Summery/Reflection of "Island Civilization"

                In his essay, “Island Civilization: a vision for human occupancy of Earth”, Professor Roderick Frazier Nash explains the importance of taking a new approach towards the environment.   For thousands of years, he argues, hunters and gatherers lived harmoniously with nature.  It wasn’t until people started to try to control nature that it became more of a nuisance than a friend.  Man began to work against the “wilderness” by building fences, clearing out trees, and herding animals to name a few.  Furthermore, technology reinforced the separation through the emergence of railroad tracks, bridges, tunnels, dams, and pavement. 

            Nash informs his readers that there are four directions in which the fate of the earth can go.  Think of it as a road with four paths branching at a single point.  The single point is where we are presently.  The paths are the different future scenarios that may occur within the next millennium.  The first path, he says, leads to what he calls “Wasteland” Earth.  Imagine a mundane, depleted Earth exhausted of its natural resources that is only able to support a few species.  It is the road that our growing population and continued mistreatment of flora and fauna will cause.  To avoid a future like this, he argues, we must take proper steps towards change.   

            The second path Nash describes is called the “Garden Scenario”.  This seems to be an approach that we might expect to come out of a science-fiction book.  In this illustration, the earth would be under control of the human species.  We would use technology to operate the planet instead of letting it run its natural course.  The earth would be far less diversified, but the water would be clean, and food plentiful.  Large animals would only exist for us to eat because the wilderness would be nonexistent.  This world that is described is one fully centered on us.  

            “Future Primitive” is what Nash calls the third path.  In this course, groups of humans revert back to the hunter-gatherer ways of their ancestors.  Technology is considered an enemy and discarded entirely.  People would have to learn how to live side-by-side with nature as an equal instead of fighting it.

            Lastly, Nash describes the path he feels is best suited for our future.  He calls it “Island Civilization”.  Instead of fencing in the wilderness, he says that we should fence in human settlement.  Imagine little bubbles of human communities scattered across the world.  In these “bubbles”, humans can still enjoy the same artificial comforts we have today (think of air conditioning!).   With technology, we could trade the harsh lands we’ve pushed wild animals into and turn them into comfortable places for us to live.  He says that if people want to opt out of these highly populated communities, they can live in the wilderness as long as they agree to live as hunters and gatherers.  They can never settle; they must only take what is needed to fulfill their daily needs.

            While I can agree with Professor Nash’s urgency to persuade people to take steps toward protecting the environment, I feel like his solution is much more drastic then necessary, or even possible.  I believe it is safe to broadly say that most people know that we could take better care of the world in which we live.  The fact is, however, that people have worked long and hard to obtain comfortable homes and safe environments for their children to play and grow up in.  Our society’s standard of living is much too high to achieve either the “Future Primitive” scenario or the “Island Civilization” scenario.  If either were to occur, I believe that both would be a desperate effort to save the human species.  The “Garden Scenario” would probably be most preferable and easiest for us to head towards.  Even so, much of this illustration relies heavily on faith that we will come up with the technology in the next millennium to make it possible.  Also, might arise when people realize the ethical issues involved in this plan.  One might argue that taking such control might be interpreted as “playing God”.    

            Looking at our advances in the past decade or so, I would say that we are naturally taking steps toward the right path.  With technology improving, we can now use the internet in replace of paper and pen.  Also, through things like email and instant messaging, texting, video chatting, and voice messaging, we can potentially save ourselves a drive.  Technology is only getting more eco-friendly, now that consumers are more conscientious of the environment.  I encourage people to take small steps every day towards making the world a cleaner and more beautiful place.