Books by Crichton and Whitman Are Both Shards of the Science/ Religion/ Politics Battle

Written by Lucas Brachish
Published February 13, 2005

A tiny segment of the global population has been waging an effective war against environmental awareness for years, warping hundreds of millions of otherwise sane individuals into believing that pollution is little more than a liberal, left-wing bogeyman.

This most recently came to light with the publication of Christine Todd Whitman's new book, It's My Party, Too: The Battle for the Heart of the GOP and the Future of America (Penguin Press, 2005), in which the former head of the Environmental Protection Agency (and a former favorite politico among scores of conservatives) describes how the Republican-led U.S. government has systematically gone about crippling the EPA's usefulness. Whitman was not loved by Democrats or environmentalists, but she makes a strong case for herself as being the lesser of many evils. In fact, under the pressures of an anti-environment administration and powerful corporate lobbyists, she stood her ground until forced to resign.

On Sept. 15, 2003, best-selling fiction author Michael Crichton, with his prestigious Ivy League anthropology and medical degrees in tow, did his part to confuse the issue. In his speech before the Commonwealth Club, he stated that pro-environment thinkers are steeped in mythical beliefs, that "second hand smoke is not a health hazard to anyone and never was" and "evidence for global warming is far weaker than its proponents would ever admit." He goes on to equate environmentalists to a fundamentalist religious cult (which, not coincidentally, is also the theme of his anti-global-warming-theory novel, State of Fear)

The comparison of environmentalism to other religious systems is valid--particularly the idea that modern environmentalism contains aspects of age-old mythic structures, even variants of Judeo-Christian concepts such as of Eden and Judgment Day. I wouldn't consider pulp-writer Michael Crichton the most literate authority on these matters, but he notes an abundance of interesting parallels between religious and environmental beliefs.

And Crichton's base argument is also sound--he wants to take the politics and myths out of science and environmental conservation, in an effort to have people from all aspects of the political system participate in scientific studies and practical conservation efforts. Regrettably, right-wing industrialists have latched onto Crichton's philosophical thoughts and science-fiction paranoia to bolster their case against environmental conservation in general.

Christian writer Regis Nicoll vehemently attacks environmentalists in The New World Religion: Environmentalism and the Western World using Crichton's words as proof positive. He takes the concept a step further by implying it's thoroughly un-Christian to care about the environment too much. After all, if the world is a polluted wasteland, it's a just punishment for mankind's Original Sin: "According to the biblical worldview, things like our planet's wellness are the way they are not because man has broken shalom with creation, but because he has broken shalom with his Creator."

page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4
Keep reading for information and comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own!
Books by Crichton and Whitman Are Both Shards of the Science/ Religion/ Politics Battle
Published: February 13, 2005
Type:
Section: Sci/Tech
Filed Under: Books: Nonfiction, Books: Politics and Affairs, Books: Thriller, Culture: Media, Sci/Tech: Science, Politics: Law and Rights
Writer: Lucas Brachish
Lucas Brachish's BC Writer page
Lucas Brachish's personal site
Spread the Word
Like this article?
Email this
Submit to del.icio.us Save to del.icio.us
RSS Feeds
All RSS Feeds (240+)
Comments on this article
BC articles by Lucas Brachish
Books: Nonfiction
Books: Politics and Affairs
Books: Thriller
Culture: Media
Sci/Tech: Science
Politics: Law and Rights
All Sci/Tech Articles
Lucas Brachish's personal weblog
All BC articles
All BC Comments

Comments

#1 — February 13, 2005 @ 22:22PM — DrPat [URL]

That's a very link-rich review, Lucas! It's certainly true that science tells a more believable and immediately useful tale than myth or religion. But I don't agree that it is replacing religion, nor even that it should. Science and religion are separate and distinct ways of approaching the unknown.

Science says "maybe this, then test this, then probably this, then almost certainly this [until something that explains reality better comes along]."

Religion says "this, now and evermore, despite all evidence to the contrary, because I believe."

#2 — February 14, 2005 @ 13:47PM — Dean [URL]

Good post! Having read Crichton's latest opus, I'll offer a few comments on the thesis his book advances...

First, I'm unsure about the description of Crichton as a storyteller because as a thriller State of Fear is less than...well, less then almost every other thriller on the market today. It does not deserve to be hitting the best-seller lists. It is episodic, lacking a compelling plot, with an uneven set of protagonists and a tendency to drop into pages of preachy dialogue and situations designed to lecture the reader on the evils of the environmental movement and global warming in general. It makes for a tiresome read...constantly setting up 'straw men" then knocking them down. Several characters seem to exist for the sole purpose of asking stupid questions and then being "edjercated" by the author. The book is enough of a skreed to make me overtly conscious that Crichton may have his own political axe to grind (most notably when a thinly disguised Martin-Sheen actor character meets a horrificly nasty fate).

Crichton also has a strong tech-run-amuck theme that echoes through most of his work. Generally he notes that the human qualities - falliability, pride, power etc. - tend to lead to grandiose attempts to manage nature through science (that's how you get all those damn dinosaurs all over the freakin' place. hell, i can't walk through my kitchen without tripping on one of these compys...) and that science routinely overestimates their understanding of the issues...good points all, but just not very well written.

Crichton does advance the arguable case that the science behind global warming etc. is at times questionable and that both the pro and anti-global warming camps are heavily politicized in their approaches.

My personal view is that as all of recorded human history essentially falls into an interglacial period, we probably don't have a strong enough picture of long-term climate change patterns to make a strong conclusion whether global warming is due or exacerbated by human activities... but it might be best in the interests of prudence to keep a very open mind. It is a small planet after all...

Want comments emailed to you? No spam, promise! Address:

Add your comment, speak your mind

(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/25444)

Personal attacks are not allowed. Please read our comment policy.





Remember Name/URL?

Please preview your comment!

Fresh
Articles
Fresh
Comments