Get our latest essays, archival selections, reading lists, and exclusive content delivered straight to your inbox.
July was officially the hottest month on Earth since records began. So, it’s no surprise that scientists are arguing that we have slipped out of the Holocene—the epoch that encompasses the last ten thousand years—and entered a new era: the Anthropocene, where humanity is the main force shaping the planet and nature can no longer be regarded as “natural.”
Today’s reading list wades deep into debates about how we should respond to such a time, asking questions like: Would climate engineering actually work? What would a green economy look like? Are divestment campaigns worth the effort? And how can we reconcile the emissions that coal produces with its promise of cheap and abundant energy for development?
But first, a trio of essays interrogate the very idea of the Anthropocene itself—including a brand new piece from Geoff Mann, co-author of Climate Leviathan. In “It Was Not Supposed to End This Way,” Mann reveals how the relationship between liberalism and the Anthropocene is one of dialectical doom: while it is frequently picked up by “liberal modes of sense making“ he writes, “the Anthropocene actually can’t fit the narrative because it is proof that the end of liberalism is near.”
It Was Not Supposed to End This Way
by Geoff Mann
The Anthropocene challenges liberalism’s vision of permanent progress. So why has it become another technocratic tool of liberal bureaucracy?
• • •
The New Nature
a forum with Jedediah Purdy
The Anthropocene adds nature to the list of things we can no longer regard as natural, and makes it impossible to divorce nature from human influence. But can that influence be democratic?
• • •
Nature Defends Itself
by Dayton Martindale
A recent book on climate change resurrects the antinomy between man and nature. Dayton Martindale argues that not only is this wrong, but it constrains the possibilities of a truly liberated ecosocialist future.
• • •
Build the Green Economy
a forum with Robert Pollin
“Reducing emissions is simple. It entails about $200 billion of public and private investments in clean energy every year for twenty years. This is a massive amount of money, but it is only about 1.2 percent of U.S. GDP.”
• • •
Planetary ecocide is not the result of “human nature”. To describe it in such universalizing terms obscures the (ultra-rich) people who have benefitted from carbon emissions. We have to see climate disaster as the result of fossil capitalism instead.
• • •
Living with Coal
by Richard K. Morse and David G. Victor
“Emissions from coal are growing faster than from any other fossil fuel. Yet no other fuel matches its promise of cheap and abundant energy for development.The central task of any serious (and politically viable) global-warming policy, then, is to reconcile these diverging patterns.”
• • •
Climate Gut Check
by Troy Vettese
Beneath the jargon, a new UN report serves up a revolutionary response to climate change, arguing that the economy must be constrained if there is to be a chance of keeping warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.
• • •
Get Carbon Off Campus
by Benjamin Franta
In response to David G. Victor’s defense of taking money from big carbon, Franta argues that it is not enough to reassure Americans that money does not influence research—“we know that it does.
• • •
“Solar geoengineering provides a means—risky and uncertain—to limit climate change in the near term, but those risks will fall on vulnerable ecosystems and vulnerable human populations.”
• • •
The Death and Life of America’s Waters
by Meghan O’Gieblyn
“Climate models warn that the coming apocalypse will be one of water. Glaciers will calve in thundering cascades, the rising oceans will erode the coasts, and droughts will make whole countries uninhabitable.”
Vital reading on politics, literature, and more in your inbox. Sign up for our Weekly Newsletter, Monthly Roundup, and event notifications.
…we need your help. Confronting the many challenges of COVID-19—from the medical to the economic, the social to the political—demands all the moral and deliberative clarity we can muster. In Thinking in a Pandemic, we’ve organized the latest arguments from doctors and epidemiologists, philosophers and economists, legal scholars and historians, activists and citizens, as they think not just through this moment but beyond it. While much remains uncertain, Boston Review’s responsibility to public reason is sure. That’s why you’ll never see a paywall or ads. It also means that we rely on you, our readers, for support. If you like what you read here, pledge your contribution to keep it free for everyone by making a tax-deductible donation.
But I do miss the hymns, / the small, hard apples with their dimpled skin. I do miss / things.
The vast hinterlands of the Global South’s cities are generating new solidarities and ideas of what counts as a life worth living.
Protests in China are shining a light not only on the country’s draconian population management but restrictions on workers everywhere.