Endgame By Jensen Analysis

1329 Words6 Pages
Industrialized civilization is destroying the natural world. That’s what Jensen argues in “Endgame”. Through a series of simple, yet increasingly provocative premises such as "civilization is not can never be sustainable "and" Love does not involve pacifism, Jensen believes in the destruction of industrial civilization, and not only does he believe it is inevitable, he thinks it is desirable and he encourages each of us to make it a reality as soon as possible. Most people rarely even question the idea of civilization, and whether it could be a bad thing. Perhaps, that’s because it is so deeply rooted into our minds through debates about issues such as how we can "grow" the economy and what development sustainable will save the earth - that…show more content…
Jensen also has a number of other insightful premises such as "people in power rule by force," and that "culture is driven by a death drive, a desire to destroy life," that "the needs of the natural world are more important than the needs of the economic system "and that civilization is "based on, demands and collapses rapidly without persistent and widespread violence ". These premises provide the basis for much of the book, and Jensen explains and expands on them throughout the text. The context of Jensen's book is what he calls the "thrashing endgame of civilization" or simply the realization that our life system is intrinsically unsustainable and nothing currently being done - be it the mainstream “shallow” ecological movement or the “deep” ecological movement- makes a sufficient effort to deal with this reality. Throughout the book, Jensen provides a number of examples of how civilization is destroying the planet, like the ecological impact of dams, the destruction of biodiversity, the industrial farming and fishing practices, oil dependence and carrying…show more content…
Throughout the book, Jensen launches the prospect of blowing up dams, destroying cell phone towers and such other approaches to the fight against the destruction of the earth, although it provides ample criticism of these tactics by explaining that they do not go "pretty high up the infrastructure”. He speaks of the need for actions that will hasten the fall of civilization and makes detours in discussions about hackers and the possibility that they might be able to bring large sections of civilization to a standstill, dismantling electrical networks, and the number of people it will take for the civilization to give the final assault that it must
Open Document