One with Nineveh: Politics, Consumption, and the Human Future [Englisch] [Gebundene Ausgabe]

Most of us have a mixture of values that come from both sides of the fence. The concept of being a liberal or conservative lies largely in our imaginations. We cannot help but to identify with one side or the other mostly because it is human nature to form into self-righteous groups. You will notice a pattern if you look at the reviews on Amazon.com of this book and its antithesis "The Skeptical Environmentalist" by Bjorn Lomborg. Supporters write long, heart-felt reviews, denigrators write short, mean ones. In both cases, the short, mean reviews were written by people who have not actually read the book, but have sided with their given champions.

I have read both books. I recommend this one if you are willing to face unpleasant realities so that you can try to fix or prevent them (a typical bleeding heart liberal mindset). If you want to be told that everything is OK and always will be, then read the other book. I bought a copy of "One with Nineveh" a few weeks before it was officially released and had already read it by the time Ehrlich signed it for me while on a book tour in Seattle.

As the title suggests, localized, unsustainable over-consumption, (the phrase that is replacing the vague and unpopular term "overpopulation") has been plaguing us since the dawn of civilization. Nineveh, once a great city-state located in what is still called the Fertile Crescent, is now a pile of dirt located in the moonscape called Iraq. Human activity has turned the Fertile Crescent into a wasteland. A recent comparison of historical data and new images from NASA's Landsat satellites confirms that the Fertile Crescent is almost gone.

Lo and behold, when you look around the globe, from Mesoamerica to Asia, you will find thousands of examples of ecosystems that have been irreparably laid to waste by human activities. A good book to read on that topic is "Constant Battles-the myth of the peaceful, noble savage" by Steven LeBlanc. LeBlanc is an archaeologist who has seen first hand the evidence of local overpopulation and warfare in every ancient ruin he has studied.

At first, the title "One with Nineveh" did not sit well with me but after having read the book, I realize that it could not be more poignant as war continues to rage around Nineveh just as it always has.

Think of the Earth as a giant peach. One day, a small mold spot appears. Over time, another spot appears, then another. Eventually, the spots grow in size and number to consume the entire fruit. The point; overpopulation begins as a localized phenomenon, but given time, it becomes a global one.

The Ehrlichs point out that humanity is managing to stay housed and fed even in the face of our expanding population which is expected to increase an additional 50% in the next few decades. To me, the reason for this is obvious; exponential technology growth fueled by free enterprise has found ways to turn oil into food and housing. Personally, I believe that we will continue to make progress in feeding and housing ourselves at the expense of the other life forms on the planet right up until we run out of oil and maybe beyond if we find other sources of cheap energy.

The Ehrlichs recognize that the drive for prestige and its embodiment in status symbols is consuming the planet. The root of their solution is to reduce the consumptive patterns of wealthy people. I have a difficult time envisioning so many social changes being accepted when our country is split 49-51 in most presidential elections. Cut world consumption by 50%, increase our population 50%, and you have gotten nowhere. Status seeking appears to be part of our nature and there is no way to change that anymore than you can make us stop walking upright. Paul's own speaking engagements burn up a prodigious amount of aviation fuel and his books consume massive amounts of paper. The manufacture of which consumes a great deal of water, wood, and energy. If Dr. Ehrlich can rationalize that his own level of consumption is acceptable, how can he not expect the rest of humanity to do so? I suspect that he would be the first to admit this paradox (it is unlikely that I am the first to point it out).

The Ehrlichs want our governments to step in and force us to stop consuming so much, while at the same time, they acknowledge that communist economies don't work. It sounds contradictory to me. Telling people that they must limit their consumption is a dead end strategy. It goes against the grain of human nature. They won't do it.

The Ehrlichs also wisely realize the importance of limiting the concentration of power (wealth) by individuals, corporations, and other social institutions (a never ending situation in my opinion because such behavior is ingrained in our genes).

In conclusion, although the Ehrlichs have been unjustly vilified by some simply for warning us of the potential for an unpleasant future, the world truly owes them a debt of gratitude because those warnings have, to date, helped to keep that future from fully materializing. This book continues in that tradition.

Russ Finley, Author of "Poison Darts-Protecting the biodiversity of our world."

I'm a biologist, and I have long been aware of the basic problems that the Ehrlichs clearly summarize in "One with Nineveh". Nonetheless, I loved having the issues reviewed for me, bringing me up to date. I found the book compellingly written and full of interesting examples. I was grateful it made clear why we're fighting in Iraq (not the excuses our government has broadcast), and tied it our our patterns of overconsumption. And there was a lot that was new to me. For instance, the question of the reform of corporations has been one of my concerns, but I was not fully aware of the growing discussion of what can be done about it. The Ehrlichs not only summarize the arguments well, but also provide references that are now allowing me to pursue further my interest in what can be done to limit corporate misuse of power. Indeed, placing the environmental situation in a context of power abuse is the major service of the book. Scientists are aware of the deep trouble civilization is in, but the public and politicians are not. This is a book to buy, read, and recommend (or give) to friends and anyone running for public office. The stakes are high, and the Ehrlichs give us hope that even in these dismal times we may win through to a decent and stable society.

I am not giving this book an unfavorable review because I'm some reactionary anti-environmentalist. In fact I am definitely an environmentalist, or better yet a widely-read conservationist. This book is the equivalent of a big Chinese food dinner - there's a lot of it, but it does little to satisfy your hunger. The book may be useful to students or others who are beginning to build their familiarity and interest in environmental issues. But if you are at all knowledgeable about the current state of such matters in any way, you will learn absolutely nothing new in this book.

Approximately the first half of the book is merely a summary of current conservationist knowledge and complaints from the Ehrlichs about their social problems of choice. All the villains are here, and they keep appearing again and again and again - SUVs, overpopulation, social inequality, rampant consumerism, economic imperialism (also known as free trade and globalization), and the extreme anti-green politics of the Bush administration. How these issues lead to environmental problems is good to know, of course, but if you're involved in any level of conservationism then you know this stuff already. This weakness of the book is illustrated by the fact that it is extremely well cited - there are several hundred works referenced and more than a thousand footnotes. However, this book is so widely researched that it becomes merely a giant summary of existing knowledge borrowed from other writers, with little new analysis or insight from the Ehrlichs.

Meanwhile, the second half of the book deteriorates into social criticism that continues to repeat complaints about the basic problems mentioned above, with a disconcertingly know-it-all and condescending stance against modern culture and technology. The attempted solutions of the last few chapters are little more than utopian ideals that would require vast changes to current economic and political structures, indicating a very thin understanding of those two theoretical areas. The final statement made by the Ehrlichs in this book is "idealism can be realism," but I beg to differ. That's just an excuse for an absence of concrete ideas. Once again, if you're starting to learn about the political stances of the conservation movement, this book is a passable summary of current knowledge and opinions. But if you're looking for new ideas or analysis, all you'll find are complaints and idealism. [~doomsdayer520~]