This is probably the most honest assessment of the current state of farming and our future food supply.
Photo by Rob Mulder / UnsplashPeople seem to misunderstand the connection between atmospheric CO2, climate predictability and industrialized agriculture. The number of times a “climate skeptic” has told me “plants love CO2”, like that fixes everything, is dumbfounding.
True: plants love CO2.
Also true: plants love warmth and water.
Also, also true: it’s not the CO2 (aka “plant food”) itself that’s the problem. It’s the resulting changes caused by rapidly rising atmospheric CO2 levels. Too much climate unpredictability, weather variability, heat, drought or water will destroy agriculture. That means shortages and famine.
Civilization is built off the back of agriculture. And agriculture requires a foundation of predictability and good soil. Without predictability, agriculture isn’t sustained and we once again become a species of hunters, foragers and nomads. While that worked 10,000+ years ago, the human population today is far too large and we would soon starve.
Climate change may push wild plants into areas in which they don’t currently flourish, but this has nothing to do with our ability to sustain an 8 billion population with industrialized agriculture. There is a reason why farming is concentrated in certain regions of the world: good climate and good soil.
The new areas in which plants may flourish aren’t necessarily ideal for growing fields of wheat, soy or corn. Even if they were ideal, it would take a significant amount of time to a) confidently identify these areas and b) build the necessary infrastructure.
If given a century or two, perhaps we could adapt to a changing environment. Unfortunately, the current pace of change risks multi-breadbasket failure in the near future.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
Musings from someone who has tried and failed to grow all their own food
A haul from the Author’s urban farming operation in Portland, Sept. 15, 2007, set out for CSA members to pick up (Photo C.H.White)
This is one of my all-time most popular essays, originally written in July, 2019, in response to massive flooding in farmland in the US Midwest but reposted several time since then because there’s always some crisis underway that can negatively affect farming. This year’s news peg is the fact that March was the tenth month in a row that set a record for hottest on record.
Whenever there’s a crisis that might affect the food supply, people suggest to “plant a garden.” If only it were that simple.
I used to be a small-scale organic farmer so take it from me: totally feeding yourself from your own efforts is very, very challenging. Though some friends and I tried over multiple seasons, we never succeeded, or even came anywhere close.
First of all, consider what you eat. Yes, you. What do you eat at home? At work? When you go out? Okay, what percentage of that can be raised in the bioregion where you live? If you have trouble answering this question, don’t feel bad. I would guess that the proportion of the US population with practical agricultural knowledge is lower than in any other society in history.
Looking at the subset of your current diet that can be grown in your area, is it enough to live off of? Is it well-balanced and does it provide enough calories? If not, what will you add to fill it out? This is purely an exercise of course, but there’s the rough draft of the menu you’re going to survive on. How will that work? I mean logistically?
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
As sketched in the previous post, I believe modernity to be an unsustainable flash that will not persist into future millennia. Uncomfortable with untethered speculation, I have said little about what might come after, but feel I owe something in this vein. Semantically, what follows the modern age must be the post-modern age, right? Except that name is already taken by a rather inane school of thought that may be even worse than modernist thought (it actually does not fundamentally refute modernism anyway, just throws sand into any conversation).
Despite my disdain for post-modernism, I will appropriate the term for what it will likely come to mean in centuries hence (long after people have finally forgotten the silly modern version of post-modernism). I feel better already.
The simplest explanation for why I have not written much on post-modernity is that I don’t feel I have much to say. The range of possibilities is quite large, and I would be a fool to pretend that I—or anyone, really—can paint a credible picture. I’m virtually certain I know how humans will live on the planet tomorrow, fairly sure I could paint an accurate picture for life one year from now, reasonably confident about a decade out, pretty damned fuzzy on a century from now, perhaps a little more clear a millennium into the future (as most of modernity has melted by then), have a decent guess for several million years hence (less likely to still have homo sapiens), and am increasingly certain when the number turns to billions of years (complex life on Earth extinguished). For me, the hardest part is the century scale: the messy, chaotic transition likely characterized by de-industrial scavenging.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
The following Contemplation is my comment in response to a thought-provoking post I read by Dave Pollard at his site How to Save the World.
Great read, thanks for sharing. A couple of quick thoughts.
If you’ve not stumbled across Erik Michaels work at Problems, Predicaments, and Technology you might find it confirming with regard to the notion that we have no free will. One of his major theses is that humans have no agency, and thus his motto to Live Now in the face of the consequences of human ecological overshoot.
Second, I’ve come to hold very similar thoughts as you on the idea that “we believe what we want to believe” and I think, perhaps, this is one of our primary reasons we grasp for hopeful narratives; along with the desire to believe we have agency/free will.
There are so many psychological mechanisms driving our behaviour and beliefs that it’s difficult to parse which is the most impactful — but perhaps it is our denial of reality in the face of our mortality as Ajit Varki argues. Not wanting to face the fact of death, we craft (using a lot of magical thinking) some rather complex narratives to deal with this reality. Throw in how we mitigate/reduce the stress of cognitive dissonance, and our tendencies toward deferring to authority and groupthink, and we have a recipe for clinging to stories — especially if weaved by smooth-talking snake oil salesmen — that provide ‘hope’.
Reality, facts, evidence…none of it matters. In fact, it appears we create our own reality based on ‘facts/evidence’ that tends to confirm our beliefs. As the lyrics of a song I recently heard suggest: “This is where I want to be, so this is where I go.”
Some want to believe there is an after-life. Others that human ingenuity and complex technologies will solve our existential predicaments. The laundry list of hopeful narratives is long and humans tend to want to confirm their beliefs rather than have them challenged. Denial and bargaining in the face of significant contrary evidence seems to be hard-wired in these walking, talking apes that have been able to leverage their cognitive abilities and tool-making skills to extend their ‘control’ over Nature and create the reality they wish; at least in their minds, and that seems to be all that matters for most.
If you’ve made it to the end of this contemplation and have got something out of my writing, please consider ordering the trilogy of my ‘fictional’ novel series, Olduvai (PDF files; only $9.99 Canadian), via my website — the ‘profits’ of which help me to keep my internet presence alive and first book available in print (and is available via various online retailers). Encouraging others to read my work is also much appreciated.
‘Representative’ Democracy: A Ruse To Convince Citizens That They Have Agency In Their Society
A friend recently posted on my FB timeline the link to an article about the plans of our provincial government in opening up sections of Ontario’s Greenbelt[1] to housing development and the legal action against this that is being contemplated by one of Ontario’s many First Nations communities.
He asked me the following: “I wonder how many people who vote for Doug Ford will give this some thought the next time they do a routine land acknowledgement?”
My comment on the issue:
I think the truth of the matter is that the vast/significant majority of people will not think about this issue.
The human tendency to defer/obey ‘authority’ results in most people believing the propaganda/marketing of the government.
Most citizens believe when they are informed governments are ‘consultative’, a ‘social service’, and acting on behalf of it citizens — something constantly reiterated in today’s mainstream/legacy media.
For most, what the politicians say is gospel, especially if they’re the ones they voted for.
Government consultation is a ruse, regardless of party. It is for all intents and purposes a public relations stunt to give the impression that the average person has influence or impact upon decision-making and policies, and that government is responsive to citizen input.
Can you imagine the stress created by the cognitive dissonance of holding the notion that you have agency via consultation or the ballot box but also recognising that your ‘representatives’ are the public face of a ruling caste that doesn’t truly give a shit about you but is primarily motivated by a desire to control/expand the wealth-generation/extraction systems that provide their revenue streams and thus positions of power and prestige.
Most (all?) would rather deny/rationalise away the latter belief and hold on to the former one. Living with a lie is much easier and comforting than living with the significantly problematic truth that governments are in place to represent and protect the ruling caste in society — not the hoi polloi.
If you’ve made it to the end of this contemplation and have got something out of my writing, please consider ordering the trilogy of my ‘fictional’ novel series, Olduvai (PDF files; only $9.99 Canadian), via my website — the ‘profits’ of which help me to keep my internet presence alive and first book available in print (and is available via various online retailers). Encouraging others to read my work is also much appreciated.
It’s time to move on to pastures new from my Saying NO… book, as I mentioned in my last post. Seems like an opportune moment to try an ‘open comment’ post to signal the change of direction, an idea I trailed at the start of the year.
What I think emerged from that discussion was for me to suggest a broad topic and perhaps a few talking points from it and then to see where things went in the discussion. Kind of like a normal post! Back then, Ruben wrote “ I would love to hear your thoughts on AMOC shutdown, drought, more frequent extreme weather, and other growing challenges for agriculture. That might be a good topic for an open post.” Indeed I believe it would be, so let’s go with that.
In case this is unfamiliar, the ‘AMOC’ is the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, the major current system in the Atlantic Ocean, involving the northward flow of warm water and the southward flow of colder water which helps moderate the climate of both colder high-latitude countries and warmer low-latitude ones. Studies have suggested that present human-caused climate change could result in the shutdown of the AMOC, the consequences for both colder and warmer countries within this Atlantic system being, not to overstate the case … very bad.
A recent study that models AMOC shutdown has put the heebie-jeebies up a lot of people, including me – see Prof Stefan Rahmstorf’s summary here. Seems like we could be on course for an AMOC shutdown tipping point within the next seventy years with 95 percent confidence…
Energy Future, Part 3: Authoritarianism and Sociobehavioural Control
In Part 1, I argue that energy underpins everything, including human complex societies. In Part 2, I suggest that the increasing need for diminishing resources, especially finite or limited ‘renewable’ ones, invariably leads to geopolitical tension between competing polities.
A corollary of this rising political tension tends to be increasing domestic authoritarianism[1] as the ruling caste struggles to maintain control of its own population in the face of anti-war narratives and movements, and the resulting — at least for the masses, not necessarily for society’s elite — tightening of economic conditions[2] as resources are directed towards the military/security/industrial complex and related ‘control’ mechanisms. This results in diminishing returns for citizens: they get less and less benefit from their ‘investments’ in supporting the ruling caste of society. To counter these diminishing returns, the ‘rulers’ of a society seek greater control via a variety of means, but particularly economic and behavioural. A larger proportion of a society’s ‘wealth’ must be allocated away from the masses and towards the ruling caste’s favoured ‘projects’ and citizens must be ‘convinced’ of the need for the resulting ‘austerity’.
This is neither a ‘modern’ phenomenon nor a unique one. It has its roots in pre/historical times with the development of large, complex societies[3]. As human groupings became larger and necessarily more complex, organisational structures develop that give rise to occupational differentiation and thereby differential access to resources, including information. This differential access soon develops into hierarchical relationships within the community[4]. With a ruling elite that is for the most part completely free of the restraining impulses that exist within kinship-based groups[5], motivation to maintain such a powerful/privileged position within a society results in a hereditary-based ruling elite[6] or mechanisms for keeping particular interest groups/families/etc. in dominant positions[7].
When diminishing returns are encountered for the geographical region controlled by the sociopolitical elite, it was generally countered through expansion into unconquered, peripheral regions where wealth could be extracted to support the core (i.e., ruling caste). Political tension between competing polities often was the result with the elite of competing societies coercing and/or convincing their subservient populations of the necessity to engage in war with the ‘other’.
Archaeologist Joseph Tainter points out in The Collapse of Complex Societies[8] that various theories exist as to how complexity in human societies has developed. For example: managerial hierarchies emerge as population or other stress increases; internal class conflict creates a need for protecting the privileged; conflict with competing groups leads to needed sociopolitical shifts; or, several interrelated factors combine.
Two main schools exist: conflict and integration. The conflict theory basically posits that “the governing institutions of the state were developed as coercive mechanisms to resolve intrasocietal conflicts arising out of economic stratification…to maintain the privileged position of a ruling class that is largely based on the exploitation and economic degradation of the masses” (p. 33). Integrationists argue that complexity arose because of social needs such as shared social interests, common advantages, and consensus; a positive response to the stresses affecting human populations and the differential rewards to certain members is the cost for the benefits of centralisation.
Both schools of thought have pros and cons. And although they differ in their fundamental premises, they both acknowledge the role of legitimising activities by the ruling elite — some of which must include real, material outputs such as symbolic manipulation and coercive sanctions.
Concerns about controlling behaviour through such mechanisms as symbolic manipulation and/or coercive sanctions has a long and sordid history, whether on an individual level[9] or on a broader social level[10]. As societies get both larger and more complex, maintaining social order[11] becomes of vital importance to the ruling elite for various reasons.
As Noam Chomsky argues in Hegemony or Survival: America’s Quest for Global Dominance[12]:
“While methods differ sharply from more brutal to more free societies, the goals are in many ways similar: to ensure the ‘great beast,’ as Alexander Hamilton called the people, does not stray from its proper confines. Controlling the general population has always been a dominant concern of power and privilege…Problems of domestic control become particularly severe when the governing authorities carry out policies that are opposed by the general population. In those cases, the political leadership may…manufacture consent for its murderous policies.”
This manufacturing of consent can be seen in the increasing influence/control of the narratives that circulate in a society, particularly by way of government propaganda and mass media institutions. This tends to increase not only because the ruling caste wishes to carry out military incursions in far-off lands (resulting in hardships/sacrifices for the majority of the domestic population) but because they wish to justify/rationalise/legitimise their positions of power and prestige since the domestic population far outnumbers the ruling elite and is a far more direct threat to them when/if they revolt/rebel.
Murray Rothbard similarly argues in Anatomy of the State[13] a major concern for the ruling elite is how to maintain their power. Their typical approach is the use of force but their basic problem is ideological. Any government regardless of ‘type’ requires support from a majority of its citizens, even passive resignation, given the minority status of the State (its nobility and bureaucracy). The ruling class necessarily must be small as it is supported by production surpluses. While it can attract some allies in the population, “the chief task of the rulers is always to secure the active or resigned acceptance of the majority of the citizens.” (p. 19)
Creating vested economic interests is one way to secure support. Sharing the benefits of rule attracts followers but still not a majority. Thus, “the majority must be persuaded by ideology that their government is good, wise and, at least, inevitable, and certainly better than other conceivable alternatives.” (p. 20)
The ‘intellectuals’ of society take the role of persuading the citizens. They create and disseminate the ideas/beliefs passively adopted, for the most part, by the masses. These opinion-molders are needed by the State and thus offered security, income, and prestige within the State apparatus. The arguments by the State and intellectuals to garner support of the masses are varied and many but come down to a few basics: the rulers are wise/great (e.g., divinely appointed, society’s elite, experts) and leadership/rule/government is inevitable (i.e., evil would befall society without it).
One very successful device to achieve support has been the union of the Church and State; with this, rulers were anointed by God or were God and it was blasphemous to resist. “The States’ priestcraft performed the basic intellectual function of obtaining popular support and even worship for the rulers.” (p. 23).
In addition, instilling fear about another system or none at all has also been successful and citizens are persuaded by the argument that present rulers provide an essential service: protection against marauders/criminals. Rothbard goes on to argue that our ruling caste wish a monopoly on such predation.
With the creation of various nation states, the State has discovered an additional means to persuade the masses of its necessity: identification of itself with the territory it governs. “Since most men tend to love their homeland, the identified of that land and its people with the State was a means of making natural patriotism work to the State’s advantage.” (p. 24).
The intellectuals of the State work to convince the masses that any attacks upon the nation are attacks upon them, not simply their ruling caste; this way, wars between rulers are marketed as wars between people and the masses come to the aid of their rulers who are protecting them. This leveraging of nationalism has only really arisen in recent centuries within the West as people use to view conflicts as between nobles and not the land’s people.
In contemporary times we are witnessing increasing attempts at sociobehavioural control via mass surveillance[14], militarisation of police[15], persecution of whistle-blowers who unveil government corruption[16], and especially mass media control/influence[17]. We can expect the trends we are experiencing in these areas to continue and likely enlarge as conditions worsen due to diminishing returns increasing in severity and the elite feeling more threatened and worried about their positions of power and prestige.
Bringing this back to the issue of diminishing resources on a finite planet, one can imagine the increasing pressure upon the ruling caste to not only maintain/increase their competitive edge with other polities as resource control/access becomes more costly but also their ‘control’ over their domestic population as limited ‘wealth’ must be diverted to activities that support the ruling elite’s actions/policies. Even in tyrannical societies, the hoi polloi must be ‘persuaded’ to support, even grudgingly, their leadership.
As Tainter points out, as a society becomes increasingly complex we see a rise in centralisation and control through activity aimed at legitimising the ruling caste, symbolic manipulation, and coercive sanctions. These tendencies are costly in nature and costs must be borne by the masses as the elite siphon societal surpluses or manipulate the economic/monetary system to fund them. Tainter’s thesis maintains that the decreasing benefits of participating/supporting society lead an increasing number of members to ‘opt out’, until eventually a tipping point of withdrawn support leads to sociopolitical collapse.
The speed with which this ‘collapse’ occurs has pre/historically been relatively slow, sometimes taking centuries as was the case for the decline of the Roman Empire. Typically it appears a population can deal with diminishing returns on their investments in society for a long time believing that the situation is temporary, or due to recency bias and the belief that the current situation, as bad as it may be, is ‘normal’.
In a world of quickly diminishing resources that are necessary to support the complexities of society and in which people have lost the skills/knowledge to live self-sufficiently — and here there are no unexploited lands to migrate to — the path towards ‘collapse’ is likely going to be much, much faster than the pre/historical ‘norm’: it will probably be a Seneca-type decline[18] given most of humanity’s reliance upon complex and fragile long-distance supply chains and the various subsystems that support these.
I could go on and on about this sociocultural shift towards control by the elite mostly because I view it as something that is so easily overlooked by most. To reduce one’s cognitive dissonance people deny or justify/rationalise away the actions/policies of their society’s ‘leaders’. They ‘allow’ themselves to be caught up in the fervour of ‘patriotism’. They are quick to point fingers at the ‘other’ that have been painted by the ruling caste as the cause of their problems/predicaments.
As I responded to another on a post in the Peak Oil Facebook Group I am a member: “ I think, in order to keep the various Ponzi schemes from collapsing for as long as possible, keeping people ‘in the dark’ is amongst one of the most important motivations for the ruling caste and snake oil salesmen leveraging all this to their self-interested machinations. Narrative management/control is a powerful, powerful aspect to not only legitimise their positions of power/prestige but to keep them safe from the hordes of the disenfranchised.”
I’ve come to find the following image humourous in a sad way given I don’t really think most are as close as depicted and will continue to have ‘faith’ that our ‘rulers’ are acting in OUR best interests when really they are acting in THEIRS:
And, I close with quotes from the late Carl Sagan and Malcolm X:
Energy Future, Part 4: Economic Manipulation can be found here.
If you’ve made it to the end of this contemplation and have got something out of my writing, please consider ordering the trilogy of my ‘fictional’ novel series, Olduvai (PDF files; only $9.99 Canadian), via my website — the ‘profits’ of which help me to keep my internet presence alive and first book available in print (and is available via various online retailers). Encouraging others to read my work is also much appreciated.
I believe you’ve hit the nail on the head about the underlying motives behind the geopolitical morass our globe’s ruling elite are creating (and consequential fallout for the hoi polloi): a rearranging of the deck chairs on the Titanic.
Ecological overshoot and peak resources (especially energy) have the socio/psychopathic ruling caste fighting amongst themselves for the vestiges of an ever-shrinking economic pie.
Emboldened and blinded by their ‘successes’ in the past (when there existed much in the way of surplus net energy), they are proceeding full steam ahead with a final blow-off top of resource extraction/exploitation, all-in attempt to consolidate and expand their ‘winnings’; first with the far-off ‘other’, then their domestic political ‘enemies’, and finally with their out-group citizens before they begin to cannibalise their own.
As I have been arguing for some time, the primary motivation of our ruling caste (as has been evidenced throughout pre/history of complex societies) is the control/expansion of the wealth-generating/-extracting systems that provide their revenue streams and thus positions of power and prestige. None of us are safe from the machinations of these people; nor is our environment and the very important ecological systems that serve to support the essentials of life.
Everything will be sacrificed to serve the ends of the ruling caste…bet on it. And things are likely to get much, much worse before the impact of significant diminishing returns — to say little about ecological overshoot — puts a final nail in the coffin of such misguided and insane behaviour.
It’s most interesting how cyclical human pre/history is. Perhaps that’s because of the truism that those who don’t study history are destined to repeat it; either that, or humans simply don’t learn from their mistakes. We are after all a very intelligent species, just not too wise — despite our self-proclaimed taxonomic nomenclature.
Complex societies, empires, civilisations all come and go. They reach a peak of complexity then invariably ‘collapse’. It may take centuries or it may only take a handful or less of generations for this decline, but it always occurs. As Joseph Tainter points out, a population can actually ‘put up with’ significantly diminishing returns on their ‘investments’ in supporting the-powers-that-be for a long time.
The other point Tainter makes, that I believe is relevant to your narrative here, is the aspect of competing polities in this ‘Grand Chessboard’ of geopolitics.
As he argues, such polities tend to get caught up in spiralling competitive investments as they seek to outmaneuver others and evolve greater complexity together. The polities caught up in this competition increasingly experience declining marginal returns and must invest ever-increasing amounts leading to greater economic weakness.
Withdrawing from this spiral or collapsing is not an option without risking being subsumed by a competitor. It is this trap of competition that will continue to drive the pursuit of complexity regardless of human/environmental costs.
Incentives and economic reserves can support this situation for a lengthy period as witnessed by the Roman and Mayan experiences where centuries of diminishing returns were endured.
Ever-increasing costs and ever-decreasing marginal returns typify peer polities in competition. This ends in either domination by one state and a new energy subsidy or collapse of all.
As he concludes: “Collapse, if and when it comes again, will this time be global. No longer can any individual nation collapse. World civilization will disintegrate as a whole. Competitors who evolve as peers collapse in like manner.”
Eleanor Parker writes in her book, Winters in the World, that “in Anglo-Saxon poetry winter is often imagined as a season when the earth and human beings are imprisoned, kept captive by the ‘fetters of the frost’. Naturally enough, then, spring is associated with images of liberation and freedom once those fetters are released.” (p. 93) Even the title of the book, Winters in the World, described one’s age, e.g. I have 30 winters in the world, a recognition of the harshness of the winters which one had survived.
Historically, the transition from winter to spring was symbolised by many traditions that reflected the end of difficult times and the coming of the new season of growth and rebirth. These traditions ranged from the celebration of vegetation deities through fertility rites, and the public rituals associated with Carnival/Fat Tuesday (February/March), Lent (February/March), Easter (fires/eggs/hares) (March/ April) and Rogation Days (April). Many rituals were taken over by the Christian church and given new meanings which themselves are now being secularised.
However, since the development of industrial farming in the early twentieth century, the connection between local farming and spring rituals associated with the land have declined and taken on a commercialised aspect separated from nature. We can see this with Carnival and Easter, while Lent fasting is not practised so much anymore.
This is not to say that the ending of the underlying reasons for carnival and the fasting of Lent, i.e. the finishing up of winter stocks and the privation until new crops grew, is such a bad thing, but our dependence on the current global system of industrial farming is worrying at a time when climate change is affecting food production around the world.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
Humanity is in overshoot, and a major correction is already underway, something, which will only accelerate even further. A runaway energy crisis, together with resource depletion, climate change and ecosystems collapse will upend centuries of growth and prosperity. But what does that mean on an individual level? Is there any way to course correct? If not, what are the possible ways of adaption?
The world economy faces a runaway energy crisis, not seen by most commentators. The energy needed to extract the next unit of both oil and minerals increases exponentially due to rich depleted deposits being replaced with ever poorer quality ones. Since energy is the economy, not money, an exponential rise in this area will eventually make further expansion impossible, and lead to a relentless decline. Something, which cannot be stopped, nor financed without bankrupting the economy… In the meantime, both investors and politicians act as if energy were just a cost item, and its supply could expand without any hurdles. What could possibly go wrong?
We are clearly approaching a civilizational tipping point, and there is nothing anyone in power can do about this. The entire process is driven by physics and geology, not wishful thinking and clever humans supposedly inventing their way out if this mess. However, if you were following the logic of how we got here so far, I don’t think it is realistic to say that the passing of this inflection point will suddenly upend civilization, and push everyone, everywhere back into the stone age in a matter of years. Instead, we are about to walk down a long winding road fraught with all sorts of perils, and have to prepare ourselves accordingly.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
Today’s Contemplation: And Now For Something Completely Different, Part 5
January 19, 2023 (original posting date)
While I take a break from my Contemplation posts and specifically the energy series I began (see here for Part 1, Part 2), here is the sixth installment of chapters from the fourth book in my fictional novel series (that stalled a few years ago but have ready). I will continue to share some of these over the next little while. Here are the links to PDF files of Chapter 1, Chapter 2, Chapter 3, Chapter 4, and now Chapter 5.
The storyline: Flowing from actual world events, a damaged environment, dwindling energy resources, and a manipulated market-economy all come crashing together in this tale about the social and individual impact of stresses that overwhelm a precarious and complex global system. Supply chain interruptions, border disputes, increased fascism, growing protest movements, and mass migration out of rural areas into cities dominant the new normal.
Basically, this is a tale (set in Canada) about the individual (and societal) reactions to a breakdown of our complex systems. Life is proceeding ‘normally’ for most while a marginalised minority are increasingly concerned about the unsustainability of our way of life. Governments begin to clash with domestic populations while the machinations of some of the ruling caste, especially around energy systems, is exposed. Chapters trace the lives and experiences of a handful of people during the timeframe of about 3 months before to 3 months after a grid-down situation…
If you’ve made it to the end of this contemplation and have got something out of my writing, please consider ordering the trilogy of my ‘fictional’ novel series, Olduvai (PDF files; only $9.99 Canadian), via my website — the ‘profits’ of which help me to keep my internet presence alive and first book available in print (and is available via various online retailers). Encouraging others to read my work is also much appreciated.
Mainstream Green Narratives: It’s About Selling More Industrial Products
A follow-up to Contemplation LXXXIX that responded to the idea that if enough people found true contentment and happiness by cooperating with others, humanity would discover a ‘oneness’ that could ‘achieve truly coherent action’; all within the context of pursuing a ‘sustainable’ future. The individual that shared this notion added a link to a UK House of Lords publication as a follow-up, suggesting it demonstrates ‘an evolution of ideas’. The following is my response after reading the document.
Skimmed through the document. Here are a few clues as to why what is written will not and cannot work, and, in fact, will exacerbate our overshoot:
“…through adopting new technologies…[that] will bring…economic benefits.”
“… through technological innovations and their uptake…[by] making it easier…to adopt new technologies…”
“…focus [upon]…adopting ultra-low emission vehicles…low-carbon heating technologies…”
“…several positive trends such as…growing uptake of electric vehicles…”
“…stimulate investment and innovation…”
“…focus on the rollout of low-emission vehicles…”
“…new developments [of public transportation]…”
Then there’s the entire mythical narrative around ‘net zero’ and achieving it via non-renewable, renewable energy-harvesting technologies and their associated industrial products (when really it’s about dependence upon unproven technologies and manipulative accounting). And one way of achieving this is the ‘phasing out’ of fossil fuel-based products (conveniently leaving out the inconvenient facts that ‘green/clean’ energy products rely heavily upon fossil fuels both up and down their production, maintenance, and disposal/reclamation industrial processes).
While there is much, much more in the document, these examples point to the undeniable fact that much of what is being proposed relies upon the (mandated?) adoption of ‘green/clean’ industrial products, and the continuation of, for the most part, our status quo systems. They’re simply tweaked a bit to reduce our cognitive dissonance.
Much of the document relies upon marketing/propaganda to drive behavioural change, learning from what was achieved without much pushback during the pandemic. In fact, I get the sense that the document is a stepping stone (slippery slope?) towards what some analysts have predicted: widespread pandemic-type lockdowns in the guise of combatting climate change.
And I cannot help but interpret this as further confirmation of my growing belief that this is primarily (totally?) about narrative control and forced adoption of industrial products by those who own/control the industries and resources as they attempt to consolidate/maintain/enlarge their slice of an ever-shrinking economic pie as we increasingly bump up against the limits to growth on a finite planet. To say little about the blindness to the many layers of our predicament, especially when it comes to energy and other finite resources.
My ‘fear’ is that we will do almost exactly what is outlined here because rather than challenge or disrupt the status quo power and wealth structures of the globe’s ruling caste it actually enhances them; but, as demonstrated in this document, can be wrapped up in a veil of ‘green’ and marketed to the masses as another beneficent policy/action by the ruling class for the masses. Perhaps this image sums it up best:
Today’s Contemplation: And Now For Something Completely Different, Part 4
January 13, 2023 (original posting date)
While I take a break from my Contemplation posts and specifically the energy series I began (see here for Part 1, Part 2), here is the fourth installment of chapters from the fourth book in my fictional novel series (that stalled a few years ago but have ready). I will continue to share some of these over the next little while. Here are the links to PDF files of Chapter 1, Chapter 2, Chapter 3, and now Chapter 4.
The storyline: Flowing from actual world events, a damaged environment, dwindling energy resources, and a manipulated market-economy all come crashing together in this tale about the social and individual impact of stresses that overwhelm a precarious and complex global system. Supply chain interruptions, border disputes, increased fascism, growing protest movements, and mass migration out of rural areas into cities dominant the new normal.
Basically, this is a tale (set in Canada) about the individual (and societal) reactions to a breakdown of our complex systems. Life is proceeding ‘normally’ for most while a marginalised minority are increasingly concerned about the unsustainability of our way of life. Governments begin to clash with domestic populations while the machinations of some of the ruling caste, especially around energy systems, is exposed. Chapters trace the lives and experiences of a handful of people during the timeframe of about 3 months before to 3 months after a grid-down situation…
If you’ve made it to the end of this contemplation and have got something out of my writing, please consider ordering the trilogy of my ‘fictional’ novel series, Olduvai (PDF files; only $9.99 Canadian), via my website — the ‘profits’ of which help me to keep my internet presence alive and first book available in print (and is available via various online retailers). Encouraging others to read my work is also much appreciated.
The following contemplation shares my thoughts/response to The Honest Sorcerer’s latest article (another very worthwhile read) regarding the diminishing returns being increasingly encountered by non-renewable, renewable energy-harvesting technologies (aka ‘renewables’) — and, yes, I am still plugging away at the Energy Series (Part 1; Part 2) I began as I organise a Food Gardening Guild within my local community, the response to which has been great!
The material and environmental ‘blindness’ to the situation you describe so well seems, at least for the masses, mostly due to attempts to reduce the stress of the cognitive dissonance created by the contradictory information we are exposed to — on the one hand we have increasing numbers of ecologists/biologists warning about the perils of our unchecked growth, finite resource use, and the increasingly negative consequences of these practices; while on the other hand, we have our politicians/industrialists/economists weaving stories about salvation and continued prosperity mostly via the shifting of energy sources and associated products (their motivations being self-serving and that I have written about repeatedly).
These denial-/bargaining-based narratives around a ‘green’ energy transition must be overcome to allow us to see/comprehend the fundamental predicament we have on our hands — ecological overshoot — before any ‘progress’ can be made towards mitigating some of the inevitable consequences we will increasingly encounter as various systems break down (both human-contrived and natural). Without seeing and understanding this predicament we will not, except perhaps in some few local and lucky ‘safe havens’, be able to mitigate at least some of the fallout of the coming storm.
The problem with predicaments of course is that they have no solutions, only consequences, and human complex societies tend to be problem-solving organisations (see archaeologist Joseph Tainter’s thesis in The Collapse of Complex Societies[1]). And this problem-solving orientation of large, complex societies has served humanity well during its last 10,000 or so years, so it seems next to impossible to counter this ingrained/enculturated belief that we can ‘solve’ any issue thrown down in front of us — most recently by throwing gargantuan amounts of fiat currency and/or complex technology at it. Toss on top of this long-term belief system the tendency of our ruling caste to leverage crises to their personal advantage and our dilemma becomes increasingly ‘wicked’; in fact, it becomes next to impossible to see clearly for a variety of reasons (mostly psychological in nature; e.g., deference to ‘authority’, groupthink, cognitive dissonance reduction).
Perhaps one aspect of the issue is that we tend to interpret the world partially through our perceived position on Maslow’s hierarchy of needs[2]. Or at least through a lens that impacts our perceived risk of needs. If we believe our more basic needs are at risk, we focus upon the risk factors located there (e.g., predicament of overshoot, resource scarcity, etc.) whereas those who are in denial of/blind to those risks are concentrating on the needs to be met further along the hierarchy (e.g., achievement, prestige, growth, play, etc.) and hold out that since their basic needs are being met satisfactorily (at least for now) they are not at risk and ‘higher’ needs should be one’s focus.
Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs
As well, It seems next to impossible to counter ruling caste propaganda regarding a renewable energy-based transition to ‘sustainability’ in balance with ecological systems (all while pursuing growth), especially if they serve to instill hope (falsely-based in my opinion) and promises of continuing prosperity/security/etc.. And while some accuse ‘doubters’ of this grand narrative of being fossil fuel-industry shills, ‘doomers’, and/or — God forbid — ‘conspiracy theorists’, the truth of the matter appears to be that we are living during the time of a significant ‘phase transition’[3]. Such eras tend to be a time of competing narratives, confusion, grieving, and even despair for some.
Phase transitions are an interesting phenomenon, particularly in societal settings (an area I think I need to explore further for better understanding). There is growing research/academic study upon them, especially in the realm of transitioning to a ‘sustainable’ society[4]. It seems all of what I read in my brief look into the subject was oriented towards understanding how to shift societal ‘thinking’ towards the acceptance of a ‘sustainable’ future. There is even an entire journal dedicated to this[5]. Of course, the mainstream future being propagated by the ruling caste can be seen in much of this work: technological solutions and the concomitant uptake of new industrial products, and governing shifts that centralise power.
Regardless of the orientation of this research, the important thing to understand about phase transitions is how ‘quickly’ they can occur and how unpredictable they are. My introduction to the topic was during my research for my first novel when I came upon the topic of the Abelian sandpile model[6] and self-organised criticality[7]. Basically, the sandpile model shows why complex systems cannot be predicted and their ‘collapse’ can occur quickly, without warning.
Here are two passages from texts I read while researching for my ‘fictional’ writing that brought this to the forefront of my thinking:
First, from David G. Green’s 2014 book Of Ants and Men: The Unexpected Side Effects of Complexity in Society[8]:
The history of human civilization is, in large measure, a story of the human quest for control. After thousands of years of civilization, we think that we control the environment in which we live. We begin to think that we control the natural world. We might even fool ourselves into thinking that we control human nature. Modern society is built on the assumption of control. Yet, as the terror of the New York blackout shows, chaos all too easily bursts forth, reminding us how flimsy the illusion of control really is.
The root cause of much of the chaos that besets us is complexity, sheer complexity. From complex webs of interactions, chaos emerges. It is complexity that leads to unexpected problems, that turns order into chaos. As much as anything, the New York blackout, like most accidents and breakdowns, was a result of complexity. The power system did have backups and safeguards built in. But no one had anticipated that the network could suffer a cascade of failures of the kind that occurred. Nor could anyone anticipate the mayhem that would ensue when power failed on such a large scale for such a long period. This does not mean that the planners were incompetent; there are just so many possible ways that the system could behave, it is not possible to anticipate and plan for all contingencies.
Second, from a 2003 Corey Lofdahl paper, On the Confounding of Overshoot and Collapse Predictions by Economic Dynamics[9]:
The ability to predict when a system will ‘collapse’ is possible if it is understood when the underlying, foundational resources will exhaust themselves…The best that can be said…is that entropy decreases as the system moves towards its natural limit. The system becomes more likely to collapse, but it is impossible to say exactly when…the larger the resource base, the larger the overshoot and the more postponed the collapse…
[G]rowth can continue for far longer than seems possible to somebody who recognizes the systems’ eventual unsustainability and foresees limitation and collapse…The strongest statement that can be made is that as growth continues, the likelihood of system limitation and collapse increases. For the individual, the growth dynamic can prove so overwhelming that the possibility of collapse begins to seem unlikely and remote as naysayers are continually proven wrong…[However,] the actual likelihood of collapse grows ever larger, while for those under its thrall, the possibility of collapse grows ever more distant. When the system eventually collapses, it does so suddenly, dramatically, and unexpectedly.
The evidence is accumulating that a phase transition is fast approaching for the human species. When it occurs and how quickly it completes its shift is completely unpredictable, which is why it will be a Black Swan event[10] for the vast majority of people. The best preparation for this transition that cannot be avoided will not be to put the remainder of our diminishing resources — especially energy — towards more technologies and complexities, but the exact opposite. We need to be pursuing a ‘Great Simplification’[11], decommissioning those complexities that pose great risk for future generations, abandoning our cherished dreams of infinite growth on a finite planet, and accepting that the future is not going to be one as laid out by our ‘leaders’ and such fictional narratives as Star Trek — not even close.
Attempting to relocalise all those truly important resources (potable water procurement, food production, shelter needs for the local climate) as much as is possible is where I will be putting my energy and resources…as well as getting my community to try and do the same.
Today’s Contemplation: And Now For Something Completely Different, Part 3
January 7, 2023 (original posting date)
Common Grackle Fledgling, Whitchurch-Stouffville. (2022) Photo by author.
While I take a break from my self-indulgent Contemplation posts and specifically the energy series I began (see here for Part 1, Part 2), here is the third installment of chapters from the fourth book in my fictional novel series (that stalled a few years ago but have ready). I will continue to share some of these over the next little while. Here are the links to PDF files of Chapter 1, Chapter 2, and now Chapter 3.
As sketched in the previous post, I believe modernity to be an unsustainable flash that will not persist into future millennia. Uncomfortable with untethered speculation, I have said little about what might come after, but feel I owe something in this vein. Semantically, what follows the modern age must be the post-modern age, right? Except that name is already taken by a rather inane school of thought that may be even worse than modernist thought (it actually does not fundamentally refute modernism anyway, just throws sand into any conversation).
