Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Easter Island, C'est Moi

By Terrence McNally, AlterNet. Posted July 11, 2005.


What caused some of the great civilizations of the past to collapse into ruin, and what can we learn from their fates? Jared Diamond explains how we can avert catastrophe.
Easter Island
Advertisement

In his Pulitzer-prize winning book, "Guns, Germs, and Steel," Jared Diamond examined how and why Western civilizations developed the technologies and immunities that allowed them to dominate much of the world. Now in "Collapse: How Societies Choose To Fail Or Succeed," Diamond probes the other side of the equation: What caused some of the great civilizations of the past to collapse into ruin, and what can we learn from their fates? From the Polynesian cultures on Easter Island to the flourishing American civilizations of the Anasazi and the Maya, and finally to the doomed Viking colony on Greenland, "Collapse" traces the fundamental patterns of catastrophe.

TERRENCE MCNALLY: What called to you about the new book, "Collapse"?

JARED DIAMOND: What called to me was a romantic interest going back to when I was in my 20s and began reading Thor Heyerdahl's books about the settlement of Easter Island and the great stone statues and how they were erected and why they were overthrown. It's a question that's been on my mind for a long time.

Twenty years ago we really didn't know why the islanders ended up in this barren landscape overthrowing their statues. It also wasn't clear why the Maya had abandoned their great cities. But thanks to recent archeological excavations we now have better understanding of these collapses. It's now possible to write a unified book on collapses.

You put forth a five-point framework of factors that tend to contribute to collapse. Could you tell us what they are, in terms of one of the actual cases in the book?

Let's take a full five-factor collapse that involves a European society (collapses happen not just to exotic people like Polynesians or Native Americans, they happen to blue-eyed, blonde-haired Europeans like Norwegians). The Vikings settled Greenland around C.E. 1000. They built cathedrals and stone churches. They were literate, they wrote Latin and they wrote in runes. But after about 500 years they were all dead. Still, the Norse lasted longer in Greenland than Europeans have lasted in North America today.

Number one: human environmental impacts. Many societies unwittingly destroy the environmental resources on which they depend. The Greenland Norse chopped down their forests in order to clear land for pastures and to have firewood and construction timber, but that resulted in erosion that gradually removed land that could have been used for productive pastures.

Number two: climate change. Today we're causing climate change, but in the past the climate has naturally gotten colder or hotter or rainy or drier. In the case of the Greenland Norse, it got colder. If it's colder, you grow less hay to get your cattle through the winter and your cattle start dying.

The third factor was enemies. Most societies have enemies, and can fight off their enemies until the society gets weakened for whatever reason. The Roman Empire weakened and then was overrun by barbarians. In the case of the Greenland Norse, as they weakened, their enemies, the Inuit or Eskimos, probably played a role in exterminating them.

Factor number four: friends. The Greenland Norse depended upon Norway for essential resources, particularly iron and timber, and for cultural identity. Norway began to decline, and the trade from Norway to Greenland was impeded by sea ice.

And number five: every society responds or fails to respond to its problems. The Greenland Norse failed to respond successfully.

I find their failure very instructive. What happened?

It's a very interesting question, why a society doesn't even notice or doesn't successfully respond to problems that look obvious. You would think, not a good idea to chop down all the trees and cause soil erosion. They needed timber and pastures, how could they be so dumb?

But let's just suppose that 50 years from now there's still a complex society left on earth. What do you think they're going to say when they look back on the United States in 2005, with its well-known energy problems, continuing to waste energy? Not dealing with its population problems or its water problems, how obvious. Soil problems, how obvious. Climate change problems, how utterly obvious.

The Norse were unwilling to learn from the Inuit who preceded and outlasted them.

That's right, the Inuit are still alive today. It's like a controlled laboratory experiment. The red test tube and the blue test tube: the Inuit and the Greenland Norse. The Inuit hunt whales and seals. The Greenland Norse grow sheep and goats and cows, but refuse to hunt whales and seals. It seems obvious if you're short of food during the winter, it's a good idea to hunt whales and seals. How could the Norse be so stupid?

Well, the Greenland Norse were medieval Christians. They despised the pagan Inuit. Modern Americans have also been known to despise other people. The Greenland Norse refused to learn from the Inuit and they all ended up dead as a result.


Digg!

Interviewer Terrence McNally hosts Free Forum on KPFK 90.7FM, Los Angeles (streaming at kpfk.org), where he interviews people he believes can help create 'a world that just might work.'

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Johanna Moren
Posted by: Johanna Moren on Jul 11, 2005 2:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is a wonderful article, but I think you live in LU.LU land.
I joined the Environmental Movement in 1974. They called me a communist, a peacenik and a fool. The majority of the people that called me that have now had to leave their farms,no top soil left.
There is a a lot of talk going on but that's about all.
I have always had the idea that we should talk more about the rich. We talk all the time about the poor.Why are they poor?Because we have exploited their countries. Call them what they are....exploited.Fly over England. With that small bit of land...how did they become so rich? If they became so rich by exploiting the so called poor,underdeveloped countries,why do we keep calling them poor countries. Exploited countries that's what they are and should be called that. but as you point out..perhaps they will survive and have the last laugh. I sincerely hope so.
Johanna Moren.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Johanna Moren Posted by: tabeles
» RE: Johanna Moren Posted by: HuckFinn
» RE: Johanna Moren Posted by: AnarchX
» RE: Johanna Moren Posted by: Samantha Vimes
» RE: Johanna Moren Posted by: bornxeyed
» More Social Darwinism Posted by: cmysticism
» RE: Johanna Moren Posted by: jeffrey7
» RE: Johanna Moren Posted by: Da African
Why the optimistic ending?
Posted by: hoogenboom on Jul 11, 2005 4:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why the optimistic ending? The world is doomed, like all those other societies were doomed (it's unlikely that in those societies there weren't also people who saw what was happening). This article gives another clue in trying to predict what will happen, and from there to try and work out exactly what is likely to happen to us ourselves. We can then take steps in our personal lives, and perhaps save ourselves, our children, some of our friends.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Handwriting on the wall
Posted by: fredo1012 on Jul 11, 2005 7:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
2055 is putting it farther; might be sooner than we think! You'd wished or prayed someone were reading the signs. They are loud and clear, but who is listening? For decades now we've had the tech-know-how to build the best fuel efficient automobiles, but we've allowed the the greedy rich to buy-up successive governments. One would wish only the insatiable rich paid for the world's atrocities, but the irony is that we all will pay: the exploiter, his middlemen, and the exploited. You only need to be reminded of the recent Tsunami, Hurricanes Cindy and Dennis, mudslides and earthquakes in California, or the sinking coastlines around Lagos (Nigeria) and the rest of West Africa - let's not forget so-called oil-rich Gabon, too! I'm grateful for grassroots democracy that seems to be catching on - good Lord, may more people embrace the need to rein in avarice and become better custodians of our fragile earth. As for fallen empires of the past, and the apparent blindspot by the world's current leaders, let's remember that those the gods want to destroy they first make mad.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Handwriting on the wall Posted by: TheJacksonFive
» RE: Handwriting on the wall Posted by: bornxeyed
World wide consequenses
Posted by: crz53 on Jul 11, 2005 9:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think the biggest difference between the examples of failed societies in the past and the situation we now face is that now, literally the whole world is at stake. In the case of the Mayans or Easter Islanders, they were both geographically and culturally isolated from the rest of the world. As such, the poor decisions they made only affected their societies. We now live in a world of free-trade economics and cultural globalization. Things are increasingly being run by corporate conglomerates that know no national loyalty. When things get bad (or simply worse for the millions living in poverty), this entire globalized system will fall apart. We are facing the very real possibility of "deforesting" the entire planet, not simply some remote island.

At the risk of sounding pessimistic, I have a strong feeling that just such a global economic collapse is about the only thing that will stop us from permanently ruining the planet. Until everyone is forced to begin living more sustainable lifestyles, I think most people (particularily Americans) simply won't do it on their own, no matter what the apparent writing on the wall may be.
- Mike Lorenz

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Fix the TV
Posted by: Burnie_123 on Jul 11, 2005 11:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You speak of "if" the TV having been invented that people would see that others had fixed the same or like problem in their own country.
What if the elites blocked those broadcasts because they never wanted others to see them failing, and Eastern Islanders never had the chance to see that Japan had remedys to the exact same problem, but never got to see it happen?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Fix the TV Posted by: monkeywrench
» RE: Fix the TV Posted by: rodbland
Radical critique of Jared Diamond's "Collapse"
Posted by: lproyect on Jul 11, 2005 11:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Soylent Green is people!!
Posted by: iremember on Jul 11, 2005 11:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Perhaps the most important point he makes is that the rich in the US think they'll be immune from the consequences of their short-sighted stupidity if they only build enough gates around their communities and hire enough soldiers to protect them. They don't seem to understand that their entire way of life is dependent upon the bottom 99% of the population that drives and sustains the economy that made, and continues to keep, them wealthy. Consumer spending in the US is the engine of the world economy, and every job that US companies ship overseas reduces the power of that economy, and when it reaches the tipping point it will make Argentina look like a two week recession. And when this economic house of cards collapses as Thomas Friedman fiddles his moronic tunes of globalization, the superwealthy Americans will have much farther to fall than the rest of us. I do think, however, that we should wait until they see the last of their riches go down the toilet before we grind them up into soylent green.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We use it....We loose it
Posted by: jeffrey7 on Jul 11, 2005 2:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We as humans don't try too hard to keep the Creation in balance.It's been that way since the last Iceage.Humans aty that time saw the Earth changes as aspects of an angry god.The same was true of forest depleation,crop faliures and such,all acts of god.Not we Humans.Such is being short sighted.But here in America,more correctly Turtle Island,was kept as near as pristine as possible.It was seen as our responsibility.That worked for 70,000 years.Till Columbus got here.He brought the ways of destruction and plunder that was
the model of the then modern world,to leave us this one,because no-one with money has the sense to do it clean
and right.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Reasons for hope Posted by: Arkadian
» RE: easons for hope Posted by: jeffrey7
BEHAVIOR : contol your own or others'
Posted by: IanA on Jul 12, 2005 6:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Jared Diamond explains” Not “JUST” Americans but people around the world concluded: We have to …”. It would be fairer to say that the rest of the world has been telling America these self same and obvious ditties of fact since the 70s, but no one could shout loud enough over the greed fest which is still in full swing.

"The rich in the US think they'll be immune from the consequences…..” , The gates are fashioned as we speak by a society which lives in the illusion of control by technology and violence. Do you think a new generation of nuclear weapons and space based guidance and delivery systems is need to solve this problem? (see the article Japan Joins U.S. in Dangerous Space Race by Bruce K. Gagnon http://www.zmag.org/ ) It sure as hell is not to teach Americans sustainable consumption. Anyone disagreeing with our methods of “Liberation”…. Zap. We liberate resources.

Why shall “the meek shall inherit”? They know how to live on less in tough times without killing each other. Think, use less, be happy, is not going to make rich corporations richer so I don’t see it being taught with the latest colour codes from the Homeland Security.

The solution; according to the WHO’s Singapore Conference last week the instrument of balance, the Damocles’ sword, is ready. 1/3 of global population may not have to learn that we are all connected to each other’s destinies one way or the other. As Diamond said : They can send terrorists, they can unconsciously send emerging diseases,….. It’s always the foreigners fault, or is it?. Avian Flue pandemic would trigger economic collapse eclipsing AIDS in Africa, Imagine future Boston or LA riots. A society weaned on violence and deprived of the ability to sustain itself with no moral anchor. “Get out of here and go eat your own mother, you mother….”

Iraq and Afghanistan are live field training operation and 9/11 was a necessary catylist. The naive who find “revelation” in Diamond’s writing will still be still surprised when the National Guard guns are pointed at them.

The positive note: to all you kids out there. This problem is not going to be overcome by worrying about the starving African, the landless Brazilian, jobless Euro trash or the greedy oil corp man. In will be overcome by modifying YOUR OWN BEHAVIOUR. If it’s not don’t worry, you can try again in the next life!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Maybe we all just need each other....
Posted by: jakstrate on Jul 15, 2005 8:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...more than we would like to admit. The article states one telling point to it all in ...
Within the last 10 years we've had an increasing phenomena of what's called the "gated community" in which rich people do their very best to insulate themselves. Instead of worrying about the water supply, they drink bottled water. Instead of worrying about the public police force they've got their private security guards. Their children don't go to public schools. They're not worried about the social security system because they've got private pensions. They're not worried about Medicare because they've got private health insurance.
The poor don't necessarily "aspire" in some Alger-like determination, sometimes they simply revolt and overtake the elites. I don't particularly think the Muslim extremists of today are trying to change the world as they might be trying to punish it for the wrongs that have been committed to the poor and exploited. If we, those of abundance, actually committed ourselves to problem solving rather than defeating, we may have some sort of future generations to bestow this planet to. Instead of "slapping down" the needy as whiners and trouble-makers, the power mongers might want to stand a little taller by raising the quality of life of others....or we might simply die for our arrogance.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What about economic factors?
Posted by: cmysticism on Jul 16, 2005 1:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mr. Diamond's insights are fascinating, certainly, but much to my surprise is how little he notes the importance of economics in general. This will explain many of the reasons we conduct ourselves so wastefully these days.
A capitalist economy demands that we overproduce to fill a market, and ironically, also insists that we do not feed people who cannot financially afford to buy the vast amounts of food we produce, because food is a commodity like everything else in a capitalist system. Though many, many liberals address the issue of poverty and starvation in a world of plenty, surprisingly few question the absurdity of charging people money for extremely needed resources like food, even though they often question the cruelty of America forcing people to pay for health care.
Further, the population problem is largely a non-issue, unless you take economic factors into account. The Earth is not overpopulated, and America certainly isn't (though some countries are). The fact that our economic system forces us to buy and sell food as a marketable commodity, and the majority of people in the world lack the financial resources to buy food, creates the illusion that there are more people than the world can feed. Nonsense! The states of Kansas and Iowa alone produce enough grain to provide a few thousand calories for every human on Earth daily. But because food is produced to be sold as a commodity, it's actually global capitalism that cannot adquately feed people, not world resources in general. Of course, this is one of the current economic system's dirtiest and most abhorant "open" secrets, something many free enterprise-supporting liberals do not want to confront.
Also, the economic environment in which we run factories, and the way the system insists that we maintain reliance on rare and thus financially expensive fossil fuels, has much to do with the environmental destruction we now face as a civilization. In actuality, we have the technology to utilize non-polluting, fully renewable sources of energy (e.g., solar, hydro, electrical fuel cells), but the Bush's and Cheney's of the world are against this because that would cut into corporate profits immensely. So, human civilization itself cannot be blamed for a lot of our global problems.
I really wish Mr. Diamond would address these issues much more than he did.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What about economic factors? Posted by: cmysticism
» The illusion of control Posted by: Sojourner
» Confused Posted by: crz53
» RE: Confused Posted by: cmysticism
» Time is no longer on our side Posted by: Sojourner
The jist of the whole matter...
Posted by: redwolfreturns on Jul 22, 2005 9:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...is contained in this back & forth:

"The Norse were unwilling to learn from the Inuit who preceded and outlasted them."

"That's right, the Inuit are still alive today. It's like a controlled laboratory experiment. The red test tube and the blue test tube: the Inuit and the Greenland Norse."

The Inuit were "primitive" hunter-gatherers who lived by the principle of the circle, while the Norse were "civilized" agriculturists who lived by the principle of the pyramid. All the negative factors leading to collapse that Diamond talks about are characteristics of agricultural societies and do not apply to hunter-gatherer societies to any significant degree. 1000 years from now, the only humans likely to be alive on Earth will be living pretty much the same way all humans were living 10,000 years ago. Everything on Earth happens in a Circle, and people who thrive over the long term live by the Circle (rather than by the pyramid).

If any of this resonates with anyone, maybe read "Ishmael" & "The Story of B" by Daniel Quinn, "My Name is Chellis & I'm in Recovery from Western Civilization" By Chellis Glendinning, "The Tracker" by Tom Brown, as well as "Journey to the Ancestral Self" by Tamarack Song (this last book can be found at www.teachingdrum.org). This series of books will take you from the middle of the matrix to the edge of the rabbit hole...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

because...
Posted by: creature on Aug 1, 2005 2:51 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
because people motivated by hope are more powerful and less dangerous to themselves and to others than are people motivated by fear -- or worse yet, by panic -- and of course, also more productive than those crippled by despair.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

not entirely
Posted by: Gregor on Apr 22, 2006 3:30 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think it is an error to think only in black and white terms. Either or when it comes to an energetic being like the Planet Earth. If you look at the great philosophers and minds of the year 6,000 years ago, you will see that nothing was either/or. The Ying Yang symbol is one example, the Magen David is another example. It isn't just black nor white, there are shades of each in the whole circle. It is a circle. The aborigines say we start with "black and white" but it is the "gray" (the mixing) that goes back to God. The reason the people are in the places right now on this planet is because of the reason the souls must be very special souls to endure this big change to help effect the change and to create the ascension of all humans as we change to better and higher forms. It is a time when we are receiving help. We just don't see it yet. We all must work as hard as we are able to to keep our spiritual sides alive and elevated. Do not buy into dogmas, but find your own truths and send them out to the world.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Mrs
Posted by: Peace on Apr 24, 2006 9:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We should always remember that humans are not required for the survival of the planet.
When we are too much of a burden for the planet then we will disappear.
At the moment we have a choice as to whether we want the human race to survive or not. The decisions we make in the next few years will decide.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]