Scan barcode
akoontz11's review against another edition
informative
sad
medium-paced
3.75
+"The blind, unplanned drive to accumulate that is the hallmark of capitalist production --the profit motive--has created the problem of climate change, not individuals' profligate natures or overpopulation."
+"In other words, historically how many humans the earth can support depends primarily on the level of productivity of the existing population and the social relations within which they are embedded."
+"Under capitalism, because of the dominance of exchange value over use value, it is rational to continually seek to expand production regardless of the longer-term negative effects that make it logically irrational in relation to human need; indeed it is a requirement that corporations and capitalists do so."
+"The abstraction of exchange value from use value causes broader distortions of rationality that puts capitalism systematically at odds with the environment."
+"Human alienation from nature is intrinsic to [exchange] value's formal abstraction from use value." --Paul Burkett, Marx and Nature
+"Where threats to the integrity of the biosphere are concerned, it is well to remember that it is not the areas of the world that have the highest rate of population growth but the areas of the world that have the highest accumulation of capital, and where economic and ecological waste has become a way of life, that constitute the greatest danger." --John Bellamy Foster
+"Due to the tax structure, it can often be more profitable to export from your own country than to supply a domestic market, thus requiring imports of goods that the country actually makes itself."
• Example: Mexico, after agreements in NAFTA, imports cheap, subsidized American corn, rather than using its own
+Impression so far: I vibe with the message, but bro loses focus and pontificates. Stick to the point and be efficient in your language
+"The richest 7 percent of the global population are responsible for 50 percent of the world's CO2 emissions, whereas the poorest 50 percent are responsible for a mere 7 percent."
+"To create genuinely mass campaigns for serious action against climate change, workers and environmental activists need to start by building bonds of solidarity in smaller struggles for more immediate needs."
+"Therefore, whether we ever reach 'the end of oil' or 'peak oil' will not be determined by a physical limit or environmental destabilization, but by a social one--what profit can be made versus what resistance to this insanity can be organized."
+"All movements against entrenched power need victories, no matter how small they may initially appear to be. Any advance for our side is of necessity a setback for the other."
--Not sure how used (or accurate) this explicit "us vs. them" framing is
+"By propping up authoritarian regimes and dictators during the Cold War, and then abandoning any responsibility for these regions when the superpower rivalry subsided, imperial powers in fact bear direct responsibility for the creation of failed states."
+"Meanwhile, the United States, which has never ratified the Kyoto Protocols, increased its greenhouse gas emissions by a cumulative 17 percent throughout the 1990s under the environmental stewardship of Bill Clinton and Al Gore." Al Gore was the ambassador sent to the Kyoto Protocols; Clinton refused to send any legislation ratifying the United States' acceptance of the Kyoto Protocols onto Congress
+"Yet, for every ton of household discards--and remember, many of these discards are conditioned by the structure of the capitalist market --there are 70 tons of industrial debris created from mining, agriculture, manufacturing, and petrochemicals. In other words, less than 2 percent of all waste is residential."
+"The rich uranium ores required to achieve [the reduction of greenhouse gasses] are, however, so limited that if the entire present world electricity demand were to be provided by nuclear power, these ores would be exhausted in nine years."
+Page 146: describes capitalism as anarchic (derogatory).
+"Real environmental reforms can and have been won under capitalism, but only under one condition --when we collectively demand, organize, and fight for them."
+"According to the authors of a January 2008 Scientific American article, the United States could obtain 69 percent of all its electricity requirements and 35 percent of its total energy demands by 2050 from a single source --the sun--with the input of $420 billion of investment between 2011 and 2050...Such a price tag--$420 billion over forty years--is considerably less than the Pentagon budget for a single year..."
+"Of the more than 80,000 chemicals [used] in the United States, only 5 have been restricted or banned "
+Rather terrifying passage about BPA
+"I am all for making those personal choices if you can, but it shouldn't be confused with a political strategy that will actually bring about the change everyone wants to see. If we subscribe to lifestyle politics we then see ourselves exactly as corporate and political elites want us to see ourselves --as consumers. This is not where our power lies. It allows capitalism to go on as before, with more and more environmental damage and pollution, while we're lulled into believing we're actually doing something --recycling is the classic case."
+"Yet capitalism splits humans from their evolutionarily developed need to labor to produce what we need to survive and furthermore separates us from the natural world upon which we depend. Thus we are alienated in a double sense --from the products of our labor as we have no control over them and from the earth itself."
+Cool Marxist interpretation of machines taking over and dominating humans: because our lives are dominated by machines, in that they are dictated by the means of production
+This book could have been edited better...there are incomplete sentences, and the author shares the same Marx and Engels quote twice
+"More fundamentally, changes need to be made as part of a fully democratic process carried out by the people who will be affected by the decisions taken, not by some preplanned design into which they had no input."
+"As soon as the words 'internationally coordinated' appear in print, it should be obvious an immediate problem jumps off the page. Achieving real international cooperation on profit-related issues under this social system is just not possible; capitalist nation-states would sooner go to war over a disputed oilfield than come up with a joint international plan for planting trees."
+"Renewable energy provision for the entire planet --and the eradication of poverty --would have to be part of any move to living sustainably with the earth."
+U.N. estimate: $25 billion per year for 8--10 years is enough to provide clean water to the 1 billion people who don't have it. Annual global sales of bottled water: $100 billion
%%% OTHER BOOKS %%%
+With Speed and Violence: Why Scientists Fear Tipping Points in Climate Change
+"In other words, historically how many humans the earth can support depends primarily on the level of productivity of the existing population and the social relations within which they are embedded."
+"Under capitalism, because of the dominance of exchange value over use value, it is rational to continually seek to expand production regardless of the longer-term negative effects that make it logically irrational in relation to human need; indeed it is a requirement that corporations and capitalists do so."
+"The abstraction of exchange value from use value causes broader distortions of rationality that puts capitalism systematically at odds with the environment."
+"Human alienation from nature is intrinsic to [exchange] value's formal abstraction from use value." --Paul Burkett, Marx and Nature
+"Where threats to the integrity of the biosphere are concerned, it is well to remember that it is not the areas of the world that have the highest rate of population growth but the areas of the world that have the highest accumulation of capital, and where economic and ecological waste has become a way of life, that constitute the greatest danger." --John Bellamy Foster
+"Due to the tax structure, it can often be more profitable to export from your own country than to supply a domestic market, thus requiring imports of goods that the country actually makes itself."
• Example: Mexico, after agreements in NAFTA, imports cheap, subsidized American corn, rather than using its own
+Impression so far: I vibe with the message, but bro loses focus and pontificates. Stick to the point and be efficient in your language
+"The richest 7 percent of the global population are responsible for 50 percent of the world's CO2 emissions, whereas the poorest 50 percent are responsible for a mere 7 percent."
+"To create genuinely mass campaigns for serious action against climate change, workers and environmental activists need to start by building bonds of solidarity in smaller struggles for more immediate needs."
+"Therefore, whether we ever reach 'the end of oil' or 'peak oil' will not be determined by a physical limit or environmental destabilization, but by a social one--what profit can be made versus what resistance to this insanity can be organized."
+"All movements against entrenched power need victories, no matter how small they may initially appear to be. Any advance for our side is of necessity a setback for the other."
--Not sure how used (or accurate) this explicit "us vs. them" framing is
+"By propping up authoritarian regimes and dictators during the Cold War, and then abandoning any responsibility for these regions when the superpower rivalry subsided, imperial powers in fact bear direct responsibility for the creation of failed states."
+"Meanwhile, the United States, which has never ratified the Kyoto Protocols, increased its greenhouse gas emissions by a cumulative 17 percent throughout the 1990s under the environmental stewardship of Bill Clinton and Al Gore." Al Gore was the ambassador sent to the Kyoto Protocols; Clinton refused to send any legislation ratifying the United States' acceptance of the Kyoto Protocols onto Congress
+"Yet, for every ton of household discards--and remember, many of these discards are conditioned by the structure of the capitalist market --there are 70 tons of industrial debris created from mining, agriculture, manufacturing, and petrochemicals. In other words, less than 2 percent of all waste is residential."
+"The rich uranium ores required to achieve [the reduction of greenhouse gasses] are, however, so limited that if the entire present world electricity demand were to be provided by nuclear power, these ores would be exhausted in nine years."
+Page 146: describes capitalism as anarchic (derogatory).
+"Real environmental reforms can and have been won under capitalism, but only under one condition --when we collectively demand, organize, and fight for them."
+"According to the authors of a January 2008 Scientific American article, the United States could obtain 69 percent of all its electricity requirements and 35 percent of its total energy demands by 2050 from a single source --the sun--with the input of $420 billion of investment between 2011 and 2050...Such a price tag--$420 billion over forty years--is considerably less than the Pentagon budget for a single year..."
+"Of the more than 80,000 chemicals [used] in the United States, only 5 have been restricted or banned "
+Rather terrifying passage about BPA
+"I am all for making those personal choices if you can, but it shouldn't be confused with a political strategy that will actually bring about the change everyone wants to see. If we subscribe to lifestyle politics we then see ourselves exactly as corporate and political elites want us to see ourselves --as consumers. This is not where our power lies. It allows capitalism to go on as before, with more and more environmental damage and pollution, while we're lulled into believing we're actually doing something --recycling is the classic case."
+"Yet capitalism splits humans from their evolutionarily developed need to labor to produce what we need to survive and furthermore separates us from the natural world upon which we depend. Thus we are alienated in a double sense --from the products of our labor as we have no control over them and from the earth itself."
+Cool Marxist interpretation of machines taking over and dominating humans: because our lives are dominated by machines, in that they are dictated by the means of production
+This book could have been edited better...there are incomplete sentences, and the author shares the same Marx and Engels quote twice
+"More fundamentally, changes need to be made as part of a fully democratic process carried out by the people who will be affected by the decisions taken, not by some preplanned design into which they had no input."
+"As soon as the words 'internationally coordinated' appear in print, it should be obvious an immediate problem jumps off the page. Achieving real international cooperation on profit-related issues under this social system is just not possible; capitalist nation-states would sooner go to war over a disputed oilfield than come up with a joint international plan for planting trees."
+"Renewable energy provision for the entire planet --and the eradication of poverty --would have to be part of any move to living sustainably with the earth."
+U.N. estimate: $25 billion per year for 8--10 years is enough to provide clean water to the 1 billion people who don't have it. Annual global sales of bottled water: $100 billion
%%% OTHER BOOKS %%%
+With Speed and Violence: Why Scientists Fear Tipping Points in Climate Change
graciebrett's review against another edition
5.0
Excellent balance of Marxist thought & scientific knowledge on energy & the environment
bog_elfin's review against another edition
4.0
Pretty inspiring, though heavily academic and a little involved for a beginner to socialist literature. The concepts and arguments are wonderful, but I'd have a hard time recommending this to a friend to spread the word.
doruga's review against another edition
4.0
Great resource for understanding the roots of the climate crisis, some possible pitfall traps, and some solution ideas. I give it a 4 instead of a 5 mostly because this book does get bogged down by marxist language and jargon. It talks about how we need to build a movement for and with the working, uneducated, and poor class but its clearly written for the college graduate elite. This is a common trend in left-winged writing though, so I'm not necessarily surprised.
Also, although I should have seen it coming, this book is extremely keen on showing how Marx and Engels already were well aware of the ecological problems and how the climate crisis would be a direct consequence of capitalism. Is it a convincing argument? Sure. Do I think they spend way too much time on it, like a whole unnecessary chapter? Yep. I don't care that much whether or not Marx was fully right about everything. Like, it's cool how perceptive he and Engels were but I don't need that stuff. If Marx had shitty ideas about the climate it would change absolutely nothing about my feelings towards socialism being the best alternative to solve climate change. Marx is allowed to be wrong, we grab what's good and throw away the bad. No need to make a god or an idol out of a person or an ideology, this isn't about your team winning its about what's the real best solution for this very real scary problem.
Anyway, these are minor points that made me roll my eyes a few times but they are mostly nitpicks. I overall really liked this book! Though it does make you feel hopeless a lot of the times, it has that beautiful tragic hope of "lets fight no matter the odds, because its only thing we can do", and I really love that.
Also, although I should have seen it coming, this book is extremely keen on showing how Marx and Engels already were well aware of the ecological problems and how the climate crisis would be a direct consequence of capitalism. Is it a convincing argument? Sure. Do I think they spend way too much time on it, like a whole unnecessary chapter? Yep. I don't care that much whether or not Marx was fully right about everything. Like, it's cool how perceptive he and Engels were but I don't need that stuff. If Marx had shitty ideas about the climate it would change absolutely nothing about my feelings towards socialism being the best alternative to solve climate change. Marx is allowed to be wrong, we grab what's good and throw away the bad. No need to make a god or an idol out of a person or an ideology, this isn't about your team winning its about what's the real best solution for this very real scary problem.
Anyway, these are minor points that made me roll my eyes a few times but they are mostly nitpicks. I overall really liked this book! Though it does make you feel hopeless a lot of the times, it has that beautiful tragic hope of "lets fight no matter the odds, because its only thing we can do", and I really love that.
joillian's review against another edition
informative
inspiring
5.0
if you want to understand my politics, read this book.
boggle's review against another edition
3.0
This book is a very good source for anecdotes, stats, and references, particularly for refuting various anti-poor arguments related to global climate change (e.g. the argument that overpopulation [driven by the global South] is a/the root of current ecological crises). Its suggested remedies to the various ills it identifies and dissects are laughably facile, however. Spoiler: we need mass political movements. But like, this is a text rooted in Marxism (as Williams frequently points out), so this is, or should be, obvious from the start. I felt that there wasn't much meaningful discussion of how to even begin the hard work of building this mass movement, combined with a sort of spotty attention to feasibility throughout.
I also was disappointed with the discussion of nuclear power in this book, which was driven in no small part by vaguely worded fears about nuclear disasters (despite the fact that nuclear power is overwhelmingly safe) and a presumption of prohibitive cost and regulatory concerns, which seemed very out of place in a book that made the ousting of the fossil fuel industry lobbyists from the US government seem like a simple act of mobilizing enough people at the ballot box.
Finally, I just think this book was a bit repetitive and poorly organized. I wound up occasionally using the index to jump through topics in a way that made more sense to me in the end, but I also reread the sections that I jumped around in straight through to see what that experience was like and it was not great.
I'll end by saying that like, I gave this book 3 stars because I felt that it was too light on meaningful discussion and was sort of obvious in certain ways, but like, maybe it won't be so obvious for you, or the friend you're trying to get into socialism, or whoever. And if you're a socialist of some stripe but not very well versed on the particulars of the energy economy or climate science, for instance, this book will have a lot of new material. Pick it up, skim it, see if it's you're speed, but I don't think it's anything along the lines of a must-read.
I also was disappointed with the discussion of nuclear power in this book, which was driven in no small part by vaguely worded fears about nuclear disasters (despite the fact that nuclear power is overwhelmingly safe) and a presumption of prohibitive cost and regulatory concerns, which seemed very out of place in a book that made the ousting of the fossil fuel industry lobbyists from the US government seem like a simple act of mobilizing enough people at the ballot box.
Finally, I just think this book was a bit repetitive and poorly organized. I wound up occasionally using the index to jump through topics in a way that made more sense to me in the end, but I also reread the sections that I jumped around in straight through to see what that experience was like and it was not great.
I'll end by saying that like, I gave this book 3 stars because I felt that it was too light on meaningful discussion and was sort of obvious in certain ways, but like, maybe it won't be so obvious for you, or the friend you're trying to get into socialism, or whoever. And if you're a socialist of some stripe but not very well versed on the particulars of the energy economy or climate science, for instance, this book will have a lot of new material. Pick it up, skim it, see if it's you're speed, but I don't think it's anything along the lines of a must-read.
derelictvessel's review against another edition
5.0
I love an ecology book that devotes an entire chapter to dunking on the overpopulation myth.
Systematically goes through how we are in an ecological crises, it’s not populations fault, capitalism cant fix it, and how we have more than the means to fix these issues if we stop trying to make a profit off of it.
Systematically goes through how we are in an ecological crises, it’s not populations fault, capitalism cant fix it, and how we have more than the means to fix these issues if we stop trying to make a profit off of it.
More...