NATURE IN THE ANTHROPOCENE 65
possible but also inseparable” (An Ecomodernist Manifesto 2015). Unlike deep
ecology, which demands the “re-enchantment” of humanity with their ecological
consciousness (Barry and Frankland 2001: 117-121), ecomodernism argues that the
sophistication of technology can save nature as well as humanity. Notably, most of
the world’s total global forestation occurred before the Industrial Revolution (Pappas
2012). It is more appropriate to identify the actual political and economic systems that
fuel apathy towards nature, such as self-interest and excessive consumerism. In this
way, the ecomodernist manifesto may be revered for its rather daring disregard of the
past, tradition and the nostalgia that tends to holds back development (Lynas 2015). It
successfully rids itself of the traditional development which is still failing to admit to
its responsibility for climate change’s devastating impacts. Such acknowledgement of
the link between environmental damage and global poverty is more important in the
Anthropocene than the distinction between natural and artificial. Acknowledging the
link between environmental damage and global poverty is necessary to ensure
appropriate action is taken to combat the damage already inflicted. It is necessary to
look at both ecocentric and ecomodernist point of views so that we may understand
why the artificial ultimately predominates in the Anthropocene. A different
understanding of the Anthropocene – such as the one presented by the ecomodernist –
is necessary due to the unsustainability of ignoring the value of nature to humanity’s
survival.
Furthermore, ecomodernism’s break from nature is unrealistic and morally unsettling.
It is overly optimistic of humanity’s ability to successfully modernise the world as a
whole. Although our technological developments have been successful, parts of the
globe have yet to be fully included in the Anthropocene. The divide between
developed and developing countries clearly illustrates the inequality and inefficiency
present in global resource allocation. Already, claims of an “eco-apocalypse” have
been made in reference to Indonesia where forest fires have – in three weeks –
released more carbon dioxide than Germany’s annual emissions (Monbiot 2015). The
developed world’s relative ignorance of this ecological destruction reinforces the
immorality of the ecomodernist’s reliance on technical innovation, which has failed to
extend far enough to facilitate the ‘greening’ of the developing world. A focus on