In 1989, environmentalist Bill McKibben claimed nature was dead due to rapid anthropogenic climate change, asserting that nature can no longer be seen as separate from human activity. Richard King’s book, Brave New Wild: Can Technology Really Save the Planet?, critiques this notion while exposing the ideological dangers within the environmental movement.
King discusses a troubling belief in "technofix," which relies on technological solutions for environmental problems. He argues we are shifting towards a time when "mitigation and adaptation" will be replaced by "reengineering," as extreme climate impacts become unavoidable. Proposals like geoengineering and the extinction of species, although seemingly innovative, could pose serious, uncontrolled risks.
By scrutinizing the Anthropocene—an era defined by human alteration of Earth—King warns that this perspective risks promoting a view of nature as infinitely malleable, thereby facilitating exploitation. He introduces “ecomodernism,” which equates human actions with nature and criticizes it for misrepresenting the relationship between humanity and the environment.
As an alternative, King proposes "ecohumanism," suggesting that while humans are part of nature, they should not exploit it solely for self-interest. He advocates for a shift in how we engage with technology and nature, urging a perspective centered on care and lived experience rather than domination. This could be achieved through decentralized political control, universal basic income, and fostering communal creativity.
Ultimately, King emphasizes the need for humility in understanding nature, which transcends human rationality. He calls for an aesthetic appreciation of the sublime to cultivate respect and shift efforts from merely repairing the planet to valuing it authentically. This approach may inspire a deeper commitment to sustainable coexistence and fulfillment.
