What do you think?
Rate this book
Making Peace with the Planet
First Edition
- GenresScienceEnvironment
292 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1990
2 people are currently reading
91 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
March 22, 2020
كتاب مذهل!
March 9, 2015
I voted for this guy back in the day. He got about a million votes as I recall(actually about 300,000). Pretty interesting so far.
Reading this a bit at a time and skimming through all the data when I do. BC was a scientist so it's not realistic to expect him to omit all the data supporting the conclusions he presents. So... I don't feel the need to read all the numbers so I skim that and read the opening paragraphs of each chapter and the closing. Not terribly hopeful in any case. I read on wiki that he and Ehrlich had a disagreement about the need for population control. BC felt that it would be too oppressive and politically dicey in any case. The Chinese have been doing it but that's an autocratic government. Much better at getting things DONE!
Still interesting to read now and then. The "Trash" chapter is a bit outdated as there has been considerably improvement re-cycling. Enough???
Read the chapter on poverty and overpopulation, the stuff that got him into a dustup with Carl Sagan. I find myself much more in sympathy with the late Mr. Sagan than the wonky Mr. Commoner and others whose focus seems to be only on whether we can adequately feed 10-12 billion humans and not on whether its a desirable thing to have so many people as neighbors. I'm agin it! Not only that, but Mr. C. blithely brushes aside the concerns about expanding the environmental degradation associated with overpopulation with more of his recipes for how to deal with technology better(make it less polluting - duh!). Maybe if we COULD DO IT WE'D BE DOING NOW! Meanwhile the wild world keeps shrinking in the face of the relentless advance of "civilization"...
- Once again I had to skip all the technical talk in the middle. I'm beginning to regret voting for the guy!
Read the best chapter so far last night as the author outlines the clash between environmental activists(hard-pathers, the ones who try to confront corporate power) and environmental legislators/lobbyists(those who hang out in Washington and try to "control" pollution via the EPA and compromise with corporate polluters. Let's just say that Mr. C. is not in favor of the path of compromise). He says it just doesn't work. The problem for the hard-path activists(like Greenpeace) is that they seem to the public to be too scary/radical and anti-American and anti-profit. The true progressive path and the only one that will actually work if we don't want our planet to end up pretty much trashed a hundred years from now is the hard/activist path. It's a tough fight because corps. have SO MUCH money!
One more chapter to go. Curious that the author shies away from even the words political and politics. That's where much of the problem lies of course but he wants to steer clear of partisanship. He doesn't seem to get it. The political will... leadership... commitment to make necessary changes does not exist in enough force to make the radical changes required. Not only that, but our political system itself can't seem to deal effectively with the problem. Our government is poorly designed to respond swiftly and dramatically to ecological crises. We can only do damage control and spin. Serious and effective solutions will mean a loss in the short run at least of wealth, comfort, distractions etc. for spoiled, materialistic Americans. The Republican Party has been all to eager to carry on the blocking and denial so that it can gain political advantage and protection for its clients(the wealthy and corporate).
Finally finished this last night and it turns out he does understand the big problem... the lack of political will to choose environment over profits or, if you like the American Way of Life. Recent history shows pretty clearly that Americans are only too willing to remain ignorant, to be lied to, to stay glued to their computers screens and TV sets and allow their addiction to comfort, stuff and money to enable the continuous unfolding of an ever-deepening ecological disaster. Then, when the shit really hits the fan in 50 or 100 or 150 years from now they can whine about how "we didn't know!" Ditto with the disappearance of wild nature over the same period of time. The only "wild" animals left will live in the most inhospitable environments or will live with humans(squirrels etc.). Just wait for the first time wilderness protection is removed from an existing wilderness area when they find something valuable underneath. It's coming...
- BC calls for government to be strong in opposing corporate power. Not if the Republican Party can help it. And they apparently can! he doesn't come right out and call corporations evil but...
- Lots of boring detail brings this book down a bit as well as the lack of the appropriate ideological fire-breathing the problem(s) call for. Plus, some of the stuff is outdated. 3.75 rounds up to 4*
Reading this a bit at a time and skimming through all the data when I do. BC was a scientist so it's not realistic to expect him to omit all the data supporting the conclusions he presents. So... I don't feel the need to read all the numbers so I skim that and read the opening paragraphs of each chapter and the closing. Not terribly hopeful in any case. I read on wiki that he and Ehrlich had a disagreement about the need for population control. BC felt that it would be too oppressive and politically dicey in any case. The Chinese have been doing it but that's an autocratic government. Much better at getting things DONE!
Still interesting to read now and then. The "Trash" chapter is a bit outdated as there has been considerably improvement re-cycling. Enough???
Read the chapter on poverty and overpopulation, the stuff that got him into a dustup with Carl Sagan. I find myself much more in sympathy with the late Mr. Sagan than the wonky Mr. Commoner and others whose focus seems to be only on whether we can adequately feed 10-12 billion humans and not on whether its a desirable thing to have so many people as neighbors. I'm agin it! Not only that, but Mr. C. blithely brushes aside the concerns about expanding the environmental degradation associated with overpopulation with more of his recipes for how to deal with technology better(make it less polluting - duh!). Maybe if we COULD DO IT WE'D BE DOING NOW! Meanwhile the wild world keeps shrinking in the face of the relentless advance of "civilization"...
- Once again I had to skip all the technical talk in the middle. I'm beginning to regret voting for the guy!
Read the best chapter so far last night as the author outlines the clash between environmental activists(hard-pathers, the ones who try to confront corporate power) and environmental legislators/lobbyists(those who hang out in Washington and try to "control" pollution via the EPA and compromise with corporate polluters. Let's just say that Mr. C. is not in favor of the path of compromise). He says it just doesn't work. The problem for the hard-path activists(like Greenpeace) is that they seem to the public to be too scary/radical and anti-American and anti-profit. The true progressive path and the only one that will actually work if we don't want our planet to end up pretty much trashed a hundred years from now is the hard/activist path. It's a tough fight because corps. have SO MUCH money!
One more chapter to go. Curious that the author shies away from even the words political and politics. That's where much of the problem lies of course but he wants to steer clear of partisanship. He doesn't seem to get it. The political will... leadership... commitment to make necessary changes does not exist in enough force to make the radical changes required. Not only that, but our political system itself can't seem to deal effectively with the problem. Our government is poorly designed to respond swiftly and dramatically to ecological crises. We can only do damage control and spin. Serious and effective solutions will mean a loss in the short run at least of wealth, comfort, distractions etc. for spoiled, materialistic Americans. The Republican Party has been all to eager to carry on the blocking and denial so that it can gain political advantage and protection for its clients(the wealthy and corporate).
Finally finished this last night and it turns out he does understand the big problem... the lack of political will to choose environment over profits or, if you like the American Way of Life. Recent history shows pretty clearly that Americans are only too willing to remain ignorant, to be lied to, to stay glued to their computers screens and TV sets and allow their addiction to comfort, stuff and money to enable the continuous unfolding of an ever-deepening ecological disaster. Then, when the shit really hits the fan in 50 or 100 or 150 years from now they can whine about how "we didn't know!" Ditto with the disappearance of wild nature over the same period of time. The only "wild" animals left will live in the most inhospitable environments or will live with humans(squirrels etc.). Just wait for the first time wilderness protection is removed from an existing wilderness area when they find something valuable underneath. It's coming...
- BC calls for government to be strong in opposing corporate power. Not if the Republican Party can help it. And they apparently can! he doesn't come right out and call corporations evil but...
- Lots of boring detail brings this book down a bit as well as the lack of the appropriate ideological fire-breathing the problem(s) call for. Plus, some of the stuff is outdated. 3.75 rounds up to 4*
March 31, 2024
AN ARGUMENT FOR CONSIDERING BOTH THE ‘ECOSPHERE’ AND THE ‘TECHNOSPHERE’
Barry Commoner (1917-2012) was an American cellular biologist and college professor, who was the director of the Center for Biology of Natural Systems. (He also ran as the Citizens Party candidate in the 1980 U.S. Presidential election.)
He wrote in the first chapter of this 1990 book, “The two spheres in which we live are governed by very different laws. One of the basic laws of the ecosphere can be summed up as ‘Everything is connected to everything else.’ … the ecosphere is an elaborate network, in which each component part is linked to many others… The second law of ecology---‘Everything has to go somewhere’---together with the first, expresses the fundamental importance of cycles in the ecosphere… The third informal law of ecology is ‘Nature knows best.’ The ecosystem is consistent with itself; its numerous components are compatible with each other… In contrasty to the ecosphere, the technosphere is composed of objects and materials that reflect a rapid and relentless process of change and evolution… it is useful to compare the ecosphere and the technosphere with respect to the consequences of failure… At first glance, the technosphere appears to be extraordinarily free of mistakes…. Yet nearly every modern technology has grave faults, which appear… as a serous impact on the environment… In sum, there are numerous failures in the modern technosphere, but their effects are visited upon the ecosphere.” (Pg. 8-14)
He observes, “At present, economic considerations---in particular, the private desire for maximizing short-term profits---govern the choice of productive technology, which in turn determines its environmental impact, generally for the worse. Logically, however, environmental constraints ought to determine the choice of production technology, and that choice should govern economic investment policy… the hitherto private decisions that determine production technology must become subject to social governance.” (Pg. 161-162)
He suggests, “the task is this. We must recognize that the assault on the environmental cannot be effectively controlled, but must be prevented; that prevention requires the transformation of the present structure of the technosphere, bringing it into harmony with the ecosphere; that this means massively redesigning the major industrial, agricultural, energy, and transportation systems; that such a transformation … conflicts with the short-term profit-maximizing goals that now govern investment decisions… what we propose to do in the United States and other industrial nations must be compatible with the global task of closing the economic gap between the rich north and the poor south---and indeed must facilitate it.” (Pg. 192-193)
He concludes, “We can now see that both our suicidal assault on nature and the wars… that have engulfed the world I misery have a common origin: the failure… to begin a new historical passage---toward a democracy that encompasses not only personal and political freedom, but the germinal decision that determine how we and the planet will live… To make peace with the planet, we must make peace among the peoples who live in it.” (Pg. 243)
Like all of Commoner’s books, this one will appeal to those who have an ‘environmental’ orientation.
Barry Commoner (1917-2012) was an American cellular biologist and college professor, who was the director of the Center for Biology of Natural Systems. (He also ran as the Citizens Party candidate in the 1980 U.S. Presidential election.)
He wrote in the first chapter of this 1990 book, “The two spheres in which we live are governed by very different laws. One of the basic laws of the ecosphere can be summed up as ‘Everything is connected to everything else.’ … the ecosphere is an elaborate network, in which each component part is linked to many others… The second law of ecology---‘Everything has to go somewhere’---together with the first, expresses the fundamental importance of cycles in the ecosphere… The third informal law of ecology is ‘Nature knows best.’ The ecosystem is consistent with itself; its numerous components are compatible with each other… In contrasty to the ecosphere, the technosphere is composed of objects and materials that reflect a rapid and relentless process of change and evolution… it is useful to compare the ecosphere and the technosphere with respect to the consequences of failure… At first glance, the technosphere appears to be extraordinarily free of mistakes…. Yet nearly every modern technology has grave faults, which appear… as a serous impact on the environment… In sum, there are numerous failures in the modern technosphere, but their effects are visited upon the ecosphere.” (Pg. 8-14)
He observes, “At present, economic considerations---in particular, the private desire for maximizing short-term profits---govern the choice of productive technology, which in turn determines its environmental impact, generally for the worse. Logically, however, environmental constraints ought to determine the choice of production technology, and that choice should govern economic investment policy… the hitherto private decisions that determine production technology must become subject to social governance.” (Pg. 161-162)
He suggests, “the task is this. We must recognize that the assault on the environmental cannot be effectively controlled, but must be prevented; that prevention requires the transformation of the present structure of the technosphere, bringing it into harmony with the ecosphere; that this means massively redesigning the major industrial, agricultural, energy, and transportation systems; that such a transformation … conflicts with the short-term profit-maximizing goals that now govern investment decisions… what we propose to do in the United States and other industrial nations must be compatible with the global task of closing the economic gap between the rich north and the poor south---and indeed must facilitate it.” (Pg. 192-193)
He concludes, “We can now see that both our suicidal assault on nature and the wars… that have engulfed the world I misery have a common origin: the failure… to begin a new historical passage---toward a democracy that encompasses not only personal and political freedom, but the germinal decision that determine how we and the planet will live… To make peace with the planet, we must make peace among the peoples who live in it.” (Pg. 243)
Like all of Commoner’s books, this one will appeal to those who have an ‘environmental’ orientation.
February 3, 2022
Fantastic book.
Read
September 20, 2024No lo leáis.
October 6, 2014
A dated and somewhat tired follow-up to the Closing Circle. Much of the book was a direct reprint of magazine articles from the mid-1970s to the late 1980s. A lot of repetition and overlap with his masterpiece, without advancing many new ideas. Like any book that envisions a future and advocates changes needed, it was interesting to see where his predictions came true and where they missed the mark. Instead of editing the book to keep up with rapidly changing events, the chapters have a kind of time warp, particularly since the book closes with the Soviet Bloc showing signs of slow deterioration, but still intact. Not the timeless classic I was hoping it to be.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews