Break Through: From the Death of Environmentalism to the Politics of Possibility

When I originally read the book "Ishmael" by Daniel Quinn back in college in 1997, it helped throw me into a huge depression as I realized the huge problem we have as a culture. Recently I read a book called "Break Though" by Michael Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus. I wish I had had this book available to me then. The basic message of "Break Through" is that people who are concerned about environmental/social issues spend so much of their time complaining about what is wrong with the dominant culture that they have lost virtually all impact on actually making anything better. ("Conservatives" complaining about "liberals" who complain about everything and who are not willing to work for anything is one thing you'll hear.) The authors of "Break Through" point out that at the beginning of Martin Luther King's "I have a dream" speech, he had told of all the oppression and all the hurting he had witnessed--it started as an "I have a nightmare" speech. Then, someone said to him, tell us about the dream! And of course, that is the part of the speech we all know today. The authors of "Break Through" also say that most of us misunderstand the motives of Chico Mendes, the Brazilian rubber tapper who was assassinated in 1988. In fact, they talk about Brazil as a symptom of the dominant culture's problems. The authors want to start a new Apollo project to get the United States on track with new energy efficiency technology with a $30 billion annual investment. (Compare that to the spending in Iraq....) Daniel Quinn said we can choose to stop participating in what he calls Mother Culture by simply walking away from it. There seems to be a strong idea in those of us worried by the track of Mother Culture that "technology won't save us" and hence there is a push for organic farming and self-sustainability and local community self-sustainability, which I think is wonderful. At the same time, we as human beings are such creatures of habit that those of us who have had access to technology in the "developed" world are going to want to keep it. And those who don't have it are going to want it (in places like China and India). Knowing as an engineer that there is so much incredible amount of waste that doesn't need to be there, and that we can do so much better with some carefully selected new energy technology along with the mindset to go with it, the new Apollo project seems to make a lot of sense to me. (As an aside, check out the Aptera vehicle.) But agree with that or not, "Break Through" is well worth a read in my opinion because it speaks to the core of our attitude, as those who care about making life more livable for ourselves and all the inhabitants of the Earth. Read this especially if you have ever been massively depressed about environmental/social issues--and especially if you're just now entering college.

"Break Through" by Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger is a stirring manifesto for the postenvironmentalist movement. With remarkable erudition, maturity and precision, the two veteran environmentalists condemn the failed politics of limits to the dustbin of history but go on to sketch out a bold new politics of possibility. Brilliantly conceived and passionately written, this inspiring work helps us visualize how humanity might yet achieve greatness on earth. Mr. Nordhaus and Mr. Shellenberger remind us that post war prosperity created the postmaterialist conditions that allowed the social and environmental movements of the 1960s and 1970s to flourish. However, the authors fault the narrowly-focused, complaint-based liberalism of today for its inability to reverse the deteriorating economic conditions that are the root cause for a host of environmental ills. The authors do not shy from taking aim at some of the environmental movement's most esteemed spokespeople including Robert Bullard, Al Gore and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and fault them for deploying unproductive disaster discourses to promote a largely uninspiring and outmoded pollution control agenda. Pointing to the success of mega churches in creating community out of social and economic anxiety, the authors contend that a postenvironmentalist movement that empowers individuals to imagine and create change is required to tackle the enormous problem of global warming; in fact, they believe that only a dramatic program on the scale of the Apollo project can inspire America's increasingly individualistic and creative citizens to participate in developing a new, renewable-energy based economy and thereby reshape the world. Rewriting an exceedingly dull speech by Tony Blair on the topic of global warming in the style of Winston Churchill, the authors demonstrate how postenvironmentalists might rouse the public to face down despair and accept the challenge to do great things in service to themselves and future generations. I highly recommend this exceptional book to everyone.

This book draws on themes invoked by such thought leaders as architect/designer William McDonough, journalist Thomas Friedman and venture capitalist John Doerr about inspiring human creativity and finding hope in human aspirations and nature's abundance -- and points us to a strategic vision for the next decades. I'm the founder of The California Cars Initiative -- CalCars.org -- promoting plug-in hybrids. See a full review I posted to CalCars-News at http://www.calcars.org/calcars-news/863.html . WAYS THIS BOOK HELPED CHANGE MY THINKING * I've been mystified about people who didn't want to see "An Inconvenient Truth." Even as I agreed with many others that this powerful and effective movie came up short in offering solutions, I still felt frustrated by those who stayed away because they couldn't face the "doom and gloom" message. By drawing on their academic backgrounds, the authors convincingly show how ear and anxiety can de-motivate and disempower many people. Break Through starts off with a contrasting story -- about Martin Luther King's 1963 Lincoln Memorial speech, which began as "I have a nightmare" -- then moved to "I have a dream." * Until provoked to think more deeply, I felt those whose response to climate crisis was to conclude that instead of solutions we need adaptation as missing the point. Talk about "preparedness" seemed like a capitulation -- or an impulse to find a way to make money from misery. Now I see that including these people, who want to get involved rather than deny the problem, at least puts them on a continuum of action. * The authors say that to reduce CO2 globally, you have to reduce global per capita CO2 -- that makes sense. But then they take the mental leap to say that will require working to equalize living standards globally. That's an inconceivably large challenge -- but thinking about it this way could irrevocably transform our global strategies. * I'm also grateful for a few more catchy phrases: we've long heard "the iron age didn't end because we ran out of iron." To that we can now add: "We did not invent the Internet by taxing telegraphs nor the personal computer by limiting typewriters." LEST YOU THINK I'M ONE-SIDED * The book has an entire section that's highly abstract and philosophical ... some will appreciate it, some will skip over it! * The authors' case may at times be overstated: national environmental organizations are evolving their approaches and presenting positive visions. * The phrase "Break Through" may be problematic. The authors use it as a two-word verb: to get beyond existing social, political and technical limitations. More commonly, as a one-word noun, it implies a need to find and develop entirely new technologies and energy sources. Yet our untapped opportunities in efficiency and conservation say otherwise. Cost-effective solutions are within sight -- for instance, see http://www.calcars.org/calcars-news/860.html about how Sunpower's solar photovoltaics and Ausra's sola

Break Through from the Death of Environmentalism to the Politics of Possibility is a compelling and potent critique of the environmental movement -- and an inspiring vision for a new politics. There are two strands that run through the book. The first is that the environmental movement has consistently advocated a narrow political agenda that results from the worldview that nature is separate from humans and requires protection from human intrusions. N & S point out that the dichotomy is fallacious -- humans are natural -- but more importantly, it is counterproductive in dealing with global ecological crises. The second strand is that economic prosperity is an essential prerequisite to social and political action to reduce pollution and protect non-human habitats. N & S are insiders. Their frustration with the contemporary environmental movement, which is palpable through their use of clever aphorisms at the close of many sections of the book, emanates from a sense of opportunity lost. Break Through is the authors ' attempt to catalyze a Kuhnian-like revolution. In calling for the death of environmentalism, the authors are advocating the abandonment of doomsday narratives that demonize human agency. In Part II - The Politics of Possibility - N & S draw on their values research to examine a number of emerging socio-cultural trends in the United States. They suggest insecure affluence is a characteristic of modern America. Society is affluent in a material sense with a general abundance of food and material goods, but insecurity arises from a combination of social and economic forces. In the economic arena N & S draw on the well documented trends towards growing indebtedness and uncertainty about health care and personal retirement in an increasingly mobile workforce. The authors suggest this economic reality is a source of opportunity by advocating polices that support individual choice and possibility. They support a pragmatic message for progressive politics that speaks to the contemporary economic reality faced by the majority of voting Americans. They are quick to point out that this message, which must speak to the desire for choice and possibility, lies in sharp contrast to class-based redistributive, New Deal, policies cherished by many liberals to this day. One of the books most enlightening moments is the discussion of societal forces that contribute to insecurity. N & S echo the conclusion of social theorists that there has been a decline in traditional civic institutions that supported progressive social movements. In some communities, this decline has brought a sense of alienation and atomization. Rather than see these development as a detriment, the authors explore how society has adapted to the conditions stemming from modernity. Drawing on the concepts of social capital, strong and weak ties and value networks, N & S examine the role of church in the personal life. This discussion culminates with a cogent explanation for t

This is an important book. Certainly, for anyone concerned about environmental politics, including the politics of climate change, it is a must-read. Nordhaus and Shellenberger, long time environmental activists, challenge most of the precepts of green politics in the U.S., including its claim to draw authority from its position as "Nature's voice," its over-reliance on science as a motivator for politics, and its habitually dismal message. Following their publication of the essay, "The Death of Environmentalism," in 2004, their arguments caused considerable controversy among environmentalists. This book, an extension and refinement of the original essay, is sure to cause more controversy. The argument here is wide-ranging, drawing on historical case studies, philosophy, public opinion studies, and more. It is hard to imagine that anyone will agree with every angle of the book's approach. But the central insight, as I take it, deserves to be taken seriously by every environmentalist. It is an explicitly political insight: the years of defeats and frustrations suffered by environmentalism cannot simply be brushed aside as a consequence of the power held by the movement's adversaries. Environmentalists need to freshly examine the movement's assumptions and habits - habits of both thought and action. Despite the recurrence of the phrase "death of environmentalism" in the subtitle, this book is not another of the long string of conservative attacks. It arises from sincere and serious contemplation by two articulate and committed activists (who, I should note in the spirit of full disclosure, are friends of mine). The book's also a lively read, with dramatic stories and engaging puzzles. It's the sort of book you will want to debate with friends and family. It seems possible to me that the book is that rare event, a world-changer whose influence will be cited for decades.