A twice-weekly sharing of eco-shwag.

Today’s giveway’s a copy of Where We Stand: A Surprising Look at the Real State of Our Planet, penned by one Seymour Garte.

Garte’s main point: While there’s a lot wrong with the world, we need to celebrate — and learn from — the many environmental and humanitarian successes achieved in the last few decades. “In reality we are in the middle of a life-enhancing period of general improvement in almost all aspects of life,” says Garte, who wants to “stimulate future efforts by pointing to past successes. To that end, Garte points to everything from the improved air quality in L.A. and NYC, some of the successes in slowing the spread of HIV, to the birth of the Endangered Species Act.

Lest wary environmentalists think Garte’s discouraging activism by saying all’s fine and dandy, Where We Stand in fact draws a direct link between the work of environmentalists and other activists and the improvements we’ve seen in the world. Acknowledging these improvements and the ways they came about will ensure that activists will be motivated by seeing past efforts have paid off — thereby propelling them into continuing to work towards these ends.

So with each chapter, Garte’s cautious about not only highlighting past successes, but also emphasizing the work that still remains to be done. For example, while we’ve identified and made illegal many straightout toxic substances, little work has been done in determining “chronic, long-term, toxic effects of chemicals” that don’t pose immediate health risks — something Stacy Malkan discusses in more length in Not Just a Pretty Face: The Ugly Side of the Beauty Industry.

My main critique of Where We Stand is that, despite its 2008 publication date, some of the assumptions and attitudes seem very dated, as if Garte hasn’t quite caught up with the times. Even while he briefly notes that the Bush admin has been problematic, Garte maintains a rather over-sanguine attitude, giving readers a somewhat false impression that progress on environmental issues has continued throughout the last few decades at a healthy, steady pace. Moreover, his characterization of most environmentalists as a technology-phobic crowd seems dated indeed. I also disagree with Garte’s rather unwavering support for GMO crops; his argument relies on extremely broad generalizations that don’t seriously contend with the many issues environmentalists have brought up.

Still, I learned much about the history of some of the big, environmental battles that have been won since the 1970s, which was encouraging. Want to read Where We Stand yourself? Comment or email by Sunday to get into the drawing, which’ll happen Monday. US addresses only.

2 Comments