10 Premises Behind Collapse 2050
What does “collapse” mean? What will the downfall of civilization look like? What am I suggesting people do? What if I’m wrong?
What does “collapse” mean? What will the downfall of civilization look like? What am I suggesting people do? What if I’m wrong?
To better understand my thinking on collapse, read my 10 premises below and share your own in the comments.
Premise 1: Existential risks are converging
This is not just about rising CO2. There are converging crises driving collapse. The combination of climate change, ecological destruction, declining EROEI and AI will overwhelm civilization at some point.
Regardless of the cause, our fate ultimately comes down to our ability to grow food – something we have done for about 12,000 years under a stable climate. Agriculture requires predictability. Modern agriculture requires energy (transportation, mechanization, fertilizer). The poly-crisis is straining our ability to produce enough food to feed 8+ billion people.
AI is the wildcard, but it is emerging at such a speed that the risk of unpredictable damage is growing rapidly.
Note how I didn’t mention nuclear war or civil strife. While I believe these become more probable as the poly-crisis emerges, these are symptoms and not causes.
Premise 2: Collapse is a mathematical certainty
Collapse – however you define it – is almost a mathematical certainty at this point. The economic system, regulatory capture and individual behaviors are baked into the maintenance of civilization. Stepping back requires a decline in living standards, so few will voluntarily do so.
Importantly, the ‘math’ suggests a discontinuous change in the future, not the past. Those relying on civilization’s record of success – built on a temporary influx of high EROEI energy, no less – will miss the left turn as it approaches.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
