4 ms·
If civilisation as we know it is almost, at, or past, the no point of return, does it actually matter given it’s our only option?
by alfiedotwtf 6y ago
If civilisation as we know it is almost, at, or past, the no point of return, does it actually matter given it’s our only option?
- noselasd 6y agoThere's no indication we're at or past a point of no return that would mean the end of civilization.
- tonyedgecombe 6y agoOnce demand for food exceeds supply all bets are off. It's hard to see how we can keep growing enough with 3 or 4 degrees of warming.
- bryanlarsen 6y agoWarmer temperatures and higher CO2 levels are great for plants. The world is fully capable of growing all necessary food inside greenhouses if necessary, all it would take would be spending 25% of GDP on food rather than 10% as we do now. There will certainly be starving people in the future, but that will be a failure of capitalism not lack of capability.
- tonyedgecombe 6y agoall it would take would be spending 25% of GDP on food rather than 10% as we do now I don't know, I've grown quite sceptical about what technology can achieve against this problem. I'm pretty sure increasing food spending to 25% of GDP would involve a massive societal shift. Whatever way you look at it we are in for a lot of pain.
- bryanlarsen 6y agoGreenhouses have been around for 200 years. And yes, it is a big shift with lots of pain. A massive increase in food prices would be required, which would result in riots across the third world. Easier and cheaper to spend a trillion or five to halt the increase in carbon emissions.
- tonyedgecombe 6y agoWe don't grow staples in greenhouses.
- bryanlarsen 6y agoBut we could if absolutely necessary. They'll have to do it on Mars, for instance.
- tsimionescu 6y agoThe important point is in 'as we know it'. Industrial Capitalism is not an option for the future, but a different economic system that puts less emphasis on growth and more on sustainability can still work. Rather than trying to save the current system with dystopian technologies, the ideal would be to give it up and start moving to a new one, preferably in an organized manner (e.g. Starting with the Green New Deal), instead of waiting for an otherwise inevitable revolution.
- bryanlarsen 6y agoGiving up on our current system will kill billions during the chaos of the transition. Green New Deal is still Industrial Capitalism, which is one of the reasons why it's a great idea.
- tsimionescu 6y agoGreen New Deal is a major step in the right direction, but it will not be enough by itself to stop global warming. It is the best way I have seen to start a smooth transition to a new economic system. Unfortunately, there is no way to still have industrial Capitalism, even under a global Green New Deal, and reduce emissions enough for the world to not go through catastrophic global warming. If we do nothing, the transition will be catastrophic as you mention. If we try to start major reforms today, we might have a somewhat smooth transition. But there is no way to avoid the transition to something new.
- antepodius 6y agoIt's insane to talk about ending growth when we haven't even put down colonies in the sahara.
- tsimionescu 6y agoI'm hoping this is a joke? It did remind me of an off-topic pet peeve - it's absurd to start thinking of a colony on Mars before colonizing the Sahara and the Antarctic, both being orders of magnitude easier and more useful than a colony on Mars.
- LifeIsThermal 6y agoWith increasing world population, decreasing famine, decreasing poverty, wildfires at 5% compared to 100 years ago, climate related deaths at 5% compared to 100 years ago, there´s not even a threat in sight. Humanity and the planet is doing better than ever.