Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
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.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Is the Deadly Crash of Our Civilization Inevitable?

By Terrence McNally, AlterNet. Posted February 13, 2007.


An interview with author Thomas Homer-Dixon about the social, political, economic and technological crises we face and how long we can sustain the lifestyle that brought them about.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

More stories by Terrence McNally

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Humankind is doing more things, faster, across a greater space than ever before, producing changes of a size and speed never seen before.

Thomas Homer-Dixon compares our current situation to driving too fast along a country road in a dense fog. Some ignore the fog and keep their foot pressed on the accelerator, but most of us feel like fairly helpless passengers on this wild ride.

In 1870, the average income in the world's richest country was about nine times greater than that in the world's poorest country. By 1990 it was forty-five times greater.

In 2006, the world's 793 billionaires held combined wealth of $2.6 trillion. (If liquidated in 2006), this wealth could have hired the poorest half of the world's workers -- the 1.4 billion workers who earn a few dollars a day -- for almost two years.

Between 1977 and 1996, the weight of the average American cheeseburger grew over 25 percent, and the volume of the average soft drink grew more than 50 percent. About 40 percent of the world's population now lacks sufficient water for basic sanitation and hygiene, and nearly one out of every five people does not have enough to drink.

Between 2000 and the beginning of 2005, China's daily oil imports soared 140 percent. Saudi Arabia, has pumped a total of 46 billion barrels of oil in the past 17 years, without admitting to any decrease in its stated reserve figure of about 260 billion barrels.

Since 1950, industrialized fishing has reduced the total mass of large fish in the world's oceans by 90 percent. The atmosphere's level of carbon dioxide is the highest in 650,000 years.

Is a deadly crash inevitable?

Thomas Homer-Dixon is director of the Trudeau Centre for the Study of Peace and Conflict at the University of Toronto. He is the author of "The Ingenuity Gap" and his newest book "The Upside of Down: Catastrophe, Creativity, and the Renewal of Civilization."

Terrence McNally: What are the biggest questions driving you right now?

Thomas Homer-Dixon: I have a 20-month-old son, and I'm concerned about the future for him. I'm trying to figure out what might happen and how we can make it better.

It's unlikely that the future is going to be a linear extrapolation of the present, but I've pretty well arrived at the conclusion that the diversity and power of the stresses that we're encountering are going to cause some major volatility. I expect social, political, economic and technological crises and breakdowns. It's hard to say what they're going to look like, but the probability of some major problems developing is rising.

So how are we going to respond in times of crisis?

In the book I introduce the metaphor of earthquakes. I talk about tectonic stresses building up under the surface of our societies and of global society. Now this is something that Californians are very familiar with. Everybody in the state knows that there are mighty tectonic plates pressing together along the San Andreas Fault, among others. Potential energy builds up, and at some point it's released in earthquakes that can have devastating consequences.

And I think the same is at least metaphorically true for our world. Stresses are building, and at some point I expect there will be a release of pressure because our institutions and our adaptive capability will be overloaded. We just won't be able to cope.

TMN: You point out that it's not linear, and it isn't any one thing that's going to do it. It's the combination and interaction. In his book Collapse, Jared Diamond puts forth five factors that have led to collapse -- human environmental impacts, climate change, the behavior of your enemies, the behavior of your friends and how you respond. What are the converging stresses you see?

THD: Demographic, energy, environmental change, especially scarcity of water, shortages of cropland and forest in poor countries, climate, and then finally widening gaps between rich and poor people around the world.

You touched on something a moment ago that's very important. The real problem is that they're all happening together. We've learned in recent decades that revolution or societal collapse tends to happen when societies are stressed from multiple directions simultaneously.

Any one of the problems we face could be a major challenge for human society, but we have things going in the wrong direction in five different ways at the same time. Millions around the world are in a situation of severe water scarcity. That's already having major economic impacts, causing poverty and dislocation, and undermining institutions. Add climate change and the problem becomes that much worse. The two things will multiply each other. You could have a really catastrophic problem where, say, the precipitation fails and there's already water scarcity.

TMN: And the energy issue impacts everything -- moving water, moving people.

THD: Or drilling deeper into the ground to pull more water out of the ground. Energy is kind of a master resource. If we have enough cheap, high quality energy, we can cope with a lot of our other problems. But once energy becomes a lot more expensive, then the combination of climate change and water scarcity will be that much harder to deal with.

TMN: I recall Buckminster Fuller made the basic point that truly accurate economic value is related to energy.

THD: In fact there's a whole way of approaching economics that uses thermodynamics. Herman Daly in particular has pioneered this. Energy is a currency that is fundamental and physical, and it gets you away from prices, which are often distractions. The price of something -- a barrel of oil, a bushel of grain -- includes so many other factors that may not have anything to do with underlying abundance or scarcity of these things.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: author, book, future, interview, crisis, excess

Interviewer Terrence McNally hosts Free Forum on KPFK 90.7FM, Los Angeles (streaming at kpfk.org).

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

Advertisement
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:
Nonsense!
Posted by: Temporary on Feb 13, 2007 12:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If there ever comes problems or disagreements about economic or political issues, we'll just solve them the good old way, right?

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

» RE: Nonsense! Posted by: ISlamIslam
» RE: This country has fomented many wars... Posted by: AngryWhiteFemale
» RE: Nonsense! Posted by: JoshuaLudd
Here is what is ripping the world to pieces
Posted by: Bobsays on Feb 13, 2007 2:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Over-population, cultural relativism and the Millennium Develoment Goals. These three things have created a perfect storm of total chaos in the world. Since the early 1990s (and accelerated under Kofi Annan post 1997) the project to make everyone in the world equal has gone into over-drive. But this has had an opposite effect. It is has instead made things more unequal, destroyed the standard of living and quality of life in the west, and brought on war without end.

We need to instead hold fast on our values, have strict border controls, be self-reliant, and end this project on trying to make everyone in the world equal. Countries and cultures should be left alone to evolve at their own pace. We should instead protect our societies and freedoms. This can be best exemplified by the twin pressures of Mexican illegal migration and muslim fundamentalism: two destabilising forces.

Flacky ideas like a people's wiki and open source dmocracy will only bring more waffle and prevarication. The intellectual's country of origin - Canada - is the home to waffle and weak policy. I would not follow their example.

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

» RE: I agree with you bcgirl125 Posted by: AngryWhiteFemale
» RE: I agree with you bcgirl125 Posted by: AngryWhiteFemale
» RE: I agree with you bcgirl125 Posted by: leafsong1
» RE: I agree with you bcgirl125 Posted by: ISlamIslam
Here is what is ripping the world to pieces
Posted by: Bobsays on Feb 13, 2007 2:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Over-population, cultural relativism and the Millennium Develoment Goals. These three things have created a perfect storm of total chaos in the world. Since the early 1990s (and accelerated under Kofi Annan post 1997) the project to make everyone in the world equal has gone into over-drive. But this has had an opposite effect. It is has instead made things more unequal, destroyed the standard of living and quality of life in the west, and brought on war without end.

We need to instead hold fast on our values, have strict border controls, be self-reliant, and end this project on trying to make everyone in the world equal. Countries and cultures should be left alone to evolve at their own pace. We should instead protect our societies and freedoms. This can be best exemplified by the twin pressures of Mexican illegal migration and muslim fundamentalism: two destabilising forces.

Flacky ideas like a people's wiki and open source dmocracy will only bring more waffle and prevarication. The intellectual's country of origin - Canada - is the home to waffle and weak policy. I would not follow their example.

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

» Actually... Posted by: JoshuaLudd
Here is what is ripping the world to pieces
Posted by: Bobsays on Feb 13, 2007 2:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Over-population, cultural relativism and the Millennium Develoment Goals. These three things have created a perfect storm of total chaos in the world. Since the early 1990s (and accelerated under Kofi Annan post 1997) the project to make everyone in the world equal has gone into over-drive. But this has had an opposite effect. It is has instead made things more unequal, destroyed the standard of living and quality of life in the west, and brought on war without end.

We need to instead hold fast on our values, have strict border controls, be self-reliant, and end this project on trying to make everyone in the world equal. Countries and cultures should be left alone to evolve at their own pace. We should instead protect our societies and freedoms. This can be best exemplified by the twin pressures of Mexican illegal migration and muslim fundamentalism: two destabilising forces.

Flacky ideas like a people's wiki and open source dmocracy will only bring more waffle and prevarication. The intellectual's country of origin - Canada - is the home to waffle and weak policy. I would not follow their example.

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

Archaeology shows plenty of examples
Posted by: Ian MacLeod on Feb 13, 2007 4:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
of civilizations that died out because they refused to alter the way they did things; anthropology adds more, even if suppositional (though most likely correct). Well, we're still the same creature, and the same "types" still end up in power. I have no trouble seeing us still arguing about it when everything comes crashing down.

Ian

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

» Well, lets not disregard.. Posted by: JoshuaLudd
RE: Here is what is ripping the world to pieces
Posted by: MyLeftFoot on Feb 13, 2007 4:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
do you repeat yourself when upset? :-)

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

"seed communities" were established long ago ...
Posted by: Shakti on Feb 13, 2007 5:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... in the 1970's there was some discussion of establishing communities that could serve as sources of stability and hope should the larger society break down.

JG Bennet's Needs of the New Age Community (published in the 1970's) specifically uses the metaphor of planting the seeds of a new kind of society and letting them grow in obscurity (seeds begin sprouting in the dark, underground), so that by the time the dominant culture experiences serious disruption, these seeds will have grown into small trees that bear fruit.

Bennet writes that the mammals did not go head to head with the dinosaurs, and defeat them for dominance, but rather were just there, small and scurrying. When the dinosaurs fell, the mammals were able to flourish in the now empty ecological niches.

Similarly, these seed communities are now somewhat obscure, not on most people's radar, but they are there. There is actually a network of intentional communities, cohousing groups, organic farms, CSA's, alternative small economies, etc. that form a gossamer matrix within the rigid "steel beam" structure of dominant culture. If/when the steel beams implode, these folks will still be there, living, working, eating etc. differently and modeling a new way of being for the rest of us.

So, take heart! For more on this kind of thing, see the Directory of Intentional Communities (you will be surprised at how many there are!) or go to http://www.ic.org/.

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

» Ecovillage, Expensive? Posted by: Leadbyexample
» Easier said than done... Posted by: buffeliscious
» Homesteaders lived in sod houses! Posted by: Leadbyexample
» Sod houses would be ILLEGAL now Posted by: prairiedog
» i want hot water... Posted by: veggiegrrrl
» RE: i want hot water... Posted by: Krain61
» RE: i want hot water... Posted by: JoshuaLudd
» RE: i want hot water... Posted by: mjabele
» RE: i want hot water... Posted by: djnoll
STOP SPAMMING!!!!!! nm
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on Feb 13, 2007 6:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
nm

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

» RE: STOP SPAMMING!!!!!! nm Posted by: Krain61
How Bad, and When?
Posted by: Frish on Feb 13, 2007 6:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I believe the author fails to describe how bad it is going to be, either in isolated locations (wars over water) or worldwide (pandemic due to overpopulation, or pandemic destroying one or more staple crops (maize or rice for example).

I firmly believe it will be far worse than the author does...and perhaps sooner than later...

I agree wholeheartedly that the "collapse" is a chaotic situation, that is, it is not a gradual downward slide, but some critical component or stabilizing factor will disintegrate, cascading a gigantic systems wide failure.

Take a peek at Save the Biosphere. We are a radical bunch, who believe we understand the underlying problem, WAY too many people. We represent the moral choice, to minimize human suffering (and maximize the chance that LIFE on the planet will survive people's ignorance and unsustainable ways) the answer is to NOT reproduce.

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

» Exactly Posted by: albrechtkrausse
» RE: xactly Posted by: buffeliscious
» RE: xactly Posted by: albrechtkrausse
» RE: How Bad, and When? Posted by: pdxstudent
» good luck Posted by: Iconoclast421
» A look at History Posted by: Krain61
» RE: A look at History Posted by: Blade
Authors of Self Destruction & Delusion
Posted by: NoPCZone on Feb 13, 2007 7:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Not to sound like an alarmist, but JH Kunstler's term "The Long Emergency" fits very well. So many have fallen into the trap of trying to rearrange deck chairs on the Titanic by trying to cling to the outmoded economic structure defined by cars, trucks and cheap energy.

'Expand your view beyond the question of how we will run all the cars by means other than gasoline. This obsession with keeping the cars running at all costs could really prove fatal. It is especially unhelpful that so many self-proclaimed "greens" and political "progressives" are hung up on this monomaniacal theme. Get this: the cars are not part of the solution (whether they run on fossil fuels, vodka, used frymax™ oil, or cow shit). They are at the heart of the problem. And trying to salvage the entire Happy Motoring system by shifting it from gasoline to other fuels will only make things much worse. The bottom line of this is: start thinking beyond the car.' JHK in a recent AlterNet Post.

Thomas Homer-Dixon falls into this class, underestimating the scope & depth of what Peak Oil means to every segment of our economy. Only Gasoline/AvGas and Diesel fuel have shown themselves capable of supporting the economic matrix we have erected throughout the developed world and they don't come from coal, hydro, wind or nuclear.

Hydrogen and batteries are only means of storing energy and are not practical for flight or personal transport. The production of gasoline from coal, shale or tar sands is energy inefficient and environmentally expensive. Natural Gas will quickly prove to be far too valuable as a source for chemicals & fertilizers to be used for mere heating.

Changing things is going to be highly disruptive and very expensive- don't let anyone sell you on a quick fix. The sooner we start the less expensive and the less disruptive the transition will be. The later we wait, the harsher the transition and the more expensive in people and money terms. Factor in a nation crushed in debt and it gets even uglier.

Even more than global warming, how we address this issue will largely determine the future course of our nation. Oil depletion will force even the most headstrong and greedy to turn away from fossil fuels. How nations and societies answer the bell on this one will cast the die for a very long time. It is a fork in the road.

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

» "Thinking Beyond The Car"! Posted by: Douglas
» RE: American Audience Posted by: NoPCZone
» RE: American Audience Posted by: themotie
ah ha ha ha ha ha....
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on Feb 13, 2007 7:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Finally Alternet is starting to take a more serious look at some very real posibilities.

www.greenanarchy.org

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

Evolution sure is a kick in the pants.
Posted by: craigandrew on Feb 13, 2007 7:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Civilizations come and civilizations go, but if you look from far enough away you just might see that civilization is not the goal. It is only a step in the developmental process. Imagine people who live in peace with one anther who did not have to try to live in peace with one anther. It is not a question of our understanding and application of "civilization", but our individual evolution away from animalistic, fear driven, reactionary behavior.

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

Capitalist Has Laws of Motion...Sheep People Please Learn and Appreciate!
Posted by: felixcommi on Feb 13, 2007 8:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Capitalism is based on competition... Suppose we have two logging companies... Company A decides to reduce their output and they reserve a large portion of forest under their lease for the environments benefit....Company B decides to haul ass through the woods cutting down everything in sight...

Company B has more timber and can sell at lower prices in the market, they can outprice and outcompete Company A...Now company A facing lower revenues must cut wages, benefits, jobs, and either cut down more trees and exploit labour more ruthlessly or risk compromising their economic viability in the competitive market....

Now Sheep people...this is a basic feature of competitive markets, you must always be extracting more natural resources to remain competitive, you must always be reducing labour costs (and emptying workers fridges), you must always be moving forward to grown and grow and grow under these imperatives....

Apply these core capitalist principles to every sector of the economy, we get inexorable class exploitation, environmental degradation, and infinite growth in a finite world....how "efficient" is the maximization of commodities (...look around you right now and ask do i need all of this shit?!!!)

This is capitalism and it is the problem...We need democratic public institutions to shape our energy future, that do not run on the imperatives of profit but human need....it must be anti-capitalist because infinite growth is not impossible...we must have input in what we need....

Anyone who thinks America's, Canada's, or Western Europe's global ambitions are benevolent and their forms of capitalism are good for this planet give your head a shake...its childish non-sense...

I am a law student who is going to benefit greatly from Capitalism, but i am not ignorant of the fact that it is a system with inherent law sof motion that contradict the basic functiuoning of healthy communities and environments....It is unsustainable whether you liek it or not....it is futile to pretend it can last forever and that is why we must be looking for radical solutions....to those who think infinite growth and exploitation in a finite world is possible, please recognize your logical fault....at the end of the day the competitive market will run its course and the imperatives of surplus extraction and keeping companies going will destroy our life supprt systems both environmental and social...

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

» I agree - but... Posted by: sln70
» Company B Posted by: albrechtkrausse
» RE: Company B Posted by: themotie
We have the abillity to change but
Posted by: Krain61 on Feb 13, 2007 8:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
we in general do not have the desire to give up anything for that change. We as a whole stick our heads in the sand and we keep buying and buying. How many of your friends still can food or grow a garden? How many play board games verses watching TV or jumping online? How many play with there kids verses sitting them in front of that baby sitter called TV or vidio games? Or still cook food the old fashion way and not with the microwave or taking there kids out to micky d's or some other poison food franchies? For the last year I have lived without Electric and all the things I use to take for granted. I've found that there is some adjustments but life seems eaiser and I don't miss micky d's either..
I seen where someone from Canada was talking about health care! If we eat right and and lived right we could do with out health care except for actual needs like taking a kidney out or fixing a broken bone. Our world is causing our sickness.

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

A People's Future
Posted by: xgroverx on Feb 13, 2007 8:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
With the reference to FDR, it seems Homer-Dixon and the interviewer are suggesting the need for a strong leader (either individual or institution) to bring us back up after a collapse. I would contend, however, that it will be a mass movement which will define the values of a new society. If we look at history, we find that it has been the struggles of mass movements, not the actions of leaders, that have shaped the world (to paraphrase Howard Zinn) Today, we are seeing an emerging resistance culture, spurred on by the increasing availability of information and opportunities for communication on the internet and a resurgence of politically and socially conscious music, film, and art. This is a culture that includes those like us who seek out independent news sites or communities. There is a strong anti-authoritarian tendency among this emerging culture, a culture which values participative decision making as opposed to the currently prevailing paradigm of 'representative' government. I feel that when economic, ecological, social, and political collapse occurs, the pillars that have held up the old guard will crumble and a rapidly growing culture, steeped in the ideals of peace, unity, love, respect, and human dignity and autonomy, will rise up from the ashes. I know this sounds overly optimistic, but without hope, what do we have?

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

» RE: A People's Future Posted by: Grampop
» RE: A People's Future Posted by: djnoll
» RE: A People's Future Posted by: tiellis
OPTIMISM IS A MORAL IMPERATIVE
Posted by: drricklippin on Feb 13, 2007 9:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Even despite objective evidence to the contrary human optimism is a moral imperative. The moment we accept cultural or global collapse we contribute to it.

Human intentional thought alone can bring about the triumph of Eros over Thanatos

The great struggle of our age is "does man WANT to live?"

Thanatophilia=love of death seems to be promoted by organized religion.

Comments welcome

Dr. Rick Lippin

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

» Agreed Posted by: Grampop
We must put our own house in order.
Posted by: monkeywrench on Feb 13, 2007 9:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"There will be times of frustration and fear and anger on the part of many people when fundamental verities and patterns of life are suddenly challenged. They'll be scared. And in those moments, extremists can take advantage of the situation and push our societies in directions that are very bad."

This is precisely what happened with 9/11, and what our own government, the Bush administration, did to us after 9/11 – and it has been anything but productive: we are more vulnerable now than before that tragedy.

This is the same govenment that also has resisted all efforts to become more environmentally responsible; a sort of "twofer" of evil. As a consequence, we are dragging far behind many other regions, especially Europe, in conservation and alternative energy commercialization.

A government in the mold of what we have now will most certainly hasten our demise. The voting public needs to understand this. Whatever we do as individuals or private small businesses (and we MUST do whatever we can), government, with its size, authority and pervasiveness, must be on board. That's why the neocon and culture-of-greed scourges in control of Washington D.C. must be vanquished. The future – of America and, thanks to our influence, possibly the world – quite literally is at stake.

(Thank you Al Gore for "An Inconvenient Truth;" if you run for president, you've got my vote.)

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

To Know and Still Change
Posted by: pdxstudent on Feb 13, 2007 9:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This article, and the book on which it centers, shows the interesting tension we have in a late-capitalist society between the apocalyptic vision of an "end of the world," and the moderate though obviously un-nerving thought of changing the way the world works. It could provide a stepping stone away from the power consolidating fear that everything is going to shit, and put it in the hands of people increasingly aware that, no, things are just changing dramatically. I like it especially because the author acknowledges the fact that none of this is going to feel good, but that we got to go through with it anyway.

Part of relieving that uneasiness is the development of and opportunities for open criticism, especially of the values that so often underpin our reasons for doing what we do. Zizek points out that ideology is not an illusory view of things as much as a way of behaving despite what is obvious. It's a matter of changing the way we behave that will underpin any successful social movement to cope with the unraveling of an oil-dependent society.

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

Capitalism
Posted by: redbrownandblueparty on Feb 13, 2007 10:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think Felixcommi's comment at 8:06 was right on. Capitalism is intrinsically competitive, anti-earth and anti-women and children. A few powerful patriarchical families have an agenda of world domination, using primaily the banking system. Capitalism is their divide and conquer strategy now. They use any system that suits them. Capitalism is becoming the worst kind of communism and fascism with a small group of macho-minds at the top. The solution is for more of us as individuals to acquire deep understanding of what is happening. This includes a spiritual intentionality and beingness as alluded to in one of the above posts. The ideal government is a system of legal checks and balances that protects the individual against "systems" like Capitalism, and the new Roman Imperialists.

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

» RE: Capitalism Posted by: JoshuaLudd
» Well... Posted by: JoshuaLudd
» I have an idea Posted by: AdamG
» In defense of capitalism Posted by: AdamG
» RE: In defense of capitalism Posted by: JoshuaLudd
RE: Here is what is ripping the world to pieces
Posted by: harinama on Feb 13, 2007 11:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sounds like you drank the neocon coolaid and are trying to shove it down our throats like Rush Limbaugh.

For those of us who think for ourselves, and are not blinded by ethnocentricity, nationalism and selfishness, it's easy to see the effects of the USA's attempts at ironfisted economic and social control of the world.

Our economy depends on the valuation of the dollar, which is no longer based on a commodity outright (ie. gold), but instead maintains its intrinsic value based on being the primary currency of oil. The neocons presently will do anything to keep oil being traded in dollars, including "pre-emptive" wars of aggression on states that openly proclaim switching to euros (ie. Iraq prior to invasion, and now Iran).

America is a PLURALISTIC heterogenious society, built on the backs of two centuries of good, hardworking immigrants who bring their own values, culture and world view. This is the BEST of what America is, namely tolerant, embracing and productive. Your rant seems to try to negate their positive influence, which begs the question...WHEN DID YOUR ANCESTORS COME TO THIS COUNTRY?

Illegal immigration and Muslim Fundamentalism are NO THREAT TO THIS COUNTRY, and are largely manufactured issues by the extreme right wing corporatist (read fascist) interests that wear their politics on their sleeve and push their values on the rest of us(Murdock has admitted he does this through his media outlets).

Get your head out of your ass and think for yourself for once. And maybe, just maybe read a book or two and get your news from a NON NETWORK source. You just might get an appreciation for the citizens of the world who do not want to become our colonies.

America's time of world domination is near end, and idiots like you will be the ones who fall hardest. Open up your worldview before it comes crashing in on you.

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

RE: Here is what is ripping the world to pieces
Posted by: leafsong1 on Feb 13, 2007 11:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What planet have you been living on? There has been no significant effort on an international level to stop the increasing disparity between the world's rich and poor. There have been extreme, radical, and reckless initiatives by the world's rich and powerful to do the exact opposite, and their success is what you have been witnessing. Illegal immigration, the trade deficit, and world overpopulation are all problems that have been exacerbated or created by the rich/poor gap. And yet, the sources of this gap, tolerance for oppressive regimes in places like China, artificially depressed fuel prices, mass privatization of essential resources and services, tax cuts for the rich, and the obsession with the mythical benefits of free trade have all been in triumph for the last quarter century. One would have to be dim-witted indeed to think that any of these problems could be laid at the feet of the relatively powerless Kofi Anan. The culprits are Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, and their army of gullibles led by professional liars.

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

Hijacking of terms by corporate (chemical) agriculture is one example.
Posted by: Leadbyexample on Feb 13, 2007 11:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To know where you are going you have to find out where you have been. Agriculture in the U.S. early on was sustainable as there was nothing available but horse power for cultivation and farm duties. Soil fertility came by the way of crop rotation, plowdown crops and the spreading of manure on fields, much of the native vegetation was left in place for hay and grazing puposes. Sustainable and organic farming is now called "alternative agriculture", how did this happen? We must take back the language, start raising food in a sustainable fashion and speak out about the disaster that is chemical agriculture if we are to survive.

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

leaf
Posted by: jimbobuddy on Feb 13, 2007 12:37 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
well said, "leaf".

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

Lead By Example
Posted by: Overburdened Planet on Feb 13, 2007 1:24 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Excerpt from near the end of the article: “…how can we create what I would call an "open source democracy," an environment in which we can have some of those really deep discussions about values that we can't within our current religious institutions.”

Thomas Homer-Dixon, states he is: “…concerned about the future…(of his)…20-month-old son” but his part in its conception occurred roughly 2.5 years ago, so wasn’t he aware of all the studies he cites, that the trend was only getting worse?

Isn’t his son going to be one more person that will consume more resources as an individual growing up in Toronto (or America) than any developing nation THD speaks of?

Yes, democracy, but when religions want us to keep populating, shouldn’t we consider articles about the demise of our planet important enough to include living by example? How can people keep having kids when there’s so many to adopt?

I’m sure there will be angry posts that follow, and granted, my post is short or simplistic, but please tell me why having more kids is part of the solution, or, why it isn’t part of the problem?

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

» RE: Lead By Example Posted by: Grampop
» RE: Lead By Example Posted by: phatkhat
» RE: Lead By Example Posted by: Overburdened Planet
a question few ask is...
Posted by: DeAnander on Feb 13, 2007 3:22 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... can the crash of our civilisation possibly be more "deadly" than its continuance?

Ran Prieur and Derrick Jensen have both asked this question and come to the conclusion that the whole thing needs to come down and the sooner the better. I can't fault their premises and am still struggling with their conclusions.

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

» RE: a question few ask is... Posted by: Grampop
» RE: a question few ask is... Posted by: talkville
bamboozled
Posted by: chomsky on Feb 13, 2007 11:02 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The sky is falling!! The sky is falling!!

Wake up people. You're being sold a lot of fairy tales about the "inevitable" crash. Peak oil, global warming, inexplicable viruses etc. etc. You're being conned into accepting your own extermination.

Ask the "experts" what the answer to all these intractable problems would be. Population reduction will probably be the answer. Somewhere along the lines of say 80 to 90%. Maybe even closer to a 95% reduction.

It's the only "humane" solution they'll tell you. Hahaha, who wants to go first? I wonder if the 5% that gets to stay will be the same 5% that already controls 90% of the earth's resources. Do you think they'll keep the "experts" who peddle this crap?

signed,
Paranoid

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

» RE: bamboozled Posted by: talkville
» agreed. Posted by: JoshuaLudd
» RE: agreed. Posted by: talkville
Discussion improved dramatically...
Posted by: Blade on Feb 13, 2007 11:38 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I just read through all comments on this article. They started off, at least the way listed, as pretty lame and jingoistic. But, after you folks got Bobsays to pipe down, there was some good discussion. I think I learned a lot. Thanks.

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

RE: Religion--Author Please Note!
Posted by: bluezephyr on Feb 14, 2007 9:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Our religious institutions are supposedly the places where we think about these larger values issues. But when we go in the door of our church or our mosque or our synagogue, we're given a creed, we're told what to think. We're not given a space in which to have a conversation about these things."
This may be true in the most widely known religions. However, Unitarian Universalists are NOT given a creed nor told what to think. This religion is challenging, in that members must develop their own theology, based on a free and responsible search for meaning. Through reading, sermons, religious education classes, and small group discussions, we are building our own theology on an on-going basis. The word religion comes from a Latin word meaning "to bind together." UUs are held together through a set of seven principles that serve as operational values. One of these principles is respect for the interdependent web of all existence, of which we are a part. (Humans are not necessarily at the the center of the web.) UUs also promote 'being the change you want to see in the world." UUs are engaged in efforts related to peace, global warming, and social justice. Concern for the poorest and least powerful of our fellow humans drives many of us. I feel all of these qualities refute your comments about current religions not being the place for deep discussions about values. Learn more about Unitarian Universalism! You'll thank me!

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

» Then, of course.. Posted by: JoshuaLudd
Localism is a Useful Start
Posted by: StuartH on Feb 14, 2007 9:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In his book, "The Long Emergency," Kunstler describes a scenario in which large scale systems dependent on cheap fuel give way to small scale, local systems, especially for the distribution of food.

Given everything we can know at this point, it seems logical that oil will begin at some point to dramatically increase in price. The current reduction back to the neighborhood of $2.00 a gallon should not be taken as evidence that the Peak Oil phenomenon will not happen, but only that there is a connection between price strategies and political interests.

The media system is unfortunately dependent on advertising revenue, which keeps truckloads of goods moving through the shopping malls. Telling the deeper truths about the tectonic plates that underlie the landscape is pretty much prevented by the economic realities. More than likely, any depiction of what is going on, necessitated by events, will be sugar coated all the way down the line and spun or distorted to keep those people shopping.

A truly sustainable view of resources would include a debate about the ways in which we could all economize and NOT buy stuff. However, since at least WWII, the American economy has been completely dependent on more and more consumers buying more and more stuff.

This Alternet discussion represent a miniscule, microscopic incursion into media mindlessness that dominates the world at this time.

It may be that more people will wake up when the Peak Oil phenomenon really begins to take on a permanent reality for people at the average gas pump. How long can the oil companies manipulate prices? Probably for some time to come. But inevitably, that ability will fade.

The problem is, there needs to be some preparation for this through more discussion and debate.

Alternet seems to be living up to its name at this point. There are not a lot of venues where these considerations are being aired out. Agree or disagree with this author and the points he is making, this is a necessary subject to do a lot of deep thinking about. The implications are profound for each of us as well as for our world.

I hope Alternet keeps finding ways to keep the spotlight shining on this issue.

Meanwhile, looking around locally for opportunities to talk to people, discuss the local ramifications, and get involved in projects that lay a foundation for the future seem to me to be where the relevance is.

We need national leaders with their heads on straight, who are not beholden to special interests, but it is at the local level where the real innovations that are needed will be occur.

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

dick
Posted by: rtmyth on Feb 14, 2007 12:18 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Overpopulation first, then overpopulation, and third, overpopulation. It will be rectified by war, mainly.

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

» RE: dick Posted by: talkville
Spengler
Posted by: Ruther on Feb 14, 2007 12:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Do people still read The Decline of the West, by Oswald Spengler? Decline of the West was first published in German vol I in 1918 and vol II 1922. For a book that was written 75 years ago, it has more insights into today's world situations than most of the dribble that is currently being published. All one has to do is read it, and see Spengler was right!

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

More words of wisdom
Posted by: mom'z the word on Feb 14, 2007 2:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While we are on the subject of leaping tall buildings in a single bound and traveling faster than a speeding bullet here are some quotes on the subject from people who survived a crisis and lived to tell about it.

"America is the only nation in history which miraculously has gone directly from barbarism to degeneration without the usual interval of civilization" Georges Clemenceau. Georges Clemenceau - (28 September 1841 – 24 November 1929) was a French statesman, physician and journalist. He led France during World War I and was one of the major voices behind the Treaty of Versailles.

And this one from Omar Bradly. "Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants. If we continue to develop our technology without wisdom or prudence, our servant may prove to be our executioner." Omar Nelson Bradley (February 12, 1893 – April 8, 1981) was one of the main U.S. Army field commanders in North Africa and Europe during World War II and a General of the Army of the United States Army. He was the last surviving five star officer of the United States.

"I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand." Confucius

And one of my favorites. "Ten people who speak make more noise than ten thousand who are silent. Napoleon.

There is a lot of truth in this article.

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

where's the class-based analysis: it gets different results, big time!
Posted by: scott.gregory on Feb 16, 2007 6:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Look at it from the point-of-view of the very rich. For them, the problem is that there are just too many people. From their position, particularly with computer technologies applied to production, all that is needed are the rich owners, a well-paid but well-controlled techocratic class, and of course the private "professional" military...er..private guards and secret police. Maybe 500 million people at the most. And with a world population reduced to that number, all those "problems" would be resolved.
The fact is that we have a collusion of the political and economic elites. And those elites just don't need most of us average citizens anymore. So what do they ( who have all the control) do? They just let the disaster(s) happen. Let the great DIE-OFF begin. They want the collapse, because it won't be them that die off. They'll fly over all the mess in their private jets to their protected enclaves.
And a globalized neoliberal, meaning unregulated, capitalist economy is the device the rich are using to bring about the die off. Anyone wonder why there is such a turn toward this idealogy among the ruliing classes of almost every nation. And why any national government that resists the "game-plan" is attacked, economically and if needed, militarily. Yugoslavia, now Iraq, many other nations as well; and then there was the willful collapse of the USSR by it's leaders?

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

Pakistan may have the key to doom
Posted by: coñoloco on Feb 17, 2007 12:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
With all this provocations against Islam,time is coming
some in charge of Pakistan nukes figure out that the source
of the inminent demise of their religion is the oil.
All the main wells are at the reach of Pakistan nukes.
A nuke explosion at an oil well,will make what Sadam did
in the previous Gulf war a child play.

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

Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment
Posted by: sushil_yadav on Feb 18, 2007 5:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The link between Mind and Social / Environmental-Issues.

The fast-paced, consumerist lifestyle of Industrial Society is causing exponential rise in psychological problems besides destroying the environment. All issues are interlinked. Our Minds cannot be peaceful when attention-spans are down to nanoseconds, microseconds and milliseconds. Our Minds cannot be peaceful if we destroy Nature.

Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment.

Subject : In a fast society slow emotions become extinct.
Subject : A thinking mind cannot feel.
Subject : Scientific/ Industrial/ Financial thinking destroys the planet.
Subject : Environment can never be saved as long as cities exist.


Emotion is what we experience during gaps in our thinking.

If there are no gaps there is no emotion.

Today people are thinking all the time and are mistaking thought (words/ language) for emotion.


When society switches-over from physical work (agriculture) to mental work (scientific/ industrial/ financial/ fast visuals/ fast words ) the speed of thinking keeps on accelerating and the gaps between thinking go on decreasing.

There comes a time when there are almost no gaps.

People become incapable of experiencing/ tolerating gaps.

Emotion ends.

Man becomes machine.


A society that speeds up mentally experiences every mental slowing-down as Depression / Anxiety.

A ( travelling )society that speeds up physically experiences every physical slowing-down as Depression / Anxiety.

A society that entertains itself daily experiences every non-entertaining moment as Depression / Anxiety.


FAST VISUALS /WORDS MAKE SLOW EMOTIONS EXTINCT.

SCIENTIFIC /INDUSTRIAL /FINANCIAL THINKING DESTROYS EMOTIONAL CIRCUITS.

A FAST (LARGE) SOCIETY CANNOT FEEL PAIN / REMORSE / EMPATHY.

A FAST (LARGE) SOCIETY WILL ALWAYS BE CRUEL TO ANIMALS/ TREES/ AIR/ WATER/ LAND AND TO ITSELF.


To read the complete article please follow either of these links :

PlanetSave

EarthNewsWire

sushil_yadav

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

Cooperation
Posted by: marklp on Feb 19, 2007 2:12 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The only thing that will prevent societal breakdown is teaching children to be cooperative as well as competitive. A good example are the new breed of social entrepreneurs such as Muhammed Yunus, Jeff Skoll, Pierre Omidyar etc. who channel their energy and drive into developing new solutions to solve social problems. The present paradigm is not designed to solve social problems but to maintain the status quo. Non profit charities have to compete against each other for limited funds from foundations, while the money to actually solve the problems is wasted in Iraq. Man has a propensity for violence and competitive aggression shaped perhaps by natural selection. That doesn't mean that we can't use our large brains (also shaped by natural selection) to make the societal changes that will enable sustainability and survival.

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

Input Crises
Posted by: Kevin Carson on Feb 19, 2007 10:18 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think most of the converging crises relate in some way to the effects of subsidized inputs. In some cases, the relationship is indirect, when the crisis is a negative externality like pollution that results indirectly from subsidized resource consumption.

Market price performs an informational function in informing the consumer of the real cost of providing something. When all costs are properly internalized in price, the consumer bears the full cost of what he consumes, and thus makes a rational decision of how much to consume. But when subsidies enter the picture, the informational function is distorted. You get the same result any time you disrupt a homeostatic mechanism, like putting a candle under the thermostat and getting an ice-cold house.

Under state capitalism, the consumption of energy, transportation, and natural resources is subsidized. As a result, demand for these inputs outstrips the subsidized supply. The Interstate Highway System is congested, sprawl chokes local road networks, it takes several times as much synthetic nitrogen to get the same crop yield, etc., etc. And the state, which subsidizes these inputs, is faced with the kind of fiscal crisis James O'Connor described several decades ago.

Eventually, centralized and state-subsidized infrastructures like the highway and civil aviation system will reach a catastrophic breaking point; there will be a dramatic shift back toward less resource-intensive models of production, and a model of production for local markets that minimizes transportation use.

The one thing corporate capitalism can't survive is a free market.

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