Confronting the sixth massive extenction

We have previously addressed the fact that the human being, in later times, has inaugurated a new geologic era –anthropoceno–, the era in which humans appear as the greatest threat to the biosphere, and the eventual exterminator of our own civilization. For a long time, biologists and cosmologists have warned that our aggressive intervention in the natural processes is greatly accelerating the sixth massive extinction of living species. It has been going on for several thousand years. These extinctions mysteriously belong to the cosmogenic process of the Earth. In the last 540 million years the Earth experienced five great massive extinctions, about one every one hundred million years, that exterminated much of life in the sea and on the Earth. The last one occurred 65 million years ago, when dinosaurs, among other species, were annihilated.

All previous extinctions were caused by forces of the Earth, and the universe itself, such as, for example, climatic convulsions, or meteor strikes. The sixth is being accelerated by humans. But for the presence of humans, one species would disappear every five years. Now, due to our industrial and consumerist aggressiveness, we have multiplied extinction one hundred thousand times, as cosmologist Brian Swimme advised us in a recent interview for EnlightenNext Magazin, nº 19. The data are alarming: Paul Ehrlich, professor of ecology at Stanford University, estimates that 250,000 species a year are exterminated, while Edward O. Wilson, of Harvard University, gives lower numbers, between 27,000 and 100,000 species per year, (R. Barbault, Ecologia general, 2011, p. 318).

Ecologist E. Goldsmith of the University of Georgia affirms that humanity, by making the world ever more impoverished, degraded, and less capable of sustaining life, has reversed the evolutionary process by 3 million years. The worst is that we do not even notice this devastating practice, nor are we prepared to evaluate the meaning of massive extinctions. It signifies nothing less than the destruction of the ecological basis of life on Earth, and the eventual interruption of our essay of civilization and perhaps even of our own species. Thomas Berry, the father of Northamerican ecology, wrote: «our ethical traditions know how to handle suicide, homicide and even genocide, but we do not know what to do about biocide and geocide» (Our Way into the Future, 1990, p. 104).

Can we slow down the sixth massive extinction, given that we are its principal cause? Yes, we can, and we must. It is a good sign that we are developing an awareness of our origins, some 13.7 billion years ago, and of our responsibility for the future of life. The universe elicits that in us, because it is not against us, but for us. But it demands our cooperation, because we are the ones causing so much damage. We must wake up now, while there is still time.

The first task is to renew the natural pact between the Earth and humanity. The Earth gives us everything we need. The pact calls on us to be caring and respectful of the Earth’s limitations. But, ingrates that we are, we repay her with machetazos, bulldozers, bombs and ecocidal and biocidal practices.

The second task is to strengthen reciprocity and mutuality: to seek a harmonious relationship with the dynamism of the eco-systems, using them rationally, restoring their vitality, and ensuring sustainability. For that, we need to re-invent ourselves as a species that is concerned for other species, and learns to live together with the entire community of life. We must be more cooperative than competitive, more caring than willing to subjugate, and we must recognize and respect the intrinsic value of each being.

The third requirement is to experience compassion, compassion as a form of love and caring, not only between human beings, but with all beings. Whether they will be able to continue living or be condemned to disappear depends on us. We must abandon the paradigm of domination that reinforces mass extinctions, and live the paradigm of caring and respect that preserves and prolongs life. In the middle of the anthropoceno, it is urgent that we inaugurate the ecozoic era, that places the ecological at the center. Only then is there hope of saving our civilization and of ensuring the continuity of our living planet.

Do ilusório Gene egoísta ao caráter cooperativo do Genoma humano

Tempos de crise sistêmica como os nossos favorecem uma revisão de conceitos e a coragem para projetar outros mundos possíveis que realizem o que Paulo Freire chamava de o “inédito viável”.

É notório que o sistema capitalista imperante no mundo é consumista, visceralmente egoísta e depredador da natureza. Está levando toda a humanidade a um impasse pois criou uma dupla injustiça: a ecológica por ter devastado a natureza e outra social por ter gerado imensa desigualdade social. Simplificando, mas nem tanto, poderíamos dizer que a humanidade se divide entre aquelas minorias que comem à tripa forra e aquelas maiorias que se alimentam insuficientemente. Se agora quiséssemos universalizar o tipo de consumo dos países ricos para toda a humanidade, necessitaríamos, pelo menos, de três Terras, iguais a atual.

Este sistema pretendeu encontrar sua base científica na pesquisa do zoólogo britânico Richard Dawkins que há trinta e seis anos escreveu seu famoso O gene egoísta (1976). A nova biologia genética mostrou, entretanto, que esse gene egoísta é ilusório, pois os genes não existem isolados, mas constituem um sistema de interdependências, formando o genoma humano que obedece a três princípios básicos da biologia: a cooperação, a comunicação e a criatividade. Portanto, o contrário do gene egoísta. Isso o demonstraram nomes notáveis da nova biologia como a prêmio Nobel Barbara McClintock, J. Bauer, C. Woese e outros. Bauer denunciou que a teoria do gene egoísta de Dawkins “não se funda em nenhum dado empírico”. Pior, “serviu de correlato biopsicológico para legitimar a ordem econômica anglo-norteamericana” individualista e imperial (Das kooperative Gen, 2008, p.153).

Disto se deriva que se quisermos atingir um modo de vida sustentável e justo para todos os povos, aqueles que consomem muito devem reduzir drasticamente seus níveis de consumo. Isso não se alcançará sem forte cooperação, solidariedade e uma clara autolimitação.

Detenhamo-nos nesta última, a autolimitação, pois é uma das mais difíceis de ser alcançada devido à predominância do consumismo, difundido em todas classes sociais. A autolimitação implica numa renúncia necessária para poupar a Mãe Terra, para tutelar os interesses coletivos e para promover uma cultura da simplicidade voluntária. Não se trata de não consumir, mas de consumir de forma sóbria, solidária e responsável face aos nossos semelhantes, à toda a comunidade de vida e às gerações futuras que devem ter o direito de também consumir.

A limitação é, ademais, um princípio cosmológico e ecológico. O universo se desenvolve a partir de duas forças que sempre se auto-limitam: as forças de expansão e as forças de contração. Sem esse limite interno, a criatividade cessaria e seríamos esmagados pela contração. Na natureza funciona o mesmo princípio. As bactérias, por exemplo, se não se limitassem entre si e se uma delas perdesse os limites, em bem pouco tempo, ocuparia todo o planeta, desequilibrando a biosfera. Os ecossistemas garantem sua sustentabilidade pela limitação dos seres entre si, permitindo que todos possam coexistir.

Ora, para sairmos da atual crise precisamos mais que tudo reforçar a cooperação de todos com todos, a comunicação entre todas as culturas e grande criatividade para delinearmos um novo paradigma de civilização. Há que darmos um adeus definitivo ao individualismo que inflacionou o “ego” em detrimento do “nós” que inclui não apenas os seres humanos mas toda a comunidade de vida, a Terra e o próprio universo.

Leonardo Boff é autor de Preservar a Terra-cuidar da Vida. Como evitar o fim do mundo, Record, RJ 2011.

Como enfrentarnos a la sexta Extinción en masa

Ya nos hemos referido anteriormente al hecho de que el ser humano, en los últimos tiempos, ha inaugurado una nueva era geológica –el antropoceno– , era en la que él aparece como la gran amenaza para la biosfera y el eventual exterminador de su propia civilización. Desde hace mucho tiempo biólogos y cosmólogos están advirtiendo a la humanidad de que el nivel de nuestra intervención agresiva en los procesos naturales está acelerando enormemente la sexta extinción en masa de especies de seres vivos. Está en curso desde hace algunos miles de años. Estas extinciones pertenecen misteriosamente al proceso cosmogénico de la Tierra. En los últimos 540 millones de años la Tierra conoció cinco grandes extinciones en masa, prácticamente una cada cien millones de años, que exterminaron gran parte de la vida en el mar y la tierra. La última ocurrió hace 65 millones de años cuando fueron aniquilados, entre otros, los dinosaurios.

Hasta ahora todas las extinciones fueron ocasionadas por las fuerzas del propio universo y de la Tierra, como por ejemplo la caída de meteoros rasantes o por convulsiones climáticas. La sexta está siendo acelerada por el propio ser humano. Sin su presencia, desaparecía una especie cada cinco años. Ahora, por causa de nuestra agresividad industrialista y consumista, multiplicamos cien mil veces la extinción, nos dice el cosmólogo Brian Swimme en una entrevista reciente al EnlightenNext Magazin, nº 19. Los datos son estremecedores: Paul Ehrlich, profesor de ecología en Standford calcula que son exterminadas 250.000 especies por año, mientras que Edward O. Wilson de Harvard da números más bajos, entre 27.000 y 100.000 especies por año (R. Barbault, Ecologia geral 2011, p. 318).

El ecólogo E. Goldsmith de la Universidad de Georgia afirma que la humanidad, al volver el mundo cada vez más empobrecido, degradado y menos capaz de sustentar la vida, ha revertido el proceso evolutivo en 3 millones de años. Lo peor de todo es que ni nos damos cuenta de esta práctica devastadora ni estamos preparados para evaluar lo que significa una extinción en masa. Significa sencillamente la destrucción de las bases ecológicas de la vida en la Tierra y la eventual interrupción de nuestro ensayo civilizatorio y quizá hasta de nuestra propia especie. Thomas Berry, el padre de la ecología americana, escribió: «nuestras tradiciones éticas saben cómo manejar el suicidio, el homicidio e incluso el genocidio, pero no saben qué hacer con el biocidio y el geocidio» (Our Way into the Future, 1990, p. 104).

¿Podemos desacelerar la sexta extinción en masa ya que somos sus principales causantes? Podemos y debemos. Una buena señal es que estamos despertando la conciencia de nuestros orígenes hace 13,7 miles de millones de años y de nuestra responsabilidad por el futuro de la vida. Es el universo quien suscita todo eso en nosotros porque está a favor nuestro y no contra nosotros. Pero él pide nuestra cooperación ya que somos los mayores causantes de tantos daños. El momento de despertar es ahora mientras hay tiempo.

Lo primero que hay que hacer es renovar el pacto natural entre Tierra y humanidad. La Tierra nos da todo lo que necesitamos. En el pacto, nuestra retribución debe ser de cuidado y respeto por los límites de la Tierra. Pero, ingratos, le devolvemos machetazos, bombas y prácticas ecocidas y biocidas.

Lo segundo es reforzar la reciprocidad o la mutualidad: buscar aquella relación mediante la cual entramos en sintonía con los dinamismos de los ecosistemas, usándolos racionalmente, devolviéndoles la vitalidad y garantizándoles sostenibilidad. Para eso necesitamos reinventarnos como especie que se preocupa de las demás especies y aprender a convivir con toda la comunidad de vida. Debemos ser más cooperativos que competitivos, tener más cuidado que voluntad de someter, y reconocer y respetar el valor intrínseco de cada ser.

Lo tercero es vivir la compasión no sólo entre los humanos sino con todos los seres, compasión como forma de amor y cuidado. A partir de ahora ellos dependen de nosotros, si van a poder seguir viviendo o si estarán condenados a desaparecer. Necesitamos abandonar el paradigma de dominación que refuerza la extinción en masa y vivir el del cuidado y el respeto, que preserva y prolonga la vida. En medio del antropoceno, urge inaugurar la era ecozoica que coloca lo ecológico en el centro. Sólo así hay esperanza de salvar nuestra civilización y de permitir la continuidad de nuestro planeta vivo.

Leonardo Boff es autor con Mark Hathaway de El Tao de la Liberación: explorando la ecología de transformación, Vozes 2011.

The Great Global and Brazilian Contradiction

More and more a conviction is growing, even among establishment economists and those of the neo-Keynesian line, that we are dangerously close to reaching the Earth’s physical limits. Even with new technologies, it will be difficult to continue the project of limitless growth. The Earth can no longer tolerate it, and we have to change direction.

Economists such as our Ladislao Dowbor, Ignace Sachs, Joan Alier, Herman Daly, Tim Jack, Peter Victor and long before them, Georgescu-Roegen, fully incorporate the ecologic moment into the process of production. Especially the British Tim Jack, has become known for his book, Prosperity without Growth, (Prosperidad sin crecimiento, 2009) and Canadian Peter Victor, for his Managing without Growth, (Managing sin crecimiento, 2008). Both have shown that the growth of debt to finance private and public consumption (as the rich countries are doing), demanding more energy and greater use of natural goods and services, is simply not sustainable. 



Nobel Prize Laureates Paul Krugman and Joseph Stiglitz, because they did not explicitly include the limits of the Earth in their analysis, fall into the trap of proposing greater public expenditure as the solution to the present crisis, supposing that this will produce economic growth and greater consumption, through which the astronomical private and public debts will be paid later on. We have said many times already that a finite planet cannot support a project of this nature, one that presupposes the boundlessness of goods and services. This is an established fact. 


What Jack and Victor propose is «prosperity without growth». In the developed countries, the level of growth is already sufficient to allow development of human potential, within the possible limits of the planet. Thus, enough growth. What can be sought is «prosperity» meaning a better quality of life, of education, health, ecological culture, spirituality, etc. This solution is rational but it can cause high unemployment, a problem they do not resolve well, suggesting a universal basic rent and reduction of work hours. There will be no solution without a prior agreement as to how are we going to have a supportive relationship with the Earth, and without defining the models of consumption so that everyone can have what is enough and decent.

That relation is inverted for the poor and emerging countries. «Growth with prosperity» is needed. Growth is necessary to attend to the minimum demands of those living in poverty, misery and social exclusion. Assuring enough indispensable goods and services is a matter of justice. But prosperity, which deals with the quality of growth, must be sought simultaneously. A real danger 
exists that they will fall victim to the logic of a system that induces greater and greater consumption, especially of unnecessary goods. The Earth’s limits would be stretched, which is just what must be avoided. We are facing a painful vicious circle, that we do not know how to make virtuous, without endangering the sustainability of the living Earth.


This is the contradiction not only facing Brazil but also the Globalization: growth is urgently needed to accomplish what the Lula’s government did, this is, to guarantee the basics, so that millions may eat and, through social policies, be incorporated into society. For the classes that have already been attended, less growth and more prosperity is needed: to improve the quality of the good life, education, less unequal social relations, and more solidarity, starting with the least among us. But who can convince them, if they are forcibly controlled by propaganda that incites them to consume?

As it happens, until now, brazilian and athor governments have had only distributive policies: unequally distributing public resources. First, 140 billion reales were guaranteed to the financial system to pay the public debt, and then for the grandiose projects, and only around 60 billion for the immense majorities that only now are ascending. Everyone gains, but unequally. Treating equals unequally is a great injustice. Never have there been redistributive policies: taking from the rich (through legal means) and passing it to the needier. Then there would be equity. 


The worst is that with our collective obsession of growth we are mining the vitality from the Earth. We need growth, but with a new ecological consciousness that can free us from the slavery of productivity and consumerism. This is our great challenge, as we face the uncomfortable Brazilian and Global contradiction.