![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
luzulaThe Knowledge: How To Rebuild Our World From Scratch by Lewis Dartnell
I think it's pretty scary that (technological) civilization is so complex that no one really understands it. This book is 1) an attempt to understand it, and 2) an attempt at a manual at how to rebuild it after some sort of apocalypse. I don't know that it really succeeds at doing both of these things, and I don't really agree with some of it, but on the whole, I learned some interesting things. For example: two important bottlenecks for industrial civilization in the 1800's was the availability of sodium carbonate (an alkali which is used in the manufacture of glass, soap, paper, textiles, etc) and nitrates (for agriculture and explosives). The discovery of the Solvay process and the Haber-Bosch process made it possible to manufacture these industrially (I'm tempted to go into detail, but I won't).
Desert by Anonymous
Uh. I don't quite know what to say. This is a primitivist anarchist text which a friend recommended to me and which I wanted to read as a balance to the one above, but. Gah, I've rarely seen someone be so brutally honest! Certainly I haven't been that honest, even to myself. I feel pretty off-balance right now.
This isn't a text that's trying to convince you of an ideology. It's an analysis of the present and future of the world, drawn from a pretty eclectic set of sources (all annotated), and then it goes, oh yeah, if you share my values, here are some possible strategies.
Its points are:
1) Saving the world and global apocalypse are both illusory. Global ANYTHING is illusory, since there are so many people and places in the world that have their own struggles and their own conditions. The world is not one place.
2) Serious climate change and large-scale species extinction is going to happen. It's too late. A lot of people will starve to death during the next 100 years; conflicts and wars will blaze up, but the human species won't die out. Some places will be fine, others not, and within every place that isn't fine, some people will prosper and others die. Again, the world is not one place.
3) It goes into some detail about possible scenarios for different parts of the world--some areas might go back into a subsistence life, there will be a resource rush in the Arctic, etc. Developed countries in the north will have heavily patrolled borders to keep migrants out, and heavy surveillance of their citizens (already happening, obviously...but more of it).
4) The text starts out by saying that the author has seen many activists broken down by the realization that the world is not going to be saved, and fall into the opposite trap of thinking it's doomed. But that realization shouldn't make us stop fighting, and there is still a space where you can act, and carve out pieces of community and resistance, and there are still scraps of wilderness that can survive. Just...acceptance of the things you can do and the things that you can't, I guess.
I dunno, when I write it down like this, it seems like this text is saying nothing new. In a way, these things are obvious, and are already happening. People are already starving to death, and have throughout history. But it's the scale of things, I guess, and also the way the text is written, and some ideas really were new to me.
I recommend it. If, you know, you want to turn your brain inside out. Possibly the thing that it's not honest about is the trials and drawbacks of primitivist subsistence life, but the text isn't really about that and is not trying to convince you of the author's values.
I think it's pretty scary that (technological) civilization is so complex that no one really understands it. This book is 1) an attempt to understand it, and 2) an attempt at a manual at how to rebuild it after some sort of apocalypse. I don't know that it really succeeds at doing both of these things, and I don't really agree with some of it, but on the whole, I learned some interesting things. For example: two important bottlenecks for industrial civilization in the 1800's was the availability of sodium carbonate (an alkali which is used in the manufacture of glass, soap, paper, textiles, etc) and nitrates (for agriculture and explosives). The discovery of the Solvay process and the Haber-Bosch process made it possible to manufacture these industrially (I'm tempted to go into detail, but I won't).
Desert by Anonymous
Uh. I don't quite know what to say. This is a primitivist anarchist text which a friend recommended to me and which I wanted to read as a balance to the one above, but. Gah, I've rarely seen someone be so brutally honest! Certainly I haven't been that honest, even to myself. I feel pretty off-balance right now.
This isn't a text that's trying to convince you of an ideology. It's an analysis of the present and future of the world, drawn from a pretty eclectic set of sources (all annotated), and then it goes, oh yeah, if you share my values, here are some possible strategies.
Its points are:
1) Saving the world and global apocalypse are both illusory. Global ANYTHING is illusory, since there are so many people and places in the world that have their own struggles and their own conditions. The world is not one place.
2) Serious climate change and large-scale species extinction is going to happen. It's too late. A lot of people will starve to death during the next 100 years; conflicts and wars will blaze up, but the human species won't die out. Some places will be fine, others not, and within every place that isn't fine, some people will prosper and others die. Again, the world is not one place.
3) It goes into some detail about possible scenarios for different parts of the world--some areas might go back into a subsistence life, there will be a resource rush in the Arctic, etc. Developed countries in the north will have heavily patrolled borders to keep migrants out, and heavy surveillance of their citizens (already happening, obviously...but more of it).
4) The text starts out by saying that the author has seen many activists broken down by the realization that the world is not going to be saved, and fall into the opposite trap of thinking it's doomed. But that realization shouldn't make us stop fighting, and there is still a space where you can act, and carve out pieces of community and resistance, and there are still scraps of wilderness that can survive. Just...acceptance of the things you can do and the things that you can't, I guess.
I dunno, when I write it down like this, it seems like this text is saying nothing new. In a way, these things are obvious, and are already happening. People are already starving to death, and have throughout history. But it's the scale of things, I guess, and also the way the text is written, and some ideas really were new to me.
I recommend it. If, you know, you want to turn your brain inside out. Possibly the thing that it's not honest about is the trials and drawbacks of primitivist subsistence life, but the text isn't really about that and is not trying to convince you of the author's values.
