Like Jonathan, I am concerned though we need to do even more. Yes, set it aside. Yes, repair the damage. But we also need to figure out how we protect it from the huge catstrophies barrelling down upon it. Catastrophes getting so big we can't stop them any more. Escalations in wildfires, droughts, floods, mudslides, acidification are all trashing biodiversity at an alarming rate ... and ecosystems don't always bounce back either.
As I keep saying in my local community, wildfire doesn't recognise park or protected area boundaries. It burns just as happily there as it does on the neighbouring farm it just trashed.
Admittedly, I have longsince been blackpilled, at least in the eyes of the red- and blue-pilled and especially the undecided. Nevertheless, here goes...
Top down sustainability may well be the death of us as it seeks to sustain the unsustainable; monocrop forests, aquifer evaporating golf courses, soil depleting farms, housing on floodplains, extractive processes, continued comfort and modern, labourfree lives. All anthropocentric aims that demand Ever More Management. The transference of this approach to natural systems is probably because we want specific outcomes and that's the way we typically meet our wants. That ubiquitous linearity of thought is so often the cause of the myriad catastrophes we face, yet we struggle to consider the alternatives such as 'not doing', or as the Taoists have it, the art of wu wei. Complex systems repeatedly defy the reductive thinking and expectations we impose upon them but rarely enough to shake us from our programming. How many times does a man need told to stop assuming every problem he hears is a role for him as saviour? Took a few for me.
Typing on a phone is no place to argue for complex sociological and philosophical shifts but I'd just like to flag up that wildfires, floods and droughts (and epidemics) can be read as responses of complex systems to disregulation caused by dominant monocultures such as industrialised humanity and its mindset.
Those responses and their attendant tragedies might be the slate wiping for the new education that we deserve and need and can't manage away...
Step aside at the ego scale - the level we can't adequately comprehend.
Step back at the level where we do harm.
Step into the unpredictable lessons that unfold.
Step up less disastrously to work with our new reality.
Thanks for this, Matt. Achieving a nature mindset is possible but it's enormously challenging in a materialistic anthropocentric society such as ours. We have no choice but to fight for that.
Oh, I have this book in my reading list, but I haven't gotten to it yet. Conceptually, I like the idea of returning half of Earth to wild nature, but practically - how is this even possible? Today's earthlings (that is, us) are the result of 300 years of propaganda of indoctrinated consumerism. To leave the planet alone - at least half of it - we need some new kind of people, Homo Planetarium or Planetary Human - because Homo Sapiens will gnaw at it all until they devour it to the last crumb.
Look for recent mongabay podcast on indigenous stewardship, rereleased because it won an award. If we want to restore nature the involvement of communities who live there and already know the land intimately is essential.
They need to be healthy and strong, protected and respected. Their ancient methods of ensuring nature keeps providing for their well-being need recovering and strengthening. Their voices need to be in the highest offices, their stories and attitudes the most valued and aspired towards. THEN we might actually respect our mother enough to step back. We might learn the tools we need to do so.
Great post, thanks. Re: "It’s time we admit that Nature is a better steward of Nature than we are." -- I agree, except we can no longer leave nature alone entirely because of all of the other stressors that are hammering it (invasive species, climate change etc.). But yes, in principle, nature is a better steward of nature. Enjoyed reading this, thanks.
And wouldn't that be a better world. 🧡
Like Jonathan, I am concerned though we need to do even more. Yes, set it aside. Yes, repair the damage. But we also need to figure out how we protect it from the huge catstrophies barrelling down upon it. Catastrophes getting so big we can't stop them any more. Escalations in wildfires, droughts, floods, mudslides, acidification are all trashing biodiversity at an alarming rate ... and ecosystems don't always bounce back either.
As I keep saying in my local community, wildfire doesn't recognise park or protected area boundaries. It burns just as happily there as it does on the neighbouring farm it just trashed.
Admittedly, I have longsince been blackpilled, at least in the eyes of the red- and blue-pilled and especially the undecided. Nevertheless, here goes...
Top down sustainability may well be the death of us as it seeks to sustain the unsustainable; monocrop forests, aquifer evaporating golf courses, soil depleting farms, housing on floodplains, extractive processes, continued comfort and modern, labourfree lives. All anthropocentric aims that demand Ever More Management. The transference of this approach to natural systems is probably because we want specific outcomes and that's the way we typically meet our wants. That ubiquitous linearity of thought is so often the cause of the myriad catastrophes we face, yet we struggle to consider the alternatives such as 'not doing', or as the Taoists have it, the art of wu wei. Complex systems repeatedly defy the reductive thinking and expectations we impose upon them but rarely enough to shake us from our programming. How many times does a man need told to stop assuming every problem he hears is a role for him as saviour? Took a few for me.
Typing on a phone is no place to argue for complex sociological and philosophical shifts but I'd just like to flag up that wildfires, floods and droughts (and epidemics) can be read as responses of complex systems to disregulation caused by dominant monocultures such as industrialised humanity and its mindset.
Those responses and their attendant tragedies might be the slate wiping for the new education that we deserve and need and can't manage away...
Step aside at the ego scale - the level we can't adequately comprehend.
Step back at the level where we do harm.
Step into the unpredictable lessons that unfold.
Step up less disastrously to work with our new reality.
That pill, it was actually a deep green.
Thanks for this, Matt. Achieving a nature mindset is possible but it's enormously challenging in a materialistic anthropocentric society such as ours. We have no choice but to fight for that.
Well said Sir.
Oh, I have this book in my reading list, but I haven't gotten to it yet. Conceptually, I like the idea of returning half of Earth to wild nature, but practically - how is this even possible? Today's earthlings (that is, us) are the result of 300 years of propaganda of indoctrinated consumerism. To leave the planet alone - at least half of it - we need some new kind of people, Homo Planetarium or Planetary Human - because Homo Sapiens will gnaw at it all until they devour it to the last crumb.
Look for recent mongabay podcast on indigenous stewardship, rereleased because it won an award. If we want to restore nature the involvement of communities who live there and already know the land intimately is essential.
They need to be healthy and strong, protected and respected. Their ancient methods of ensuring nature keeps providing for their well-being need recovering and strengthening. Their voices need to be in the highest offices, their stories and attitudes the most valued and aspired towards. THEN we might actually respect our mother enough to step back. We might learn the tools we need to do so.
Unfortunately, we cannot truly set aside even 1% of a planet of which we have changed the very climate. Air and water pollution knows no boundaries.
Great post, thanks. Re: "It’s time we admit that Nature is a better steward of Nature than we are." -- I agree, except we can no longer leave nature alone entirely because of all of the other stressors that are hammering it (invasive species, climate change etc.). But yes, in principle, nature is a better steward of nature. Enjoyed reading this, thanks.