Recent reading

[luzula]

The Two Towers by J. R. R. Tolkien
I read and reread these obsessively when I was young, but it was in Swedish (the old Swedish translation, which is widely regarded as...idiosyncratic). A couple of years ago I read The Fellowship of the Ring for the first time in the original, and now I followed up with this one. Usually I forget details of books I've read and rediscover them on reread, but here I remember so many details. It's better in English in general, but some of the poetry I imprinted on too hard in Swedish to change now.

Too Many People? by Ian Angus and Simon Butler
My dad has started doing research on population issues, so I'm looking into it. I tend to agree with him that overpopulation is a potential issue, but we differ as well: he is against immigration from poor countries into rich ones on environmental grounds since those immigrants then start consuming more resources. I find this hypocritical because it assumes that rich people have more right to over-consume resources to start with.

Anyway. This book is a left-wing perspective, claiming that all the ills ascribed to overpopulation now are actually due to social and economic structures. Also, that when "populationists" say we can solve the environmental crisis just by adjusting population and not changing the social/economic structure, they are wrong. I do completely agree with the latter! They also say that family planning is often coercive, which is obviously an issue.

I find them not as convincing when they dismiss the possibility of overpopulation becoming an issue (for example, difficulties of feeding everyone in the future). They say that "carrying capacity" depends on so many factors that it's impossible to calculate. Sure, but doesn't that mean it could be lower than we think as well as higher? And we don't know how much climate change will affect food production. Also I think we might have overpopulation issues now--look at this image. Is it really okay that we and our domesticated animals so completely dominate among the land mammals?

So in total, I feel like they avoid some difficult issues, even as this was definitely worth a read. There was a awesome essay on Thomas Malthus explaining how he 1) didn't say what most people think he said, 2) was wrong in his predictions, 3) was politically loathsome [to me].

Comments

[karanguni]

Gosh, I've had poetry from the Lord of the Rings memorised since I was 10 - I can't imagine having to relearn it in another language. I'm so curious as to how they've translated it! The original English rhyme is so iconic as it stands.

[luzula]

I put so much of that poetry into music and can still sing it! And I can't be objective on those Swedish translations since I learned them that way in the first place.

There was a new translation made a few years ago, but I haven't actually read it. The guy who did the first translation turned into a weird crank later in life; he wrote this book about how the Tolkien family are all evil and Tolkien societies practice black magic. The founder of the Ku Klux Klan was a dentist! So was the father of the founder of the Stockholm Tolkien Society! Sinister, right? (Yes, that is an actual argument from his book.) Apparently the impetus to write this book was that he felt himself badly treated by the Tolkien family.

[karanguni]

Wow. That... escalated! People are so unreasonable D:

[sarren]

My folks are convinced that overpopulation would be solved by poor people in 'third world' countries having less children...they go on two international holidays a year.

I explained about carbon footprint etc, but made the mistake of quoting an article (this was years ago and I can't remember the details) it was something like, 2 German Shepherds have the equivalent footprint of a Bangladeshi man, and because I have a dog (and so does my housemate) they mention it any time anything to do with environmental issues comes up. *sigh*

George Monbiot talks about only having 60 years of harvests left. I really don't know how to talk to people about this, or even if I should bother, maybe ignorance is best?

[luzula]

Well, population increase in "third world" countries is also an actual problem...but how helpful is it to only blame other people and do nothing about environmental problems caused by your own part of the world? Not very helpful. *sigh* Do they do stuff like donate to International Planned Parenthood or something, though? Because that would be an actual helpful thing to do if they are worried about overpopulation, and also good for other reasons (like providing people with good reproductive healthcare).

I really don't know how to talk to people about this, or even if I should bother, maybe ignorance is best?

I don't want to think so? I guess there are several steps here: convincing people that it is a problem, them knowing what action would be helpful to take, and then actually taking that action. Hmm. All those steps can be hard.

[sarren]

When I suggest we *all* need to consume less because consequences are real and happening now, and their response is 'we're old now and won't be around to see it'.

I guess I feel like now I have to pick my battles? Like, when I talk to people I gauge how much I should say so they don't switch off or become defeatist?

[luzula]

we're old now and won't be around to see it

Um. So I guess they don't care about the world their child/children will live in, then...

I guess I feel like now I have to pick my battles? Like, when I talk to people I gauge how much I should say so they don't switch off or become defeatist?

I like forest issues because if you're actually out in a forest, you can appreciate it and it can become something positive that you want to save it. I guess it's harder with more abstract issues...