Beyond Sustainability A Thriving Environment 2nd

Edition Tim Delaney install download

https://ebookmeta.com/product/beyond-sustainability-a-thriving-
environment-2nd-edition-tim-delaney/

Download more ebook from https://ebookmeta.com

We believe these products will be a great fit for you. Click
the link to download now, or visit ebookmeta.com
to discover even more!

Energy, Environment, and Sustainability Saeed. Moaveni

https://ebookmeta.com/product/energy-environment-and-
sustainability-saeed-moaveni/

The New Learning Economy: Thriving Beyond Higher

Education Martin Betts

https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-new-learning-economy-thriving-
beyond-higher-education-martin-betts/

Starting Your Career as a Freelance Photographer 2nd

Edition Tad Crawford Chuck Delaney

https://ebookmeta.com/product/starting-your-career-as-a-
freelance-photographer-2nd-edition-tad-crawford-chuck-delaney/

The Promise of Sociology Classical Approaches to

Contemporary Society Second Edition Rob Beamish

https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-promise-of-sociology-classical-
approaches-to-contemporary-society-second-edition-rob-beamish/
The Greatest Escape: A gripping story of wartime
courage and adventure 1st Edition Neil Churches

https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-greatest-escape-a-gripping-
story-of-wartime-courage-and-adventure-1st-edition-neil-churches/

How to Lead in Data Science 1st Edition Jike Chong

https://ebookmeta.com/product/how-to-lead-in-data-science-1st-
edition-jike-chong/

Academic Writing and Referencing for Your Social Work

Degree Jane Bottomley

https://ebookmeta.com/product/academic-writing-and-referencing-
for-your-social-work-degree-jane-bottomley/

Crafting Effective HTML Email Beautiful emails that

work everywhere 1st Edition Rémi Parmentier

https://ebookmeta.com/product/crafting-effective-html-email-
beautiful-emails-that-work-everywhere-1st-edition-remi-
parmentier/

Tarot Inspired Life 1st Edition Jaymi Elford

https://ebookmeta.com/product/tarot-inspired-life-1st-edition-
jaymi-elford/
Physique Secrets The Underground Playbook For Building
A Muscular And Aesthetic Male Body Nick Schlager

https://ebookmeta.com/product/physique-secrets-the-underground-
playbook-for-building-a-muscular-and-aesthetic-male-body-nick-
schlager/
Beyond Sustainability
Second Edition
Also by Tim Delaney and Tim Madigan and from McFarland

Friendship and Happiness: And the Connection Between the Two (2017)
Sportsmanship: Multidisciplinary Perspectives (2016)
The Sociology of Sports: An Introduction, 2d ed. (2015)
Beyond Sustainability
A Thriving Environment
Second Editon
Tim Delaney and Tim Madigan

McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers

Jefferson, North Carolina
 ISBN (print) ­978–1-4766–8236–5
ISBN (ebook) ­978–1-4766–4429–5
Library of Congress and British Library cataloguing data are available
Library of Congress Control Number 2021027801
© 2021 Tim Delaney and Tim Madigan. All rights reserved
No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic
or mechanical, including photocopying or recording, or by any information storage and
retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Front cover image © 2021 Art Stock Creative/Shutterstock
Printed in the United States of America
McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers
Box 611, Jefferson, North Carolina 28640
www.mcfarlandpub.com
 Table of Contents
Preface

Chapter 1
Environmental Thrivability, the Ecosystem and Mass Extinctions

Chapter 2
Climate Change and Human Dependency on Fossil Fuels

Chapter 3
Overpopulation and the Five Horrorists

Chapter 4
Humans Will Be the Cause of the Sixth Mass Extinction

Chapter 5
Nature and Human Skepticism Will Be the Cause of the Sixth Mass
Extinction

Chapter 6
Environmental Ethics and Thrivability

Chapter 7
Helping the Environment Thrive

Chapter 8
Happiness Is a Thriving Environment

Chapter 9
We Can Change, but Will We Change?
 Chapter 10
Educating Thrivability

Bibliography
Index of Terms
The Doomsday Clock reads
100 seconds to midnight
 Preface
The authors of this book come from two disciplines—sociology and
philosophy—which, while having certain similarities, usually address issues
in a very different way. Nonetheless, both sociologists and philosophers have
concerns about our environment’s ability to not only sustain itself, but also
reach a point where it can actually thrive. And this helps to explain why we
feel that it is especially important to take an interdisciplinary approach to
the study of the environment.
We are children of the “Environmental Seventies” and as such have always
been well aware of the attacks on the environment and attempts to help it
thrive via social movements and the passage of a great deal of legislation
designed to protect it on behalf of humanity. At this time, both Democrats
and Republicans agreed that the environment was important enough to
protect. But then came the 1980s and all of that changed. The past four
decades have been characterized by the growing power and influence of the
fossil fuel industry, countered by large groups of people who are still fighting
the good fight. The authors have done their share of promoting
environmental causes throughout this time, but during the past decade they
have become increasingly dedicated to contributing to the conversation of
making a positive change through education.
In the spirit of the ­socio-philosophical approach to the study of the
environment, we attended and gave presentations at the Seventh
International Conference on Environmental, Cultural, Economic and Social
Sustainability, held January 5–7, 2011, at the University of Waikato in
Hamilton, New Zealand. Hundreds of dedicated individuals from
throughout the world gathered together to share their perspectives and offer
possible strategies for furthering the cause of sustainability. It was a rich
cultural experience, enhanced by the natural beauty of the surroundings. We
took the time to explore much of the North Island and among other things
became enamored with the indigenous culture of the Maori (a Polynesian
people that arrived in New Zealand around 950 ce) and the spirit of
manaakitanga—a ­deep-rooted concept in Maori culture that implies
guardianship—over their land (whenua), treasures (taonga), people
(tangata), and visitors (manuhiri). Manuhiri are expected to abide by the
Maori sentiment of “take nothing but photographs, leave nothing but
footprints.” Such a motto helps to sustain the natural environment.
This was an amazing experience for us, and we decided to become more
involved with the ­pro-environment movement by attending other such
conferences but also by conducting a great deal of research. Our research led
us to publishing the first edition of Beyond Sustainability: A Thriving
Environment in 2014 and now the second edition. We have each also
developed environmental courses at our respective college campuses that we
teach regularly (as online courses to help save the environment) and have
become a part of the sustainability programs at our colleges (see Chapter 10
for a description).
We have always been struck by the idea that a focus on “sustainability”
was misguided. Instead, we have proposed that the goal for the environment
should be “thrivability.” After all, if the environment is already
compromised, as it certainly is, why would anyone promote sustaining a
comprised environment? If one is in debt, sustaining the current situation is
not the goal; the hope would be to get out of debt and thrive. Thus, in
Beyond Sustainability we emphasize that the environment needs to be
repaired to the point that it can thrive.
In this, the second edition of Beyond Sustainability, we have made a very
large number of updates both in terms of more recent data and examples
and also with the introduction of new topics and concepts, all the while
emphasizing more clearly the need to lessen our dependency on fossil fuels
in order to halt the significant and negative impact humans have inflicted
upon the environment. In many ways, then, this is like a new book.
In Chapter 1 we examine the differences between sustainability and
thrivability and discuss such topics as sociological and philosophical
environmentalism, the environment and its many ecosystems, mass
extinctions and their causes, and social movements.
In Chapter 2, we examine the concept of “carrying capacity”; our reliance
on fossil fuels; climate change with an emphasis on carbon dioxide and
global warming, climate change and the ozone, and climate change and the
greenhouse effect; the effects of climate change including melting glaciers,
ice caps and the thawing permafrost; ocean acidification; storms and severe
weather. We also place an emphasis on the need to increase our use of
renewable energy sources.
In Chapter 3 we look at the effects of overpopulation on the environment
and discuss the “Five Horrorists” concept (an updated version of the “Four
Horsemen”) that includes a description of “enviromares”—environmental
nightmares (various forms of human caused pollution).
Chapter 4 begins with a close examination of the extraction of fossil fuels;
the creation and mass abuse of plastics; food waste; harmful agricultural
practices; deforestation; marine debris; electronic waste (­e-waste); and
medical waste. These activities contribute, either directly or indirectly, to the
sixth mass extinction.
In Chapter 5, we look at the role of nature (e.g., volcanic eruptions,
lightning strikes, wildfires, storms, invasive species, vapors from sulfur
springs, and ­outer-worldly forces) as the potential cause of the sixth mass
extinction and examine the skepticism (e.g., the role of politics, Big
Business, religion, ­anti-science rhetoric, the conservative and radical right
media, and the finite pool of worry) held by some toward the role of humans
in the sixth mass extinction.
Chapter 6 provides a philosophical and ethical look at sustainability and
thrivability and addresses such issues as whether or not it is humanity’s
responsibility to try and protect the environment.
In Chapter 7 we examine ways to help the environment thrive including a
discussion on such topics as the meaning of “going green”; measures
designed to protect and save natural resources; the development of new
technology; and the idea that the environment itself should have the right to
thrive.
Chapter 8 examines the meaning of happiness and describe the many
different ways of achieving happiness. We conclude with a discussion on the
concept of Gross National Happiness (GNH).
Chapter 9 highlights the need for humans to change their behavior if we
hope to prolong the sixth mass extinction as long as possible; provides two
case study examples that demonstrates that humans can change if properly
motivated; explores the concept of the “Change to Green”; and describes the
environmental movement toward thrivability.
Chapter 10 discusses ways in which we need to educate people on
environmental sustainability and thrivability. The chapter concludes with a
checklist of ways people can help the environment thrive in the home, the
yard, at school or work, while on vacation, in the car, and green RVing.
Each chapter ends with a popular culture section. The purpose of these is
to demonstrate that one of the most effective ways to influence change, as
well as to educate people about the ways in which the environment is being
compromised, is through a variety of popular culture mediums. Didactic
lecturing seldom causes individuals to change, and quite often has the
opposite effect of raising resentment, whereas popular works can often have
an immediate impact on one’s behavior. Thus, popular culture has direct
application for changing people’s actions.
It is also our hope that this book will help to raise the awareness of others
about the dire issues connected to our compromised environment. From a
personal standpoint we also hope to pay off some of the carbon footprints
we generated by traversing the planet in our pursuit of knowledge and
cultural awareness of a multitude of diverse cultures. Ultimately, it is our
goal to educate others on the need to change our behaviors immediately if
we hope to save humanity from itself.
We wrapped up the revisions of this second edition of Beyond
Sustainability while the November 3, 2020, U.S. elections for president and
several other governmental positions were held. These elections were critical
for a number of ­socio-economic reasons including the future of the
environment. The reelection of Donald Trump would have led to a
continued assault on the environment while the election of Joe Biden would
signal a rebirth in environmentalism. As we demonstrate throughout this
text, Trump took innumerable steps to gut not only the eight years of ­pro-
environmental legislation ushered in by former president Barack Obama
and ­vice-president Joe Biden, but he also sided with the fossil fuel industry
repeatedly much to the chagrin of those who would prefer such basics as
clean air, water, and sustainable land and those who would promote
renewable forms of energy and a lessening of our dependency on fossil fuels.
Under Trump, the environment would not only fail to thrive, but it would
also no longer sustain itself. Conversely, Biden promised, among other
things, to create millions of ­good-paying green jobs (many of them union),
invest in a green infrastructure, create a clean energy future, establish a plan
to reach his goal of ­net-zero emissions by 2050, and recommit the United
States to international climate agreements (i.e., the Paris Agreement). Biden
won the election (in what people referred to as a “landslide” victory), giving
hope to all environmentalists across the globe that, perhaps, the
environment could be saved.
It should also be noted that this new edition of Beyond Sustainability was
written during the COVID-19 pandemic and as such there are many
references to this disease, primarily in direct relationship to the
environment. A few politicians, including Boris Johnson, UK prime
minister; Jair Bolsonaro, Brazil’s president; and U.S. president Donald
Trump were referenced with regard to ­the coronavirus and all three of these
men would minimize its threat and contract the disease. Johnson contracted
the disease in early April; Bolsonaro in July; and Trump in October. All
three survived. By the start of November 2020, other world leaders would
also contract the disease including Juan Orlando Hernandez (Honduras);
Alexander Lukashenko (Belarus); Prince Albert II (Monaco); Jeanine Anez
(Bolivia); Luis Abinader (Dominican Republic); and top officials from many
other nations including Iran, India, Israel, South Africa, South Sudan,
Gambia, and ­Guinea-Bissau. Globally, more than 110 million people had
contracted ­COVID-19 and more than 2.4 million had died from ­COVID-19
by the start of November. In the United States, more than 28 million
Americans had contracted the disease and nearly a half million deaths were
recorded by ­mid-February 2021. As alarming as these statistics are, they
represented data just as the second global wave of ­COVID-19 was
beginning.
 Chapter 1

Environmental Thrivability, the Ecosystem

and Mass Extinctions
When you hear the expression “The sky is falling!” what image comes to
mind? Perhaps it is the folktale from “Chicken Little” in which a chicken
thinks the sky is falling when an acorn falls on his head, with the
corresponding moral of not succumbing to the paranoia and mass hysteria
of others? Or maybe you think of the version of “Chicken Little” wherein
one chick learns to heed the warning that a danger, in the form of a fox, is
imminent. The chick that heeded the warning lived while all the others
perished (eaten by the fox).
Cornelia Griggs, a general surgeon affiliated with Massachusetts General
Hospital at the time of the early American stages of the ­COVID-19 global
pandemic, warned in mid–March 2020, “The sky is falling. I’m not afraid to
say it. A few weeks from now you may call me an alarmist; and I can live
with that. Actually, I will keel over with happiness if I’m proven wrong”
(Griggs 2020). ­COVID-19, also known as the novel Coronavirus, was first
reported in Wuhan, China, and quickly spread worldwide. As explained by
the Cleveland Clinic (2020), “Coronaviruses are a family of viruses that can
cause respiratory illness in humans. They get their name, ‘corona,’ from the
many ­crown-like spikes on the surface of the virus. Severe acute respiratory
syndrome (SARS), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) and the
common cold are examples of Coronaviruses that cause illness in humans.”
Initially, a number of people including such politicians as U.S. president
Donald Trump, UK prime minister Boris Johnson and Brazilian president
Jair Bolsonaro did not heed the warnings of medical experts and were slow
to respond. It’s as if they cried, “Fake fox.” Predictably, these three nations
would have among the highest number of infected persons. Other global
and local leaders (i.e., Jacinda Ardern of New Zealand; Lee Hsien Loong,
Singapore; and Moon ­Jae-in, South Korea) reacted more quickly, fearing that
the proverbial fox was already in the henhouse. (See Chapter 3 for a further
discussion on ­COVID-19 specifically and pandemics in general.)
The “sky is falling” expression has been applied to all sorts of social
activities, including concern about the environment. For many years ­pro-
environment extremist advocates have proclaimed the idea that we are all
doomed unless we drastically change our behaviors. And, while some
inroads have been achieved by ­pro-environmentalists in their attempt to
better protect the environment, their voices have, historically, often gone
unheard. Why is this? Because they are perceived as people who have been
hit on the head with an acorn and have now developed a heightened sense of
paranoia? For people who doubt that the proverbial sky is falling,
environmentalists and their proclamation that humans are harming the
environment are merely the product of ecohype. Ecohype refers to the
constant proclamations among certain environmentalists that the
environment is doomed (the sky is falling) unless humans drastically change
their behaviors.
As the evidence of a compromised environment becomes too
overwhelming and convincing for most people to doubt, however, a ­pro-
environment movement has grown. This social movement is generally
expressed, in some variation, as environmental sustainability. For years now,
all sorts of people have used the terms “environment” and “sustainability”
together. Proclaiming an interest in environmental sustainability has
become almost ubiquitous. Most college campuses, places of business, and
governmental agencies express a growing concern about taking
sustainability to heart, and an increasingly large number of task forces are
devoted to various projects related to this.
Unfortunately, in some cases, promoting environmental sustainability or
environmentally friendly products has merely served as a gimmick by
corporations hoping to sell products promoted as “green” or politicians
desperately trying to project some sort of cultural meaningfulness by
expressing “green” concerns and yet holding back their votes on actual green
initiatives. A number of colleges and universities, perhaps to appease
environmentally concerned students and faculty members, have
implemented policies that, essentially, incorporate the same desired ends of
corporations and politicians. There also exists, however, academic persons
who are very concerned about the environment for the same reason that
many individuals and truly ­pro-environmental groups care about the
environment; that is, to save the environment so that both humans and all
other life forms may thrive.
It is necessary to explain the two terms “environment” and
“sustainability.” The environment refers to the totality of social and physical
conditions that affect nature (land, water, air, plants, and animals) and
humanity and their influence on the growth, development, and survival of
organisms found in a given surrounding (e.g., a limited proximity or the
earth as a whole). Miller and Spoolman (2018) concur with our perspective
and define the environment as everything that surrounds us including “all
the living things (such as plants and animals) and the ­non-living things
(such as air, water, and sunlight) with which you interact” (p. 5).
Sustainability refers to the ability of the environment to hold, endure, or bear
the weight of a wide variety of social and natural forces that may
compromise its functionality. Miller and Spoolman (2018) define
sustainability as “the capacity of the earth’s natural systems that support life
and human social systems to survive or adapt to changing environmental
conditions indefinitely” (p. 4).
As individuals with a deep concern about the environment, the two
authors of this text used the concept of “sustainability” to express our
perspectives on how to address such matters. After conducting research and
teaching courses on the environment, however, each of us came to realize
just how compromised the earth’s environment really is. As a result,
sustaining the environment seems too insignificant of a goal. And that is why
we are now promoting the ideal of “thrivability.” Thrivability refers to a cycle
of actions which reinvest energy for future use and stretch resources further;
it transcends sustainability by creating an upward spiral of greater
possibilities and increasing energy. Each cycle would build a world of ­ever-
increasing possibilities. Thrivability emerges from the persistent intention to
create more value than one consumes. Thrivability incorporates all that is
implied with sustainability but expands beyond its limitations. By no means
will we ignore the relevant aspects of sustainability; instead, we try to
emphasize the importance of thrivability as an ultimate goal of
environmentalism.
Although the authors come from different academic backgrounds
(sociology and philosophy, respectively) they nonetheless share a single
voice of concern about the environment. But each of their respective fields
has its own unique perspective on environmentalism.

Environmental Sociology
There exists in the field of sociology a concept known as the “sociological
imagination.” The term coined by C. Wright Mills highlights the importance
of the social environment’s influence on human behavior (Delaney 2012). As
Mills explained, “The sociological imagination enables its possessor to
understand the larger historical scene in terms of its meanings for the inner
life and the external career of a variety of individuals” (1959: 5). The
sociological imagination concept is a staple within the field and has been
applied to explain numerous scenarios. Many decades after Mills first used
this term, Lawrence Buell created the concept of the “environmental
imagination.” According to Buell (1995), any text that purports to provide a
sociological perspective on the environment must address the four key
aspects of the environmental imagination:

1. The nonhuman environment is present not merely as a framing

device but as a presence that begins to suggest that human history is
implicated in natural history.
2. The human interest is understood not to be the only legitimate
interest.
3. Human accountability to the environment is part of the text’s
ethical orientation.
4. Some sense of the environment as a process rather than as a
constant or a given is at least implicit in the text.
Buell and other sociologists that utilize an environmental imagination
will be pleased with the contents of this text. In addition to addressing a
sociological imagination, it addresses the four major concerns.
Sociologists look at the environment as the totality of social and
physical conditions that affects nature (land, water, air, plants, and
animals), and humanity and its influence on the growth, development,
and survival of organisms. “Sociologists examine how people waste or
conserve natural resources. They track public opinions on issues such
as global warming and identify what categories of people support one
side or the other of environmental issues. But the most important
contribution sociologists make is in demonstrating how our society’s
technology, cultural patterns, and specific political and economic
arrangements affect the natural environment” (Macionis 2010: 420).
From this perspective, sociologists examine the environment from both
the micro level, e.g., individual and small group behaviors, and the
macro, e.g., governmental policies, business practices, and human
ecology.
Environmental sociology in the United States has existed in one
form or another since the mid–1930s with the formation of the Rural
Sociological Society (RSS). The RSS was officially established on
December 29, 1937, and had, among its goals a commitment to
understanding the human impact on the physical environment (Rural
Sociological Society 2010).
Today, environmental sociology examines natural and social forces
that have an impact on the environment. The sociological perspective
examines the many adverse effects that nature has on the environment,
including volcanic eruptions, lightning strikes, wildfires, storms and
invasive species. The sociological perspective is most concerned with
the role of humans on the environment. Among the issues concerning
environmental sociology are environmental social movements,
overpopulation, human dependency on fossil fuels, the use of plastics,
medical waste, ­e-waste, agricultural mismanagement and hydraulic
fracturing.
As sociology is the authority on the study of human behavior in the
context of human interaction within local and global communities and
environments, Bell and Ashwood (2016) define environmental
sociology as “the study of community in the largest possible sense” (p.
2). Bell and Ashwood (2016) describe how people, other animals, land,
water and air are all closely interconnected and that together, they form
a kind of solidarity, what we have come to call ecology.

Environmental Philosophy
Philosophers have traditionally attempted to address what the great
thinker Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) called the Four Great Questions
(or as Germans would say, “Die Kantischen Fragen”): “What can I
know?” (epistemology); “What should I do?” (ethics); “What may I
hope for?” (metaphysics); and “What is Man?” (anthropology). One
can add two other major questions: “What is beauty” (aesthetics), and
“How should I think?” (logic). These great questions were often asked
about humans in isolation, without reference to the environment(s) in
which they lived, or to the other living beings with which they
interacted. Kant himself, for instance, felt that ethics only pertained to
the actions of human beings, and had no particular relevance to other
animals.
A ­sea-change in thinking has occurred in philosophy since at least
the early 1960s, in part due to the impact of books like Rachel Carson’s
1962 classic work Silent Spring. Environmental philosophers now ask
questions. What can I know about the environment in which humanity
exists? What should I do to both sustain and contribute to this
environment? What may I hope for regarding the future of this
environment? What is “humanity” in relationship to the ecosystem?
What role does nature play in developing our sense of beauty? What are
the most logical ways of addressing the role of humans in the
environment?
This new emphasis on ­humans-in ­the-world rather than on ­humans-
apart-from ­the-world has revitalized the entire field of philosophy. In
particular, the realization that the existence of the human species itself
is fragile and interconnected with forces previously ­little-understood
has given a new urgency to all of the above questions. In the words of
the philosopher Anthony Weston, “Environmental philosophy emerged
to insist upon the next step: recognizing the richness and depth of the ­-
more-than-human world: the way in which physical embodiment, for
example, does not end at the skin … and the ways in which we are and
must always be profoundly animal—a distinctive animal, perhaps, but
so are all animals—as well as kin even to stone and stars. Very large
issues come up, from the cultural history of our alienation from nature
to the resources for recovering a sense of connection now” (Weston
1999: 2–3).
Perhaps what makes the human animal distinctive is that it alone, as
far as we know, even asks such questions, and it alone feels a sense of
responsibility for preserving and improving upon the ecosystem to the
best of its abilities. The International Association for Environmental
Philosophy states that it “embraces a broad understanding of
environmental philosophy, including not only environmental ethics,
but also environmental aesthetics, ontology, and theology, philosophy
of science, ecofeminism, and philosophy of technology” (IAEP 2020).
Environmental philosophy, therefore, attempts to unify the various
fields of philosophy and provide a holistic approach to understanding
the role of humans in the world.

Ecosystems and Ecology

Protecting the earth’s wide variety of ecosystems is the primary goal
of environmentalists and environmental social movements. But what
exactly is an ecosystem? An ecosystem refers to the ecological network
of interconnected and interdependent living organisms (plants, animals
and microbes) in union with the nonliving aspects found in their
immediate community, including air, water, minerals and soil.
Although it could be argued that the entire planet is an ecosystem, the
term is generally applied to limited spaces. In this regard, the concepts
of “ecosystem” and “environment” are similar but not interchangeable.
Charles Harper (2012) explains that an ecosystem refers to specific
parts of the greater environment: “An ecosystem means the community
of things that live and interact in parts of the geophysical
environment…. [They] are composed of structural units that form a
progressively more inclusive hierarchy” (p. 3). Miller and Spoolman
(2018) define an ecosystem as “a set of organisms within a defined area
of land or volume of water that interact with one another and their
environment of nonliving matter and energy” (p. 5).
The term “ecosystem” was coined by the British botanist Arthur
Tansley in his 1935 article “The Use and Abuse of Vegetational
Concepts and Terms” (1935). He stressed that one should not focus
solely upon organisms, but rather upon the interactions between
organisms and their environments. He writes: “The more fundamental
conception is, at is seems to me, the whole system (in the sense of
physics), including not only the ­organisms-complex, but also the whole
complex of physical factors forming what we call the environment of
the biome—the habitat factors in the widest sense. It is the systems so
formed which, from the point of view of the ecologist, are the basic
units of nature on the face of the earth” (1935: 286). It was Tansley’s
goal to make ecology a legitimate area of scientific study, akin to
biology, chemistry or physics, so as to differentiate it from more
metaphysical concepts that looked upon organisms as ­purpose-driven
or essentially unconnected with their environments. As Joseph R. Des
Jardins points out, “The ecosystem concept preserves the key ecological
idea that ecological wholes are a fundamental part of nature. The
individualism that characterizes much of zoology and botany cannot
tell the entire story of the biological sciences. Ecology contributes by
observing and explaining the integration, connections, and
dependencies within and among ecological wholes” (1997: 160).
The discussion of ecosystems goes ­hand-in-hand with the concept of
ecology, as ecology is a branch of science that concerns itself with the
interrelationship of organisms and their immediate environment
(ecosystems). Perhaps the most influential of the early ecologists is
Aldo Leopold. According to the Aldo Leopold Foundation (2020),
Leopold is considered by many to be the father of wildlife ecology and
the United States’ wilderness system. He is most famous for his 1949
publication A Sand County Almanac and Sketches Here and There, and
the ­oft-quoted line, “A thing is right when it tends to preserve the
integrity, stability, and human beauty of the biotic community. It is
wrong when it tends otherwise.”
Ever since the works of Tansley and Leopold first appeared, the role
of ecologists has been to examine the structures and functions of
ecosystems, in particular the various ways in which life forms interact
and rely upon each other. It is this network of relationships which we
have since learned are so fragile and yet so resilient. Clearly, our
understanding of ecosystems is still being mapped out and developed,
which makes it all the more important to be cautious about policies
which seem to degrade the environment or cause massive disruptions
to its functionings.
The network that comprises any ecosystem is linked through a
system of exchanges of energy flows, chemicals and nutrients that are
interconnected and bind the various components together. The
ecosystem is fueled by energy drawn from the sun that operates
through a process known as photosynthesis. Photosynthesis assists the
cycles and flows of carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, phosphorus, and water.
The photosynthesis process allows energy and carbon to enter the
ecosystem. Plants and animals play an important role in facilitating the
movement of matter and energy through the system. For example, dead
organic matter decomposes and releases carbon back into the
atmosphere, which assists the nutrient cycle by converting the nutrients
stored in the dead biomass back into a form of energy that can help fuel
other plants and microbes. Most mineral nutrients are recycled within
ecosystems.
Every ecosystem housed on our planet is potentially affected by
many external and internal variables that either help to sustain life or
compromise it. Among the most critical variables to affect an
ecosystem is climate. Our planet possesses a very diverse biosphere,
one that is capable of creating a wide range of climatic conditions that
affects living organisms. “The biosphere is the biological component of
the earth systems, which also include the lithosphere, hydrosphere,
atmosphere and other ‘spheres’ (e.g., cryosphere, anthrosphere, etc.)”
(Ellis 2009). The biosphere is the part of the earth and its atmosphere in
which living organisms exist, or areas that are capable of supporting
life. The biosphere is a relatively thin ­12-mile zone of life that extends
from the depths of the oceans and to the tops of the tallest mountains
(Miller 2011). Living organisms, the dead organic matter produced by
them, and ecosystems compose the biosphere’s totality.
The diversity of the biosphere is the result of climate, and climate, in
turn, determines the biome of an ecosystem. The biome refers to a large
community of plants and animals that occupies specific areas. Climate
dictates whether some regions will result in grasslands, tundras,
deserts, rainforests and so on. There are a number of subcategories such
as freshwater and marine biomes.
Among the other variables that may affect an ecosystem are internal
periodic disturbances. Changes in climatic conditions—such as an
unusual dry spell in marshland areas or an unusual amount of rainfall
in an arid region or forces of nature such as an earthquake or hurricane
—may negatively influence an environment. There are numerous
instances where invasive species and human interference (to be
discussed in subsequent chapters) have had devastating impacts on
localized ecosystems.

The Evolving Ecosystem

Scientists have long been aware of the fact that biological species
evolve through a process of natural selection and rare genetic
mutations (Harper 2012). Ecosystems also evolve in the same manner
and have done so since long before humans arrived on the planet. The
biosphere itself has evolved from a ­single-celled organism that
originated 3.5 billion years ago under atmospheric conditions that
resemble those of neighboring planets Mars and Venus (Ellis 2009).
The development of ­multi-cell organisms from ­single-cell organisms
further led to the creation of more complex organisms, populations,
species, biomes and, eventually, the biosphere.
Our current exploration of Mars is spirited by this evolutional
realization of how life is formed, and it is hoped that as we learn more
about what happened on Mars, we will learn more about the direction
in which our own planet is headed. Among the things we know for sure
about Mars is that it once had plenty of water, more than enough to
sustain life. We also know that Mars (and Venus) have atmospheres
composed primarily of carbon dioxide. On Earth, plants have released
enough oxygen to create the ­oxygen-rich atmosphere we know and
enjoy today. There is plenty of oxygen to (O2) to breathe and sufficient
oxygen in the stratospheric ozone (O3) to protect us from the harmful
effects of UV radiation, all of which has made life possible on Earth.
The influence of natural selection on the evolving ecosystem is
reflected in the reality that competition among species exists in order to
secure critical needs. These needs are expressed in terms of available
energy (nutrients and food) found in the environment (Harper 2012).
Each species needs energy to survive; hence, the battle of the species.
Those species which successfully secure their energy needs are selected,
by nature, to survive. In some instances, genetic mutations take hold
within individual members of a species. If these mutations lead to
further development of the species, the species gets stronger. If the
mutation was harmful to the individual and was passed on to the
population of a species, then that species risks dissolution. The survival
of one species generally comes at the cost of one, or several other,
species. In some cases, the cost may mean extinction. This aspect of the
evolving ecosystem is referred to as the process of “ecological
succession”—species that replace one another in gradual changes
(Harper 2012).
There is an alternative to “winner” and “loser” categories in the battle
for survival of the species. This is coevolution, or the reciprocal natural
selection that forms relationships between different species, called
symbiosis. Symbiosis can be mutually beneficial (mutualism) or (as
parasitism) only beneficial to one species but not mutually beneficial, as
when fungi or microorganisms infect humans and other species
(Harper 2012: 6).
Humans often act as parasites and take from the environment what
they please and, in many cases, more than what they need. Humans
create monocultures wherein one species dominates and grows while
others disappear. For example, as humans have moved to suburbs, they
infringe upon wildlife areas. Where species such as foxes and deer once
roamed free in grassy ecosystems designed to help sustain their lives,
humans have moved in and altered the environment. Humans have
cleared woods and brush and drained marshlands and replaced them
with lawns maintained by chemical fertilizers, all the while chasing
wild animals away from their habitants.
One has to wonder, will we reach the point where human intrusion
alters the biosphere so dramatically that we risk the very viability of the
planet? Such a concern is just one of many that will be addressed
throughout this book. In the short term, we will conclude our
discussion of the ecosystem by reviewing the “Seven Pillars of
Ecosystem Management” put forth by Robert T. Lackey.

Seven Pillars of Ecosystem Management

If there is a need to save ecosystems, how do we begin such a task? In
1998, Lackey, then an associate director for science at the
Environmental Protection Agency’s Western Ecology Division,
National Health and Environment Effects Research Laboratory, put
forth the idea of seven core principles, or pillars, of ecosystem
management. Although ecosystem management itself is subject to a
number of interpretations, Lackey uses Overbay’s (1992) definition:
“The careful and skillful use of ecological, economic, social, and
managerial principles in managing ecosystems to produce, restore, or
sustain ecosystem integrity and desired conditions, uses, products,
values, and services over the long term.” Lackey states that there are two
fundamentally different world views of ecosystems. The first is the
biocentric, which considers maintenance of ecological health or
integrity as the goal. All other aspects, including human needs (tangible
or intangible), are of secondary consideration. The second view is
anthropocentric, an approach that considers the needs of humans
within any attempt to manage the environment. The ­seven-pillar
approach reflects the anthropocentric approach.
A brief review of Lackey’s (1998) seven pillars of ecosystem
management approach is provided below:

1. Ecosystem management reflects a stage in the continuing evolution

of social values and priorities; it is neither a beginning nor an end. This
pillar acknowledges the evolving ecosystem model and as a result is
mindful that changes in the ecosystem may be a part of an evolutionary
process, and therefore any manipulations to the ecosystem have to be
weighed against the potential of disturbing bigger issues and concerns
related to the biosphere.
2. Ecosystem management is ­place-based and the boundaries of the
place of concern must be clearly and formally defined. With pillar one in
mind, attempts to protect the health of a particular ecosystem need to
be weighed against the overall health of the totality of the environment.
Assuring the health of ecosystems is directly tied to concerns of
protecting the health of humans.
3. Ecosystem management should maintain ecosystems in the
appropriate condition to achieve desired social benefits; the desired social
benefits are defined by society, not scientists. If one is truly taking an
anthropocentric approach to managing the environment, the needs of
the public need to supersede those of scientists. Such a pillar may lead
to debates between scientists who claim to be working in the best
interests of people even when people do not want certain
infringements. For example, if scientists provide evidence that ­hydro-
fracking is dangerous to an ecosystem but people in a particular
community want ­hydro-fracking because it will generate jobs, who
should make the decision whether ­hydro-fracking can take place? The
third pillar would state that the community should. The biocentric and
ecological approach to ecosystem management would be suspect of this
pillar.
4. Ecosystem management can take advantage of the ability of
ecosystems to respond to a variety of stressors, natural and ­man-made,
but there is a limit in the ability of all ecosystems to accommodate
stressors and maintain a desired state. Ecosystems benefit from
biological diversity. The anthropocentric approach, because of its
concerns for humans first, puts forth the idea that human societies
need to weigh out how diverse species ­co-exist in given ecosystems.
The biocentric and ecological approach would be very suspect of this
pillar too.
5. Ecosystem management may or may not result in emphasis on
biological diversity as a desired social benefit. This fifth pillar follows the
logic of the fourth pillar, and it is essentially claiming that human needs
are more important than other biological species’ needs. Lackey claims
that the “sustainability” movement has roots in this pillar’s idealism.
That is, the environment needs to be saved only to assure the
sustainability of the human species; if that costs other species their
extinction, so be it. Lackey defends this approach by referring back to
the idea of the first pillar; that is, ecosystems are in a constant state of
flux. There is no “natural” condition of any ecosystem because it is in
flux. Seeking ways to create a balance with nature becomes passé
because there is no homeostatic state for nature.
6. The term sustainability, if used at all in ecosystem management,
should be clearly defined—specifically, the time frame of concern, the
benefits and costs of concern, and the relative priority of the benefits and
costs. The fifth pillar, which downplayed the importance of
sustainability in the first place, is here being put to a deeper question.
Of particular emphasis is the need for the creation of a measuring
device to determine whether the goals of sustainability supporters are
met through sustainability efforts.
7. Scientific information is important for effective ecosystem
management, but it is only one element in a ­decision-making process that
is fundamentally one of public or private choice. The ­anti-science bias of
the ecosystem management approach is emphasized once again.
It seems a little odd that a member of the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) (Lackey) would downplay the role of science and the
need to protect people and the diversity of ecosystems and biological
species. These seven pillars did not necessarily reflect policy positions
of the EPA or any other organization. But the discussion of the seven
pillars approach provides us with a steppingstone to our next topic at
hand, as the seven pillars help to illustrate the complexity involved with
any attempt to protect ecosystems, let alone create an approach wherein
the environment may thrive. There are people who want to do their
part to save the ecosystem and they heed the warnings of the world’s
scientists, including climatologists, about the many threats to our
planet—the only one (that we are aware of) that can sustain human life.
Debates over protecting ecosystems are further complicated by those
who refuse to believe that there is any need to intervene with the
current course of the environment. Such skeptics will tell us, “The sky is
not falling!” and will suggest that environmentalists need to “Calm
down!”

Mass Extinctions: The Sky Has “Fallen” in the Past

Ultimately, the discussion on environmental sustainability and
thrivability comes down to the following: are we doomed with an
inevitable ecocatastrophe(s), or are the problems, if any, related to the
environment greatly exaggerated and ­over-hyped (ecohype)? Let’s
return to the story of Chicken Little. If one screams, “The sky is
falling!” and the sky really is falling, that is not paranoia and such an
alarm of pending doom should be heeded. Proclamations akin to the
sky is falling by “alarmist” environmentalists could be accurate and
perhaps, at the very least, everyone should take the time to consider the
consequences of ignoring dire warnings about the compromised
environment. In other words, what if the proverbial sky actually falls?
What happens to our planet’s ecosystems? What happens to humanity?
Could humans become as extinct as dinosaurs and countless other
species? If you don’t think that is possible, consider the fact that the
planet has faced mass extinctions in the past. What’s to stop it from
happening again? And, if you really want to look at the “big picture,”
realize that during the earth’s past 3.5 billion years or so, about 99
percent of the estimated 4 billion species that ever evolved are no
longer around (Tarlach 2018).
If an ecosystem is compromised beyond the point of reconciliation
any number of species may perish. As alarming as it is to acknowledge
the demise of a species, a mass extinction is far more dire. A mass
extinction has many characteristics, including the destruction of a
significant proportion of the world’s biota; substantial biodiversity loss;
and the overall destruction of the earth’s environment. Barnosky and
associates (2011) state that a mass extinction (ME) occurs when the
planet loses more than ­three-quarters of its species in a geologically
short interval of time, usually during a few hundred thousand to a
couple of million years. However, a critical event such as meteorite
impact may trigger a mass extinction in a much shorter period of time.
According to a group of biologists and paleontologists headed by
Anthony Barnosky at the University of California at Berkeley, the
planet Earth has already endured five mass extinctions in the past 540
million years. In order of occurrence, these five mass extinctions are
known as the “Big Five” and include the end–Ordovician, Late
Devonian, end–Permian, end–Triassic, and end–Cretaceous (Wake and
Vredenburg 2008; Andryszewski 2009).
The first mass extinction event took place at the end of the
Ordovician period (beginning nearly 440 million years ago) when,
according to fossil records, nearly ­two-thirds of all genera of both
terrestrial and marine life worldwide were killed off (Cook 2010;
Endangered Species International 2011). About 365 million years ago
in the Late Devonian period, the environment boasted natural reefs
that had existed for at least 13 million years but as the world plunged
into the second mass extinction nearly, 85 percent of marine species
disappeared. During the end–Permian mass extinction (occurring
about 250 million years ago), the planet lost approximately 80 to 95
percent of all marine species. Coral reefs would not reappear for about
10 million years, the greatest hiatus in reef building in all of Earth’s
history (Cook 2010). The end–Triassic mass extinction (approximately
200 million years ago) is estimated to have claimed about half of all
marine invertebrates and approximately 80 percent of all land
quadrupeds. The end–Cretaceous mass extinction (65 million years
ago) is the most famous because it resulted in the demise of the
dinosaurs. Nearly all land animals perished during this mass
extinction.
The “Big Five” mass extinctions are named after the geological time
period during which they occurred. During these events an average of
80 percent of species were killed off (Hallam and Wignall 1997).
Although the math does not calculate precisely, Michael Benton
(2003a) states that mass extinctions occur about every 65 million years
(with the extinction time period lasting millions of years). (We
calculate an ME occurring approximately every 65–70 million years
since the date of the first ME.) The past five mass extinctions are the
result of forces of nature (worldly or celestial), and the inevitability of
mass extinctions results in a life expectancy of any particular species of
about five million years.
If you are wondering when the sixth ME will occur, Barnosky and
associates (and a slew of other scientists) suggest we are already in the
sixth mass extinction period. As evidence, consider that during the
time period of 1970–2014 humanity has wiped out 60 percent of
mammals, birds and reptiles, leading the world’s foremost experts to
warn that annihilation of wildlife threatens civilization (The Guardian
2018). These foremost experts come from around the world and are a
part of the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and they have found that “the
vast and growing consumption of food and resources by the global
population is destroying the web of life, billions of years in the making,
upon which human society ultimately depends for clean air, water and
everything else” (The Guardian 2018). The WWF cites deforestation,
chemical pollution, the introduction of invasive species and disease as a
result of global trade as leading causes of species cleansing. “The worst
affected region is South and Central America, which has seen an 89%
drop in vertebrate populations” (The Guardian 2018). Species
extinction did not occur as quickly before humans arrived and
mammal extinction was very rare, on average, just two mammal species
died out every one million years (The Independent 2011). Before human
existence, there were any number of species subject to extinction, as
this is a part of the natural cycle of events on earth. Human existence,
however, has sped the process of the sixth mass extinction and
consequently represents a threat to biodiversity, ecosystems, and the
environment as a whole. Stuart Pimm, a conservation biologist at Duke
University, published a paper in the journal Science in 1995 which
found that species are currently going extinct at rates 100 to 1,000 times
faster than the normal pace of evolution would dictate; fifteen years
later, Pimm argues the pace is even higher (Weise 2011). More recently,
Pimm and ecologist Mark Urban state that for every species
disappearing for natural causes, 1,000 are vanishing because of
unnatural ­man-made causes (Associated Press 2015).
To further highlight the point that we are currently in the sixth ME
consider the “Doomsday Clock” established by the Bulletin of Atomic
Scientists, a nonprofit organization. The Doomsday Clock was started
in 1947 due to the threat of nuclear warfare. The clock was originally
set to seven minutes to midnight to highlight the urgency and dangers
the world faced because of advanced weaponry and the threat of
nuclear warfare. According to former Irish president Mary Robinson,
the Doomsday Clock is now recognized as an indicator of the
vulnerability of our existence (Welna 2020). As of late 2020, the official
time of the Doomsday Clock was 100 seconds to midnight indicating
the amount of time to our impending extinction.
The rapid disappearance of so many species and the contributions of
Nobel laureates and leading scientists that determine the time for the
Doomsday Clock are among the signs that we are in the sixth mass
extinction. Another warning comes with the previously mentioned
point that mass extinctions occur about every 65–70 million years
coupled with the reality that it has been about that long since the
planet’s last mass extinction. What distinguishes this mass extinction
from the previous five is the realization that this will be the first one to
involve humans.

Mass Extinctions and Their Causes

The Earth’s environment is constantly under “attack” by ­human-
made forces and nature itself. Long before humans rose to the top of
the food chain, nature had begun to, and continues to, bombard the
environment in a variety of fashions including glaciation, volcanic
eruptions, global warming and cooling, lightning strikes and natural
wildfires. The planet has even been attacked by ­outer-worldly forces
such as asteroids and meteorites. (An asteroid is a minor planet, and a
meteorite is any object that survives entering the earth’s atmosphere
and lands on the surface.)
Scientists have used fossil analysis to determine that there have been
five mass extinctions in the past (see Table 1.1). Evidence would
indicate that the sixth mass extinction is upon us. The first five mass
extinctions were caused by forces of nature, worldly or ­outer-worldly,
while the current one has been accelerated by human behavior. Let’s
take a quick look at the leading causes of mass extinctions and connect
them to the mass extinctions.
Table 1.1: Past Mass Extinctions (ME) and Their
Causes
ME# Name/When It Began Cause(s)
1st End–Ordovian/440 million years Glaciation
ago
2nd Late–Devonian/365 million years Glaciation and Global Cooling
ago
3rd End–Permian/251 million years ago Asteroid and Volcanism
4th End–Triassic/200 million years ago Asteroid, Volcanism and Climate
Change
5th End–Cretaceous/65 million years Asteroid and Volcanism
ago

1. Glaciation. Near the end of the ­end-Ordovician period,

approximately 450 million years ago, the second largest and first of the
five major extinction events took place. This ME is attributed to a brief
glacial interval that produced two pulses of extinction (Sheehan 2001).
“The first pulse was at the beginning of the glaciation, when ­sea-level
decline drained epicontinental seaways, produced a harsh climate in
low and mid–latitudes, and initiated active, ­deep-oceanic currents that
aerated the deep oceans and brought nutrients and possibly toxic
material up from the oceanic depths. Following this initial pulse of
extinction, surviving faunas adapted to the new ecological setting”
(Sheehan 2011). When this glaciation event suddenly ended, sea levels
rose, global cooling occurred, ocean circulation stagnated, and another
pulse of extinction followed. This second related glaciation event
marked a long stasis of several million years (Sheehan 2001).
The glaciation event of the end–Ordovician era led to the extinction
of an estimated 60 percent of marine invertebrates, ranking below only
the Permian extinction. All known life was confined to the seas and
oceans at this time. The cause of this glaciation event appears to have
been the movement of Gondwana, the name of the ancient
“supercontinent” that incorporates the ­present-day Africa, Australia,
South America, Arabia, India and Madagascar, into the South Polar
Region. Evidence for glaciation was discovered through fossil deposits
found in the Sahara Desert.
Although scientists are not as sure about the cause(s) of the Late
Devonian mass extinction, the second ME is believed to be the result of
the two prime factors that led to the first ME: glaciation and global
cooling. We do know that the second ME took place around 364
million years ago. The evidence that does exist indicates that warm
water marine species were the most severely affected in this extinction
event. This leads paleontologists to believe that an episode of global
cooling occurred as a result of another glaciation event on Gondwana,
which is evidenced by glacial deposits of this age in northern Brazil
(Endangered Species International 2011).
2. Asteroid Impact. As a speck of dust hurtling through space, the
planet Earth is statistically bound to get hit by something or run into
something. Yes, we have a fairly stable orbit, but orbits are subject to
change and to celestial impact violations. Scientists are quite sure that
the fifth mass extinction was caused, at least in part, by an asteroid and
reasonably sure that the third mass extinction was also caused by an
asteroid. As for the end of the Permian period (the third ME), life on
Earth was nearly completely wiped out by an environmental
catastrophe of a magnitude never seen before or since (Benton 2003b).
In February 2001, a team of scientists led by Luanne Becker of the
University of Washington claimed that they had found clear evidence
(extraterrestrial helium and argon in rocks from the ­Permo-Triassic
boundary in China and Japan) that the mass extinction at the end of
the Permian era was caused by meteorite impact (Becker et al. 2001).
The end–Permian extinction, which took place about 251 million years
ago, was the Earth’s worst mass extinction with 95 percent of all species,
53 percent of marine families, 84 percent of marine genera, and an
estimated 70 percent of land species such as plants, insects and
vertebrate animals were killed during this catastrophe (Endangered
Species International 2011).
Researchers have been quite confident that an asteroid impact
caused the fifth ME (Benton 2003b; Gibbons 2011). The huge asteroid
that hit Earth 65 million years ago incinerated all the dinosaurs and
nearly all other life forms. Research conducted at the University of
Colorado at Boulder estimates that the asteroid hit the coast of what is
now Mexico. Within a few hours of impact only those organisms
already sheltered in burrows or in water were left alive. The ­six-mile-in-
diameter asteroid is thought to have hit Chicxulub, in the Yucatan,
striking with the energy of 100 million megatons of TNT. The kinetic
energy of the explosion would have turned the normally blue sky ­red-
hot for hours, baking the earth below. According to researchers
Douglas S. Robertson and associates, “For several hours following the
Chicxulub impact, the entire Earth was bathed with intense infrared
radiation from ballistically reentering ejecta. The global heat pulse
would have killed unsheltered organisms directly and ignited fires at
places where adequate fuel was available. Sheltering underground,
within natural cavities, or in water would have been a necessary but not
always sufficient condition for survival” (2004: 760). Recent research
suggests that the asteroid strike may have been a contributing force to
the ­die-off and that subsequent planetwide volcanism is what actually
killed the dinosaurs (Tarlach 2018; Rosen 2019a). Other research
suggests that the asteroid strike caused a temporary but devastating
“impact winter”—darkening the sky, cooling the Earth and inhibiting
photosynthesis (Netburn 2014).
Writing for the journal Nature, Roff Smith (2011) proposes that an
asteroid strike on earth at the ­end-Triassic period could have wiped
out, or at least had an impact in wiping out, much of that period’s flora
and fauna, resulting in the opportunity for dinosaurs to spread around
the globe during the subsequent Jurassic period. If the earth was to be
hit with another asteroid the size of the one that led to the ­kill-off of the
dinosaurs, humanity would be helpless to stop it. The likelihood of that
happening again is certainly a possibility.
3. Massive Volcanism. Volcanic eruptions can cause a great deal of
harm to the environment and local ecosystems. Lava flow will kill
animals and plant life upon impact, while sulphur dioxide emissions
harm the atmosphere (Wignall 2004). When the sulphur dioxide gas
reacts with water vapor, it forms clouds of sulphuric acid that block out
the sun’s light, causing changes in the climate while rain from such
clouds results in a phenomenon known as acid rainfall (Wignall 2004).
Although the evidence seems to support the idea that an asteroid was
responsible for the third and fifth ME, there are those who argue that
massive volcanic eruptions, sustained over half a million years or more,
caused catastrophic environmental deterioration via poisonous gases,
which in turn caused global warming, stripping of soils and plants from
the landscape, and mass deoxygenation, and great loss of marine
biodiversity (Benton 2003b; Stanley Jr., Shepherd and Robinson 2018).
Suffice it to say the end of the Permian was characterized by huge
volcanic eruptions.
Massive volcanism may also contribute to global warming and
cooling, another contributing cause to mass extinctions. It is believed
that the fourth ME, the end–Triassic extinction, which took place
roughly 251 million to 199 million years ago, was most likely caused by
massive floods as a result of lava erupting from the central Atlantic
magnetic province triggering the breakup of Pangaea and the opening
of the Atlantic Ocean. Volcanism may have led to deadly global
warming (Endangered Species International 2011).
4. Global Warming and Cooling (Climate Change). As we have
learned so far, the causes of specific mass extinctions have been tied to
natural events such as volcanism, glaciation and asteroid impact; these
events, in turn, contributed to either, or both, global warming and
global cooling. An asteroid strike is capable of creating huge dust
storms that lead to devastating darkness, and cold and warming
temperatures can cause mass bleaching of corals (Cook 2010). A
consistent pattern of changing atmospheric CO2 has been linked with
every mass extinction. Since oceans do not respond instantly to a CO2 ­-
build-up, and since it can take decades to centuries to develop
significant problems, humans may fail to see, or heed, the warning
signs of global warming and global cooling.
The main evidence that we have of global warming and cooling
comes from fossils (Wignall 2004). For example, scientists argue that
the causes of the end–Triassic ME were a combination of climate
change and rising sea levels that resulted because of the sudden release
of large amounts of carbon dioxide. The release of carbon dioxide from
widespread volcanic activity contributes to the global greenhouse
effect, which raises average air temperatures around the globe. Other
theories suggest that rising carbon dioxide concentrations in the
atmosphere could have freed massive amounts of methane trapped in
permafrost and under sea ice. Methane is a gas that traps heat in the
atmosphere and contributes to global warming. Methane, then, could
contribute to global temperature change as much as CO2 (Encyclopædia
Britannica 2012).
Citizens of earth have been warned about both global cooling and
global warming for the past four decades, at least, and yet many people
live in denial of the inevitable conclusion. That is to say, both global
warming and global cooling can take place in a same era and ultimately
both natural events will contribute to the sixth mass extinction. Unlike
past eras, however, humans are contributing to the accelerated pace of
global warming and cooling.
5. Human Impact. Tens of millions of years after the fifth ME, the
humanoid species began to evolve. For multiple millennia now, humans
have, arguably, been the most evolved creatures on the planet. There are
those who now worry that humans are slowly, or rapidly, depending
upon one’s perspective, destroying the Earth. Humans are certainly
capable of destroying the earth quickly via nuclear war, but it is a slow
death that we are likely inflicting upon our home planet.
Depending on one’s definition of what constitutes a “human,”
archeologists estimate that our species has been on this planet for about
200,000 years. Humans are a member of the bipedal primate species in
the Hominidae (the great apes) family, having diverged from apes 6
million to 8 million years ago and a dozen humanlike species removed
(PBS 2001; Pickrell 2006). Current day humans are Homo sapiens, a
Latin term for “thinking human.” Unlike other animal species, humans
have developed a ­high-level brain, a bipedal gait, and opposable
thumbs. All evidence to date indicates that the birth of modern
humanity can be traced to Africa. Approximately 70,000 years ago,
humans migrated out of Africa and began to colonize every corner of
the planet. Evidence indicates that humans reached Eurasia and
Oceania 40,000 years ago and reached the Americas less than 15,000
years ago (Leakey 1996).
In the grand scheme of things, human existence hardly registers a
hash mark on the historic timeline of our planet. As intellectually
advanced as humans are, we have done a poor job as stewards of the
environment. Our overall blatant disregard for the health of the
environment highlights human arrogance. We have treated the planet
as a dumping ground for our ­human-made toxins and trash. We are
responsible for the destruction of countless species (animal, plant and
marine), and our willingness to pollute the planet with abandon has
contributed to the destruction of numerous local ecosystems.
Humanity, it seems, has placed its hopes on a God or nature to ­self-
correct the problems it causes. In all but rare occurrences, however,
nature does not have an “­auto-reset” button so long as humans
continue to contaminate the environment.
An atypical example of nature correcting human neglect has taken
place on Glass Beach. Located near Fort Bragg in Northern California,
Glass Beach was a spot where residents brought all forms of trash,
including old cars, kitchen appliances, glass bottles, and so on, to dump
at a beach. People, it seems, have always been willing to pollute water
(as we shall see in greater detail in later chapters), especially before the
days of environmental consciousness spearheaded by social
movements. According to the City of Fort Bragg (2012), people first
started dumping trash at the beach following the 1906 San Francisco
Earthquake when the city’s streets were filled with rubble. Using the
ocean as a dump made perfect sense to officials in those days because
seaside towns around the world had done so for centuries (City of Fort
Bragg 2012). Only in the early 1960s did officials at the North Coast
Water Quality Board finally begin to regulate what was dumped on the
beach, first by forbidding toxins and then everything else (Keneally
2012; City of Fort Bragg 2012). In 1967 the board moved the official
dump to a different location.
Today, Glass Beach, which is a part of Mendocino Area State Parks
(Glass Beach is in the MacKerricher State Park, which once was a part
of the Mendocino Indian Reservation), looks nothing like a toxic
dumping ground. After years of thrashing waves pounding away at the
debris left behind, a very colorful and almost ­magical-looking beach
has emerged. The beach is now covered with ­stone-sized pieces of sea
glass, coloring the seascape and adding a tourist element to the natural
beauty of the spot (Keneally 2012). The colorful sea glass is so valued by
local officials and residents that it is a misdemeanor offense to remove
any artifacts from the beach (Fort Bragg 2012; Keneally 2012). The
beach is about a ­three-hour drive north of San Francisco and is a
regular tourist destination spot.
The Russian equivalent to Glass Beach is Ussuri Bay, once a Soviet
era dumping ground for old glass bottles and porcelain. However, like
Glass Beach, nature has transformed this bay (within the Peter the
Great Gulf of the Sea of Japan) near Vladivostok to one of the most
stunning beaches imaginable. Over a period of many years, the
crashing waves have washed the broken beer, wine and vodka bottles
into millions of smooth and colorful “pebbles” that have turned the
area into a tourist attraction that visitors pay to see (Bored Panda 2016;
Roxan 2020). After an even longer period of time, these colorful rock
pebbles will transform into sand.
Although the Glass Beach and Ussuri Bay stories represent two
bright examples of the ability of nature to overcome human errors,
there are at least three takeaways. First, the ability of nature to “­clean-
up” human environmental neglect and harm is very limited and takes a
great deal of time. Add to this the constant new forms of devastation
caused by humans against the environment and it becomes clear that
nature could never keep pace. Second, while the beaches may be pretty
to look at, it exists as the result of humans dumping trash and toxins
into an ecosystem not equipped to handle such a poisonous invasion.
Third, numerous plant and marine species were exposed to toxic
substances that may lead to, or have already caused, their extinction.
We not only pollute our oceans and beaches, but we also pollute our
rivers and lakes. In fact, humans have been polluting the earth in a
wide variety of ways throughout the millennia. Although most
commentaries point to industrialization as the beginning era of drastic
negative human involvement with the environment, the ancient
Romans and Chinese empires were also producers of greenhouse gases.
Sapart and associates (2012) found that the methods of burning of
plant matter to cook food, clear cropland and process metals utilized by
the ancient Romans and Chinese released millions of tons of methane
gas into the atmosphere each year for several periods of ­pre-industrial
history. Methane, as we have already learned, is a gas that traps heat in
the atmosphere and is a contributor to global warming. The quantity of
methane produced then pales in comparison with the emission
released today (the amount is roughly 70 times higher today). The
findings suggest that man’s footprint on the climate is larger than had
been realized (Morin 2012). Sapart and his fellow scientists reported
their findings in Nature and based their conclusions on analysis of ice
core samples from Greenland that dates back 2,000 years. They found
three distinct periods predating industrialization wherein human
activity caused significant environmental harm because of methane
production. The first period—roughly 1 ce to 300 ce—encompassed
the end of the Roman Empire and the Han Dynasty, when charcoal was
a preferred form of fuel. The second period of elevated methane
emissions occurred during the Medieval Climate Anomaly (800 to
1200 ce) and the third era was during the Little Ice Age, between 1300
and 1600 (Morin 2012; Sapart et al. 2012).
 The research conducted by Sapart and associates indicates that
human behavior has already contributed to increased levels of methane
release significant enough to affect climate change. The results also
indicate that negative past ­methane-producing behavior pales in
comparison to today’s production. And yet, only recently, in the last 50
years or so, has there been any concerted interest or effort in doing
something about humanity’s negative impact on the environment.
Concerted interest is spearheaded by collective action and collective
action is accelerated via social movements. The first environmental
social movement, arguably, was the result of Rachel Carson’s landmark
warning about the indiscriminate use of pesticides detailed in her
controversial 1962 book Silent Spring. It could be argued that the
environmental social movement began in 1962 as a result of this
publication.
In Silent Spring, Carson warned the public about the indiscriminate
use of pesticides and connected DDT
(dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, a colorless, tasteless, and mostly
odorless chemical compound) spraying to the decimation of bird
populations. This book launched the modern environmental
movement as well as a ferocious backlash that continues to this day
(Souder 2012). Carson’s book caused controversy even before it was
published as a book, as The New Yorker published three long excerpts
prior to its book release. An alarmed public deluged the Department of
Agriculture and other agencies with demands for action, and the
outraged chemical industry with its allies in government fought back,
claiming Carson’s warnings were overblown.
This pattern of social activists and environmental social movements
being countered by big business and in many cases big government has
continued right up to the current day. Today, chemical corporations are
much larger than the ones Carson attempted to bring down and they
are equipped with lobbyists and public relations machines that are ­well-
funded and sophisticated and exert unprecedented influence over
regulators, the media, and most critically, elected officials. For example,
the chemical industry benefits from the massive amounts of chemicals
that are used in hydraulic fracturing, or “hydrofracking.”
Carson’s critics claimed she was a ­left-wing nut and tried to lump her
with other “radicals” such as organic farmers, food faddists and ­anti-
fluoridationists (Souder 2012). Conversely, with the creation of the
Environmental Protection Agency in 1972, the deadly insecticide DDT
was banned in the United States. That did not, however, stop the U.S.
manufacturing and exportation of DDT to nations across the globe
until the mid–1980s. As a deadly neurotoxin, DDT destroyed many
species and has been connected to cancer in humans. The residual of
DDT remains in our environment. Interestingly, some of the criticism
directed at Carson originated from health officials who pointed out that
DDT spraying was an effective way to curtail the spread of malaria,
especially in developing nations. In 2006, the World Health
Organization (WHO) announced a renewed commitment to fighting
malaria with DDT, primarily in Africa (Sounder 2012). Rachel Carson
died in 1964, long before such data became available. How would she
likely have responded to this? What do you think?

Social Movements
The primary focus of this book is to analyze the human impact on
the environment and ultimately our contribution to the sixth mass
extinction. We will also examine whether or not it is the responsibility
of humanity to curtail its harmful activities in an attempt to slow the
extinction process. It should be pointed out that there are plenty of
people who have formed, or contribute to, social movements that are
designed to raise awareness of the negative human impact on the
environment. Let’s take a quick look at the stages of social movement.

Stages of Social Movements

Carson’s Silent Spring helped to spur the environmental social
movement and the many subsequent variations (e.g., “Going Green”).
A social movement may be defined as “an organized effort at claims
making that tries to shape the way people think about an issue in order
to encourage or discourage social change” (Macionis 2010: 6). As
described by sociologist John J. Macionis, social movements play a key
part in the response to numerous social problems, including the AIDS
epidemic, sexual harassment, and family violence. He could have very
easily have mentioned environmental issues as well. Macionis states
that social movements involve four stages.
1. Emergence—The emergence of a social movement occurs when
people (initially just a few) come together and share their concern
about the status quo or some specific social problem. For example,
when Carson described the negative effects of unregulated insecticides
on the food we eat and on the ecosystem in which we reside, a few
people voiced their shared concern and eventually mobilized others
into social action. Another example would include the initial concern
of a few people that using grocery store paper bags contributed to the
depletion of trees, causing them to spearhead the promotion of plastic
bags instead of paper. In turn, it was just a matter of time before a few,
and then many, people led a social movement to ban ­single-use plastic
bags in grocery stores.
2. Coalescence—The coalescence (to come together, to unite, and
form a whole) of a social movement occurs when a new organization
begins holding rallies and demonstrations, making public its belief, and
engaging in political lobbying. A major step in the U.S. environmental
movement occurred in 1970 as people across the nation joined in
celebrating the first Earth Day. In 2011, the “Occupy Movement” that
started as a protest against Wall Street finance companies, big banks
and the 1 Percenters (the very rich) gained coalescence as Occupy
protesters set up on college campuses and local cities across the nation
and internationally. The social movement to ban plastic bags gained
momentum because a large number of diverse interest groups (e.g.,
environmental groups, save the oceans activists and the million women
march campaign) came together to put pressure on governments and
businesses.
3. Formalization—Social movements begin with a few ­highly-
motivated individuals who have expressed their displeasure about a
certain policy or behavior of others, especially the government, big
business, or traditional standards of morality that seem outdated to
members of a younger generation. In an attempt to accomplish specific
goals (and the establishment of specific goals is critical in the success of
any social movement), social movements must become formalized as
they attempt to become established players on the political scene. The
environmental movement was believed to have become formalized via
the establishment of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in
1970. However, as we know today, the EPA is drastically underfunded
and viewed by many of today’s environmentalists as being inept in its
ability to carry out the movement’s objectives. The Occupy Movement
failed to establish any specific and attainable goals and continues to
exist primarily as an example of how not to maintain a social
movement. Although, to be fair, the sentiment of the Occupy
Movement remains strong among those who want to keep a check on
the rich and powerful. For example, “both Elizabeth Warren and Bernie
Sanders were convinced to run for president [during the 2020
presidential election] in large part by Occupy activities. And you can
hear it. They both rail against big banks. They both talk about the
billionaire class and inequality. But Sanders and Warren never really
say the word occupy” (Sanders 2020). In early March (2020) Warren
ended her presidential campaign and in early April (2020) Sanders did
the same. Sanders proclaimed, however, “while this campaign is
coming to an end, our movement is not” (Goodman and Moynihan
2020: A4). Indeed, Sanders assured his followers that he would press
Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden to embrace ideals of the
progressive movement. Formal organizations such as the Sunrise
Movement (a ­youth-led political movement) vowed to continue
Sanders’ “visionary solutions” to many contemporary social problems.
As another example of formalization, the ban the plastic bag movement
was effective (at least in terms of banning certain usages of plastic bags)
because it was spearheaded by formalized organizations that were
already established (i.e., 1 Million Women Organization; Save the
Oceans Foundation; The Ocean Foundation; The Surfrider Foundation;
and the Plastic Pollution Coalition).
4. Decline—As argued by Macionis (2010), social movements tend
to decline over time, and there are a number of reasons for this. Social
movements may decline because they run out of money, because their
claims and concerns failed to catch on with the public, or because
opposing organizations are more convincing than they are. Social
movements may also decline because they actually met their goals or
because their goals have been modified. In the case of the latter, the
social movement that led to the banning of plastic bags at stores has
been expanded to additional goals including banning plastics wherever
feasible (e.g., plastic straws and water bottles) and banning polystyrene
foam (i.e., Styrofoam). The need to ban plastic straws is evidenced by
the fact that in the U.S. alone, more than ­one-half of plastic straws are
thrown away every day; that equals 15,183 miles when you lay them ­-
end-to-end. In the U.K, more than 8.5 billion plastic straws are
discarded in a year (WBUR 2018).
Throughout this text we will examine a number of environmental
social problems that have once been, or currently are, connected to
social movements. We will discover that a great number of significant
laws designed to help the environment were passed in the 1970s and we
will look at current ­environmental-related concerns among activists
and the masses. It will become clear that certain movements, such as
recycling have become routine for most people while other issues, such
as the social movements to ban hydraulic fracking and combat climate
change, remains in the early stages, somewhere between stage 2
(coalescence) and stage 3 (formalization).
Environmental social movements are designed to protect the planet
and whether explicitly stated or not to lessen human contributions to
the sixth mass extinction. We are already in the sixth mass extinction
era, but such eras can last for thousands or millions of years. So how far
along are we? Are we merely at the beginning of the sixth ME era,
meaning humans and other species have hundreds of thousands of
years remaining before they become extinct? Or are we at the point
where if we don’t take drastic steps to modify our behaviors now, we
have already gone past the breaking point? Scientists look for evidence
to answer such questions. ­Open-minded scientists, and there shouldn’t
be any other kind, will look for evidence, conduct analyses and report
the results regardless of their findings. In this, the second edition of
Beyond Sustainability, the authors add the results of the research they
have conducted in the seven years since the first edition.

Popular Culture Section 1

 The Planet Earth and a Potential Asteroid
Apocalypse
There are no shortages of natural disaster films depicting mass
destruction of the planet Earth. ­Disaster-themed films include such
sources of obliteration as planetary geological catastrophes (e.g.,
avalanches, earthquakes and ­cave-ins); ­weather-related storms (e.g.,
massive lightning strikes, volcanic eruptions, blizzards, wildfires, floods
and tsunamis); and ­outer-worldly sources (e.g., attacks from aliens; and
meteorite, asteroid, and comet impacts).
As humans, we prepare the best we can for impending attacks from
nature. Buildings and bridges are increasingly designed to absorb the
impact of earthquakes; advanced radar tracks the progress of storms so
that we can take shelter; warning systems alert us to tornados; ­fire-
fighting crews combat wildfires; and so on. Although we are ultimately
at the mercy of nature, we like to think we can handle, or at least
minimize, the negative impact of nearly any potential natural
catastrophe.
Preparing for meteorite, asteroid and comet strikes, however,
represents an entirely different challenge. As a matter of distinction, a
meteorite is a meteoroid that has entered into the Earth’s atmosphere.
Thus, once a meteoroid breaches the atmosphere, they are called
meteorites. A major meteorite (say the size of 5 to 10 miles in width)
impact could destroy the planet, but even smaller ones can be highly
destructive. Asteroids are small, airless rocky worlds (too small to be
called planets) that revolve around the sun and are primarily found in
orbits lying mostly between Mars and Jupiter (the asteroid belt). It is
estimated that there are more than 750,000 asteroids larger than ­three-
fifths of a mile (1 kilometer) in diameter and millions of smaller ones
(Space.com 2013). Asteroids are leftovers from the formation of our
solar system billions of years ago that are subject to breaking away from
their orbit, opening the possibility of their eventual pull into the Earth’s
atmosphere. According to NASA (2012), comets are cosmic snowballs
of frozen gases, rock and dust roughly the size of small towns. Like
asteroids and meteoroids, comets are capable of breaking free from
their orbits and striking Earth. In fact, since the Earth formed some 4.5
billion years ago, meteorites, asteroids and comets have routinely
slammed into our planet. In three instances, the size of these ­outer-
worldly bodies of rock and metals has been large enough to contribute
to three of the previous five mass extinctions.
Among the more memorable examples of films depicting the deadly
consequences of asteroid and comet strikes on Earth are Deep Impact
(1998) and Armageddon (1998). Deep Impact, the more scientifically
accurate of the two films, starring Robert Duvall, Tea Leoni, Elijah
Wood, Vanessa Redgrave, and Morgan Freeman, describes humanity’s
preparation for a ­7-mile-wide comet on a collision course with Earth to
cause a mass extinction. In this film, reporter Jenny Lerner (Leoni)
discovers that a government acronym E.L.E. stands for “­Extinction-
Level Event.” Because of her investigation, President Tom Beck
(Freeman) is forced to prematurely announce the grim reality that the
comet, named “­Wolf-Biederman,” large enough to cause a mass
extinction is on course to impact the planet. American and Russian
scientists have built a spacecraft, called Messiah, that will carry a team
led by Captain Spurgeon Tanner (Duvall) to the comet so that it can be
destroyed with nuclear weapons. The crew land on the comet and plant
nuclear bombs 100 meters beneath the surface.
Instead of destroying the comet, its splits in two pieces, named
“Wolf ” and “Biederman” respectively. The wealthy governments of the
world have built underground shelters that will house scientists and key
officials along with a lottery to allow 800,000 “everyday” citizens a
chance to survive. The “Biederman” fragment crashes into the Atlantic
Ocean, creating a ­mega-tsunami that kills millions of people due to the
resulting massive flooding. In a ­last-ditch attempt to stop the “Wolf ”
fragment from hitting the earth and causing greater damage, the crew
of the Messiah, still equipped with its remaining nuclear warheads,
decides to go on a suicide mission by intercepting and colliding with it
in hopes of breaking it up into much smaller pieces that will burn up in
the Earth’s atmosphere.
While Deep Impact did very well at the box office, generating more
than $350 million worldwide, Armageddon fared better, earning over
$550 million worldwide. Armageddon, however, was highly criticized
by the scientific community for its many scientific flaws. Armageddon
Discovering Diverse Content Through
Random Scribd Documents
to Monsieur de Retz all that a man of his profession could do for me
in the capital; but still there is much more to be done. He has
undertaken to win one part of society to our cause; but you must
know that in Paris there is a complete class of men, distinct and
separate from all the rest of the people, whom it concerns me much
to gain, for the purpose of securing the metropolis. You will be
curious to know what class I speak of:--I mean," he added with a
smile, "the honourable body of bravoes, swash-bucklers, swindlers,
and, in short, the whole company of those who, having no property
of their own, live at the expense of others. I am credibly informed
that these persons form one great body, and have certain means of
corresponding and communicating with each other throughout the
kingdom. The number in Paris is said to be twenty thousand. You
may well look surprised; but it is an undoubted fact; and it is to gain
these respectable allies that I now intend to send you back to the
capital. The mission, truly, is not a very elevated one; but when I do
not disdain to treat with such a body, you must not scorn to be my
ambassador. In the conduct of this business, you and De Retz must
be in constant correspondence; for though his clerical character
stands in the way of his taking any active part in the negotiation
itself, his knowledge of Paris, and all that it contains, may be of the
greatest service to you in facilitating your communication with these
gentry, who are not in general very fond of trusting their secrets
with strangers."

The Prince was then proceeding once more to give the motives
which induced him to look upon nothing as mean which could insure
the most speedy termination to an enterprise on which the fate of
France depended--reasoning with all the eloquence of a man who,
not very sure of being in the right, hopes to persuade himself
thereof, while he is persuading another; but I assured him in reply,
that I was perfectly convinced of the propriety of the conduct which
he pursued, and only required to be made perfectly aware of the
nature of my mission, what I was to demand, and what I might
promise on his part.
 "Much must be left to your own discretion," replied the Count:
"the object is to insure that these men will instantly rise in my
favour, on a given signal; but not to commit me to them so far, that I
cannot retract should any change of circumstances induce me to
abandon the enterprise."

The sketch of Monsieur le Comte, as drawn by the Marquis de St.

Brie, instantly rose to my recollection at these words; and I saw how
truly he had spoken, when he said, that want of resolution was the
great defect of the Count's character. How dangerous such
irresolution must ever be in the conduct of great undertakings was
at once evident; and I almost shuddered to think what might be the
possible consequences to all concerned, if the struggle that was
likely to ensue could not be terminated at a blow. This, more than
any other consideration, made me resolve to exert the utmost
energies of my mind, in the part that was allotted to me, for the
purpose of preparing everything to act upon the same point at the
same moment, and produce one great and overpowering effect. I
promised, therefore, to do my best, according to the views his
highness entertained; and said that I doubted not of my success
with the persons to whom I was sent, provided I was furnished with
the necessary means to touch their hearts, through the only points
in which the hearts of such men are vulnerable.

"You shall have it, De l'Orme! you shall have it!" replied the
Count, "though money is one of those things of which we stand
most in need. But you will not set out till to-morrow morning; and
before that time, I will try to furnish you with a few thousand
crowns, for I know it is absolutely necessary; especially as I trust
you will, on your return, bring with you two or three hundred
recruits; for should you find any of our friends the swash-bucklers,
who have a grain or two more honesty than the rest, you must enlist
them in our good cause, and send them one by one over to Mouzon.
But now hie you to the rest till dinner; and accept, as a first earnest
of my friendship, the good horse on whose back you were so
successful just now. No thanks! no thanks, my good De l'Orme! Take
him as he stands; and he may perhaps recall me to your memory
when Louis de Bourbon is no more."

There was a touch of sadness in the Count's tone that found its
way to the heart, and, like the whole of his manners, won upon the
affection. It seemed to familiarise one with his inmost feelings, and
any coldness in his cause would have been like a breach of
confidence. A prince binds himself to his inferior, by making him the
sharer of his pleasures or his follies; but he binds his inferior to him
by admitting him into the solemn tabernacle of the heart.

On retiring from the prince's apartments, I felt no inclination to

join any of the merry, thoughtless parties of his friends that were
roving about the town and the citadel, some running to the mall,
some to the tennis court, and all eager to chase away those precious
hours, which man the prodigal squanders so thoughtlessly in his
youth, to covet with so much avarice in his latter days. On the stairs,
however, that conducted to my own apartments, I met Monsieur de
Varicarville, who gave me the good morning, and stopped to speak
with me. "I know not, Monsieur de l'Orme," said he, "whether I am
about to take a liberty with you, but I have just seen your servant
conducted to the private cabinet of the Duke of Bouillon. It appeared
to me this morning that you were not inclined to attach yourself to
the Duke's party; and that, from that or some other cause, he
seemed somewhat ill-disposed towards you at first. I therefore
presume to tell you of your servant's having gone to him, that if you
did not yourself send him, you may make what inquiries you think
fit. You are still young in the intrigues of this place, or I should not
give you this warning."

This took place not above ten steps from my own chamber; and
after thanking Varicarville for his information, I asked him to wait
with me for Achilles' return, and we would question him together
concerning his absence. This mark of confidence on my part opened
the way for the same on the part of the Marquis; and after
proceeding cautiously step by step for a few minutes, both fearful
that we might betray in some degree the trust reposed in us by
Monsieur le Comte, if we spoke openly, and neither wishing to
intrude himself into the private opinions of the other, we gradually
found that there was nothing to be concealed on either side, and
that our opinions tended immediately towards the same point.

This once established, and the communication instantly became

easy between us. Varicarville spoke his sentiments freely concerning
the situation and character of the Count, and the schemes and
wishes of the Duke of Bouillon, whose endeavours to hurry the
Prince into a civil war were every day becoming more active and
more successful.

"Notwithstanding the advantages which may accrue to himself,"

said Varicarville, "and which are certainly very many, I do believe
that the duke seeks principally the good and honour of Monsieur le
Comte; and did I feel sure that the event we desire could be
procured by a single battle, or even a single campaign, I should not
oppose him; for, an excellent soldier and even a skilful general, the
Count would be almost certain to overcome the only disposable force
which the cardinal could oppose to him. This, however, would not be
the only arms with which the wily minister would fight him:--he
would employ negotiations, treaties, and intrigues; and thus he
would conquer, and even intimidate, a man who has really ten times
more personal courage than those who most eagerly urge him to
war. From what you have said, I easily see that you have discovered
the Prince's defect:--he has no resolution. He has the courage of a
lion; but still he has not resolution. The first, to use the words of the
Abbé de Retz, is an ordinary, and even a vulgar quality; the second
is rare even in great men; but yet there are two situations in which it
is eminently necessary--the ministry of a great country, and the chief
of a conspiracy. Richelieu has it in the most eminent degree; and the
man who would oppose him with success must not therein be
deficient."
 While he spoke, the door of the chamber opening, Achilles made
his appearance, and was running up to me, when he perceived
Monsieur de Varicarville, and suddenly stopped.

"What were you going to say, Achilles?" demanded I. "You may

speak freely:--this is a friend."

"But what I have to say is a state secret, which I shall

communicate to none but your lordship," replied the little player,
with a look of vast importance. "Deep in the bottom of my profound
heart will I hide it, till opportunity shall unlock the door and draw it
forth from its dungeon."

Varicarville looked somewhat surprised; but I, who better

understood my attendant's vein, merely replied, "You had better
draw it forth immediately yourself, my good Achilles, for fear I
should break the dungeon door, as you call it, and your head both in
one."

"Oh, if your lordship insists," replied the little player, not

displeased at the bottom of his heart to be delivered of his secret at
once, "I have nothing for it but to obey. Know then, illustrious scion
of a noble house, that as I was returning from that famous field,
wherein you this morning covered yourself with victory, one of the
domestic servants of the great and puissant Prince, Frederic Maurice,
Duke of Bouillon and Sovereign of Sedan, pulled me by the tags of
my doublet, and insinuated, in a low and solemn voice, that his
master wanted to speak with me: to which I replied, that duty is the
call which generous souls obey, and therefore that I must see
whether you stood in need of anything, before I could follow him.
Finding, however, that you were closeted with Monsieur le Comte, I
proceeded to the lodging of the high and puissant Prince, who asked
me if I were much in your private secrets. To this I answered, that I
did not believe there was a thought on earth which you concealed
from me."
 "You were either a great fool or a great knave to say so," replied
I, "and I do not very well know which."

"A knave, a knave! please your worship," replied Achilles, with a

low bow. "A fool has something degrading in it. I would rather at
any time be supposed to exercise the profession of Hermes than that
of Æsculapius.--But listen! He next asked me how long I had been in
your worship's service. On which I replied, all my life--that we had
been brought up together from the cradle. My mother, I assured
him, was your worship's wet-nurse, so that we were foster-
brothers."

"A pretty apocrypha truly!" replied I; "but go on."

"His highness then asked me," proceeded Achilles, "whether your

lordship leaned really to peace or war. To which I replied, that as
yet, I believed, you were quite undecided, although your natural
disposition led you to war, for which you had so strong a turn, that
you must needs go fighting in Catalonia, when you had no occasion
in life. At this I thought he looked pleased; but I was afraid of going
any farther, for fear of committing your Excellence. So then, his
majesty proceeded to say that I must try and determine you to war,
and that you must try and determine Monsieur le Comte; and on the
back of this he gave me at least one hundred excellent reasons why
men should cut one another's throats, all which I have forgot; but
doubtless your Eminence can imagine them. He then gave me a
purse, not at all as a bribe, he said, but merely for the trouble he
had given me; and made me promise at the same time not to reveal
one word of what had passed to any one, which I vowed upon my
honour and my reputation, and came away to tell your grace as fast
as possible."

"And your honour and your reputation, mon drole!" said

Varicarville, "what has become of them?"
 "Oh, your worship!" replied Achilles, "I stretched them so often in
my youth, that they cracked long ago; and then, instead of patching
them up as many people do, which is but a sorry contrivance, and
not at all safe, I threw them away altogether, and have done ever
since quite as well without."

After having sent Achilles away, I consulted with Varicarville in

regard to the proper course of proceeding under such
circumstances.

"All you can do," replied he, "is to take no notice, and remain
firm--if I understand you rightly, that you are determined to join with
those who would dissuade the Count from proceeding to so
dangerous an experiment as war."

"I am certainly so far determined," replied I, "that I will continue

to oppose such a proceeding, till I see the Count once resolved upon
it; but after that, I will, so far from endeavouring to shake his
resolution, do all in my power to keep him steady in it, and to
promote the success of the enterprise; for I am convinced that after
that, hesitation and conflicting opinions in the party of the Prince
might bring about his ruin, but could do no good."

"Perhaps you are right," replied Varicarville, "and that is all that I
could hope or require. When I see you alone with the Count, I shall
now feel at ease, convinced that, as long as he continues undecided,
you will continue to oppose any act of hostility to the government;
and when he is decided, and the die cast, we must both do our best
to make the issue successful."

Thus ended my conference with Varicarville, and nothing farther

occurred during the day affecting myself personally. I heard of the
arrival of several fresh parties, both from the interior of France and
from the adjacent countries, which were almost peopled with French
exiles; and Achilles also brought me news that the Baron de
Beauvau had returned from the Low Countries, accompanied by a
Spanish nobleman, as plenipotentiary from the Archduke Leopold
and the Cardinal Infant of Spain; but nothing of any consequence
happened till the evening, in which I was at all called to take part.

I strolled, however, through the town of Sedan; and from the

labours which were hurrying forward at various points of the
fortifications, I was led to conclude that the Duke of Bouillon himself
anticipated but a short interval of peace. At length, as I approached
an unfinished hornwork on the banks of the Meuse, a sentinel
dropped his partisan to my breast, bidding me stand back; and, my
walk being interrupted in that direction, I returned to the citadel and
proceeded to my own chamber.

CHAPTER XL.

I was standing at the window of my bedchamber, in one of those

meditative, almost sad moods, which often fill up the pauses of
more active and energetic being, when the mind falls back upon
itself, after the stir and bustle of great enterprises, and the silent
moral voice within seems to rebuke us for the worm-like pettiness of
our earthly struggles, and the vain futility of all our mortal
endeavours.

Nothing could be more lovely than the scene from the window.
The sun was setting over the dark forest of Ardennes, which, skirting
all round the northern limits of the view, formed a dark purple girdle
to the beautiful principality of Sedan; but day had only yet so far
declined as to give a rich and golden splendour to the whole
atmosphere, and his beams still flashed against every point of the
landscape, where any bright object met them, as if they
encountered a living diamond. Running from the south-east to the
north were the heights of Amblemont, from the soft green summit of
which, stretching up to the zenith, the whole sky was mottled with a
flight of light high clouds, which caught every beam of the sinking
sun, and blushed brighter and brighter as he descended. A thousand
villages and hamlets with their little spires, and now and then the
turrets of the châteaux, scattered through the valley, peeped out
from every clump of trees. The flocks of sheep and the herds of
cattle, winding along towards their folds, gave an air of peaceful
abundance to the scene; and the grand Meuse wandering through
its rich meadows with a thousand meanders, and glowing brightly in
the evening light, added something both solemn and majestic to the
whole. I was watching the progress of a boat gliding silently along
the stream, whose calm waters it scarcely seemed to ruffle in its
course; and, while passion, and ambition, and pride, and vanity, and
the thousands of irritable feelings that struggled in my bosom during
the day were lulled into tranquillity by the influence of the soft,
peaceful scene before my eyes, I was thinking how happy it would
be to glide through life like that little bark, with a full sail, and a
smooth and golden tide, till the stream of existence fell into the dark
ocean of eternity--when my dream was broken by some one
knocking at my chamber-door.

Though I wished them no good for their interruption, I bade them

come in; and the moment after, the Duke of Bouillon himself stood
before me.

"Monsieur de l'Orme," said he, advancing, and doffing his hat, "I
hope I do not interrupt your contemplations." I bowed, and begged
him to be seated; and after a moment or two he proceeded: "I am
happy in finding you alone; for, though certainly one is bound to do
whatever one conceives right before the whole world, should chance
order it so, yet of course, when one has to acknowledge one's self in
the wrong, it is more pleasant to do so in private--especially," he
added with a smile, "for a sovereign prince in his own castle. I was
this morning, Monsieur de l'Orme, both rude and unjust towards
you; and I have come to ask your pardon frankly. Do you give it
me?"

Although I believed there was at least as much policy as candour

in the conduct of the Duke, I did not suffer that conviction to affect
my behaviour towards him, and I replied, "Had I preserved any
irritation, my lord, from this morning, the condescension and
frankness of your present apology would of course have obliterated
it at once."

I thought I saw a slight colour mount in the Duke's cheek at the

word apology; for men will do a thousand things which they do not
like to hear qualified by even the mildest word that can express
them; and I easily conceived, that though the proud lord of Sedan
had for his own purposes fully justified me in the use of the term, it
hurt his ears to hear that he had apologised to any one.

He proceeded, however: "I was, in truth, rather irritable this

morning, and I hastily took up an opinion, which I since find, from
the conversation of Monsieur le Comte, was totally false; namely,
that you were using all your endeavours to dissuade him from the
only step which can save himself and his country from ruin. Our
levies were nearly made, our envoy on his very return from the Low
Countries, all our plans concerted, and the Count perfectly
determined, but the very day before your arrival. Now I find him
again undetermined; and though I am convinced I was in error, yet
you will own that it was natural I should attribute this change to
your counsels."

"Your Excellence attributed to me," I replied, with a smile, at the

importance wherewith a suspicious person often contrives to invest a
circumstance, or a person who has really none--"Your Excellence
attributed to me much more influence with Monsieur le Comte than I
possess: but, if it would interest you at all to hear what are the
opinions of a simple gentleman of his Highness's household, and by
what rule he was determined to govern his conduct, I have not the
slightest objection to give you as clear an insight into my mind, as
you have just given me of your own."

The Duke, perhaps, felt that he was not acting a very candid part,
and he rather hesitated while he replied that such a confidence
would give him pleasure.

"My opinion, then, my lord," replied I, "of that step which you
think necessary to the Count's safety, namely, a civil war, is, that it is
the most dangerous he could take, except that of hesitating after
once having fully determined."

"But why do you think it so dangerous?" demanded the Duke:

"surely no conjuncture could be more propitious. We have troops,
and supplies, and allies, internal and external, which place success
beyond a doubt. The Count is adored by the people and by the
army--scarcely ten men will be found in France to draw a sword
against him. He is courage and bravery itself--an able politician--an
excellent general--a man of vigorous resolution."

This was said so seriously, that it was difficult to suppose the

Duke was not in earnest; and yet to believe that a man of his keen
sagacity was blind to the one great weakness of the Prince's
character was absolutely impossible. If it was meant as a sort of bait
to draw from me my opinions of the count, it did not succeed, for I
suspected it at the time; and replied at once, "Most true. He is all
that you say; and yet, Monsieur de Bouillon, though my opinion or
assistance can be of very little consequence, either in one scale or
the other, my determination is fixed to oppose, to the utmost of my
power, any step towards war, whenever his highness does me the
honour of speaking to me on the subject--so long, at least, as I see
that his mind remains undetermined. The moment, however, I hear
him declare that he has taken his resolution, no one shall be more
strenuous than myself in endeavouring to keep him steady therein.
From that instant I shall conceive myself, and strive to make him
believe, that one retrograde step is destruction; and I pledge myself
to exert all the faculties of my mind and body, as far as those very
limited faculties may go, to assist and promote the enterprise to the
utmost of my power."

"If that be the case," replied the Duke, "I feel sure that I shall this
very night be able to show that war is now inevitable; and to
determine the Count to pronounce for it himself. A council will be
held at ten o'clock to-night, on various matters of importance; and I
doubt not that his highness will require your assistance and opinion.
Should he do so, I rely upon your word to do all that you can to
close the door on retrocession, when once the Count has chosen his
line of conduct."

The noble duke now spoke in the real tone of his feelings. To do
him justice, he had shown infinite friendship towards his princely
guest; and it was not unnatural that he should strive by every means
to bring over those who surrounded the Prince to his own opinion.
When as now he quitted all art as far as he could, for he was too
much habituated to policy to abandon it ever entirely, I felt a much
higher degree of respect for him; and, as he went on boldly,
soliciting me to join myself to his party, and trying to lead me by
argument from one step to another, I found much more difficulty in
resisting than I had before experienced in seeing through and
parrying his artifices.

It is in times of faction and intrigue, when every single voice is of

import to one party or the other, that small men gain vast
consequence; and, apt to attribute to their individual merit the court
paid to them for their mere integral weight, they often sell their
support to flattery and attention, when they would have yielded to
no other sort of bribery. However much I might overrate my own
importance from the efforts of the Duke to gain me--and I do not at
all deny that I did so--I still continued firm: and at last contenting
himself with what I had at first promised, he turned the conversation
to myself, and I found that he had drawn from the Count so much of
my history as referred to the insurrection of Catalonia, and my
interview with Richelieu.

I felt, as we conversed, that my character and mind were

undergoing a strict and minute examination, through the medium of
every word I spoke; and, what between the vanity of appearing to
the best advantage, and the struggle to hide the consciousness that
I was under such a scrutiny, I believe that I must have shown
considerably more affectation than ability. The conviction that this
was the case, too, came to embarrass me still more; and, feeling
that I was undervaluing my own mind altogether, I suddenly broke
off at one of the Duke's questions, which somewhat too palpably
smacked of the investigation with which he was amusing himself,
and replied, "Men's characters, monseigneur, are best seen in their
actions, when they are free to act; and in their words, when they
think those words fall unnoticed; but, depend upon it, one cannot
form a correct estimate of the mind of another by besieging it in
form. We instantly put ourselves upon the defensive when we find
an army sitting down before the citadel of the heart; and whatever
be the ability of our adversary, it is very difficult either to take us by
storm, or to make us capitulate."

"Nay," replied the Duke, "indeed you are mistaken. I had no such
intention as you seem to think. My only wish was to amuse away an
hour in your agreeable society, ere joining his highness, to proceed
with him to the council: but I believe it is nearly time that I should
go."

The Duke now left me. I was not at all satisfied with my own
conduct during the interview that had just passed; and, returning to
my station at the window, I watched the last rays of day fade away
from the sky, and one bright star after another gaze out at the world
below, while a thousand wandering fancies filled my brain, taking a
calm but melancholy hue from the solemn aspect of the night, and a
still more gloomy one from feeling how little my own actions were
under the control of my reason, and how continually, even in a
casual conversation, I behaved and spoke in the most opposite
manner to that which reflection would have taught me to pursue.

Sick of the present, my mind turned to other days. Many a

memory and many a regret were busy about my heart, conjuring up
dreams, and hopes, and wishes passed away--the throng of all those
bright things we leave behind with early youth and never shall meet
again, if it be not in a world beyond the tomb. All the sounds of
earth sunk into repose, so that I could hear even the soft murmur of
the Meuse, and the sighing of the summer-breeze wandering
through the embrazures of the citadel. The cares, the labours, the
anxieties, and all the grievous realities of life, seemed laid in slumber
with the day that nursed them; while fancy, imagination, memory,
every thing that lives upon that which is not, seemed to assert their
part, and take possession of the night. I remembered many such a
starry sky in my own beautiful land, when, without a heart-ache or a
care, I had gazed upon the splendour of the heavens, and raised my
heart in adoration to Him that spread it forth; but now, I looked out
into the deep darkness, and found painful, painful memory mingling
gall with all the sweetness of its contemplation. I thought of my
sweet Helen, and remembered how many an obstacle was cast
between us. I thought of my father, who had watched my youth like
an opening flower, who had striven to instil into my mind all that was
good and great, and I recollected the pain that my unexplained
absence must have given. I thought of my mother, who had nursed
my infant years, who had founded all her happiness on me--who had
watched, and wept, and suffered for me, in my illness; and I called
up every tone of her voice, every glance of her eye, every smile of
her lip, till my heart ached even with the thoughts it nourished; and
a tear, I believe, found its way into my eye--when suddenly, as it
fixed upon the darkness, something white seemed to glide slowly
across before me. It had the form--it had the look--it had the aspect
of my mother. My eyes strained upon it, as if they would have burst
from their sockets. I saw it distinct and plain as I could have seen
her in the open day. My heart beat, my brain whirled, and I strove to
speak; but my words died upon my lips; and when at length I found
the power to utter them, the figure was gone, and all was blank
darkness, with the bright stars twinkling through the deep azure of
the sky.

I know--I feel sure, now, as I sit and reason upon it--that the
whole was imagination, to which the hour, the darkness, and my
own previous thoughts, all contributed: but still, the fancy must have
been most overpoweringly strong to have thus compelled the very
organs of vision to co-operate in the deceit; and, at the moment, I
had no more doubt that I had seen the spirit of my mother than I
had of my own existence. The memory of the whole remains still as
strongly impressed upon my mind as ever; and certainly, as far as
actual impressions went, every circumstance appeared as
substantially true as any other thing we see in the common course
of events. Memory, however, leaves the mind to reason calmly; and I
repeat, that I believe the whole to have been produced by a highly
excited imagination; for I am sure that the Almighty Being who gave
laws to nature, and made it beautifully regular even in its
irregularities, never suffers his own laws to be changed or
interrupted, except for some great and extraordinary purpose.

I do not deny that such a thing has happened--or that it may

happen again; but, even in opposition to the seeming evidence of
my senses, I will not believe that such an interruption of the regular
course of nature did occur in my own case.

CHAPTER XLI.
 Still, at the time I believed it fully; and, after a few minutes given
to wild, confused imaginings, I sat down and forcibly collected my
thoughts, to bend them upon all the circumstances of my fate. My
mother's spirit must have appeared to me, I thought, as a warning,
probably of my own approaching death: but death was a thing that
in itself I little feared; and all I hoped was, that some opportunity
might be given me of distinguishing myself before the grave closed
over my mortal career. Now, all the trifles, which we have time to
make of consequence when existence seems indefinitely spread out
before us, lost their value in my eyes, as I imagined, or rather as I
felt, what we ought always to feel, that every hour of being is
limited. One plays boldly when one has nothing to lose, and
carelessly when one has nothing to gain; and thus, in the very fancy
that life was fleeting from me fast, I found a sort of confidence and
firmness of mind, which is generally only gained by long experience
of our own powers as compared with those of others.

While the thoughts of what I had seen were yet fresh in my mind,
a messenger announced to me that the prince desired my presence
in the great hall of the château as speedily as possible; and, without
staying to make any change of dress, I followed down the stairs. As
I was crossing the lesser court, I encountered my little attendant. He
had been straying somewhat negligently through the good town of
Sedan, and had been kept some hours at the gates of the citadel on
his return.

I had not time, however, to give him any very lengthened

reprehension; but bidding him go to my chamber and wait for me, I
followed the Count's servant to the council-hall.

It was a vast vaulted chamber in the very centre of the citadel;

and the candles upon the table in the midst, though they served
sufficiently to light the part of the room in which they were placed,
left the whole of the rest in semi-obscurity; so that when I entered I
could but see a group of dark figures, seated irregularly about a
council board, with several others dispersed in twos and threes,
talking together in various parts of the room, as if waiting the arrival
of some other person.

The words "Here he is, here he is!" pronounced more than once,
as I entered, made me almost fancy that the council had delayed its
deliberations for me; but the vanity of such an idea soon received a
rebuff, for a moment after, the voice of the Count de Soissons
himself, who sat at the head of the table, replied, "No, no, it is only
the Count de l'Orme. Monsieur de Guise disdains to hurry himself, let
who will wait."

Advancing to the table, I now found Monsieur le Comte, with

Bardouville, Varicarville, St. Ibal, and several others whom I did not
know, seated round the table, while the Duke of Bouillon was
conversing with some strangers at a little distance. But my greatest
surprise was to find Monsieur de Retz near the Count de Soissons,
though I left him so short a time before at Paris. He seemed to be in
deep thought; but his ideas, I believe, were not quite so abstracted
as they appeared: and on my approaching him, he rose and
embraced me as if we had known each other for centuries, saying at
the same time in my ear, "I hear you have received the true faith. Be
a martyr to it this night, if it be necessary."

I now took a seat next to Varicarville, who whispered to me, "We

have here an ambassador from Spain, and you will see how laudably
willing we Frenchmen are to be gulled. He will promise us men and
money, and what not, this Marquis de Villa Franca; but when the
time comes for performance, not a man nor a stiver will be
forthcoming."

"Perhaps I may thwart him," replied I, remembering, at the sound

of his name, that I had in my hands a pledge of some worth in the
diamonds which Achilles had pilfered at Barcelona. Varicarville
looked surprised; but at that moment our conversation was
interrupted by the Duke of Bouillon turning round, and observing
that the conduct of Monsieur de Guise was unaccountable in keeping
such an assembly waiting in the manner which he did.

"To council, gentlemen!" said the Count, hastily. "We have waited
too long for this noble Prince of Loraine. To council!"

The rest of the party now took their seats, and the Baron de
Beauvau rising, informed the Count that he had executed faithfully
his embassy to the Archduke Leopold and the Cardinal Infant, who
each promised to furnish his highness with a contingent of seven
thousand men, and two hundred thousand crowns in money, in case
he determined upon the very just and necessary warfare to which he
was called by the voice not only of all France but all Europe--a war
which, by one single blow, would deliver his native country from her
oppressor, and restore the blessing of peace to a torn and suffering
world. He then proceeded to enter into various particulars and
details, which I now forget; but it was very easy to perceive from
the whole that Monsieur de Beauvau was one of the strongest
advocates for war. He ended by stating that the Marquis de Villa
Franca, then present, had been sent by the Cardinal Infant to
receive the final determination of the Prince.

My eyes followed the direction of his as he spoke, and rested on a

tall, dark man, who sat next to the Duke of Bouillon, listening to
what passed, with more animation in his looks than the nobility of
Spain generally allowed to appear. He was simply dressed in black;
but about his person might be seen a variety of rich jewels, evidently
showing that the pillage which I had seen committed on his house at
Barcelona had not cured him of his passion for precious stones.

After the Baron de Beauvau had given an account of his mission,

the Duke of Bouillon rose, and said, that now, as the noble princes
of the house of Austria had made them such generous and friendly
offers, and sent a person of such high rank to receive their
determination, all that remained for them to do was, to fix finally
whether they would, by submitting to a base and oppressive
minister, stoop their heads at once to the block and axe, and add all
the most illustrious names of France to the catalogue of Richelieu's
murders; or whether they would, by one great and noble effort, cast
off the chains of an usurper, and free their king, their country, and
themselves.

The Duke spoke long and eloquently. He urged the propriety of

war upon every different motive--upon expediency, upon necessity,
upon patriotism. He addressed himself first to the nobler qualities of
his hearers--their courage, their love of their country, their own
honour, and dignity; and then to those still stronger auxiliaries, their
weaknesses--their vanity, their ambition, their pride, their avarice;
but while he did so, he artfully spread a veil over them all, lest
shame should step in, and, recognising them in their nakedness,
hold them back from the point towards which he led them. He spoke
as if for the whole persons there assembled, and as if seeking to win
them each to his opinion; but his speech was, in fact, directed
towards the Count de Soissons, on whose determination of course
the whole event depended.

Varicarville did not suffer the Duke's persuasions to pass, without

casting his opinion in the still wavering balance of the Count's mind,
and urging in plain but energetic language every motive which could
induce the Prince to abstain from committing himself to measures
that he might afterwards disapprove.

It is a common weakness with irresolute people always to attach

more importance to a new opinion than to an old one; and Monsieur
le Comte, turning to De Retz, pressed him to speak his sentiments
upon the measure under consideration. The Abbé declined,
protesting his inexperience and incapability, as long as such
abnegation might set forth his modesty to the best advantage, and
enhance the value of his opinion; but when he found himself urged,
he rose and spoke somewhat to the following effect:--
 "I see myself surrounded by the best and dearest friends of
Monsieur le Comte; and yet I am bold to say that there is not one
noble gentleman amongst them who has a warmer love for his
person, or a greater regard for his dignity and honour, than myself.
Did I see that dignity in danger, did I see that honour touched, by
his remaining in inactivity, my voice should be the first for war; but
while both are in security, nothing shall ever make me counsel him
to a measure by which both are hazarded. I speak merely of
Monsieur le Comte, for it is his interests that we are here to
consider; it is he that must decide our actions, and it is his honour
and reputation that are risked by the determination. To me it
appears clear that, by remaining at peace, his dignity is in perfect
safety. His retreat to Sedan guarded him against the meannesses to
which the minister wished to force him. The general hatred borne
towards the Cardinal turns the whole warmth of popular love and
public admiration towards the Count's exile. The favour of the
people, also, is always more secure in inactivity than in activity,
because the glory of action depends upon success, of which no one
can be certain: that of inaction, in the present circumstances, is
sure, being founded on public hatred towards a minister--one of
those unalterable things on which one may always count. The public
always have hated, and always will hate the minister, be he who he
will, and be his talents and his virtues what they may. He may have,
at first, a momentary popularity, and he may have brief returns of it;
but envy, hatred, and malice towards the minister are always at the
bottom of the vulgar heart: and as they could never get through life
without having the devil to charge with all their sins, so can they
never be contented without laying all their woes, misfortunes, cares,
and grievances to the door of the minister. Thus then, hating the
Cardinal irremediably, they will always love the Count as his enemy,
unless his highness risks his own glory by involving the nation in
intestine strife. It is therefore my most sincere opinion, that as long
as the minister does not himself render war inevitable, the interest,
the honour, the dignity of the Prince, all require peace. Richelieu's
bodily powers are every day declining, while the hatred of the
people every day increases towards him; and their love for Monsieur
le Comte augments in the same proportion. In the meanwhile, the
eyes of all Europe behold with admiration a Prince of the blood royal
of France enduring a voluntary exile, rather than sacrifice his dignity;
and, with the power and influence to maintain himself against all the
arts and menaces of an usurping minister, still patriotically refraining
from the hazardous experiment of war, which, in compensation for
certain calamities, offers nothing but a remote and uncertain event.
Peace, then! let us have peace! at least till such time as war
becomes inevitable."

While De Retz spoke, the Duke of Bouillon had regarded him with
a calm sort of sneer, the very coolness of which led me to think that
he still calculated upon deciding the Prince to war; and the moment
the other had done, he observed, "Monsieur le Damoisau, Souverain
de Commerci"--one of the titles of De Retz--"methinks, for so young
a man, you are marvellously peaceably disposed."

"Duke of Bouillon!" said De Retz, fixing on him his keen dark eye,
"were it not for the gratitude which all the humble friends of
Monsieur le Comte feel towards you on his account, I should be
tempted to remind you, that you may not always be within the
security of your own bastions."

"Hush, hush, my friends!" cried the Count, "let us have no jarring

at our council-table. Bouillon, my noble cousin, you are wrong. De
Retz has surely as much right to express his opinion, when asked by
me, as any man present. Come, Monsieur de l'Orme, give us your
counsel."

I replied without hesitation, that my voice was still for peace, as

long as it was possible to maintain it; but that when once war was
proved to be unavoidable, the more boldly it was undertaken, and
the more resolutely it was carried on, the greater was the probability
of success, and the surer the honour to be gained.
 "Such also is my opinion," said the Prince; "and on this, then, let
us conclude to remain at peace till we are driven to war, but to act
so as to make our enemies repent it when they render war
inevitable."

"Whether it is so or not, at this moment," said the Duke of

Bouillon, "your highness will judge, after having cast your eyes over
that paper"--and he laid a long written scroll before the Count de
Soissons.

The Count raised it, and all eyes turned upon him while he read.
After running over the first ordinary forms, the Count's brow
contracted, and, biting his lip, he handed the paper to Varicarville,
bidding him read it aloud. "It is fit," said he, "that all should know
and witness, that necessity, and not inclination, leads me to plunge
my country in the misfortunes of civil war. Read, Varicarville, read!"

Varicarville glanced his eyes over the paper, and then, with
somewhat of an unsteady voice, read the following proclamation:--

"In the king's name![8] Dear and well-beloved. The fears which we
entertain, that certain rumours lately spread abroad of new factions
and conspiracies, whereby various of our rebellious subjects
endeavour to trouble the repose of our kingdom, should inspire you
with vain apprehensions, you not knowing the particulars, have
determined us to make those particulars public, in order that you
may render thanks to God for having permitted us to discover the
plots of our enemies, in time to prevent their malice from making
itself felt, to the downfall of the state.

"We should never have believed, after the lenity and favour which
we have on all occasions shown to our cousin the Count de
Soissons, more especially in having pardoned him his share in the
horrible conspiracy of 1636, that he would have embarked in similar
designs, had not the capture of various seditious emissaries, sent
into our provinces for the purpose of exciting rebellion, of levying
troops against our service, of debauching our armies, and of shaking
the fidelity of our subjects, together with the confessions of the said
emissaries, fully proved and established the criminality of our said
cousin's designs.

"The levies which are publicly made under commissions from our
said cousin--the hostilities committed upon the bodies of our faithful
soldiers, established in guard upon the frontiers of Champagne--the
confession of the courier called Vausselle, who has most
providentially fallen into our hands, stating that he had been sent on
the part of the said Count de Soissons, the dukes of Guise and
Bouillon, to our dearly beloved brother, Gaston Duke of Orleans, for
the purpose of seducing our said brother to join and aid in the
treasonable plans of the said conspirators; and the farther
confession of the said Vausselle, stating that the Count de Soissons,
together with the dukes of Guise and Bouillon, conjointly and
severally, had treated and conspired with the Cardinal Infant of
Spain, from whom they had received and were to receive notable
sums of money, and from whom they expected the aid and
abetment of various bodies of troops and warlike munition, designed
to act against their native country of France, and us their born liege
lord and sovereign;--these, and various other circumstances having
given us clear knowledge and cognisance of that whereof we would
willingly have remained in doubt, we are now called upon, in justice
to ourself and to our subjects, to declare and pronounce the said
Count de Soissons, together with the dukes of Guise and Bouillon,
and all who shall give them aid, assistance, counsel, or abetment,
enemies to the state of France, and rebels to their lawful sovereign;
without, within the space of one month from the date hereof, they
present themselves at our court, wherever it may be for the time
established, and humbly acknowledging their fault, have recourse to
our royal clemency. (Signed) LOUIS."

No paper could have been better devised for restoring union to

the councils of the Count de Soissons. War was now inevitable; and,
after a good deal of hurried, desultory conversation, in which no one