Scan barcode
oisinofthehill's review against another edition
challenging
dark
inspiring
reflective
sad
fast-paced
5.0
lensdeer's review against another edition
2.0
Thank god I read a digital version, or the first half would've been sticky from how much the author jacks off to anarcho-primitivism.
thewaronhugs's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
sad
medium-paced
4.0
tardigradest's review against another edition
2.0
though some of the sections of this book were good and useful, I had to put it down after some of the sections (specifically those on food and conservation) had a lot of misinformation and were borderline ecofascist. specifically, the author takes a Malthusian lens to food production and claims we have an overpopulation problem now that will get any worse if we give up industrial ag.
1) we dont have a food production problem, we have a food distribution problem. we grow plenty of food to feed 10 billion people, it's just caught up in biofuels and overproduced in some regions so as to undermine farming in others
2) we can produce enough food for 10 billion people with no extra land cleared and *better nutritional results* with agroecological methods instead of industrial ag.
3) for someone citing famine theory, they dont seem to really understand famine theory.
it's clear the author had no understanding of what they were talking about here, and as this is a central point of the work, it's hard to trust that they know what they're talking about on things I'm not able to judge based on my background knowledge.
while some sections I got to were definitely worth reading (esp the first), it's a shame that I've seen this uncritically passed around some leftist circles, probably by those who simply didnt know better. I guess my takeaway is read critically, and dont assume this author really knows what they're talking about.
1) we dont have a food production problem, we have a food distribution problem. we grow plenty of food to feed 10 billion people, it's just caught up in biofuels and overproduced in some regions so as to undermine farming in others
2) we can produce enough food for 10 billion people with no extra land cleared and *better nutritional results* with agroecological methods instead of industrial ag.
3) for someone citing famine theory, they dont seem to really understand famine theory.
it's clear the author had no understanding of what they were talking about here, and as this is a central point of the work, it's hard to trust that they know what they're talking about on things I'm not able to judge based on my background knowledge.
while some sections I got to were definitely worth reading (esp the first), it's a shame that I've seen this uncritically passed around some leftist circles, probably by those who simply didnt know better. I guess my takeaway is read critically, and dont assume this author really knows what they're talking about.
edmondduong's review against another edition
5.0
I mirror many critiques of the book by pointing out that most anarchists don't believe in the "global anarchist revolution" that the author criticises.
However, I also see many people deriding the author's discussion of population being "eugenic and eco-fascist", and I think these people have missed the point the author was trying to make there. Perhaps many were too eager to jump on any discussion on population, completely ignoring the author's statements. Here, they explain that as climate change occurs, areas become unliveable and arable land becomes more scarce, and current farming practices are unsustainable. As a result, the current population would not be sustainable. This is not the same argument that eco-fascists make that the reason for climate change is occurring is due to the increasing population, and thus eugenics must occur. In the author's worldview (which I believe to be correct), they believe that climate change, whatever the cause, is completely inevitable.
I found the book really easy to read and was well-researched, even if I didn't agree with all the points. The author evidently had a good understanding of the topic of climate change and the scenarios they've proposed were quite logical. The author also took care to discuss the disparate futures of the Global North and South from different points of view, and showed a clear understanding of how things have evolved to it's current state.
For an anarcho- and eco-pessimist book, it was surprisingly optimistic and not at all nihilistic. While acknowledging the dystopic futures that lay ahead, the author was quick to point out how some of the disadvantages we face can be our advantages as well (albeit perhaps somewhat too optimistically). Far from being defeatist, the author takes the viewpoint of our need to continue our resistance regardless of our circumstances.
Desert is obviously not a book that acts as an introduction to anarchy, but more so an introduction to ecological resistance for anarchists. And to this point, I think it performs well, demonstrating the importance of the ecology in our anarchist analyses.
However, I also see many people deriding the author's discussion of population being "eugenic and eco-fascist", and I think these people have missed the point the author was trying to make there. Perhaps many were too eager to jump on any discussion on population, completely ignoring the author's statements. Here, they explain that as climate change occurs, areas become unliveable and arable land becomes more scarce, and current farming practices are unsustainable. As a result, the current population would not be sustainable. This is not the same argument that eco-fascists make that the reason for climate change is occurring is due to the increasing population, and thus eugenics must occur. In the author's worldview (which I believe to be correct), they believe that climate change, whatever the cause, is completely inevitable.
I found the book really easy to read and was well-researched, even if I didn't agree with all the points. The author evidently had a good understanding of the topic of climate change and the scenarios they've proposed were quite logical. The author also took care to discuss the disparate futures of the Global North and South from different points of view, and showed a clear understanding of how things have evolved to it's current state.
For an anarcho- and eco-pessimist book, it was surprisingly optimistic and not at all nihilistic. While acknowledging the dystopic futures that lay ahead, the author was quick to point out how some of the disadvantages we face can be our advantages as well (albeit perhaps somewhat too optimistically). Far from being defeatist, the author takes the viewpoint of our need to continue our resistance regardless of our circumstances.
Desert is obviously not a book that acts as an introduction to anarchy, but more so an introduction to ecological resistance for anarchists. And to this point, I think it performs well, demonstrating the importance of the ecology in our anarchist analyses.
heavenlyspit's review against another edition
dark
emotional
reflective
sad
medium-paced