Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

"Ecotopia" Ernest Callenbach

A forum to either submit your own review of a book, video or audio interview, or to post reviews by others.

"Ecotopia" Ernest Callenbach

Unread postby Zentric » Sat 23 Jul 2005, 01:15:07

I’m writing in praise of Ecotopia, a politics-fiction novel written 30 years ago by Ernest Callenbach, in response to the machine -- rampant political corruption, consumerism, militarism, and predation of our natural environment. To be sure, this book is not art or beautiful prose, nor is it an exciting read per se, except that the author envisions a futuristic steady-state society that is humane, spiritually-fulfilling and, above all, plausible! And since it is all these things, such a society, or a form of it, should be actively investigated and possibly pursued.

You should read the book. But in the meantime, here is a synopsis: Responding to society’s increasing ills, and the absence of any national effort to do anything about them, Washington State, Oregon and Northern California secede from the United States, calling their new country Ecotopia. Ecotopia goes green in a major way. They ban nearly all types of consumption that are not renewable or biodegradable. For instance: fossil-fueled internal combustion transportation or power generation, or rayon or polyester – all banned.

Self sufficiency and learning how to live off the land is encouraged. People become more open – spiritually, conversationally and sexually. The “nuclear family” to a large extent disassembles, giving way to “families” consisting of larger groups. People’s interests become more intellectual – as they develop a much keener interest in “the truth” – either when they speak it or when they hear it from their newscasters.

The poor and sick are expertly cared for. Drugs are used sparingly, since the Ecotopians have discovered that touch and compassion are substantially more effective for the mind and body than prescription drugs could ever be. On the other hand, the cultivation and the use of marijuana are encouraged, and the nonviolent, pre-Ecotopian drug offenders are released from prison.

Upon secession, half of the jobs are wiped out. So the government mandates a 20-hour work week - and, thus, full employment. Because their true needs (e.g., food, shelter and community) are few, the Ecotopians learn to relax and enjoy their extra time off. The epidemic of mental stress and illness is abated – and so, accordingly, is the rationale for the field of psychology, as an example.

Several years after secession, after adding geothermal and hydroelectric power plants (while, at the same time, undamming the particular rivers whose natural habitat was too badly threatened), they possess a power grid that can meet the basic needs of society – including a high speed maglev train that takes skiers out to the slopes or hikers to the desert, or power the electric cars that transport the citizens between the ring of sub-communities that comprise a larger city. And the waters of the lakes and streams begin to sparkle again with purity.

Inheritance tax is nearly 100%. Eminent domain is used to dispossess the wealthy from their prime real estate, to be turned over for public use. Women are given full reproductive control – whether through birth control or abortion – where, while being immersed inside a culture that looked after the needs of the individual, the population actually declines slightly, from year to year.

Employment in Ecotopia is substantially a cooperative between worker and owner, where hardships and profits are greatly shared. Government tax revenues are largely generated from the profits of factory production, where it is almost impossible for the owners or anyone to get obscenely rich from this because production of goods is primarily mandated by the government, meaning there is, almost by definition, aggressive competition between rival factories who produce roughly the same items – and there is little advertising on TV that can too-aggressively hype one factory’s product over another’s.

Education for children is outdoors-oriented – where the kids learn much about life by gardening, building shelters and tools, and observing the processes of the natural world, and their civics lessons come from mutual cooperation (and respect) while undertaking their class projects. Since Ecotopia, by design, is a country where people live closer to the earth, and the kids are taught to understand their place among the natural processes, there is a natural synchronicity between student, students, teacher and classroom.

I’m just a guy who read his book, but here are the flaws I perceive with Callenbach’s vision, back in 1975:

Currency exchange and wealth preservation: U.S. and Ecotopia were enemies, and did not trade with one another. On the other hand, Ecotopia did trade with a few Asian countries, and on that basis, the Ecotopian currency could have been subject to game-playing by Wall Street arbitragers, causing either surpluses or shortages of some commodities, or possibly destabilizing the Ecotopian economy as a whole.

Beyond this, since their currency was exchangeable for Japanese yen, if the wealthy Ecotopians wanted to leave a more substantial chunk of their wealth to their children instead of to the larger Ecotopian community in general, what would stop them from either stockpiling large amounts of the Ecotopian currency, or converting into gold, yen or American dollars so that their offspring-inheritors could go on a reckless spending spree in Ecotopia, or around the globe if they so desired? Callenbach, from what I can tell, did not address this.

Wealth of resources keeps aggression in check: The one-time greatness of the American society might be attributable to the vastness of our open space and natural resources, which are now substantially depleted. With an abundance of space and resources, our aggression can effectively be taken out on the environment. Although, these days, we can see how the environment is pushing back. With Ecotopia, on the other hand, it seems that their society addressed this all too-human aggressiveness with casual sex, brief fits of rage, war “games” and massages with happy endings.

Back then, Callenbach wouldn’t have a need even to speculate on how great a role a disease like AIDS could play in an almost “free love” modern-day Ecotopia. If such a society were to exist today, how would it adjust to this new reality? I will hazard to guess that a hidden tattoo (maybe between the webbings of the toes?) on the afflicted individual, where the so-afflicted inflicted would then be directed to live in a special community ready to provide him with support, could be part of the answer.

Would the powers that be allow an Ecotopia or multiple Ecotopias to exist?

Yes, I think they would, since such regions could provide the rich with their vegetables and where present society’s “social misfits” and criminal pot-smokers could be transplanted, greatly relieving present society of an economic burden. and such a society would consume far less, and even grow new, resources, and form an example for the rest of civilization to later follow. Perhaps a UN mandate is possible? A constitutional amendment? Or maybe even a Kyoto-type protocol to this effect.

Would Ecotopias need anything from larger society?

Yes, a few things. They would need some protections from ill-informed, hostile and aggressive people or powers who would collectively try to do them in. They would probably also want freedom from patent encroachments as they seek to manufacture goods that are easy to make, fix and are sparing on resources. In exchange for this consideration, Ecotopia might freely share their new inventions with larger society, and might even “forgive” it for its continued global warming, light, noise and air pollution.

Would an Ecotopian community (or state) in your neighborhood be a problem?

Not necessarily. Say you, like me, live in Washington State, and you learn that the state legislature has just voted to make us an Ecotopia. Me – I like the idea and I’m thrilled to stick around for the transition and renounce my car and polyester and rayon disco shirts. You – on the other hand – have long since lamented the death of disco and decide you need to move out of the state – essentially trading places with someone from Oregon who is gung-ho for Ecotopia. Everybody sticks around or moves at his own pace. You want my disco shirts and I sell them to you. You find a job in Idaho and you move there.

Remember, the United States, as well as many other countries around the globe, are trying to effectively manage a long emergency. If you are a Washingtonian who loves Jesusland – well, then Jesusland loves you. You should move there to seek salvation and to live among others who will be more sympathetic to your beliefs.

Moving to or from a modern-day Ecotopia should be easy – if you were living inside its geographical space to begin with, then you’re an Ecotopian by default. If today, a quarter-million people want to leave it, while another quarter-million want to enter it, then you have something of a happy balance. The Ecotopian states and the permissive national governments would work to balance the incentives for coming or going - today, tomorrow and 10 years from now.

Building out our Ecotopias would permit our governmental powers to effectively fess-up that the world is facing a resource crunch and is doing something constructive about it. So there is no need to panic. If tomorrow, somehow, we perfect nuclear fusion, we learn how to transform our landfills into loamy topsoil, and convert the atmospheric carbon dioxide into elemental carbon and oxygen, then we can call off the emergency and close down the Ecotopias by calling them “crass” and “barbaric,” telling all the hippies to go out and get real jobs. But until that day, I think we’ll need and need to love our hippies.

Can anyone or anything out there beat Callenbach's Ecotopian vision?
User avatar
Zentric
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 709
Joined: Mon 14 Mar 2005, 04:00:00

Unread postby EnergySpin » Sat 23 Jul 2005, 01:39:50

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'C')an anyone or anything out there beat Callenbach's Ecotopian vision?

One internal incosistency (which is my main objection against ANY flower loving, weed smoking, will-copulate-with-anything-that-moves utopia).
There is no way to create such a utopia without deploying technology to such a wide scale that it becomes impossible to separate machine from animal, natural from artificial. There is no way to have "Self sufficiency and learning how to live off the land is encouraged." and geothermal plants with maglev trains without encouraging scientific and technical exploration.
A society which strives to to educate kids in nature, to use and make tools etc but frawns upo genetic engineering and semiconductior technology dooms technological progress and will eventually leading regress back to stone age tribal stuff . Meaning you get to keep the flowers and the sex with your neighboors daughter without the maglev trains.
I used the word progress in an engineering term i.e. the ability to increase efficiency with decreasing throughputness (i.e. less material and energy flows for the same amount of services or goods produced).
From a historical perspective .... the novel combines the ideals of the 60s (weed smoking, lots of sex and massage therapies, flower power) with Technocratic ideas but without the insights that Australian poet Hooton had in the 50s about anarcho-technocracy.
In addition he did not foresee the emergence of industrial ecology, the view that ecosystems and biological organisms CAN be harnessed for the human's benefits using "soft" interventions.

For a more workable model consider Gene Roddenberry's Star Treck "advanced Societies (both Humans and the Borgs).
PS Why is weed such a central theme in the all "ecological" utopias?
"Nuclear power has long been to the Left what embryonic-stem-cell research is to the Right--irredeemably wrong and a signifier of moral weakness."Esquire Magazine,12/05
The genetic code is commaless and so are my posts.
User avatar
EnergySpin
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2248
Joined: Sat 25 Jun 2005, 03:00:00

Unread postby MicroHydro » Sat 23 Jul 2005, 02:14:01

Yes the US of A would gladly part with vital strategic military assets like Beale AFB, Boeing, and the Trident base in Puget Sound - NOT!

What was Callenbach smoking? Oh, he told us...
"The world is changed... I feel it in the water... I feel it in the earth... I smell it in the air... Much that once was, is lost..." - Galadriel
User avatar
MicroHydro
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1242
Joined: Sun 10 Apr 2005, 03:00:00

Unread postby Zentric » Sat 23 Jul 2005, 02:17:35

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergySpin', 'T')here is no way to have "Self sufficiency and learning how to live off the land is encouraged." and geothermal plants with maglev trains without encouraging scientific and technical exploration.
A society which strives to to educate kids in nature, to use and make tools etc but frawns upo genetic engineering and semiconductior technology dooms technological progress and will eventually leading regress back to stone age tribal stuff .


Hey EnergySpin,

All I can do is guess here, but if you were to do a private poll of all recent Nobel Laureates, an above-average percentile of them would probably admit to smoking pot creatively and recreationally or enjoying massages ...

Callenbach's Ecotopia, I think, was about understanding and respecting sustainable natural processes. If an Ecotopian kid starts his schooling by watching an ant colony at work, and then later learns the underlying process of photosynthesis, it's not a stretch in my mind that this kid later grows up with a keen interest in semiconductors and magnetic levitation and so on.

Callenbach spoke of steady-state and I, myself with a physics background, bought into the cause and effect natural world-to-natural science-to-mechanical engineering argument that he presented. For example, in the book, the Ecotopians had the brightest minds at UC Berkeley available to do their engineering work for them.

But, who knows, you might be right - after some intitial successes or failures, it might then all be downhill towards the stone age ...?

But I wonder, even if technology does go downhill inside modern Ecotopias, wouldn't larger society still benefit? Modern Ecotopias and the US and the world don't necessarily have to be at war.
User avatar
Zentric
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 709
Joined: Mon 14 Mar 2005, 04:00:00

Unread postby EnergySpin » Sat 23 Jul 2005, 02:37:48

Smoking too much weed kills the grey cells in the brain and leads to apathy (i.e. no ant colony wathcing no mag lev trains lol)
The problem with this particular utopia is that the link $this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'n')atural world-to-natural science-to-mechanical engineering
is not well described.
He is describing a world where humans are essentially allowed to do whatever they want to (20 hrs a week is noooothing).
But humanity's involvement with technology OR an automatic way for the technology infrastructure to be maintained has to be provided.
If you ask me, a society that controls technology which can be either hard or soft (think a combination of fusion reactors, wind farms, solar panels, GMOs, industrial ecology and nanotech - since this discussion is at a theoretical level) will be able to do all that. And in such society people will be interested in ant colonies, microbes, agriculture and nanotech :) But such a society, if ever created, seems to be incompatible with a preoccupation of money OR material objects for the sake of possessing them. This is why I suggested Roddenberrys Humans and Borgs ...
However , and this is just a critical appraisal of the summary you provided, Callenbach threw in stuff from the prevailing atmosphere of the 70s to create a novel.
"Nuclear power has long been to the Left what embryonic-stem-cell research is to the Right--irredeemably wrong and a signifier of moral weakness."Esquire Magazine,12/05
The genetic code is commaless and so are my posts.
User avatar
EnergySpin
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2248
Joined: Sat 25 Jun 2005, 03:00:00

Unread postby Zentric » Sat 23 Jul 2005, 03:10:37

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergySpin', 'S')moking too much weed kills the grey cells in the brain and leads to apathy (i.e. no ant colony wathcing no mag lev trains lol)
The problem with this particular utopia is that the link $this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'n')atural world-to-natural science-to-mechanical engineering
is not well described.
He is describing a world where humans are essentially allowed to do whatever they want to (20 hrs a week is noooothing).
But humanity's involvement with technology OR an automatic way for the technology infrastructure to be maintained has to be provided.
If you ask me, a society that controls technology which can be either hard or soft (think a combination of fusion reactors, wind farms, solar panels, GMOs, industrial ecology and nanotech - since this discussion is at a theoretical level) will be able to do all that. And in such society people will be interested in ant colonies, microbes, agriculture and nanotech :) But such a society, if ever created, seems to be incompatible with a preoccupation of money OR material objects for the sake of possessing them. This is why I suggested Roddenberrys Humans and Borgs ...
However , and this is just a critical appraisal of the summary you provided, Callenbach threw in stuff from the prevailing atmosphere of the 70s to create a novel.


Maybe it's a just a grey-cell thing, dude, but 30 years hence, I had been thinking a lot along the lines of Callenbach before I just this week read his book. The question is ultimately about the viability of modern-day Ecotopias as opposed to profound resource shortages, resource wars, disease, starvation, nuclear annihilation, suffering, fascism and death. And your argument is pretty much along the lines of Ecotopia is bad because because they smoke too much pot or that they don't worship money quite enough. Could it be there is more to it than is dreamt of in your philosphy?

And if a young Ecotopian wants a scholarship to be an engineer, I imagine he'll be cracking the books for more than 20 hours a week. You know, I don't think I read anywhere in the book how they imprison people who show exceptional ambition. In fact, I know I read something in it to the contrary. Such devotion to a cause - either personal or social - is not out of character with the human condition or with Ecotopia.

Roddenberry - I'll check it out.
User avatar
Zentric
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 709
Joined: Mon 14 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Unread postby EnergySpin » Sat 23 Jul 2005, 03:25:54

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')nd if a young Ecotopian wants a scholarship to be an engineer, I imagine he'll be cracking the books for more than 20 hours a week. You know, I don't think I read anywhere in the book how they imprison people who show exceptional ambition. In fact, I know I read something in it to the contrary. Such devotion to a cause - either personal or social - is not out of character with the human condition or with Ecotopia.

I question the technicalities and not the goal or the vision of the Book.

For example Manna is another utopia but there are no internal incosistencies in how the story unfolds or how the society works. The guy who wrote it based the novel in a society where machines replicated machines and served humans and the machine infrastructure. If you reach that level, you are home free.
But in such a society, there is coupling of man-machine-nature .... the whole world becomes an ecosystem of natural and embodied artificial intelligence.
Call me a purist ... but when I read something I want no internal incosistencies. My critique had to do with the internal mechanisms of such a society, not its goals for people and the environment.
Regarding the role of Money .... the monetary system seems unworkable (both in our real life and the Book). Check the Technocracy movement of the 30s or the steady state economics literature or even Medieval Germany History for energy or limited life time currencies :)
Last but not least... I have a bias on psychoactive substances due to my profession.
As for Roddenberry ... watch Star Treck Next Generation :lol:
"Nuclear power has long been to the Left what embryonic-stem-cell research is to the Right--irredeemably wrong and a signifier of moral weakness."Esquire Magazine,12/05
The genetic code is commaless and so are my posts.
User avatar
EnergySpin
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2248
Joined: Sat 25 Jun 2005, 03:00:00
Top


Return to Book/Media Reviews

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

cron