A Reversible Crisis

All the signs seem to be that the planetary crisis is sharpening, deepening, accelerating, worsening. The thing about a planetary crisis is that we are all threatened, although the prophets say that the people least responsible are also the most vulnerable, and there is certainly an elite who are looking to protect themselves as everyone else is destroyed.

Ponder this. The great waves of migration into the US from the Mexico side of the border are largely due to the subsistence of great swathes of central America becoming impossible. The recent wars of north Africa and the middle East and the migrants trying to get into Europe are also due to rising temperatures and desertification of the land. No-one in official politics is trying to address the root causes of these problems, still less voicing Nora Bateson’s question: how do we know we are not the next to be refugees?

Millán Millán is also very clear that because we know there are consequences, we can mitigate those consequences. We can regenerate some forest locally, we can change the patterns of agriculture to compensate. Big Energy is criminally responsible for much of the rise in greenhouse gases. Culpable by exploiting oil reserves too fast and culpable by lying about the effects and subverting climate science. But we don’t have to close down the oil majors to deal with what we are doing ourselves without regard for the consequences.

Think perhaps of a third runway at Heathrow. Although there are endless and endlessly political environmental risk assessments, they never propose the sorts of mitigation that would concretely counterbalance the effects of all that concrete.

I think agriculture is best regarded as a microcosm and as a death spiral. We know that managed grazing can be used to restore arid landscapes, even the deserts of the Arabian peninsula. If you watch over historical time, humans turn fertile land into deserts. That is simply an observation, not an accusation. And we have good evidence that this is a reversible process, to some degree.

When aridification is reversed, the local climate stabilises, cools. A place can become truly habitable again, when it was absolutely not. Springs and rivers flow, the landscape is green and productive. And we should emphasise that this process does not require external energy or inputs, and is not externalising costs. It is simply life stabilising its environment, which is what life does, when we don’t interfere.

The opposite of this process is the standard death spiral. Agricultural practice and global warming changes to weather patterns mean it is difficult to maintain traditional approaches to land management. Advice from government scientists and corporate interests typically makes the situation much worse. As the remaining vegetation cover is overgrazed and trees are used for fuel, the process of desertification gathers pace.

The key is in the soil and whether the rise in surface temperatures is allowed to destroy the soil biology which supports the whole of terrestrial life. Armouring the soil and grazing vegetation in a tightly managed way (to allow plants to regrow after each grazing) can start the regeneration process.

Not only is there precious little agreement on causes and mitigations, the prophets of collapse have wildly different ideas about the way forward. I want to focus on two tendencies that we have touched on before. They go to opposite extremes in a way I find edifying. Let’s look at the rewilding cult and the vegan cult. I quite appreciate that these are not mutually exclusive as personified but I think their logic is at polar opposite ends.

The rewilders say that if agriculture became more productive then we would not need all the land currently used for agriculture and lots of land could be left to become wild again. I have some sympathy with the need for wilderness even if it is a sort of post-industrial jungle. It gets past our need to manage things and to pretend we have answers.

Certain sorts of terrain and certain climatic conditions allow relatively rapid rewilding. But if you read Richard Powers disturbing novel The Overstory, you will understand that there are forest regenerations that take thousands of years, if they ever take hold. And, of course, the arid deserts we have created will not rewild: they will remain as deserts.

The vegan say we must eat plants not animals. If got our calories from plants and cut out the middleman of feeding animals in order to eat their meat, then we would put less pressure on planetary resources. I have less sympathy with this thinking mistake. Yes, we are mad to put thousand of animals in sheds and feed them corn and soy, but that does not mean that animals are not indispensable to regenerative agriculture.

So, at the rewilding extreme people are saying we must get humans out of the picture altogether in order for nature to survive. And at the vegan extreme people are saying that it is only humans who count in the design of the world food system. Both suffer grotesquely from human species solipsism, a human exceptionalism that say that when the chips are down, only humans count. It is precisely because of this solipsism that people can take both these extreme positions simultaneously, as George Monbiot does.

Battling the oil majors is not systemic thinking, it is decidedly linear in its logic. It is thinking about a system, not thinking with the logic of the system. Put it this way. The oil and the coal which fuel our little technology bubble of cars and electric devices were put in the ground by natural processes. Those processes worked at a scale that we can barely conceive of in taking carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. Which is obvious if you think how much oil and coal we have chosen to squander.

That sequestration of carbon on an unimaginable scale happened because of a flourishing of life processes that needed to stabilise the atmosphere in that way. I can say comfortably and categorically that no humans were involved. Not only have we burned fossil fuels but we have directly and on a massive scale interfered with the processes that sequester carbon. In fact, there are denialists who say it is not possible to sequester carbon in the volumes required!

Regenerative agriculture sequesters massive amounts of carbon at the same time as restoring habitability to places. You can tell that this is a life process because it is not a trade-off. George Monbiot wants to limit agriculture geographically to make space for nature: that is a trade-off. Life processes do not work that way and that is why any sort of thinking that has human exceptionalism in it cannot be part of the available solutions.

Voila: we are close to being able to argue that if the planet is to continue with life as we know it, then humans have to become well-behaved parts of an ecosystem they can neither understand or manage. We are not central and cannot be central because no part of a system can manage the system. It is the abject lie that the world is here for us that means that, increasingly, the world is not here for us.

Our political systems are very ill-designed for the purpose of civilising our behaviour as a species. If we were really democratic in spirit, we would have to extend that democracy to the rest to the ecosystem: to animals, birds, fish, but most of all to the soils that we abuse at our peril. Remember that we depend absolutely on teeming trillions of incredibly diverse life forms in every square metre under our feet.

The best parts of the US constitution were put there by First People representatives who understood far more about our place in the world than do any current politicians. Progress in understanding this has been decidedly and vehemently backwards: a regression into ignorant self-harm. We still have this trope about “primitive” hunter-gatherers: let me commend David Wengrow again to bring us out of our totally delusional and self-serving understanding of human history.

We need to be able to observe the world with different eyes. We need to be able to join with other species in understanding what heals. We need to understand the achievements in human history that are about successful respect for our place in the ecosystem, not temporary domination of one sort or another. From this needed perspective domination is always destructive both of the world and of ourselves.

There have been experiments and proposals around basing politics on the measurement of happiness. But the key indicator is always health. If the great majority of western populations now suffer from metabolic syndrome, meaning their health is fundamentally compromised, then you can tell we are trashing the planet: it is the same thing. When any species sickens something in the environment has changed: when a coral reach bleaches, whole ecosystems sicken and die. It is not necessarily a problem caused by human disregard, but the chances are that it is. When we are trashing the systems that keep us healthy, we need to pay attention: not to whether we are happy to be hooligans but whether we actually want to live.

Finding a political route requires allowing, supporting, people who are least damaged, most in touch with the crisis to have a public prominent voice. The prophets we need are more like the Old Testament prophets, insisting that the people and their leaders have lost their way and are heading directly for disaster. We need the truth about our political diseases, not a fresh bunch of ideas and “answers” that do not even understand the question. We need to find a way to stay in our place as a species and to steward the worlds we impact.

— — —

Related posts:

Thank you for reading! I often do my writing in my favorite little coffee shop. I would be very grateful if you would consider supporting my writing by buying me a coffee! ko-fi.com/chrispatton1145

In 1980 there were a handful of programming languages available.: Cobol, Fortran, BASIC, SQL and a few others. In 1980 C++ was released. The next 10 years brought languages like Objective-C, Perl…

See At this article how and why use the WordPress comments pagination. Have you noticed that your blog posts with a lot of comments load slower than other posts? That’s because loading so many…