Island Civilizations

            Island Civilizations by historian Roderick Fraizer Nash is an article explaining how the human population is corrupting the “wild” environment that was given to us untamed. Breaking it down in to millenniums, Nash explains how modernization has drawn back the wilderness population to as little as two percent – the same percentage of land covered by pavement. At the end of the second millennium, the idea of conservation began and people started viewing the importance of preserving the wilderness. As people began to better understand the wilderness, the study of ecology was brought forth which taught people that “nature was a community to which mankind belonged, not a commodity it possessed” Nash states.  The third millennium marked concern over the land’s water, soil, forest, and food issues. The tables turn as people began to realize that excess urbanization was not in our environment’s best interest. Nash concludes the article with four possible scenarios for the fate of Earth, the fourth being his own solution to the problem that balances human occupancy in a more economical preserving manner.

            Nash states that the world began as complete wilderness. The word “wild” meaning that it carries on without human intervention. As humans began to take over this freestanding territory, civilization began to form at the expense of the current ecosystems. Nash refers to the Indians as savages who destroyed most of the wilderness with their barbaric behavior.  In some respect to Nash’s remark, the Indians never concentrated on preserving their environment. The Indians were known for utilizing the environment with little worry about what damage it could be causing.  This issue seemed to be raised much later as we reached the near end of the second millennium. Nash states, “maybe what really needs to be conquered is not wilderness but rather our capitalist-driven culture with its cancer-like tendency to self-destruct”. Currently, our society has many preservation methods to save our environment, but in our carefree past, we focused way too much on modernizing our society and too little on the effect.

             The idea of conserving our environment began in part as people started to enjoy the environment and view the wilderness as a symbolic church and representation of history, art and literature. The Wilderness Act of 1964 was a step in the right direction, however as Nash states, was to benefit the people. The society still viewed the wilderness and environment as something that was theirs. By preserving it, it was seen as giving them a type of recreational activity. It was not until Asian cultures began their study of ecology that society began to understand the concept of an ecosystem. The wilderness was never theirs to control; humans are only a link in what is known as a food chain.

            The third millennium stressed the issues at stake if preservation methods are not taken. Nash states that water, soil, and food issues made headlines daily and people began to view the need for a change. Society is facing a point where the decisions that will be faced are irreversible and we must do what is best for our environment. Our present-day society is at this point currently. Neighboring nations to the United States are beginning new ecofriendly projects to protect our environment, while the United States contributes the most pollution to our world.  It is time to make a change so we can benefit the outcome of our environment.

            Nash includes four possible scenarios to the fate of our environment. The wasteland scenario anticipates a “trashed, poisoned, and used-up planted that can support only a pathetic remnant of its once-miraculous biodiversity and civilization”. The garden scenario allows “human control of nature to be total, but this time it’s beneficent”.  Humans would control every aspect of the way of life, nothing left to be “wild”. The third scenario, the future primitive, “involves writing off technological civilization as a ten-thousand year bad experiment”. This dramatic scenario is highly unlikely given today’s technology-driven society. Finally, Nash’s solution known as the Island Civilization calls for boundaries to be “drawn around the human presence, not around the wilderness”.  The Island Civilization limits human intervention and restores large parts of the world to be “wild” again.

As humans, we take so much and feel so entitled. Nash’s main purpose of this article is to present a method for just enjoying a small portion and not using more than we need. We do not need to civilize the entire wilderness and adapt it for human needs. More over, we must designate certain areas for our existence and let others be free to carry on by itself. There is little wilderness left in our world today and if our actions are not altered, we can expect nothing more than Nash’s first scenario where our planet and home go to complete waste.