Sounds like you're doing amazing work! And the fact that you're finding celebrities and the wealthy who are shocked at conventional methods seems promising because these people can help drive change.
Totally with you on this. I just read Pollan’s Omnivore’s Dilemma as well as one of Joel Salatin’s books, by the way, so this dovetails well with my current thinking.
I read this book for the similar reasons to those that you presented here, feeling like I had an obligation to be familiar with what he his arguments and what he was proposing. I found the book a difficult read, I think especially because I was so engaged in and felt a connection with the first chapters. I cannot imagine that trying to completely remove ourselves from the nature that we are completely a part of (like it or not) could ever be a good idea. I think that putting our food and health in the hands of tech companies and governments is one of the most dangerous suggestions I can imagine. As usual, those that have the least and have the most to lose will be the biggest losers in this scenario. Thanks for writing this review, I will be passing it along.
Thanks so much for your supportive comment. I felt like a masochist reading the book, but I really needed to know the contents. Monbiot is a good writer and probably a very likeable guy, and he's dangerous because of this.
I'll be the wrench in your writing. ;) First off, I haven't read the book, though I have read one of his books and am somewhat familiar with him. I read Feral a few years ago, it was much more of a UK slant and I thought it very interesting because I wasn't aware of some of the ecological issues the UK faced.
I think you are rather simplistic in relying on farmers to know their land to quantify soil. Farmers are farmers, they may be good at growing whatever crop they produce, but they aren't soil scientists. It's also simplistic to not take into account indigenous cultures and how devastating they were to megafauna prior to European colonization in the Americas. Many people prefer this kumbaya perspective of native cultures without considering for a moment they too are humans who have exploited the landscape at some point in time.
I'm curious why you called environmentalists techno-optimists? I definitely do not see tech involved in decoupling ag from nature. Again, I think you are incredibly simplistic in "learning from indigenous and peasant cultures that have retained sustainable relationships with their land..." because to me this sounds like you are meshing together all of those cultures into one without taking into account the historical facts for many of those cultures on their own land. Peasant cultures deforested the British Isles and much of Europe.
Looked up some of your names at the end, I recognized Diana Rodgers from her podcast. I was once vegetarian for a few years and also very into the permaculture and somewhat paleo movements. I have heard the rigmarole from both groups. There's a middle ground but also a ground that removes humans as the center of conversation.
Have you read anything by Benjamin Vogt? I highly recommend his book A New Garden Ethic---it isn't about meat or soil but it's about the human primacy we've placed on our ecosystems.
Anyway, I will be checking out Monbiot's book from the library so that I can come back and discuss this with a little more information than what you've shared here. Hopefully I can come back sometime this spring and chat more.
To address a couple of your points: I'm not denying the alleged devastation of megafauna by indigenous North Americans.
I am questioning GM's assertions that the Great Plains were an ecosystem out of balance pre-conquest, which is what he is claiming, and also ridiculing him for using this to support his case that farmers manuring their fields is bad.
The term "techno optimist" is often used as a synonym for "ecomodernist." I'm not referring to all environments as techno optimists, but it's a recognized branch of the movement. There's an "Ecomodernist Manifesto" available online that outlines their beliefs and goals. If you don't see tech involved in decoupling ag from nature you will once you read the book!!
As for quantifying soil, yes it has it's place, but my intent was to point out the reductionist and paternalistic attitude of educated and urban types. There's so much more to agriculture than quantification, and people who spend time on their land over generations know it the best and deserve our respect and support. Obviously there are many farmers using destructive practices and I'm not denying that.
Thanks for the reply! I am trying to track the book down at the library, doesn't seem to be available digitally yet, so that I can have a more well-formed conversation with you about it.
Thank you for reading George's book so I wouldn't have to! Did he talk about food waste? I believe it's at about a third of food produced is discarded even though it is edible. Maybe too simple a solution; not fancy at all.
No problem, I took one for the team for sure. He does talk about food waste but believes addressing it to be far less significant than changing diets. He says that stopping food waste in poor, hot countries would mean adding lots of refrigeration capacity and roads to aid distribution would cancel out the savings.
Thank you! It's great to have my writing appreciated.
Sounds like you're doing amazing work! And the fact that you're finding celebrities and the wealthy who are shocked at conventional methods seems promising because these people can help drive change.
Totally with you on this. I just read Pollan’s Omnivore’s Dilemma as well as one of Joel Salatin’s books, by the way, so this dovetails well with my current thinking.
I read this book for the similar reasons to those that you presented here, feeling like I had an obligation to be familiar with what he his arguments and what he was proposing. I found the book a difficult read, I think especially because I was so engaged in and felt a connection with the first chapters. I cannot imagine that trying to completely remove ourselves from the nature that we are completely a part of (like it or not) could ever be a good idea. I think that putting our food and health in the hands of tech companies and governments is one of the most dangerous suggestions I can imagine. As usual, those that have the least and have the most to lose will be the biggest losers in this scenario. Thanks for writing this review, I will be passing it along.
Thanks so much for your supportive comment. I felt like a masochist reading the book, but I really needed to know the contents. Monbiot is a good writer and probably a very likeable guy, and he's dangerous because of this.
Very interesting. I barely know Monboit from a few articles I've read in The Guardian. Now I know a lot more. Thanks for this.
You're welcome! Looking forward to the first chapter of that book of uncertain genre...
I'll be the wrench in your writing. ;) First off, I haven't read the book, though I have read one of his books and am somewhat familiar with him. I read Feral a few years ago, it was much more of a UK slant and I thought it very interesting because I wasn't aware of some of the ecological issues the UK faced.
I think you are rather simplistic in relying on farmers to know their land to quantify soil. Farmers are farmers, they may be good at growing whatever crop they produce, but they aren't soil scientists. It's also simplistic to not take into account indigenous cultures and how devastating they were to megafauna prior to European colonization in the Americas. Many people prefer this kumbaya perspective of native cultures without considering for a moment they too are humans who have exploited the landscape at some point in time.
I'm curious why you called environmentalists techno-optimists? I definitely do not see tech involved in decoupling ag from nature. Again, I think you are incredibly simplistic in "learning from indigenous and peasant cultures that have retained sustainable relationships with their land..." because to me this sounds like you are meshing together all of those cultures into one without taking into account the historical facts for many of those cultures on their own land. Peasant cultures deforested the British Isles and much of Europe.
Looked up some of your names at the end, I recognized Diana Rodgers from her podcast. I was once vegetarian for a few years and also very into the permaculture and somewhat paleo movements. I have heard the rigmarole from both groups. There's a middle ground but also a ground that removes humans as the center of conversation.
Have you read anything by Benjamin Vogt? I highly recommend his book A New Garden Ethic---it isn't about meat or soil but it's about the human primacy we've placed on our ecosystems.
Anyway, I will be checking out Monbiot's book from the library so that I can come back and discuss this with a little more information than what you've shared here. Hopefully I can come back sometime this spring and chat more.
To address a couple of your points: I'm not denying the alleged devastation of megafauna by indigenous North Americans.
I am questioning GM's assertions that the Great Plains were an ecosystem out of balance pre-conquest, which is what he is claiming, and also ridiculing him for using this to support his case that farmers manuring their fields is bad.
The term "techno optimist" is often used as a synonym for "ecomodernist." I'm not referring to all environments as techno optimists, but it's a recognized branch of the movement. There's an "Ecomodernist Manifesto" available online that outlines their beliefs and goals. If you don't see tech involved in decoupling ag from nature you will once you read the book!!
As for quantifying soil, yes it has it's place, but my intent was to point out the reductionist and paternalistic attitude of educated and urban types. There's so much more to agriculture than quantification, and people who spend time on their land over generations know it the best and deserve our respect and support. Obviously there are many farmers using destructive practices and I'm not denying that.
Thanks for the reply! I am trying to track the book down at the library, doesn't seem to be available digitally yet, so that I can have a more well-formed conversation with you about it.
Found the manifesto---didn't read it all but read enough to disagree with most of it. I also found this editorial by Monbiot from 2015 disagreeing with them as well: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/georgemonbiot/2015/sep/24/meet-the-ecomodernists-ignorant-of-history-and-paradoxically-old-fashioned
It may just be my interpretation that he's an ecomodernist. Or possibly he's changed his mind since 2015. I'll check out that link. Thanks!
Read the editorial. Wow! I really like the old Monbiot! He seems to have made a 180° turn since then.
Thank you for reading George's book so I wouldn't have to! Did he talk about food waste? I believe it's at about a third of food produced is discarded even though it is edible. Maybe too simple a solution; not fancy at all.
No problem, I took one for the team for sure. He does talk about food waste but believes addressing it to be far less significant than changing diets. He says that stopping food waste in poor, hot countries would mean adding lots of refrigeration capacity and roads to aid distribution would cancel out the savings.