https://c402277.ssl.cf1.rackcdn.com/publications/1187/files/original/LPR2018_Full_Report_Spreads.pdf
60% of all vertebrates have gone extinct over the last 4 decades and those extinctions are directly linked to rising rates of affluence and corresponding consumption. There can be no sensible argument to attribute the preponderance of these extinctions to anything other than human activity.
As fluffy as it may be, our psychology seems to favor excessive or conspicuous consumption, and cultures all round the world place value onto people who possess things others don't, celebrate via conspicuous consumption, and seek tangible reward for their labors creating a spiral of demand withdrawn ultimately from nature's bank.
Will it be our own greed that brings about our civilization's end? Will we fail to master our own consumption, eat ourselves out of house and home, and fall foul of a Malthusian trap? Or do you think it's possible we can bring about societal, political, and psychological changes which focus on stability rather than growth?
If optimistic, when do you think this will begin to be apparent? How can you foresee it occurring? Wouldn't the 'altruistic' nations that put our species' long-term survival ahead of their own immediate wealth put themselves at an extreme disadvantage to societies that refuse to do so? Within the metaphor of the tragedy of the commons, it's rarely noted that the most equitable and therefore desirable cooperative solution still entails maximal exploitation of the resource, so it's generally accepted that independent commissions tend to offer better long term protection managing that resource - but can we do this for all Earth's resources?
Alternatively, is it really just fucked any which way due to the predatory nature of the universe and the fact that we're living on a very small ball of rock with a fragile ecosystem that cannot hope to survive the rise of a machine civilization? Do we need space, not to save us from ourselves, but to glut us on near infinite resources?
Any which way, I think it's worth considering how 'lucky' we are to be alive in this time where we sit at a threshold and can still 'see' the past so clearly even as it shrinks before our eyes, while having the potential to change the future should we find a collective will to do so. A curse, perhaps, but we may live in interesting times.
60% of all vertebrates have gone extinct over the last 4 decades and those extinctions are directly linked to rising rates of affluence and corresponding consumption. There can be no sensible argument to attribute the preponderance of these extinctions to anything other than human activity.
As fluffy as it may be, our psychology seems to favor excessive or conspicuous consumption, and cultures all round the world place value onto people who possess things others don't, celebrate via conspicuous consumption, and seek tangible reward for their labors creating a spiral of demand withdrawn ultimately from nature's bank.
Will it be our own greed that brings about our civilization's end? Will we fail to master our own consumption, eat ourselves out of house and home, and fall foul of a Malthusian trap? Or do you think it's possible we can bring about societal, political, and psychological changes which focus on stability rather than growth?
If optimistic, when do you think this will begin to be apparent? How can you foresee it occurring? Wouldn't the 'altruistic' nations that put our species' long-term survival ahead of their own immediate wealth put themselves at an extreme disadvantage to societies that refuse to do so? Within the metaphor of the tragedy of the commons, it's rarely noted that the most equitable and therefore desirable cooperative solution still entails maximal exploitation of the resource, so it's generally accepted that independent commissions tend to offer better long term protection managing that resource - but can we do this for all Earth's resources?
Alternatively, is it really just fucked any which way due to the predatory nature of the universe and the fact that we're living on a very small ball of rock with a fragile ecosystem that cannot hope to survive the rise of a machine civilization? Do we need space, not to save us from ourselves, but to glut us on near infinite resources?
Any which way, I think it's worth considering how 'lucky' we are to be alive in this time where we sit at a threshold and can still 'see' the past so clearly even as it shrinks before our eyes, while having the potential to change the future should we find a collective will to do so. A curse, perhaps, but we may live in interesting times.