1 files changed, 64 insertions, 7 deletions
diff --git a/chapter1.md b/chapter1.md
index 06c2e0d..baca48a 100644
--- a/chapter1.md
+++ b/chapter1.md
@@ -332,11 +332,70 @@ As I've already shown, green rhetors have a tendency to address an unspecified
 purposes, everyone has the same interests and powers. Thus Chris Packham and
 Megan McCubbin can talk about 'Ape Aware,' explicitly describing the
 environmental movement as the up-and-coming stage in human evolution
-[@cornerstones, p. 202]. Similarly, the word 'Anthropocene,' coined by \[WHO?\]
-in \[WHEN?\], describes the present time as one characterised by human dominion
-over the earth, as if the anti-green actions of some humans represents the
-interests of everyone \[DEMONSTRATE SOMEONE ELSE HAS SAID THIS BEFORE\]. \[NEED
-TO SHOW CURRENCY OF 'ANTHROPOCENE'? NATURE ANTHROPOCENE BRIEFING?\]
+[@cornerstones, p. 202].
+
+The word 'Anthropocene' tells a similar story. The word was coined by Paul
+Crutzen in 2000 in order to propose that the International Geosphere-Biosphere
+Programme, an international scientific society, recognise a new geological
+epoch, usually dated some time shortly after the Second World War. After an
+extended discussion, the IGBP rejected Crutzen's proposal, but the word has
+nevertheless obtained currency far beyond the discipline of geology
+[@meaning-of-anthropocene].
+
+For many critics in the humanities, the term 'Anthropocene' describes the
+present time as one characterised by human domination over the Earth. The choice
+of 'anthropos,' or 'human,' as the focus point, rather than 'animal' or
+'accountant,' implies that all humans take a roughly equal share of
+responsibility for recent changes to Earth's ecosystems. Some critics have
+proposed alternative terms such as 'Capitalocene' or 'Oligarchocene' so as to
+more fairly reflect the social texture of the changing relationship of human
+beings within Earth ecosystems [see e.g. @anthropocene-or-capitalocene]. But
+Anthropocene, by describing the shaping power over Earth's ecosystems as the
+undifferentiated 'anthropos', downplays the importance of the different powers
+and interests between different humans. Thus, when a green rhetor uses the word
+'Anthropocene', they suggest that you and I engage in environmental discourses
+as a universalised human, that our location in social systems is not relevant to
+our location in Earth ecosystems.
+
+For example, Mike Berners-Lee uses the word 'Anthropocene' liberally in his
+public appearances. On his website, he offers to give private presentations
+titled 'Investment in the Anthropocene' and 'Education for the Anthropocene',
+and claims to have recently presented for clients including Microsoft, Shell,
+and British Gas [@mike-berners-lee]. In his popular book, _There Is No Planet B_,
+he describes the 'Anthropocene' as the time when ever-expanding human power comes
+to dominate Earth's systems [@no-planet-b, pp. 2-3].
+Notice how seamlessly
+Berners-Lee slips from talking about systems far larger than individuals into
+talking about individual psychology:
+
+> Some people I meet say energy has always gone up so it always must. Some say
+> it will come to a natural halt on its own. Some say our species will wipe
+> itself out because we are so unfit for the situation we are in. Some say we
+> will be fine because we always have been. (By the way, the dinosaurs could
+> also have said that before they died off.) Some wishfully tell me that solar
+> power will replace fossil fuels because the market will simply make it happen.
+> Some say the transition to clean energy has to take a long time because all
+> transitions always have done. Some say global cooperation is beyond the
+> capacity of humankind. Some say levels of inequality are determined by ‘human
+> nature’. Some say humans wake up only when they have a nasty experience, so we
+> may as well wait until the inevitable nasty experience happens to us (and they
+> are generally talking about exceptionally nasty experiences).
+>
+> All this strikes me as determinism. I am not a determinist. I reject any
+> scientist telling me they can prove the absence of free will. I don’t actually
+> think anyone can prove it either way, and I don’t see much point in a long
+> discussion about it either. Like most people, I have at some point
+> contemplated the possibility that I’m a figment of my own imagination and, of
+> course, I can’t rule it out. However, my practical observation is that people
+> who live as if they have free will tend to have more positive lives. To put it
+> another way, determinism is a way of dodging the challenge of trying to do
+> things that are difficult.
+
+If the relevant problems are at the scale of global co-operation, energy
+systems, and the human species, it's not obvious that individual psychology is
+directly relevant. But in the 'Anthropocene' discourse, because it is the human
+that is at fault, it is easy to elide super-human social structures with the
+human individual. Thus green rhetors apparently address the universal human.
 
 In reality, green rhetoric is primarily addressed to the Western middle classes.
 This makes sense, since the green movement has historically been heavily
@@ -405,7 +464,6 @@ catastrophic language is counter-productive in this context.
 
 ## TODO
 
-- Evidence: who coined 'Anthropocene' and when?
 - Incorporate evidence: the fossil fuel industry is following a rational science-capture strategy in the style of Big Tobacco
 - Find quotes and page numbers in @{back-to-nature} and @{heat}
 - Find an example of a green rhetor promoting smart market-based fixes
@@ -420,4 +478,3 @@ catastrophic language is counter-productive in this context.
 - Explore: PMC people feel powerless because the actions they have taken aren't very effective
 - Explore: how does 'listen to the scientists' and 'science denial' discourse lead to action?
 - Explore: Gordon Brown's fuel-price escalator
-- Explore: currency of 'Anthropocene'