The thesis of the book (I haven't read it but am familiar with the core ideas) is that our arbitrary distinction between pristine wilderness and human civilizat

The thesis of the book (I haven't read it but am familiar with the core ideas) is that our arbitrary distinction between pristine wilderness and human civilization is itself the problem. It's not the goal at all. Pristine wilderness is a modern myth that never existed - humans have always actively managed the landscape to our advantage, and we in turn considered ourselves a part of that landscape. It's only recently that we've developed this insane idea that we are distinct from nature, and that humanity "in here" exists apart from the purity of nature "out there". That isolation is purely imagined - it's as factually wrong as it is spiritually barren and ecologically destructive.