The Great Disruption by Paul Gilding should be required reading for those who see the signs of our coming ecological, economic and social crisis and wish to orient towards possible solutions. Like Eaarth by Bill Mckibben, it weaves the facts of a growing ecological catastrophe into a narrative both accessible in its style and convincing in its scope. Where Mckibben emphasizes the direct climatic impact of global warming on our natural systems and how these sweeping changes will affect our centralized energy and food production systems, Gilding focuses more on the economic impacts and how present market models will not sustain the inevitable crash against our limits to growth. Mckibben argues for decentralized energy grids and localized food production as major factors in an alternative future, while Gilding sees a centralized “one-degree war” led by government and forward thinking market forces as key to saving our present economic and social structures essentially intact. Both of these books are full of important information and analysis with excellent resource materials for further studies. They should be read and shared by all concerned with the direction we are headed as a species.

However much they may disagree on the relative importance of different responses to the coming ecological disaster, they share a deeply optimistic view of the future. This makes reading their books both shocking and uplifting. The reality of how seriously our denial will cost us, by the time the scope of our situation breaks though our collective awareness, is mitigated by the vision of the best of our human nature coming to the fore just in time. Where the hard cold facts of the disaster we face might lead us to despair, they both find cause for hope. Only those reduced to abject cynicism can ignore what we all know in our bones—we are far more generous and self-sacrificing as a species than what we are led to believe or allowed to express. But, while energized by optimism, we must be crystal clear about the world we inhabit and the forces we will face as we strive for positive change.

That is where The Great Disruption breaks new ground. Gilding presents ample proof that we will be faced in the near future with the choice to devolve into chaos or mobilize our forces to evolve to a higher level of social organization. He argues that the collective impact of hitting the limits of growth will shock our consciousness into a “Great Awakening” which will lead us to mobilize for the “one-degree war.” As we as a society wake up to the facts of climate change, we will set aside all hesitation and launch a desperate campaign of radical change. He even presents a 100-year timetable for post-peak Eaarth.

This plan calls for a WWII type mobilization for the first five years to battle global CO2 emissions down by 50%. Another 15 years of protracted reductions to move the world to a net zero emissions. And lastly an 80-year campaign to remove CO2 from the atmosphere, along with geo-engineering innovations to reverse the lingering affects of global warming. As the first five years after the crash will be the most critical, emergency measures to cut emissions are spelled out in greater detail—everything form sequestration to fuel rationing. This discussion of how to hold overall global warming to a rise of one degree, brings the climate change debate to a whole new level.

Unfortunately there is a consistent blindness woven into Gilding’s vision of the future. He has jumped with both feet into the maelstrom of fossil fueled socio-economic reality but turned a blind eye to the political storm surrounding climate change. There is a disconnect between his analysis of how we got to this disastrous point in human history and who we can depend on to help us survive the coming global disruption. The argument he pushes is that global agreements to begin dealing with global warming are held back by inertia and the need for society to hit the limits of our economic model in a dramatic way. The impression is that the global community, at least in the developed countries, is too comfortable in their regal-like existence that they will not consider the ecological consequences of their life style until there’s a dramatic crisis.

The truth is that the government of the United States of America has been the major block to global emission standards in every international meeting. No matter whether led by Democrats or Republicans, the US has done the bidding of the ruling corporations, who are only interested in short-term profits at the expense of future generations. These forces are guilty of international crimes against humanity and nature. When we hit the limits of growth in catastrophic ways, these economic and political forces will be looking for any way to exploit the chaos to their advantage and will use the military to ensure that the other 99% don’t get in their way. Predictions about the future are always problematic, but at least we should take into account the consistent past performance of the US government—answering every crisis with more violence and less democracy.

Our political/military/industrial/media complex is good at repression but has yet to even begin a critical analysis of the economic and social system they wield. At various points in the book Gilding recognizes this fact but still he thinks we should let them do it—let them run the one-degree war. When Eaarth’s systems make business as usual impossible, we should depend on those who caused, profited and then hid the truth of climate change to suddenly change and unselfishly lead the battle for survival—because they are good at waging war. “Besides, we need them to run the war, something they’re very good at!” (p. 122)

While it is undeniable that modern capitalism is good at waging war, it is also skilled at deflecting the blame for war onto others. German capitalists after WWI blamed other capitalists, communists, unionists, and Jews for their drive towards war. US capitalists blamed the communists for forcing them into a war in Vietnam. And now it is the terrorists who are to blame for the current US drive to spread war and economic domination throughout the globe. The Iraq war showed how control over the media by the warmongers is crucial to sell the Nazi-style big lie to its citizens (show me the WMDs!). Now, the Obama administration in “lock-step with Israel” is pushing a media fed hysteria about non-existent threat from Iran. Can we hope that this corrupt system of propaganda-fed violence will suddenly turn into a positive force for change? There is no historical evidence to support such a fantasy.

He extends this dream-world view of modern capitalism to the present situation in the advanced industrial nations, comparing the current living standard to that of royalty in ages past. Seems he is leaving out of the equation the billions around the world and the nearly 50 million Americans who are hungry, the millions loosing their homes and the rising seas of homeless and jobless. Yes, we have new monarchs but its not us, it is the elite on the top who in spite of the suffering of the majority, continue to build their financial empire and luxury mansions. Gilding thinks we should look to the government of the rich and their police and military to lead the one-degree war. It is just as likely that we will need to wage a war on two fronts—on one hand against climate change, on the other against the anti-democratic forces who will try to turn chaos into profit. This isn’t a nitpicking side issue in some theoretical future. This reality should inform our present actions. While a massive movement against climate change is still pending, the war against those who have caused the problem has begun. Its first manifestation is the Occupy Movement.

Gilding’s misunderstanding of our present situation and the role of the government/military-takeover of our political discourse are clear from his views on the terrorist wars. As an example of how the people will begin to feel the impacts of climate change and suddenly veer into a war footing to stop it, he sites the example of 9/11. “Terrorism was a powerful example of this. Even though few were directly affected by the 9/ll attacks, people around the world felt an emotional engagement with those who did. As a result, enormous political and economic changes were accepted from new airport security measures to changes to legal rights to two wars—because people could relate to the issues in a new way.” (p. 105) But again, when he ventures into politics, he puts on rose colored glasses and misses the most important point about the lessons of 9/11.

The shock of 9/11 was a classic example of how the most tightly organized wing of the capitalist class—the neo-conservatives and their military profiteers—use a major crisis to further their political agenda. (See Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein for a detailed discussion) The United States and their allies used this attack and their control of the news media to panic the population into accepting an unprecedented increase in military/security spending and a wholesale attack on civil liberties and historical social gains. Neither of these had anything to do with fighting terrorism and everything to do with concentrating economic and political power in the hands of the corporate/financial elite and their representatives in the White House.

The true origins of the terrorists, trained and financed by the US and its allies such as Saudi Arabia, Israel, and Egypt, remained hidden. Even though 15 of the 19 terrorists who carried out the attack were Saudis, their most likely support group—over 100 Saudis, many family to Osama bin Laden, were spirited out of the US without questioning—by direct order of President Bush. Instead we attacked the Taliban in Afghanistan, who had nothing to do with 9/11, and later Iraq—one of the few countries in the Middle East were al Qaeda did NOT exist—of course until we invaded. Can we really count on those who used the horror of 9/11 to manipulate public opinion and further their military and economic agenda to save us from an even greater threat? (See Noam Chomsky’s 9/11 for a counter narrative to the lies we have been taught to believe.)

The same economic and political forces that have made terror, torture and drugs their weapons of choice to spread war and austerity around the globe, will use their control of the mass media and violence to turn a global eco-catastrophe to their advantage. The food shortages, weather related disasters, and economic hardships will be met by the same brutality that we see on the streets of America itself. The police state methods used against the Occupy Movement are the kind of response we can expect to any challenge to the tight control of the 1%. Those who want to see real change should be preparing for the collapse that Gilding so convincingly describes—just not in the way he recommends. We need to build a plan to totally restructure our economic, social and political way of life. Instead of waiting for market forces (that caused the problem) to adapt to the new post growth reality, we need a plan to extend both political and economic democracy. This is the opposite of the so-called free market, which just hides the invisible hand of the 1%. We need to develop a program of peace and prosperity for the 99%, not leave control of our future in the hands of those pushing war, austerity and repression for the benefit of the ruling elite.

To begin with we must support and defend the right of the Occupy Movement to set up protest encampments. No matter what the weaknesses within the movement it is an attempt to experiment with new forms of democracy and engage the world in a meaningful dialog. This is a positive step by mainly young people to be part of the political process. To meet these protesters with military tactics including flash-bang grenades, rubber bullets and pepper spray shows how desperately the powers that be want to limit the discussion of how to deal with the current crisis. Even if you don’t agree with all the demands or tactics of the Occupy Movement, isn’t it better to bend a few park rules to favor democracy, rather than beat and arrest protesters? The Oakland police chief recently called the protesters ‘terrorists’, setting the stage for even more repression. This year we should be organizing for an “American Spring” to push back the violence and open up democracy.

As we grow the movement, we need to begin the long-term planning that the future described by both Gilding and Mckibben necessitates. What demands can we bring forward that not only deal with immediate problems but have a logic that prepares us for an even more desperate future? Within the debate on energy issues we must find ways to counter the US governments criminal foot dragging—wanting to wait on binding CO2 emission standards till 2020. Instead we should demand 50% cuts by 2020. This is a doable goal, but would require serious changes—both cutting net use and switching immediately to all electric cars. As a side benefit building the necessary infrastructure such as plug-in parking, battery swap stations, etc that would be required for a serious switch to electric cars, would put millions back to work building our sustainable future. And further, to convince the majority of Americans that such a dramatic change was necessary, we would need to patiently educate about climate change and what it will take to survive on planet Eaarth.

Even where debates are not directly related to energy, there are connections to be made. There is a raging debate over public education between the those who want to hand over public education to private hands and those who want to throw more money at a broken system. Both miss the real problem. We have been measuring ‘gains’ in education solely by standardized test scores. Whether we are ‘leaving no child behind’ or ‘racing to the top’, this whole approach is flawed. We should be discussing how to implement creative programs to inspire students—not locking teachers and students in the mental prison of test score based evaluations. (See Education Crisis for a more detailed discussion.)

Why not challenge schools to go on a campaign to save energy? Educate students to be active participants in a nation-wide push to cut CO2 emissions—as part of a serious hands-on approach to science. Schools should be rewarded for innovative garden/greenhouse projects, solar retrofitting, and water conservation, including catchment and storage. Parents could play a vital role by taking into account the CO2 emissions spent transporting children to school. Car pools, safe bike or walking routes etc. could cut energy use and reduce traffic around schools. Parents and community, including private businesses, would need to play important roles to ensure the safety, viability, and effectiveness of these programs and work with teachers to draw out their educational and health benefits. This is something that would inspire children, unlike memorizing sterile facts to regurgitate on standardized tests.

One of the elements of Gilding’s ‘one-degree war’ is cutting deforestation and other logging by fifty percent. Sounds ambitious and out of reach short of a disaster—right? This is where solutions to one problem become interesting solutions to another. Legalize hemp! The vilifying of marijuana was carried out by wood-based paper manufacturers who feared the rising use of hemp to produce not only rope but also paper. Hemp is a weed and grows quickly in relatively poor soil. It could replace trees as a source of paper pulp and corn as a source of bio-fuel. Plus, making marijuana legal and taxing it at the level of alcohol would result in $14 billion net gain per year in enforcement savings and revenue. Wow, talk about a win, win, win situation. Besides if it was good enough for George Washington—it should be good enough for us. Lastly, being able to buy organic Boise Bud, along with Deshutes Obsidian Stout, would go a long way to building Gilding’s “Happiness Economy.”

Whether or not you agree with any of the ideas presented here you owe it to yourselves to read The Great Disruption and Eaarth. These excellent works paint a picture of where we are going and should inform all of our current discussions. Each of us can have a positive role to play even if you never leave the comfort of your living room. Simply inform yourself and spread the information. Take some time to contemplate real life possibilities. What if gas, water, or electric services were disrupted by political, economic or weather related problems? Do you have back-up systems? Are your schools prepared to serve as rescue centers? Japanese people learned a hard lesson last March with the earthquake/tsunami and Fukushima meltdown. We should not wait for disaster to strike nor should we depend on federal, state or even local governments to save us when the worse happens. This will also help prepare us for a new life on Eaarth, before, during, and after the Great Disruption.