There are basically (always a simplification) two kinds of writing about global ecology dealing differently with some core questions: what is it, where it is going, and what we can do about it.
The first is reflections and information about mostly technical issues and trends. This kind of writing leaves our basic assumptions about the world in tact.
The second kind is mote difficult to read and understand and more penetrating. It upsets our core beliefs about reality, what it is, how we perceive and think about it, and what it suggests we do.
The difference between the two leads to different strategies;, The first to linear, redouble our efforts and don’r rock the boat, and the second, systems thinking, deals with interconnections and is willing to consider sinking the boat..
I think the boat's already sinking. The first type of thinking ignores the fact that it's sinking and continues to try to steer the ship. The second type of thinking tries to figure out how to abandon ship without dying. That's where I feel stuck. How do we abandon this sinking ship without just falling into the ocean and drowning?