The Bet/Book Review

The Bet was written in a way that explains the complicated issues of overpopulation in a simple, chronological way. Sabin does an excellent job remaining as unbiased as possible, showing the merits and drawbacks of being overly optimistic and too worried about overpopulation and the future of humanity. Additionally, Sabin shows the harm media can do to people just trying to share their findings. Ehrlich spoke on various T.V shows and gained so much attention that he became a celebrity, and the only voice people would listen to when it came to population consultation. The media was also generalizing much of what Ehrlich said so it became posed as radical ideas of reducing the growing population. This media attention sparked the interest of Simon, who also joined the media through his views that contrasted Ehrlich's. The two actually agree on a lot, like measures need to be taken to make sure we don't overshoot our carrying capacity, and that technology can assist us in the process. However, where they disagreed, the media enlarged that to make it a battle with two polarized sides- pitting them against each other when they were advocating for the same thing. Granted, the processes they came up with were largely different, but the idea behind was the same. 

Sabin does a good job showing the struggles of sharing a viewpoint without it being twisted for the media, and also provides good examples of other advocates of each side and their research, with helpful graphs and background. A part of the novel I greatly appreciated was the background information Sabin added to Ehrlich and Simon. It helped keep in mind that they're still people, and that they're upbringing has a lot to do with where they stand. Simon lived around a lot of people so saw them as beautiful when abundant. Ehrlich lived in the countryside, so was more fearful when there were large groups of people. 

Christensen's review of Sabin's novel summarizes the ideas behind the text well enough, "We see the 

evolution of Simon’s ‘cornucopian’ view of ongoing population growth supported by human ingenuity; his open conflict with Ehrlich’s steadfast ‘neo-Malthusian’ argument that there are real ecological limits to growth; and how both standpoints have influenced US environmental politics." This article also puts into a larger perspective of how much this bet meant to Simon and Ehrlich. Even after Ehrlich lost, Christensen notes that Ehrlich said he doubted England would be around in 2000. Christensen is also able to show the surrounding political and environmental elements that shaped the bet, mentioning the presidential elections immigration, energy, and climate change. "Ultimately," Christensen explains, the bet is used to explain the whole messy evolution of US environmental politics from the early 1970s, when Republican Richard Nixon was an environmental champion, to today, when Republican environmentalists are an endangered species." So, Christensen sees Ehrlich and Simon's competition through a political lens, viewing how their bet shaped the legislation of the United States across their bet until today. Additionally, Christensen notes that Sabin thinks the split in environmental policies comes from the shift in political parties, and thus uses this novel to show the cause and effect environmental issues and solutions. 

"Sabin bemoans the polarization that is the very structure of a wager, as if it were an important cause of the larger divide. But bets can be useful — they can clarify what is at stake and, by doing so, help us to frame thinking about the future of the planet." Here, Christensen notes the his issue with The Bet- he feels Sabin's issue with polarization isn't helpful. Christensen finds that the bet, and thus the polarization of the sides, allows people to see both sides as well as what each side is worth. Additionally, Christensen ends his article noting that the senior science advisor to Obama was against Simon in the bet, while Obama himself says he's hopeful for the future. By pushing that fact and Obama's quote together, Christensen is trying to imply the complexity of environmental policies, and how closely tied to politics environmental issues are. 

Personally, I like The Bet- it's a helpful book that shows the issues with just choosing a side, and what can occur if you're more interested in the media than in the facts. Christensen's review has merit- he sees flaws and interesting points for the book, but only interprets the text to be about the politics of environmentalism, and no the social factors that Sabin also discusses in detail.