Arguably, the best strategy for mitigating existential risk and responding to a NEO collision event is a diversity of populations, civilizations, economies, and

Arguably, the best strategy for mitigating existential risk and responding to a NEO collision event is a diversity of populations, civilizations, economies, and governance on the planet, so that as a species we are more resilliant to such an event takes out one or some of us. Proposals that end in creating a single planetary policy source, and single global coordination and governance scheme to "fight" it necessarily reduce to dumbness because they create an economics that optimizes for reinforcing it over the interests and aggregate desires of individual organisms. Removing the diversity of governance alternatives means you have to optimize for that single solution, which in any complex system is essentially risk convergence, collapse, and death. We are much more likely to die off of a confluence of starvation, war, disease, and non-replacement birth rates wrought by the risk correlation of central policymaking before a meteor hits or some other global catastrophe is actually realized. It's so much easier to make humans fear the same thing than to get us to all believe in it, and once you get your hand on that lever, does it matter what the threat is? The lever is narrative. I'd be skeptical of people indexed on planetary defense, because it's just a proxy and pretext for another centralization agenda. Just like when everyone is responsible, nobody is - when a solution is for everyone, it's pretty much also guaranteed to be for almost nobody as well.