Letter to Paul Gilding, author of "The Great Disruption" (and response)

Hello Mr. Gilding,

Last week I watched your TED talk online and immediately bought The Great Disruption. It had a huge impact on the way I think and the choices I make in the future. I am currently waiting to enter graduate school at Yale for a PhD in neuroscience, however after reading your book, environmentalism and Sustainability (with a big “S”) will always be on my mind. I am not even sure anymore that neuroscience is the best choice for me!

The claim in your book – that we are now hitting the limits of both the planet’s resources and its capacity to absorb our impact – was shocking to me for multiple reasons. I was shocked by the prescience and content of the claim. The truth tightened its grip on my reality. I was also shocked to learn that I was unaware of the scope of resource depletion on a global scale until seeing your talk. I generally pay attention to current events and I am a popular science buff. I was sympathetic to environmentalism, however I was never swept up by the wave of the green movement because its message of “saving the planet” and staying healthy was too fuzzy for me. I was aware of the Sixth Extinction, but adopted a defeatist attitude because no one was taking the necessary steps to tackle climate change.

Your book is important to me because it recognizes the peril of human welfare as well as provides a new angle for environmentalism. As you said, we are not trying to protect the environment anymore, we are trying to save ourselves. At this point I believe they are the same thing!

So here’s my point. The fact that I had not heard of The Great Disruption’s claim suggests that there are many others who are also in the dark about this topic (in other words, it’s not just denial – it’s lack of information and discussion). While I was reading the book I felt like my mind was swarming with ideas, mainly to get the word out. I believe we (the environmentalists) can create a powerful campaign to reignite environmentalism, this time as a human rights issue and with the simple but crucial objective of saving civilization.

I believe the message of environmentalism can be clearer and louder. One way we can do this is by creating a short (30 min) film which grabs attention and gives people a clear reason why climate change and resource depletion is important to them. While I was reading your book the Kony 2012 video went viral and I started wondering why your message couldn’t have a film which evoked the same kind of response. After all, preventing more climate change will undoubtedly prevent more hunger, refugees, wars, and atrocities than putting one man in jail will. So one could argue this cause is much more important. Of course there are some things which impede this idea from spreading like Kony 2012 did:
1. The “enemy” is not a person or group. This can be ameliorated by giving what we are fighting against a name (I like to call it Collapse – part of me feels like this name exaggerates the issue but in reality if we continue blindly over the edge it could very well mean the end of civilization).
2. It is relatively difficult for the public to understand. The first instinct of environmentalists and scientists is to try to explain to the public with a lot of information, but this drives people away and makes them less curious, especially in a video. Perhaps we can use simple analogies to explain what is happening in the world. The trick is to explain with the smallest number of words. I was trying to think of some analogies… like an ant farm running out of food (surely there are better analogies). Although you mentioned Jared Diamond in your book, I was surprised you didn't discuss Easter Island since it is a clear example of civilization collapse due to finite resources.
3. Explanations of resource limits and environmental impact generally lack deep emotion. An anti-collapse video could show scenes from the developing world: women waiting in line for hours to get a jug of water for their family in places such as Mozambique or the Punjab region of India. If this kind of footage were shown along with the statement “climate change is speeding up aquifer depletion”, it would make a lasting impact in people’s hearts and minds and motivate them to learn more, spread the word, and make changes in their own lives.
4. It is relatively abstract because it tries to prevent something in the future, not something that is happening now. If fully understood, the public would treat your claim as if an asteroid were heading towards Earth. People continue to avoid the conclusion by invoking technology (I believe the people whom you call the techno-optimists).

As I write this, I am comparing the Story of Stuff video to Kony 2012, two videos meant to spread awareness on an issue (however the latter got over 75 million views in less than a week). Story of Stuff is chalk-full of information, but doesn’t grab attention. There is a constant stream of information, no real emotion, and personally I felt patronized by the speaker. Comparatively, Kony 2012 looks great, tugs on the strings of emotion, and the crowds of people make you feel like you are in a community by supporting their cause. I feel like I am way out of my league here, both within environmentalism and marketing, but I am writing this because I think it would be worth looking into how to better spread the message. Maybe an advertising company would be the best option?!

Another aspect of the Kony 2012 video which I believe gave it so much success was the emotion of hope and change (the Obama 2008 campaign too!). I think Story of Stuff did little to harness that energy, and your talk and book started to but it can be made much more powerful through imagery. This should be easy to show because of all the reasons you stated – healthier people and a less polluted planet, more emphasis on communities and less on consumerism. Also, people obviously won’t change their behavior if they think the situation is hopeless. So you can show them what they can do.

Besides a video, I believe an online portal is necessary for environmentalism. Because of its massive size, it is difficult to navigate the world of environmentalism on the web. There are so many aspects of environmentalism, from water quality to climate change, and the plethora of associated websites, it becomes overwhelming and anyone new to the subject doesn’t know where to start (or what is most important).
At the least, for the sake of spreading awareness, there should be a portal for The Great Disruption. This website would have an introduction to the ideas in your book, as well as links to:
1. Climate Change reports for those still unconvinced
2. Sites which monitor global resources like the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
3. Sites which monitor human impact like the Global Footprint Network
4. Sites which describe actions you can take to fight collapse such as freecycling and carrotmobbing.
5. Who are the “bad guys”? Organizations such as anti-climate change groups and ExxonMobil.

As you can probably tell, your book instilled a lot of excitement in me and if for no other reason I wanted to express my gratitude through this email. I really do want to spread the word about The Great Disruption. I am planning on sending an email to Paul Krugman, an American economist, and Nichlas D. Kristof, an American journalist, both of whom are New York Times op-ed columnists and advocates of human rights. Hopefully they will choose to write more about resource depletion and environmental impact because it is both an economic and human rights issue.

I would love to hear your thoughts about a possible Great Disruption video, a website, and ways to spread the word in general. I have some other questions and ideas as well if you are able to answer them.

Thank you for your time and for writing an incredibly powerful book,

David “Dov” Salkoff

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dov

Wow, thanks for going to so much effort to get your ideas down in such detail!

There is great richness and insight in your thinking, so firstly let me encourage you to pursue this direction. I think you could make a very significant contribution to these issues.

With respect to the video/website ideas, I think again these are great. While many have suggested this and I certainly agree re the need and the benefit of having them, I have chosen a path for myself of being a single operator, with no organisation. My focus is on doing what I do best - the writing and speaking. The frustration in this is the loss of leverage, the great thing is that after a life time of building and running organisations, I can now focus on thinking and communicating and as a result do that better.

So, the short answer, I'd love someone or a group of people to do a video/website etc on the great disruption and would happily and enthusiastically endorse their efforts, but right now this is not my focus (again, not because it's not important or useful, but because of my capacity and focus). My job is to trigger people like you to act, not to do all the acting.

But I love your thinking and approach, so if you have the energy and enthusiasm for it, then go wild!

Kind regards

Paul