Editorial Review

 Below is a review of my first book provided by:  International Review of Books.

...........................

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The Beginning of the Path to Human Extinction, and HOW TO GET OFF IT

Which line stood out from all the others in the book?
It has taken about forty to fifty years for neoliberalism and corporate globalization to bring us to what might be the beginning of the path to human extinction.

General Summary for Context:
A look into what's going on right under our very noses—the extinction of the human race.  While this may sound a bit dramatic and drastic, the author provides us with a detailed albeit frightening look at how our preconceived notions (more is better, for example) are not leading us to happiness but instead, on a direct path to being obliterated. In addition, he offers recommendations as to how we can stop this freight train from crashing and burning, taking all of us along for the ride.

Concise Review:
A fascinating look at how our preconceived ideas of acquiring possessions, status, power and prestige (leading to unstoppable financial accumulation) is actually a barrier to personal fulfillment. Conspicuous consumption is not providing us with happiness but on the contrary, straight to ruination and destruction.  Indeed, how our actions are propelling us not to contentment but to the wanting of more and more, continuing the vicious cycle of materialism, greed and overconsumption. But there are things we can do to halt this process, and the author offers specific and informative suggestions as to what each of us can do as our part in continuing the human race.  

General Thoughts on the Book:
A truly grounding and disturbing look at how ideas and values ground into us from birth are not leading us towards happiness but to mass extinction.  Perhaps not tomorrow but certainly in the generations to come. I was riveted and totally engaged with this book and highly recommend it to anyone with an open mind who is willing to overcome their preconceived notions and take a careful look as to what this author is describing. Definitely a five star read.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

..........................

The book may be purchased here---
 https://www.amazon.com/stores/author/B0BVJMMWLG/about
OR - 

https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-beginning-of-the-path-to-human-extinction-and-how-to-get-off-it-scott-haley/1141364431?ean=2940160947181\
OR-
email me & I'll send you a free pdf copy.  Make the title of your email "Book 1 Copy".

My email is:  abstractcowboy@gmail.com
...................................
Be Well

The U.S. Department of Sustainability

In the article at the link in my last post, the author cites a few governments which are exceptions to the contention that politics and politicians essentially are incapable of effectively dealing with our worldwide Crisis.  The exceptions are:  "New Zealand, Bhutan,  most of the Scandinavian countries, [and] Germany perhaps...".  In my opinion, here are a few more (in no particular order):  Netherlands, Austria, Costa Rica, Portugal, and Uruguay.  There are several others, as well.  The USA is not one of them.

Despite the praiseworthy efforts of the exceptions above, the world as a whole is not yet where it needs to be relative to significantly dealing with the socio-eco-econ-ethical Crisis.  There are about 200 countries in the world today.  [That's not counting a few dozen which are not recognized by the U.N., but have declared themselves independent.]  The Crisis we are in is global, and surmounting it will require a global effort.  Furthermore, the "Market" will not solve the problem.  It will take Main Street, NGOs, all manner of other groups, the U.N., Business (of a flavor different from much of what we have today), and yes, Governments as well.

We all know that.  Or rather, all of us do except for most economists, most politicians, and a few others.  The problem here is 1) lack of knowledge in high places, and 2) the focus is on the wrong aspect of our existence, as follows.

1)  As pointed out in the essay by Julian Cribb, Leaders around the world (with a few notable exceptions) essentially are clueless when it comes to Ecology and Environmental Science.  They seem to think going Green means only solar panels, electric vehicles, and recycling.  A few probably add reuse and using less.  They appear to know little-to-nothing about the importance of biodiversity in Nature, the extent of toxicity in our environment, the nuclear waste problem, the nuke weapons problem, desertification, soil degradation, the extent of both income and wealth inequality and their impact, the problem of inequity, and on & on.

To compound the problem, the advisors of many Leaders are mostly lawyers or mainstream economists.  All they seem to know is the status quo.  On top of that, there's no (in the USA, at least) comprehensive, centralized Gov't agency with the purpose of implementing sustainability.  I don't even know which current agencies are working on it, probably in isolation.  None of the above bodes well for sustainability.

2)  It seems 99.9% of the time when government begins working on some aspect of the socio-eco-econ-ethical Crisis we're facing, too much emphasis is on the economy only.  Everything else is shoved to the back of the bus, or thrown under it.

...............

For those who still believe government plus technology is going to solve the Crisis, I suggest this:  "lobby" hard for a national Department of Sustainability.  Sustainability has three major components:  environmental, economic, and social.  In such a department, all three components must be equally represented.  It's a transdisciplinary field, and comprehensive thinking is paramount.  This proposed department should be staffed with botanists, wildlife biologists, ecologists, agriculturalists, anthropologists, ecological economists, industrial ecologists, and perhaps an environmental geographer, a climatologist, and an ethics philosopher.  [I imagine I left out an important field or two.]  With all that, government might come up with significant solutions.

How will the new department be financed?  There are numerous possibilities, none of which involve increasing taxes on wage earners.  For example, tax the billionaires 0.1% on their incomes.  They should be anxious to help finance the discovery of solutions.  Why?  Because civil society is at stake.  Or, cut the Defense budget by 1% (or some such number).  Or, cut the budgets of every current Department by some appropriate fraction of 1%.  Or, believe it or not, there are many millionaires who are divesting themselves of a large portion of their wealth.  Solicit their donations.  Or, root out the financial waste in all departments and use that.  Or, mix & match from the above.  Or, just "print" the money.  The Fed Reserve has been doing something similar to that for a few decades.  It's not good for the value of the dollar, but then, neither is the collapse of organized human existence.  Hello.

............

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

Humans are the problem, not carbon.

The carbon cycle---

 https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_cycle#/media/File:Carbon_cycle-cute_diagram.svg

NOTE:  At the link, be sure to read the Key below the diagram, and be aware that the "purple" numbers (fluxes in gigatons of carbon per year) appear to be BLUE.  At least, on my screen they do.  Then go to the upper right and expand the diagram so it takes up the full page.

Life on Earth is carbon-based.  It's an element without which we wouldn't exist.  The problem is that we are overloading a natural cycle, and thus committing species suicide.  Most of us are aware of this, right?

So, the question is:  why aren't the Powers-That-Be AND Main Street folks doing more to mitigate the problem?  Why, for example, are more & more drilling permits being issued for fossil fuels?  We should be phasing out such fuels rather than finding more to burn.  Why are we talking about 2050 instead of 2030?  In 2021, why isn't coal ancient history?  Are those (in particular) in the Upper Crust taking all this seriously, or are they trying to put it off onto the next generation?  Is "greenwashing" the flavor of the day?  Arguably, it seems so.  Ditto re this:  is the Rat Race of unlimited growth & overconsumption still ruling the day?  [Or is sustainability?]

There are a lot more "why?" scenarios, and they have little or nothing to do with climate disruption.  This Crisis upon us NOW is multi-faceted, all the various parts are systemic, and the whole ball of wax constitutes the greatest existential threat humans ever have faced.  Politicians of all stripes seem to be either ignorant of most of the overall problem, or coming up with solutions which tinker around the edges of it.  The same is true for most of the moguls of Big Business.

Solutions are known.  History and research have shown us the way.  By the end of January 2022 (hopefully), I'll have a short book out which will summarize both the problems and the solutions.  The only thing standing in our way is the mindset of some people.  If we don't solve this, Mother Nature will.  The latter already has started, but it's merely the beginning.

.....................

Not only my opinion.  Be Well