In that it is an ideal human community, one that has become increasingly rare if not impossible in our modern neoliberal world. Does this really apply to the so-called American democracy in the 21 st century? Well, we are a “nation that has been at war – either in shooting wars or cold war for domination – for our entire lives (since World War II; we are participating in both, one by proxy, in early 2023). Economic inequality and the resulting suffering have deepened in our lifetimes, facilitated by a government so captured by concentrated wealth that attempts to renew the moderate New Deal-era social contract seem radical to many.” And we are left with a culture “competent to implement almost anything (relating to government power) and to imagine almost nothing.” Just another example of fundamentalism thriving in the absence of imagination, “where both the Right and the so-called Left either endorses or capitulates to royal power.” Yes, “royal tradition” applies to us. Well, Jeremy, that’s the key philosophical, maybe even practical question: how do I keep the feet moving when my head and my heart tell me it’s hopeless?

An Inconvenient Apocalypse by Wes Jackson, Robert Jensen

By KLG, who has held research and academic positions in three US medical schools since 1995 and is currently Professor of Biochemistry and Associate Dean. He has performed and directed research on protein structure, function, and evolution; cell adhesion and motility; the mechanism of viral fusion proteins; and assembly of the vertebrate heart. He has served on national review panels of both public and private funding agencies, and his research and that of his students has been funded by the American Heart Association, American Cancer Society, and National Institutes of Health.So what is in the book? They discuss the importance of environmental and geographic factors in history, the need for anticapitalist perspectives and for social justice. Then the overall problems of “size, scale, scope, and speed.” One useful concept was the “Overton window,” which postulates that political leaders only consider policies which already have wide public support — which explains much of the environmental crisis. A chapter of conclusions. “We recognize that we will all face a belt-tightening future whether we like it or not, but that is not an endorsement of the cruel austerity policies in contemporary policy making.”

An Inconvenient Apocalypse: Environmental Collapse, Climate

How would slowing down and spending more time with family, friends and taking care of our planet and our own health ‘kill people?So, we conclude that the type of living arrangements that groups of humans develop arise from the differences in geography, climate, and environmental conditions. Absent any other credible explanation, we assume that the different material realities under which humans have lived have shaped the variations in human culture. People make choices to build cultures in specific ways, but if all people are basically the same animal, then the differences in those choices around the world are most likely the product of those different conditions. Discusses the four hard questions that are essential to confront now. “What is the sustainable size of the human population?” three different relationships among systems of political and cultural power, the royal, prophetic, and apocalyptic We humans have made a mess of things, which is readily evident if we face the avalanche of studies and statistics describing the contemporary ecological crises we face. But even with the mounting evidence of the consequences for people and the ecosphere, we have not committed to a serious project to slow the damage that we do. Those who have little or no access to wealth and power would be within their rights to object, on the grounds that the “we” diffuses responsibility. Who has made a mess of things and who has failed to act? Who’s to blame for the problems and who’s responsible for the costs? Put more bluntly, borrowing from the imagined exchange between the Lone Ranger and Tonto when they were in a tough fight with Indians, “What do you mean, we, white man?”

An Inconvenient Apocalypse by Wes Jackson, Robert Jensen An Inconvenient Apocalypse by Wes Jackson, Robert Jensen

Read this personal manifesto of wisdom and passion for our suffering planet, a very important, timely, and riveting book." — CounterPunch Harrowing and accessible, this is just the thing for readers interested in a sociological or philosophical examination of the climate crisis." — Publishers Weekly An Inconvenient Apocalypse excels at making difficult concepts easily understandable through skillful use of thought experiments. In one, we’re asked to imagine how history might have unfolded differently had the contiguous United States, rather than western Europe, been blessed with the conditions that first paved the way for the industrial revolution. In another, we’re given a scenario in which socialism, instead of capitalism, established itself as the dominant economic system of the industrial world. Both of these thought experiments make crucial points about the reality of geographic determinism in history and humanity’s susceptibility to “the temptations of dense energy,” and they do so in a simple, accessible manner. It discusses contemporary crises. “First, within the human family, we face a struggle for social justice in societies that currently do not operate in a manner consistent with widely held values concerning dignity, solidarity, and equality.” “Second, we face a struggle for an ecologically sustainable relationship between humans and the larger living world, the ecosphere.” The nature of all living organisms, so this book argues, is to go after 'dense energy,' resulting eventually in crisis. If that is so, then the human organism is facing a tough question: Can we overcome our own nature? Courageous and humble, bold and provocative, the authors of An Inconvenient Apocalypse do not settle for superficial answers." —Donald Worster, author of Shrinking the EarthDifferent groups with different possible alternatives in mind should all advocate for their own most favored alternatives. The authors have coined the term “ecospheric grace” to describe their vision of an ideal orientation toward the natural world. To show ecospheric grace is to humble ourselves before the rest of nature. It is to accept that we humans aren’t at the center of everything, that we’ll never completely understand the natural world of which we’re a part and that nature doesn’t favor us over any other species. It is thus also to reject the ideal of Earth stewardship, since stewardship implies authority and control. Our goal should instead be to return the biosphere’s favor of “the gift of life with no strings attached” by treating it well. Describes the concept of the saving remnant. “The term is used in various ways, but at the core is a faith that even in the face of an overwhelming catastrophe, a saving remnant will survive and become the basis for renewed community life.” The book reads well. It’s infused with provocative questions and existential philosophy. The authors are reasonable and highly sensitive to social justice.