29 ms·
Are we on the road to civilisation collapse? (2019)
- hermitsings 5y ago"Nobody knows."
- Santosh83 5y agoThe graph showing the lifespan of ancient civilisations seems to have ignored the Indus Valley civilisation, which apparently lasted from about 3300 BC to 1300 BC. It is also a good example of climate change leading to collapse, according to experts.
- wanderingstan 5y agoIt is mentioned on the detail link for the chart: > Harappan Civilisation (Indus Valley Civilisation) [800] But also missing is the Sumerian civilization, which I understand to have been over a thousand years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumer
- wsc981 5y agoIf only they could have reduced their CO2 emissions ...
- UWillOwnNothing 5y agoThe West is descending as the East ascends.
- bobmaxup 5y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convergence_(economics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convergence_(economics)
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- imoverclocked 5y agoYes, everyday, in any civilization. Keeping any civilization alive takes collective will, work and adaptation.
- mikewarot 5y agoOf course we are, this too shall pass. There is a constant struggle to keep things afloat, people seem to forget that at times, especially the rent seeking class who place little to no value on infrastructure, both physical and societal. If we get another FDR style reset, things should be good for a generation or two, if not... the horrors of history will rhyme once again. Edit/Update: The New Deal provided a social safety net which greatly relieve the inequality that ripped apart Germany and other countries. It also provided the infrastructure that just happened to make it much easier to out-manufacture the rest of the world in WWII, and benefitted society for decades later.
- TheBlight 5y agoFDR's initiative didn't provide any reset. WW2 was responsible for that.
- ncphil 5y agoAre you really so sure of that? I'm old enough to have known a lot of people who lived through the Depression _because_ of FDR's programs. Whether the New Deal alone could have saved the country is literally academic to the tens of millions who were saved by jobs in the CWA, WPA and CCC, or the relief provided by the FSA, SSA and economic aid to businesses under the NIRA. It seems unusually cold hearted for any historian or economist to ignore the tremendous suffering those measures spared so many, just because they didn't meet some theoretical threshold for full recovery.
- no_wizard 5y agoPerhaps not entire civilization collapse, pending nuclear arsenals unleashed, but I think we are edging ever closer to massive social upheaval, what shape of this I am unsure about. To quote an adjacent article that was mentioned in this one: How Western Civilization Could Collapse > Eventually, the working population crashes because the portion of wealth allocated to them is not enough, followed by collapse of the elites due to the absence of labour. The inequalities we see today both within and between countries already point to such disparities. For example, the top 10% of global income earners are responsible for almost as much total greenhouse gas emissions as the bottom 90% combined. Similarly, about half the world’s population lives on less than $3 per day[0][1] This is from 2017. This has gotten, in my view, much worse and is not continuing to alleviate itself, and I believe climate change is only making this worse over the next 5-10 years as wealthier nations and their wealthiest citizens try to insulate themselves further from its effects at the expense or perceived expense of the poor. I don’t think the current political climate is going to prove its sustainable. Couple that with serious economic pressures as in part, a result of globalization and coming shortages and issues of natural resources and it’s a recipe for real disaster [0]: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20170418-how-western-civilisation-could-collapse https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20170418-how-western-civi... [1]: https://academic.oup.com/nsr/article/3/4/470/2669331/Modeling-sustainability-population-inequality https://academic.oup.com/nsr/article/3/4/470/2669331/Modelin...
- branko_d 5y agoThe best stats you've ever seen | Hans Rosling https://youtu.be/hVimVzgtD6w https://youtu.be/hVimVzgtD6w
- noahtallen 5y agoI do really like that video and the book Factfulness. However, income inequality is definitely one of the things getting worse with time. And it’s scary for everyone, because if you don’t have money, your ability to survive is reduced, and if you do have money… look back to what happened only a handful of centuries ago or even less when the proletariat revolted. Sure, we aren’t there currently, but the trajectory is not going in a direction which inspires confidence in our future.
- hughrr 5y agoAren’t we always? On a microscopic view of a single life, at best we can cross our fingers and hope that we live through a calm bit.
- esarbe 5y agoOn a large enough timescale, everything becomes irrelevant.
- bluejekyll 5y ago“By 476, the empire’s reach was zero.” I stopped reading right here. The Western Empire fell in 476 (for many reasons). The Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine Empire) lasted until 1453. Even that isn’t a perfect way of articulating it, given the continued influence of the Catholic Church had well into the 1500’s (Luther). In some ways one could argue civilization has never ended, but paused in different areas of the world. Also, taking a myopic view on civilization focused on the western civilization ignores the inter-continental trade that existed around Africa, Asia and Europe, doesn’t seem fair to the history. I know that’s a reductive argument, but I do think global civilization has been continually making progress, all be it with some slow downs and set backs along the way. Yes some empires went away, but we still read writings from Ancient Greece, so is it correct to say even that civilization ended? Long way of saying, “no” but things might change, and it could be uncomfortable for a while.
- edgyquant 5y agoFurther. The empire ending didn’t mean civilization did as the Kingdom of Italy continued to exist and the empire was simply replaced with German kingdoms.
- labster 5y agoReplaced is an interesting word. Certainly the Holy Roman Empire claimed to be a successor state to Rome in the west, but in some sense Latin language and Roman culture pervades Europe. That’s why we have Kaisers and Czars who claim the power of Caesar. The United States’ civic architecture and symbols are explicit references to the Roman Republic, as it’s own bald eagle replaces the legion’s Aquila. Might as well say America replaced the Roman Empire.
- nsf39k 5y agoOdoacer also recognized Julius Nepos as de jure Western Emperor (although Nepos only ruled over a small rump state in Dalmatia) until Nepos was assassinated in 480. The Kingdom of Italy also maintained Roman institutions like the consuls and Roman senate, which continued to exist as an organization until the 7th century. With Odoacer acknowledging Nepos as the nominal ruler, referring to himself with Roman honorifics (usually as a patrician), and Roman institutions being preserved, I bet the average Roman civilian wouldn’t have experienced too big of a difference between 474 and 478 even if the Western Roman Empire had already been ‘replaced’ by the Kingdom of Italy.
- Mengkudulangsat 5y agoOn an unrelated note, the author is a "researcher based at the Centre for the Study of Existential Risk at the University of Cambridge". Just imagine the atmosphere at that workplace, must've been very heavy and brooding.
- chii 5y agoor, only the happiest and most optimistic people can continue studying existential risk day in day out.
- anovikov 5y agoI don't think there is any problem with inequality. Inequality may be increasing within individual countries, but it's decreasing worldwide because of decreasing inequality between countries. Similarly, i can't see a problem with East/West divide. "Eastearn" civilisations are rising only as long as they adopt Western principles. It's not as much of a disadvantage of a Western civilisation, it's simply that it's losing it's exclusive position, because it WON: there is no alternative to market capitalism in today's world, no one even pretends there is. There are alternatives to democracy, but success rate of democracy is a mixed bag in the West itself, and it may be simply an outdated form of government for the post-industrial world, and universal democracy where everyone votes was a short (<100 years) experiment anyway, so it's not a big deal if it ends. Democracy the way it was implemented in 200 years ago USA when 3% of people - actual stakeholders - could vote, would be the most sustainable form of government today, and it's more or less the way China is governed (where 6-7% of population are in the Party and can meaningfully vote).
- no_wizard 5y agoI think this ignores a few realities: 1) the largest of the economies rising in Asia, being China, is funded in large part by state subsidies to this day. That won’t last forever. Few wholly Chinese companies that weren’t in Hong Kong before China took it back over have proven they can compete without these subsidies either. 2) As a result of the above, for instance, free market isn’t really “free” and I argue this about USA and EU too, yes, but China still requires that companies be 51 percent Chinese owned by default, hardly free enterprise compared to western economies all other things being equal. At least if I do business in USA or EU I don’t have to cede 51 percent of my companies ownership in that country to do business 3) globally a lot of critical natural resources are dwindling or being threatened due to climate change, depletion / overuse or just plain waste. Helium, for instance, was already a shortage pre pandemic, and is truly non renewable[0]. Oil, natural gas, and other critical resources are also reaching critical threshold levels 4) no country is immune from inequality issues, after all China, Japan and Korea have many historical examples of uprisings and civil unrest due to inequality 5) importantly, the USA is not a democracy, it’s actually a democratic republic [0]: https://www.npr.org/2019/11/01/775554343/the-world-is-constantly-running-out-of-helium-heres-why-it-matters https://www.npr.org/2019/11/01/775554343/the-world-is-consta...
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- Subsentient 5y agoOf course we are! It's been obvious for years, at least to anyone in my circle. Even my boss has said as much. We can feel it in our bones. Things are getting worse, not better, and it's accelerating. We did this to ourselves, with our own greed and indifference, and now it's time to reap our rewards. Even now, rich nations are hoarding vaccines for themselves. We have learned nothing and we will learn nothing, until it is too late.
- thwor234234 5y agoI don't think we appreciate the difficulties of a post-Peak-oil world. For the latter part of the past-decade Hubbert's theory was rubbished because of new supplies from fracking and tar-sands, but the basic hypothesis: that there is a finite supply of cheap oil remains. There is little doubt that this resource will run out soon, putting an end to cheap transport, cheap agri (fertilizers, mechanization), and pretty much everything else we take for granted in the new 'modern' world. It's unclear how the world can support 10B population in this scenario, even taking into account the developments in electric and hydrogen vehicles etc. In fact, one wonders if the first world will be worse off because of its extreme reliance on this. This is a far bigger reason for the eco push, much more so than Global Warming IMO.
- labster 5y agoWorst case scenario we have a few hundred years of coal remaining. But fortunately in most developed nations, population is decreasing when you exclude immigration. As we improve standards of living, population will fall to more manageable levels. We are smart enough to escape the Malthusian trap.
- Sevii 5y ago10 years ago I'd agree with your sentiment. But now? I really think peak oil is overblown. A realistic scenario is linear or polynomial increases in oil prices over the next couple decades. The long tail of oil may end up at $10-20 a gallon before electric vehicles replace it completely. Electric vehicle technology is ready to replace oil for all commuter and in-city use cases. Is it cheaper maybe not, but its not 10x more expensive. Maybe people will have to have an electric sedan instead of a $50k SUV. But people will make do. According to https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/oil-and-petroleum-products/use-of-oil.php https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/oil-and-petroleum-produc... 66% of US oil usage goes to transportation. If we shift all short in-cities transportation to electric we can save oil for long haul trucks, trains, ships, planes, and industrial/agricultural uses. As oil supplies dwindle the price will increase until most of the demand (transportation) is shifted to electric vehicles. Food and plastics might increase in price. But the average American will be able to continue their car heavy lifestyle by switching to electric. I'm very optimistic on the future of solar and wind power. We may see average energy prices decrease significantly despite phasing out oil, coal and natural gas. But even if there are no further improvements in renewables I think electric vehicles will be good enough to avoid a peak oil crisis.
- BurningFrog 5y agoI'm an amateur historian at best, but I'm not aware of any era that has not expected the world to end soon. The Christians have done it for 20 centuries now, as one example. During my life, it has always been a common expectation, though the expected cause has shifted a few times. My hunch is that maybe we're hard wired to expect the world to end, for some undiscovered reason. Again, I remind you of my amateur status!
- quickthrower2 5y agoI feel it’s the opposite - everyone expects things to go on as they are. At least in stable countries. We are hard wired not to expect the world to end.
- thrdbndndn 5y agoAgreed. By the way, is there any sort of memoirs from ordinary people before WW2? Like did people at the time see it coming 1 years, 5 years etc. before?
- hindsightbias 5y agoRoosevelt and Churchill certainly saw it coming.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- NL807 5y agoInteresting question. Would be good to study such data.
- mellavora 5y agoThe bond market famously did not see WWI coming. And WWI was arguably much more catastrophic that WWII.
- shadilay 5y agoWell obviously, all civilizations collapse bar none.
- bg117 5y agoWhen in doubt, it is better to ask someone who doesn't belong to your country, race, religion, gender what their views are. If they don't agree, it could be a false alarm.
- dragonelite 5y agoSure the west is in decline, but a decline or collapse doesn't mean going back to living in caves or so. No the west will most likely experience a soviet style collapse where it will need multiple decades to recover. I do feel that Europe will probably find its own way after the collapse and the US will go from a global hegemon to a regional super power. A collapse of the west is still decades ahead of the average state of being in the global south.
- FiggyPudding 5y agoI liked seeing this concept "as government loses control of its monopoly on violence." but I can't articulate why... Maybe something to do with a comparison to organized crime as a competition to a (possibly separately corrupt) government?
- runarberg 5y agoMany definitions of the word state include having monopoly on violence as a necessary (and sometimes also sufficient). A state loosing its monopoly on violence would—by definition—mean that the state has collapsed.
- FiggyPudding 5y agoThanks. That certainly makes sense. The existence of organized crime does represent some failing of the state towards collapse.
- cyberpsybin 5y agoThe "collapse" happens over 100 years. We could already be in it.
- esarbe 5y agoWe're certainly already in it. We're witnessing the last few acts.
- CryptoPunk 5y agoWe've come unacceptably close to a nuclear war, multiple times. The danger still exists, with China's blatantly illegal colonization project in the South China Sea. Beyond that, the interconnectedness mentioned in the article allows hysterias to spread globally at an alarming rate. By some estimates, the reaction to covid did 100X more damage to society than it mitigated: http://www.sfu.ca/~allen/LockdownReport.pdf http://www.sfu.ca/~allen/LockdownReport.pdf We saw childhood obesity rates skyrocket: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2783690 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2783690 Education attainment levels plummet: https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/coronavirus-leading-through-the-crisis/charting-the-path-to-the-next-normal/30-to-40-percent-of-minority-and-low-income-students-werent-learning-during-lockdowns https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/coronavirus-leadi... But the hysteria surrounding covid has made any kind of rational discussion on the costs of covid mitigation strategies impossible.
- ttonkytonk 5y agoCivilization requires trust and fairness. Saying someone theoretically has a fair shake therefore an unfair outcome is fair won't keep getting it. There's also this strange idea that government itself is a bad thing (from Thomas Payne's Common Sense?), when the problem would be bad government. Someone has to make the big decisions, so if it's not the government, then presumably it's whoever has the most power? Then there is the general abandonment of spiritual values in the west? (If you think the U. S. is a religious country, just try getting Sundays off - I probably didn't get hired at a grocery store once because of this - in the Carolinas.)
- tarsinge 5y agoThis is actually what bothers me the most. It seems we are moving from individuality to egoism. More than values I think it's the abandonment of a shared society narrative (the book "Sapiens" was insightful on that mechanism): why bother being a good citizen and play our role when the game is rigged at every level (bonus with taxes financing useless wars)? And all of that reported by media on a credibility free-fall. The social contract seems kind of broken (not without reasons unfortunately).
- kierkegaard7 5y ago> Are we on the road to civilisation collapse? Only for those without money
- 8bitsrule 5y agoThe correct answer to every news headline that ends with a question-mark is: no.
- saberience 5y agoExcept for those where the answer is provably yes.
- jacknews 5y agoI think we're on the path of a new cold war between 'the west' and China, if not mildly there already. Since China currently make almost everything, that could certainly cause some collapse-like symptoms, as key equipment becomes unavailable. Just look at some of the covid supply-chain issues for a taste.
- ramesh31 5y agoOf course we're always on the road to civilization collapse. Life is an unending struggle against entropy. The entire history of human civilization is the struggle of keeping it together.
- coldtea 5y agoAs the people in the last decades of the Roman Empire said: no.
- streamofdigits 5y agoIts not a civilization crisis its a governance crisis (which is an important but small fraction of what constitutes a "civilization"). The adage "we have the politicians that we deserve" is true in the long term average but it may well not be true at each time-step. The political system that produces governance is in itself a piece of social technology (set of laws, procedures, morals, behaviors etc) and it can easily become unfit-for-purpose. Why? because one of its primary tasks is to perpetuate an existing order. If it overdoes this "stabilization" task (that is, ignores material shifts in reality) it can hold society hostage. That period of disconnect between what society needs and what its organizational tech is offering can feel gut-wrenching and surreal. All of the dysfunctions of the current era, e.g. environmental un-sustainability, absurd levels of inequality, rampant surveillance capitalism are well recognized and studied and, by-and-large, blueprints for solutions exist. Dig to find what is standing in the way and it is invariably i) an aged male politician and/or corporate leader who ii) has built a long career over decades knitting power networks with similar "winners" of his generation iii) is incapable of reinventing / invalidating himself and iv) will only be forced away from the cookie jar. Maybe what is happening is not civilizational collapse but enormous resources and human talent (world-wide) are hostage to near idiotic (as in: non-adapted) political arrangements.
- kubanczyk 5y agoI can certainly agree with the diagnosis! Putting things naively, do you think the primary call to action should be "change the law" or "change the politicians"? Wasting resources and human talent is not a problem in itself. It's suboptimal, that's it. You can interpret it simply as taming the whirlwind so that it doesn't disintegrate the structure and law, putting us back to pre-industrial times. While that aspect of paralysis is mild, the paralysis in response to the environmental changes, to a next pandemic, to virtually any possible physical danger (whether it's an asteroid or an AGI...) is the problem to solve now. Our system needs to be much much quicker when handling dangers on a global scale. I mean, it would be so embarrassing as a civilization to fall over some trivial bump.
- streamofdigits 5y ago
- jstimpfle 5y agoA talk on the topic by Jonathan Blow: Preventing the Collapse of Civilization (2019), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSRHeXYDLko https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSRHeXYDLko
- esarbe 5y agoI'm still kinda surprised that there are people that actually question that premise. Yes; our civilization is going to collapse and it's going to collapse quite soon-ish, in the next 30 to 50 years. I think people are a) hard-wired to expect the tomorrow to be the same as the today and b) socially trained to just keep our heads down and not stir the pot, even in face of calamity. Because of a) and b) we're still - as a society - acting as if everything was fine and so we continue to ignore the real and present danger of a total systemic collapse.
- ambientenv 5y agoI feel that "American Psychosis"[0] provides a reasonable and rational overview of the situation worth contemplation and discussion. [0]: https://vimeo.com/293802639 https://vimeo.com/293802639
- raxxorrax 5y agoAs surely as we are all going to die. Question is who long and perilous that road is.