3 ms·

Climate change will do that anyway. The first thing to go when resources get scarce (I mean truly, decades-long-famine-level scarce) is individual liberty. We'r

by jadell 8y ago

Climate change will do that anyway. The first thing to go when resources get scarce (I mean truly, decades-long-famine-level scarce) is individual liberty. We're talking back to a worldwide feudal warlord society within 100ish years.

Aunche 8y ago
Humans are surprisingly adaptable. We're a species of Saharan apes that somehow managed to find a way to thrive in the Arctic before the miracles of modern technology. Currently, we "waste" a lot of economic productivity on things like advertising and entertainment. In the time calls for it, we'll turn Siberia into a breadbasket before we let society collapse.
- untog 8y ago
  I feel like that statement brushes over the frankly enormous amount of suffering throughout history - war, famine, genocide, and so on. While we might survive it's worth at least considering the costs we'll encounter along the way.
- jadell 8y ago
  Life was brutal and short for the vast majority of humans for hundreds of thousands of years. The last 1-2 hundred are a complete anomaly, brought on by exactly the types of practices that are currently destroying our environment. Sure, we won't probably won't wipe ourselves out completely. But I do not look forward to 99.99% of the remaining population going back to a pre-industrial level of civilization. The type of technological save you're talking about is already possible. The problem is we have no political or societal will to get it done. Turning Siberia into a breadbasket to feed the world (among many other needed solution) most likely requires exactly the type of tyranny the OP is talking about.
  - Aunche 8y ago
    Currently, we're investing a lot of money into things like social media because the world has more than enough food and water (it just isn't distributed efficiently). If demand of food outpaces supply, we'll start pumping trillions of dollars into efforts into desalination, lab grown meat, terraforming, and better GM crops. It doesn't require any tyranny. Inevitably, climate change will directly or indirectly kill millions of people, as well as destroy many biomes. That should be enough to motivate people to want to change. In my opinion, doom and gloom scenarios encourage people to be more skeptical.
    - jadell 8y ago
      You misspelled "billions".
- belltaco 8y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias

by jadell 8y ago

Aunche 8y ago

Humans are surprisingly adaptable. We're a species of Saharan apes that somehow managed to find a way to thrive in the Arctic before the miracles of modern technology. Currently, we "waste" a lot of economic productivity on things like advertising and entertainment. In the time calls for it, we'll turn Siberia into a breadbasket before we let society collapse.

untog 8y ago
I feel like that statement brushes over the frankly enormous amount of suffering throughout history - war, famine, genocide, and so on. While we might survive it's worth at least considering the costs we'll encounter along the way.
jadell 8y ago
Life was brutal and short for the vast majority of humans for hundreds of thousands of years. The last 1-2 hundred are a complete anomaly, brought on by exactly the types of practices that are currently destroying our environment. Sure, we won't probably won't wipe ourselves out completely. But I do not look forward to 99.99% of the remaining population going back to a pre-industrial level of civilization. The type of technological save you're talking about is already possible. The problem is we have no political or societal will to get it done. Turning Siberia into a breadbasket to feed the world (among many other needed solution) most likely requires exactly the type of tyranny the OP is talking about.
- Aunche 8y ago
  Currently, we're investing a lot of money into things like social media because the world has more than enough food and water (it just isn't distributed efficiently). If demand of food outpaces supply, we'll start pumping trillions of dollars into efforts into desalination, lab grown meat, terraforming, and better GM crops. It doesn't require any tyranny. Inevitably, climate change will directly or indirectly kill millions of people, as well as destroy many biomes. That should be enough to motivate people to want to change. In my opinion, doom and gloom scenarios encourage people to be more skeptical.
  - jadell 8y ago
    You misspelled "billions".
belltaco 8y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias