Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Environment & Energy
In reply to the discussion: Dennis Meadows: Collapse inevitable 2015-2020 [View all]GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)21. From where I sit, things ARE happening now.
But you have to look beyond simply politics and economics to see it clearly.
First there are the ecological factors:
» Climate disruption and the couple of dozen positive feedbacks that are already in play;
» Ocean acidification;
» Desertification and deforestation;
» Loss of fresh water aquifers;
» Loss of soil fertility;
» Loss of topsoil;
» Increasing soil and water pollution with chemicals and garbage;
» Accelerating species extinctions on land and in the oceans;
» Increasing human appropriation of the biosphere's Net Primary Productivity: ~50% at the moment;
» Human overshoot of over 50% according to the Global Footprint Network;
Then there are the social, political and economic factors:
» Increasing instability of global financial system;
» Increasingly extended and fragile supply chains;
» Rising fuel and food costs;
» Loss of economic opportunities around the world due to slowing growth;
» Increasing disparity between rich and poor;
» Increasing disenfranchisement of the poor;
» Increasing authoritarianism by governments in order to suppress growing dissent (or the potential for dissent) due to the previous four points.
There are three related reasons I think that collapse is the likely outcome, rather than just a series of isolated and correctable failures. The first is that the system of global civilization contains too many interlocking existential risks to allow us to avoid them all - or even most of them. The second is that no person or group that has the authority to change the system as a whole in order to avoid failures. The third is that there is too much opposition even to regional changes - too much of the world depends on the continuation of BAU, so any disruption of the current path represents not only a loss of profits, but a potential loss of lives in vulnerable regions.
Growth-oriented BAU is entrenched vigorously defended, and the stresses at multiple points in the system are demonstrably increasing. A failure under these circumstances has an increasing chance of producing a cascade. Any significant cascade failure that implicates multiple human systems and their underlying ecological support has a good chance of proving devastating. IMO.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
36 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I recently turned 70. It appears to me collapse is already happening, just slowly,
enough
Jun 2014
#6
There's nothing like an LtG thread to draw the cornucopians out of the woodwork, eh?
GliderGuider
Jun 2014
#8
1914 to 1960 was a lot worse for humanity, by many many orders of magnitude.
Benton D Struckcheon
Jun 2014
#10
The problem with complex systems is that up until they fail things look fairly normal.
GliderGuider
Jun 2014
#19
Well, yeah. Now, if you get your own version of Boko Haram.... n/t
Benton D Struckcheon
Jun 2014
#33
An interesting "short paper", that basically says "shit happens" regardless system safety measures.
Starboard Tack
Jun 2014
#22