An Inconvenient Apocalypse: Environmental Collapse, Climate Crisis, and the Fate of Humanity

Product Information

When I started to comment there were three before me. Posting reveled 15 more insights helpful to me. Reinforces my belief that solution is only in collectivity. The question is how can we deal with this most humanly (and that should include the rest of life’s creation)? The next 95 yards are the most difficult, hard-fought, grueling part of the game, and we’re not really organized for, nor aware of, what it’s going to take. Above all, the prophets remind us of the moral state of a people: Few are guilty, but all are responsible. If we admit that the individual is in some measure conditioned or affected by the spirit of society, and individual’s crime discloses society’s corruption.

Review: An Inconvenient Apocalypse by Wes Jackson and Robert

Read this personal manifesto of wisdom and passion for our suffering planet, a very important, timely, and riveting book." — CounterPunch The development of those technologies was not the product of inherently superior intelligence of people in particular regions of the world—remember, we are committed to an antiracist principle that flows from basic biology. That means the forces that led to the creation of those technologies must have been generated by the specific environmental conditions under which that culture developed over time. Likewise, the lower rate of carbon depletion that results from the absence of those technologies cannot be a marker of inherently superior intelligence of people in particular regions but is instead the product of environmental conditions. In a significant sense, the trajectory of people and their cultures is the product of the continent and specific region in which they have lived. I’ve wrestled with what this means in everyday life,” and Jensen, “and these are distressing questions. It’s about wrestling with that sense of grief, rather than trying to avoid it. And when you wrestle with that, it means you don’t wake up every day on the sunny side of the street. It’s weighing on a lot of us. My goal is just try to open up space for people to say what’s on their mind.”Finally, two conclusions and a minor quibble. The Crisis of Consumption that is built into our inconvenient apocalypse – which is surely coming – is the primary obstacle preventing rational responses to the multiple overlapping, cascading crises we face. No one wants to pay if that means less play. There are two ways to meet our desires: increase consumption or be happy with less. The first is not possible in a full world that has been pushed past its limits. The second will require a complete reset. But it is doable and if we are intentional, it will be all the better. Chas, I agree strongly. We need more small farms, tied to their communities. Problem right now is …. land. Thousands, if not millions, of the best farmland ‘owned’ by corporations and billionaires (looking at you, Bill Gates!). A great big enclosing of the commons has occurred in the USA. There are two ways to meet our desires: increase consumption or be happy with less. The first is not possible in a full world that has been pushed past its limits. The second will require a complete reset. Right now we don’t seem to have the inclination or the ability to structure our basic econ sub-systems (ag, energy, materials, mfg’g) such that they repair and replenish .vs. degrade and disperse.

An Inconvenient Apocalypse with Bob Jensen (Bonus episode of An Inconvenient Apocalypse with Bob Jensen (Bonus episode of

So, great that we’re having a discussion, not only about ‘let’s ditch capitalism before it kills us all’ but, also imagining alternatives. And steps to achieve alternatives. So we don’t have a chaotic and messy revolution and end up with some Schelling Point dictator running the show. I’ve sorta learned this lesson, but it took a lot of decades to choke down the pill. And it makes a huge positive difference every time I remember to do it. Herman Daly’s work was actually recognized and then promptly dismissed by one Lawrence Summers of the World Bank, who maintained that placing the “economy” within the ecosphere was “not the way to think about it.” No surprise there from the John Bates Clark Medal awardee of 1993. John Bates Clark was a teacher of Thorstein Veblenat Carleton College in the 1870s. This little fact makes me smile. Scale, scope and speed refer, respectively, to the natural size limit of human social groups, the maximum technological level of a sustainable industrial infrastructure and the speed with which humanity must undergo its transition toward a sustainable society. The authors cite 150 people as the natural size limit of a human community, a figure rooted in human cognitive capacity and known as “Dunbar’s number.” They argue compellingly for an industrial infrastructure that is technologically simpler and far less energy-intensive than today’s. As for the speed with which we must shift our society onto a sustainable path, they say we need to do so “faster than we have been and faster than it appears we are capable of.” Yes, we’ll need technology and more importantly, a vastly different economic and political system which is more likely now to arise from the partial ashes of our current society. But the overriding goal of our society–economic growth with the benefits flowing almost entirely to the billionaires–must end be dropped now.I lived insuch a place for about ten years (age 24 to 34). Experimental and quite imperfect, but at least we were (and others still are) trying to figure it out. Dealing with thw many various issues.