1. Descriptive summary – (8 – 10 key points in bullet format)
To start off, McKibben discusses how our society is growing on a structure in which organizations and businesses have gotten to the point where they are “too big to fail.” While analyzing the way these big corporations function, he uncovers the negative effects that this structure has on our economy, society and our environment.
McKibben then introduce statements and points to make an argument about it further in the chapter. By revisiting the idea of fast growing economy, as he had mentioned in chapter 2, the first point in the chapter that he made was using a metaphor that we are “too big” for our own good by basing it off the financial crisis in the past.
He uses banks metaphor as the example of caution for what happens when something “grows too big”. The end result was that many banks were “bailed out” to avoid any economic collapse. McKibben tries to prevent getting too political and came to the conclusion that bigger things are worse.
McKibben then proposes that we need to look at things on a smaller scale in order to protect the wellbeing of our communities. He begins to ask questions like: Can we slow down? Can we imagine slower? Can we imagine smaller? He also demonstrates that it is up to the local economies to build community.
He envisions the world, and describes successful communities, as being “durable, sturdy, stable, hardy and robust” enough to support what we already have instead of striving for economic growth. These are communities that are not “too big to fail” but instead steady.
In order to support his claim that big is not always better, McKibben focuses in on small communities and and explains what about them makes them work well. Some of these economically and environmentally friendly ideas include supporting small local businesses and buying locally grown food, which he spends a good amount of time discussing about it.
Additionally, he believes that we need to scale back in the sense that institutions and government agencies should be determined based off of the size of the project at hand; a school should not be built to accommodate 5,000 people when the population of the town it is in isn’t even that big, to give an example.
In order to slow down the depletion of resources, we need to start figuring out how to reuse what we have instead of finding and creating more materials because it is just a waste.
2. Sympathetic and Critical remarks – Among author points, which 2-3 are most impressive to you, and why? Which do you question, and why?
I agree with the idea that we need to start supporting local businesses and buying our food locally. By shopping at local businesses, we are not only supporting the growth of the local economy and creating more jobs, but we are also establishing relationships that are hard to form between consumers and large corporations. My favorite section in this chapter is about McKibben’s summary of the Family Diner, a restaurant that uses local farm products for the menu items. Then it got me questioning, how many restaurants are similar to the Family Diner in Michigan? Now that I think about it, there are only a few I’ve been to. I then realized that what we as eat, wear, and use day to day are, most of the time, not made locally.
3. Synthetic and constructive remarks. In what way can you connect this new information with previous academic learning or life experience? What new areas of connection can you imagine would be fruitful to explore? 3-5 sentences
Although I agree with him that smaller, more stable businesses will reduce some risks in our lives. However, I think that this goal should be reached with personal choice, not government spending. In my opinion, government projects to help develop green energy have actually stalled its progress. It goes like this, if a government writes a check for whatever the company has, then the incentive to refine and innovate goes down, and the company tries to manufacture more of what they have in able to receive more money from the government (that is just how it works). Instead, if a solar company build a panel that could efficiently power a home for very little money, then every home would have one. Government could also offer tax credits for household that installed on their own, then we are almost incentivizing people to buy a better product.
4. Conclusion – What is your take-away from this, or what now do you want to know more about? (2-3 sentences)
All in all, I agree with McKibben’s proposals. We do need to focus on the essentials and maintain the small communities we have. If we focus on growth and expansion, our resources will diminish and we’ll be lost on this new Eaarth.