Review by Forrest Whitman
Environmentalism – March 2008 – Colorado Central Magazine
Break Through: From the Death of Environmentalism; to the Politics of Possibility
by Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger
Published in 2007 by Houghton Mifflin
ISBN B001M0MDLG
COLORADO CENTRAL READERS are very interested in the environment and in preservation of special places in Central Colorado. That’s obvious from letters to the editor and many a column. Some readers have noticed the publicity Nordhaus and Shellenberger have gotten for their serious criticism of the environmental movement in their last book The Death of Environmentalism.
Some members of conservation groups have expressed anger toward the authors, yet others have seen truth in their criticism. As I read their latest book I thought of one particular battle about to be joined, namely the fight to ” save the Baca Grande wildlife refuge” from oil and gas drilling. Since the authors tout this new book as a better way to accomplish environmental goals, why not consider a test case right here in Central Colorado?
The new book is, in many ways, a repeat of their original case against environmentalism. To back their dispute, they employ the “needs pyramid” which was developed by Abraham Maslow and is familiar to many a student. The base of the human pyramid calls for humans to feel wealthy, secure and strong. Unless those basic needs are met humans will not consider ways to feel compassionate toward others, feel concern about the next generation, or be generous enough to save the environment, especially wild nature.
THESE AUTHORS THINK the American public is not feeling particularity strong, or wealthy and is therefore not ready to move up to the higher needs in the “need pyramid.” That analysis bodes ill for ” saving” a lovely wildlife reserve like the Baca, but they do give some suggestions for changing the paradigm.
First of all, they urge conservationists to be more positive. No one listens to groups always saying “stop!” and insisting that we must cut back and give up things. Rather, as we look at the Baca, “enviros” could say: “We’ll develop a strong tourist economy, sustainable for many years, to compensate for the loss of a few temporary oil and gas drilling jobs.”
Merely to say “save the Baca for future generations” will probably not appeal to very many. In fact, in poll after poll, “the environment” and “global warming” fall to the very bottom of concerns U. S. voters have.
One other strategy that will not work, the authors claim, is to argue on behalf of “unspoiled nature.” There is no such thing since all of nature is now managed by humans. Even the Baca has been grazed, is home to primitive roads and trails, and is managed by a government bureau. A much better strategy they would suggest is to argue for ways in which the Baca helps the local economy in a long-term, sustainable way.
To some degree these authors demonize “liberals” and “enviros” in stereotypical ways. I don’t know any environmentalists who are “hobbled” by “resentment of human strength and ability to control nature.” After all it was the founder of modern environmentalism, Steward Brand of the Whole Earth Catalog, who said, “We are as god, so we might as well get used to it.” I don’t know many liberals who “resent wealth and power” either. In fact, most liberals I know are working to get some of that for themselves.
The authors suggest that environmental groups could learn from Evangelical Christians about how to form strong dedicated groups because Evangelicals do a good job of providing social ties and esteem for their members, whereas not many conservation groups do. But I remember some S.U.W.A campouts at “Seldom Seen’s Ranch” over in Utah that came close to a revival.
THIS IS NOT A BOOK to be read in a couple of sittings. Nordhaus and Shellenberger must have majored in philosophy. They spend many a page discussing the theories of Nietzsche, Carl Rogers, C.G. Jung, Fukuyama, Richard Rorty, Carl Pope, Alexis de Tocqueville, Hegel, Kant, Kierkegaard, Heidegger, and on and on. I enjoyed the philosophical romp, but doubt many readers would. Most readers come to a book like this wondering how this can help them deal with global warming (or to save the Baca wildlife refuge or whatever their cause is).
And the authors of this book do have a plan to save the whole earth, which is, well, grand. Nordhaus and Shellenberger are authors of a very visionary alternative energy project which they’ve tried to sell to the U.S. Congress. They’d like to see us put 300 billion dollars into this “Apollo Project” over the next 10 years. Finding new sources of alternative energy would be the focus. They’d also like plenty of research about ways to genetically engineer humans, and plants, and animals to survive the coming global warming. So far they’ve not had much success raising the money, perhaps because of that old Maslow pyramid of human needs they started their book with. If I’ve not met my basic needs it’s hard to focus on hundreds of billions of dollars for alternative energy.
But even so, this book should be read by any of us serious about working in the conservation movement. Some of the authors’ criticisms could well be in the back ground as groups work to find a way to save the Baca Wildlife Refuge or do any other conservation project. Whatever else Nordhaus and Shellenberger do, they definitely make us think.
