests, and were thus allowed to visit
factories, museums, gardens and other local communities in order to learn through
experience. Students not only learned art, craft, science, math, and reading, but
engaged in philosophical discussions about power, coercion, and justice. They
were not asked to engage in memorization, but were supported to explore, question
and think creatively.

An important tool for all school communities were long excursions and shorter
walks, following Pestalozzi's principle for exploring the surrounding
environment. These schools implemented the idea of external fieldwork as an
integral part of educational settings, including the case of the industrial
environment. A real "intuitive geography" started in the school environment based
on the "method of observation", which arose from a paradigm directly inspired by
the work of Reclus. Children thus had greater freedom of individual inquiry and
spontaneity, time for personal reflection in school or in the surrounding
gardens, and were not treated as lesser beings to be governed by a dogmatic
authority. The walks, the cultivation,

The attempt to realize the theories in the Little Tree

The "Little Tree that will become a forest" is a community pedagogic project that
works with the values of self-organization, libertarian education and
experiential learning. The idea of its creation was born in August 2012, at the
first self-organized children's camp, in Thessaloniki. The starting point of
these people was the desire and the need to realize in the here and now an alien
school, which will be based on the desire for freedom and community life. For an
education that initially starts with respect for the individual autonomy of each
child, and their personal rhythms. Afterwards, the education continues with the
experience of the direct democratic community, with tools of co-education, mutual
assistance and participation in collective life.

For more than a year the assembly met on a regular basis and elaborated on a
theoretical and practical level how the school would operate. Throughout the
course of the meetings, the same weight was given both to the organization of the
project and to the self-education of the individuals who make it up. In 2013 the
pedagogic team presented the pedagogic framework and in January 2014 the Little
Tree started its morning routine with 14 families and 5 escorts. Children's ages
reach up to 6 years (kindergarten age). In the Little Tree, no ideology is
followed as a recipe for freedom on an individual and collective level, but the
relationship between education and social change is a common assumption.

Social anarchism consists of different perspectives and traditions created in
different time periods. In the pedagogical framework of the Little Tree, some
theories and characteristics of social anarchism were combined in order to
implement the school in the realistic condition of the here and now. The
pedagogical context and the self-organization of the school community are the
points of reference that allow us to rush into reality.

For Mikro Dentro, the approach to a different pedagogy implies and stems from the
necessity for a different society, taking as a parameter the interrelated
relationship between society and education. In the question of what we would like
our society to look like, much of the answer is covered by what we would like
education to be like, not only for children but also for adults. Politics and
pedagogy are two inseparable concepts, where one includes the other. Thus,
pedagogy is recognized as an integral part of libertarian and anarchist philosophy.

This pedagogy, on the one hand, struggles to realize in the here and now, the
operation of this school. On the other hand, it is equally important to open up
the subject of libertarian education in the public sphere, so that it ceases to
be a gap in the history of pedagogy.

The community school is a network of cooperation and communication, a living
organism in motion, where the learning of the individual stems from his personal
autonomy and from the experience of his participation in the community.
Furthermore, it is a self-managed school with anti-hierarchical characteristics
both in its operation and in its extroverted actions. The way in which this
community is organized constitutes an overall proposition for social
organization. Thus, children, parents and companions interact according to the
values we mentioned and at the same time try to extend these experiences to the
family, their neighborhood and the whole range of daily life. After all, only by
experiencing community life can you go from theory to practice and vice versa.

Self-organization and self-financing are two more basic values of community
organization. By self-organization we mean that they make the decisions
themselves, through horizontal processes for the operation of the school and then
implement them.

The daily routine of the school with children and attendants forms a school
community, in which all individuals, children and adults, are called upon to make
decisions, both for the operation of the school and for the collective
coexistence, as well as to implement them. When we say self-financing, we refer
to the financial autonomy of the project, through subscriptions from
participating families, as well as solidarity donations.

Education is impossible to isolate from identities and values, it cannot be
neutral, objective or equidistant. The positions of neutrality produce and
reproduce the existing social and therefore pedagogical system. Ethnic and racial
racism, class inequality, gender oppression, age discrimination, and the
ecological crisis cannot be approached with objectivity and passivity, because
that is how they perpetuate and dominate.

Grounding the above in the pedagogical relationship, the educator cannot be
neutral, but is a model of behavior and imitation, a silent teaching of values as
stated by M. Apple. Companions in the Little Tree are not passive receivers of
situations, nor do they deal with situations neutrally. They are there for the
children and live with the children. Escorts carry their IDs while trying not to
extend them. Whenever they are called upon to express a point of view, they try
to be there authentically. Adults, like children, are bearers of ideas, values
and feelings that need to be communicated in the school community. Nonviolent
communication for conflict resolution is achieved through empathy and active
listening in an effort to understand the other's position, without the dipoles of
right and wrong. All subsets of the community learn together, because they live
together.

Libertarian education does not focus on any specific axis of
cognitive-social-emotional-motor development, but aims at the all-round
development of the individual within the community. The transmission of values
and the development of consciousness is not contained in any syllabus or
examination material, but is the peaceful exploration of self, others and the
environment. Only through movement and experience is self-awareness and
self-discipline built both on an individual and collective level.
The central tool of self-organization is that of direct democracy in the
community. Escorts, parents and children are involved in the educational process
without authorities and divisions, creating a libertarian school for all with the
aim of individual and collective self-regulation and autonomy. A school that
tries to break ageist racism and free the child from childhood stereotypes and
adult expectations.

Field trips to the Little Tree are an integral part of the community's
educational process. It is the space and time for discovering oneself, others and
the environment. With this means, the re-appropriation of public spaces and
intervention in them is attempted. The city and nature are always the best basis
for the conquest of knowledge and freedom not only for children but also for
adults. Defending the right of childhood not to be identified with preparation
for adulthood, but life itself inside and outside the walls of school and home.

Also, a basic philosophy followed from the beginning for the creation and
maintenance of the school material is the DIY practice. Creation is preferred
over consumption, correcting mistakes, damages, making and enriching the
pedagogical material and equipment with natural -recyclable materials and not
with the easy purchase from multinational companies.

A key element of the educational process is the observation of the environment.
The school is close to a forest area, with several human interventions. Despite
this, it is possible to study the world around and to bring companions and
children stimuli into the school. In the school garden there is a part of the
land without human intervention, a cultivable part with a seedbed and a nursery,
there is also the care of animals without being in a fenced area, there is the
possibility to observe insects-birds and mammals. Inside the school there are
themed corners related to the environment, such as those of plants, animals,
insects, minerals, stones and recycling. The materials-tools of the school are
made of wood, glass, metal, fabric and paper in order that they can all be recycled,

Mikro Destro is an open school as its environment is shaped, as we said, by
stimuli brought from outside by adults and children. Furthermore, the knowledge
objects are approached starting first of all with the awakening of the child's
interest and imagination for the whole of the natural world and human culture.
The process of exploration does not begin by presenting the details but by trying
to help the child to place himself first in a world that is complex, wonderful
and ready for exploration. Stimulating interest is also what will create the
motivation for further exploration and learning, which is driven by enthusiasm
thus enhancing the child's natural love for the world.

The Little Tree is a pedagogical project that aims to highlight a form of
organization that promotes biodiversity for the sake of the stability of the
system on the one hand but also for the sake of biodiversity itself on the other.
It rejects the idea of anthropocentrism and promotes anti-hierarchical
relationships within communities organized from below, as a resistance to the
rampant exploitation and profiteering of the capitalist model. The Little Tree,
in addition to the pedagogical tools it uses in the morning routine, tries to
face the ecological and social crisis by being a self-organized venture that
operates with a general assembly and anti-hierarchical organization and that
promotes and supports the creation of similar ventures in other parts of the
Greek space through the free movement of ideas and networking. The Little Tree
produces discourse against the patriarchal model and any gender, racial, ethnic,
class and age discrimination.

Through the pedagogical act, the idea is instilled in the children that the world
is not made to serve human needs, but is an organic unity from biodiversity and
the balance on which the survival and development of all its parts depends, that
is, the idea that nature has an intrinsic value. Children themselves participate
in an equal way in the creation of an organic community which learns, coexists,
decides and develops in a free environment.

Conclusion

Contemporary anarchist educators may find meaning in the core arguments of
ecological justice theories and pedagogical practices. Pioneers such as Paul
Robin advocated outdoor education and learning directly related to nature
(Avrich, 2005).
Combining the values of libertarian and anarchist education with those of
environmental philosophy and ethics, as mentioned above, through the educational
process individuals will have the freedom to explore their social, cultural and
spiritual identities in relation to learning as well as and the freedom to
explore their ecological identities.

After all, children are wonderful listeners of nature. Deeper understandings of
the area's animals, plants, fungi and microbes help co-create the natural history
of a site. This is part of the deeper listening that anarchist pedagogy
incorporates in order to fully liberate the individual within the community.

Individuals can freely and authentically explore, investigate, intuitively
entertain, create artistically in relation to their home communities and various
intersections with global communities. Community could not be seen as an
anthropocentric human collective, but more inclusive and balanced with nature as
it is fully present in and around us. Individuals, well-acquainted with their
socio-cultural and ecological identities, will be able to identify hegemonic
processes (as well as disrupt them), and have attuned capacities to listen to
their eco-socio-cultural communities.

Eco-anarchist pedagogies can provide individuals with an education that enables
them to explore deep power imbalances, social injustices, and destructive
relationships and practices in relation to nature. Anarchist pedagogies offer a
hope that is real because it can and is a call to operate not from fear but from
love, not with an education based on scarcity but rather on abundance, and not
with a blind ignorance but with a sense clarity and purpose we seek and leads us
to any change we desire for our individual lives and our communities.

It is important to make it clear that both anarchism and social ecology are not
meant to be prescriptive or universal. Of course, every philosophy has certain
fundamental principles, but these principles are such that their application will
differ significantly in each social and cultural context. The principles are
meant to be adapted, debated and reinterpreted by real people living in
communities created within local contexts. By living and working at the
grassroots level in mutually supportive and cooperative ways, free of
hierarchical relationships, people everywhere can begin to take control of their
own lives and the decisions that directly affect them, while expanding the
possibilities of increasing freedom,

In short, education should revolve around community contact, community problems
and what the individual, as a citizen, can do about them. To achieve this goal,
we need to devise an expanded framework, what we now call environmental
education, that will truly involve individuals in participating in what concerns
their environment. These efforts are not aimed at strengthening isolation, but at
its root, anti-hierarchical relationships and sustainable ways of living
accompanied by understanding and empathy with other, human and non-human organisms.

Bibliography
Avrich, P. (2005). The Modern School Movement: Anarchism and Education in the
United States. Oakland: AK Press.
Breitbart, M. M. (2014). Inciting desire, ignoring. ??? K. J. Catherine Burke,
Education, Childhood and Anarchism: Talking Colin Ward (??. 175-185). New York:
Routledge.
Burke, C. (2014). "Fleeting pockets of anarchy":Streetwork. The exploding school.
Paedagogica Historica .
C. Burke, K. J. (2014). Education, Childhood and Anarchism: Talking Colin Ward.
New York: Routledge.
C. Ward, P. H. (2014). Sociable Cities: The 21st-Century Reinvention of the
Garden City. London: Routledge.
Carson, K. (2014). The Anarchist Thought of Colin Ward. Center for a Stateless
Society , ?. vol18.
Chappell, R. (1978). Anarchy Revisited. An inquiry into the public education
dilemma. Journal of libertarian studies, ??. 367-372.
Clark, G. (1984). A Theory of Local Autonomy. Annals of the Association of
American Geographers, ??. 195-208.
Clark, J., & Martin, C. (2013). Anarchy, Geography, Modernity, selected writings
of Elisee Reclus. Oakland: PM Press.
Colin Ward, C. W. (2011). Autonomy, Solidarity, Possibility: The Colin Ward
Reader. Oakland: AK press.
Curran, G. (2007). 21st Century Dissent. Anarchism, Anti-Globalization and
Environmentalism. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
DeLeon, A. P. (2006, November). The time for action is now! Anarchist theory,
critical pedagogy, and radical possibilities. Journal for Critical Education
Policy Studies, ??. 72-94.
Ferrer, F. (2008). The Origin And Ideals Of The Modern School. Montana: Kessinger
Publishing.
Ferretti, F. (2016). "The spatiality of geography teaching and cultures of
alternative education: the ‘intuitive geographies' of the anarchist school in
Cempuis (1880-1894)". Cultural Geographies, ??. 615-633.
Ferretti, F. (2017). Teaching Anarchist Geographies: Elisée Reclus in Brussels
and "The Art of Not Being Governed". Annals of the American Association of
Geographers.
Ferretti, F. (2019). Anarchy and Geography: Reclus and Kropotkin in the UK. ?ew
York: Routledge.
Ferretti, F. (forthcoming). Radicalizing pedagogy: Geography and libertarian
pedagogy between the 19th and the20th century. ??? R. W. S. Springer,
Transgressing Frontiers. New York: Rowman & Littlefield.
Fielding, M. (2005, January). Alex Bloom, Pioneer of Radical State Education.
forum for promoting 3-19 comprehensive education.
Goldman, E. (1911). Anarchism and Other Essays. London: Mother Earth Publishing
Association.
Goodway, D. (2006). Anarchist Seeds beneath the Snow. Liverpool: Liverpool
University Press.
Goodway, D. (2014). Talking Anarchy. Oakland: PM Press.
Gore, J. (1993). The Struggle For Pedagogies. New York: Routledge.
Haworth, R. (2012). Anarchist Pedagogies. Oakland: PM Press.
Holohan, K. (2017). Anarchist Ethics as a Foundation for Educational
Alternatives. Educational Studies, ??. 1-17.
Honeywell, C. (2011). A British Anarchist Tradition. London: The Continuum
International Publishing Group.
Houssaye, J. (2000).
Ishill, J. (1927). Élisée and Élie Reclus: In Memoriam. Berkeley Heights, N.J.:
Oriole Press.
Jickling, B. (2005). Ethics Research in Environmental Education. Southern African
Journal of Environmental Education, Vol.22.
Karamali, A. (2017). A Community Based school. The Small Tree That Will Become a
Forest. Tvergastein, ??. 43-53.
Kelly Biedenweg, M. C. (2013). The importance of teaching ethics. International
Journal of Sustainability, Vol. 14.
Kossoff G., W. D. (2007). Anarchism, Libertarianism and Envinonmentalism: Anti-
authoritarian thought and the search of self-organizing societies. ??? A. S.
Jules Pretty, The SAGE Handbook of Environment and Society. London: Sage
Publications.
Kropotkin, P. (1893, October). On the teaching of physiography. The Geographical
Journal, pp. 350-359.
Kropotkin, P. (2015). Mental and manual work. Athens: Eleftheros Typos.
Love, K. (2012). "Love and Rage" in the Classroom: Planting the Seeds of
Community Empowerment. Educational Studies: A Journal of the American Educational
Studies Association, pp. 52-75.
Mills, S. (2010). infed. Retrieved May 2020, from infed.org: https://www.infed.org
Morris, B. (2004). KROPOTKIN, THE POLITICS OF COMMUNITY. Oakland: PM Press.
Nettlau, M. (1988). History of Anarchy. Athens: International Library.
Omran, MS (2014). The effect of educating environmental ethics on behavior and
attitude to environmental protection. European Online Journal of Natural and
Social Sciences, Vol. 3.
Padovan, D. (1999, November). Social Morals and Ethics of Nature: from Peter
Kropotkin to Murray Bookchin. Democracy & Nature, THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF
INCLUSIVE DEMOCRACY.
Pelletier, P. (2004, September). The city and urban geography in the work of
Elisé Rekly through his time. Eutopia, pp. 30-34.
Purchase, G. (2003). Peter Kropotkin. Ecologist, Philosopher and Revolutionary.
Purchase, G. (2013, December). Green Flame: Kropotkin and the Birth of Ecology.
Eutopia, pp. 40-50.
Ram, F. (1993). Instant Encyclopaedia of Geography Vol.18. New Delhi: Mittal
Publications.
Reclus, E. (1903). On spherical maps and reliefs. The Geographical Journal, ?. 290.
Springer, S. (2016). The Anarchist Roots of Geography. Toward Spatial
Emancipation. London: University of Minnesota Press.
Suissa, J. (2001, November). Anarchism, Utopias and Philosophy of Education.
Journal of philosophy of education, ??. 627-646.
Suissa, J. (2006). Anarchism and education. A philosophical perspective. London:
Routledge.
T. Perreault, G. B. (2015). The Routledge Handbook of Political Ecology. New
York: Routledge.
Ward, C. (1995). Talking Schools. London: Freedom Press.
Ward, C. (1996). Anarchy in Action. London: Freedom Press.
Ward, C. (2004). Anarchism, a very short introduction. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Ward, D. (2012, October). Alchemy in Clarence: Kropotkin and Reckly, 1877-1881.
Eutopia, pp. 101-115.
Ward, D. (2012, October). Alchemy in Clarence: Kropotkin and Reckly, 1877-1881.
Eutopia, pp. 101-115.
Woodcock, G. (1967). The Encyclopedia of Philosophy. New York: Macmillan.
Georgopoulos, A. (2002). Environmental Ethics. Athens: Gutenberg.
Georgopoulos, A. (2014). Environmental education, identity issues. Athens: Gutenberg.
Georgopoulos, A., Nikolaou, K., Dimitriou, A., Gavrilakis, K., & Blionis, G.
(2013). Earth is a small and fragile planet. Athens: Gutenberg.
Guerin, N. (1973). ANARCHISM, from theory to practice. Athens: Eleftheros Typos.
Karageorgakis, S. (2012, October). Élysée Recly, a neglected pioneer of anarchy.
Eutopia, pp. 75-82.
Karageorgakis, S. (2016). Environmental philosophy and environmental education.
Athens: Eutopia.
Karageorgakis, S. (2016). Environmental Philosophy and Environmental Education.
Athens: Eutopia.
Kropotkin, P. (2005). Farms, factories, workshops. Thessaloniki: Islands.
Small Tree. (2018). The children's assembly. Eutopia, pp. 8-20.
Small Tree. (2018). Collection of experiences from distant schools. Thessaloniki:
Self-publishing.
Bakirtzis, K. (2002). Comm

https://www.anarkismo.net/article/32698
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca