Hello, thank you for your articles and for the comments. I’m glad that some consistent criticism emerges. I guess C. Eisenstein is also caught up in the economic system he has chosen as a younger person (no institution, public dependant so in a way more susceptible to feudalist associations. Also if your business is to provide intellectual understanding you are bound at some point to want to have “a real influence”, so selling out to powerful figures seems likely to happen). I’m not sure he had predicted that though, how internet based intellectual economy would turn out.
I’ve always found it a bit strange that he would be quick to dismiss feminist and POC critiques as being reification of parts of one’s identity, thus missing oneness and universalism (which are from these POV clear signs of white male privilege and invisilibisation). I heard him say that in a workshop in Paris I guess in 2014 or so, and I kept coming back to the strange feeling I had. Not to mention the oversharing of his family life as a shield, I don’t know how his family feels about it.
Thank you all for being rooted in a different reality than he is and denouncing the dangerous confusion and justifications he’s sadly doing.
Great article. I'm a former follower of Charles Eisenstein. Met him back in 2014 or 2015, read Sacred Economics and The More Beautiful World Our Hearts Know is Possible, went to a couple retreats. It all really meshed with my way of thinking. I made some friends I still talk to. I had huge problems with the climate book. When I checked his sources I found it was very sloppily researched. Then he became a figurehead of covid resistance (with which I sympathize) and spokesman for RFK (who I also agree with about 50/50). I noticed a shift in the rhetoric coming from Charles and a demand for absolute agreement within the community. So I left. Super sad about it, was such a great group to be a part of, until it wasn't. I'm glad you and others are speaking out about this.
Thank you for this. I, like many, have been absolutely horrified by Eisensteins strange evolution. I also have a four year old daughter, I am a farmer and a seed saver and live now in Thailand in a small rural village where the impact of the changing climate is obvious and severe. There is a part of me that yearns so desperately for a true elder to guide us. Yet few are to be found. I suppose now we must look within and I guess this is a bit of what Charles (and others) rightly suggest. And yet, we have to look hard at the tangible realities of what is going on. The situation is not good and we need all hands on deck. Martin Prechtel, a mentor of mine, reminds us that the end has come many times before. But we must be like seeds and livew for q time beyond now. THIS is what makes us worthy ancestors, to have the courage to show up, not for what we want, but for what the future needs. Thank you, again. All blessings.
I just found this earlier article - sad, puzzling, alarming! I realize I don't really comprehend the full complexity of the human psyche. Maybe nobody does.
Some thoughts that came to me after reading this have to do with the polarity that is sometimes referenced between practical action and the belief that that thoughts, feelings, expectations etc. have a real impact on what ultimately unfolds in the physical world. I think it's both/and, not either/or. If we are complacent about the problems we are facing (as in whatever God or the universe or fate or evolution - pick one - decrees is meant to happen) we become passive. Or, if we decide that based on science its too late to take effective action, if we are then hopeless to the point of despair, it is natural to become apathetic. Denial is another common response to either of these ways of seeing things. None of these fatalistic responses are going to save us, to put it mildly. On the other hand, fully realizing and feeling the full extent of our situation as suggested by science can be a strong motivator to take necessary action. (Joanna Macy has written about this.) When we also understand that we really can't know for sure whether a situation is hopeless, and that how we respond does make a difference - this is motivating and powerful, whether we are talking about climate change, elections, or a myriad of other situations that need our active attention and response. So hope can be a powerful force for change, unlike despair. We don't have to choose between being alarmed and being hopeful - in the balance of those two we may discover the best responses.
Charles's idealism has become dangerously ungrounded. This is really too bad. His past belief in a more beautiful world was highly idealistic while also acknowledging the reality of our present time. He influences a lot of people and right now his influence could tip the election to Trump. How can he justify this?
Very well written. I agree. I don't have high hopes for our current possibilities as a human race and for all our relatives (other species), but it seems to be that "trying" is good. Without this, there is no hope at all.
THANK you for this cogent explanation of the inexplicable conversion of Eisenstein. I am a YUGE fan of the two books of his you mention, and as a climate psychologist and advocate, I had considered him a kindred spirit and brilliant mind on the side of social transformation. And so it feels deeply personal to suddenly see him advocating for the forces of social ignorance and malevolence that he seemed to view as the foe in, especially, his New Story book. We really DO need a new myth, and to reject the worldview that got us into this mess. And now he's perpetuating that world view? REALLY?? It's like RFK Jr.'s brain worm jumped ears!! And you're right - we need two-eyed solutions to the climate crisis. Not a rejection of science, but rather the scientific-materialist worldview it gave rise to that objectifies nature and others human beings. Early on my own spiritual path, I had to confront my "Spiritual Ego" (ego cloaked in spirit) to make any real progress. All I can think of with Charles is that he is blind to his own prodigious spiritual ego, and has been seduced by privilege and praise - not unlike a certain orange-haired narcissist. Gaia help us when these kinds of friends turn into strangers first and enemies thereafter. It's rather demoralizing at a time when we need all the help we can muster.
Well said. I share your deep disappointment in Eisenstein. I had a friend who said he understood that because I had put Charles on a pedestal or followed him, that I was perhaps being too "upset" about him. I actually never did put him on such a pedestal. I think that with "Climate: A New Story," I began to have my doubts; and, as I write in my longer essay, with his white/male privileged critique of activism (something white men have generally not had to resort to to protect their own bodies and freedoms). But more so, I see an overall pattern that the Conspirituality podcast has done a great job tracking--of both Leftists/natural health and spiritual folks joining the grift and losing their senses. Their recent podcast on the "Save the Republic" rally in DC might sum it all up. The whole pipeline (to the alt Right) here is what alarms me most.
Hello, thank you for your articles and for the comments. I’m glad that some consistent criticism emerges. I guess C. Eisenstein is also caught up in the economic system he has chosen as a younger person (no institution, public dependant so in a way more susceptible to feudalist associations. Also if your business is to provide intellectual understanding you are bound at some point to want to have “a real influence”, so selling out to powerful figures seems likely to happen). I’m not sure he had predicted that though, how internet based intellectual economy would turn out.
I’ve always found it a bit strange that he would be quick to dismiss feminist and POC critiques as being reification of parts of one’s identity, thus missing oneness and universalism (which are from these POV clear signs of white male privilege and invisilibisation). I heard him say that in a workshop in Paris I guess in 2014 or so, and I kept coming back to the strange feeling I had. Not to mention the oversharing of his family life as a shield, I don’t know how his family feels about it.
Thank you all for being rooted in a different reality than he is and denouncing the dangerous confusion and justifications he’s sadly doing.
Great article. I'm a former follower of Charles Eisenstein. Met him back in 2014 or 2015, read Sacred Economics and The More Beautiful World Our Hearts Know is Possible, went to a couple retreats. It all really meshed with my way of thinking. I made some friends I still talk to. I had huge problems with the climate book. When I checked his sources I found it was very sloppily researched. Then he became a figurehead of covid resistance (with which I sympathize) and spokesman for RFK (who I also agree with about 50/50). I noticed a shift in the rhetoric coming from Charles and a demand for absolute agreement within the community. So I left. Super sad about it, was such a great group to be a part of, until it wasn't. I'm glad you and others are speaking out about this.
Thank you for this. I, like many, have been absolutely horrified by Eisensteins strange evolution. I also have a four year old daughter, I am a farmer and a seed saver and live now in Thailand in a small rural village where the impact of the changing climate is obvious and severe. There is a part of me that yearns so desperately for a true elder to guide us. Yet few are to be found. I suppose now we must look within and I guess this is a bit of what Charles (and others) rightly suggest. And yet, we have to look hard at the tangible realities of what is going on. The situation is not good and we need all hands on deck. Martin Prechtel, a mentor of mine, reminds us that the end has come many times before. But we must be like seeds and livew for q time beyond now. THIS is what makes us worthy ancestors, to have the courage to show up, not for what we want, but for what the future needs. Thank you, again. All blessings.
I just found this earlier article - sad, puzzling, alarming! I realize I don't really comprehend the full complexity of the human psyche. Maybe nobody does.
Some thoughts that came to me after reading this have to do with the polarity that is sometimes referenced between practical action and the belief that that thoughts, feelings, expectations etc. have a real impact on what ultimately unfolds in the physical world. I think it's both/and, not either/or. If we are complacent about the problems we are facing (as in whatever God or the universe or fate or evolution - pick one - decrees is meant to happen) we become passive. Or, if we decide that based on science its too late to take effective action, if we are then hopeless to the point of despair, it is natural to become apathetic. Denial is another common response to either of these ways of seeing things. None of these fatalistic responses are going to save us, to put it mildly. On the other hand, fully realizing and feeling the full extent of our situation as suggested by science can be a strong motivator to take necessary action. (Joanna Macy has written about this.) When we also understand that we really can't know for sure whether a situation is hopeless, and that how we respond does make a difference - this is motivating and powerful, whether we are talking about climate change, elections, or a myriad of other situations that need our active attention and response. So hope can be a powerful force for change, unlike despair. We don't have to choose between being alarmed and being hopeful - in the balance of those two we may discover the best responses.
Charles's idealism has become dangerously ungrounded. This is really too bad. His past belief in a more beautiful world was highly idealistic while also acknowledging the reality of our present time. He influences a lot of people and right now his influence could tip the election to Trump. How can he justify this?
Very well written. I agree. I don't have high hopes for our current possibilities as a human race and for all our relatives (other species), but it seems to be that "trying" is good. Without this, there is no hope at all.
THANK you for this cogent explanation of the inexplicable conversion of Eisenstein. I am a YUGE fan of the two books of his you mention, and as a climate psychologist and advocate, I had considered him a kindred spirit and brilliant mind on the side of social transformation. And so it feels deeply personal to suddenly see him advocating for the forces of social ignorance and malevolence that he seemed to view as the foe in, especially, his New Story book. We really DO need a new myth, and to reject the worldview that got us into this mess. And now he's perpetuating that world view? REALLY?? It's like RFK Jr.'s brain worm jumped ears!! And you're right - we need two-eyed solutions to the climate crisis. Not a rejection of science, but rather the scientific-materialist worldview it gave rise to that objectifies nature and others human beings. Early on my own spiritual path, I had to confront my "Spiritual Ego" (ego cloaked in spirit) to make any real progress. All I can think of with Charles is that he is blind to his own prodigious spiritual ego, and has been seduced by privilege and praise - not unlike a certain orange-haired narcissist. Gaia help us when these kinds of friends turn into strangers first and enemies thereafter. It's rather demoralizing at a time when we need all the help we can muster.
Well said. I share your deep disappointment in Eisenstein. I had a friend who said he understood that because I had put Charles on a pedestal or followed him, that I was perhaps being too "upset" about him. I actually never did put him on such a pedestal. I think that with "Climate: A New Story," I began to have my doubts; and, as I write in my longer essay, with his white/male privileged critique of activism (something white men have generally not had to resort to to protect their own bodies and freedoms). But more so, I see an overall pattern that the Conspirituality podcast has done a great job tracking--of both Leftists/natural health and spiritual folks joining the grift and losing their senses. Their recent podcast on the "Save the Republic" rally in DC might sum it all up. The whole pipeline (to the alt Right) here is what alarms me most.
Perhaps you are correct. I liked a lot of the book. But nothing I had not thought before, really.