[Newfie]

The problem with tactics such as Extinction Rebellion or Cog’s is that neither relies on logic, or thoughtful contemplation of the issues. I would venture to say that is true of 90% that one hears from either side of the Climate Change argument. Both sides think they understand it all and neither side is willing to listen to the other. It’s very much the American partisan divide on a global scale.

While I have no faith that it will happen what we need is thoughtful contemplation of the problem. Hell we need folks to listen so that they can hear the problem.

What’s going on in the USA is probably illustrative of how things will work out globally. IMHO, and open to discussion, what we have is far more akin to a RELIGIOUS divide than anything else. What is at the bottom is either a belief in the INDIVIDUAL as supreme or the COLLECTIVE as supreme. Realities such as Climate Change, no matter how real, are unfortunately being used to further the cause. This muddles the arguments and makes them hard to understand. The other side is so entrenched in their religious dogma that they can’t see when they are bowing to make believe Gods. Both side feel righteous, which never won a debate, but has killed many in battle.

And this is where Greta is a part of the problem, as much as any CC denier she is increasing the emotional tension without increasing the collective intellect.

Each one of us, or at least our leadership, needs to come to grips with the worlds problems in terms that having meaning for us. When I ask folks to name the five biggest problems facing humanity I get some interesting answers. At first people are kind of dumbfounded, they have never confronted that question before, and they can come up with some pretty stupid answers; I.e. “excessive incarceration of black men in America” for one. Given a few minutes to reflect they get deeper. One I have heard from a humanist perspective is “Mans unrelenting greed.” This is closer to the truth. And each one of us frames these problems from our own perspective, so I frame them from a Project Management point of view, which is one of the valid view points.

And I think this is a better way to move the discussion forward. When I listen carefully to what concerns folks and more importantly, what they value, I hear far less division. Somewhere down below in each of us is a pretty similar beast with common desires. To advance, indeed - to survive, the discussion needs identify those commonalities and address ways to achieve them.

[rockdoc123]

This muddles the arguments and makes them hard to understand. The other side is so entrenched in their religious dogma that they can’t see when they are bowing to make believe Gods. Both side feel righteous, which never won a debate, but has killed many in battle.

And this is where Greta is a part of the problem, as much as any CC denier she is increasing the emotional tension without increasing the collective intellect.

A deep long look in the mirror is probably warranted. On the one hand you are accusing everyone else of feeling rightous and being entrenched in religious dogma and then immediately you invoke the term "deniers" to characterize those (including scientists versed in the subject matter) who don't subscribe to the viewpoint you have chosen to follow.

This is not a lot different from the "do as I say, not as I do" approach of Thunberg and her ilk.

[EnergyUnlimited]

And this is where Greta is a part of the problem, as much as any CC denier she is increasing the emotional tension without increasing the collective intellect.

Base on my observations collective intellect of first world citizens is simply not there.
It is reduced to lowest common denominator and mob reasoning resembles intellectual level of someone of IQ 70-80.
For such society intellectual arguments are of no use but emotional ones can still work.
Perhaps Greta's strategy is correct in such circumstances.
Of course we may now look from our ivory towers and point out that all what she does is an emotional manipulation and carries little (if any) intristic value. Such assessment is in fact correct.
But yet that is exactly what needs to be done, if degenerated mobs confused of their sex/gender, indulged in entitlements and welded to smarphones are to notice it at all.

[Newfie]

The problem with that is that it then becomes a propaganda arms race, policy decisions become the equivalent of a pin ball machine.

In short it leads to random illogical actions where only the constant, unrelenting force of entropy wins. It always does, but I like to slow its advance, not hasten it.

[Ibon]

Consider a moment how societies with strong religious fundamentals function. The belief system held by the constituents are not logical, not rational, fundamentally based on fictitious fairy tales that are not based on organic reality and yet at the same time hold the collective in a unified narrative.

We discussed this in the past. Having a society follow ecological tenants of staying within carrying capacity does not require the followers to understand science, ecology, climate change, diversity loss, freshwater aquifer depletion, fossil fuels, peak oil, etc. etc. etc. as long as the fairy tail narrative has a set of regulations and commandments that follow ecological principals.

The high priests need to set the framework with an ecological bible that can be filled with all kinds of allegories and stories as fictitious as Adam biting the apple and Noah boat and all the rest. People are moved by the bibles stories acting in accordance with its principals. Faith guides the collective more than science and facts.

This idea that we have to educate the masses with science and ecology is actually a futile endeavor. We have to align the mythology with ecological principals using biblical type stories that will be believed by the followers. Science need not play as major a role as you might assume in this case.

The high priests and the creators of the set of principals of course must be educated with science and must use science and ecological principals to create and define the mythology but the followers only have to have faith.

Some faiths don't eat pork based on the mythology even though the origin of this practice was based on the diseases that uncooked pork transmitted. The followers never understood the underlying organic biology of the disease, their faith was their only guide.

We do not need a society full of cerebral high IQ individuals. Just the priests and the creators have to be smart.

The followers can be as dumb as a sack of hammers (thanks Pops) as long as their faith is unified and strong.

The Lone Ranger and Tonto were camping in the wilderness. After they got their tent set up, both men fell sound asleep. Some hours later, Tonto wakes the Lone Ranger and says,"'Kemo Sabe, look towards sky, what you see?"
The Lone Ranger replies, "I see millions of stars."
"What that tell you?" asked Tonto.
The Lone Ranger ponders for a minute then says, "Astronomically-speaking, it tells me there are millions of galaxies and potentially billions of planets. Astrologically, it tells me that Saturn is in Leo. Time-wise, it appears to be approximately a quarter past three in the morning. Theologically, the Lord is all-powerful and we are small and insignificant. Meteorologically, it seems we will have a beautiful day tomorrow. What does it tell you,Tonto?"

"You dumber than buffalo... It mean someone stole tent."

[rockdoc123]

We do not need a society full of cerebral high IQ individuals. Just the priests and the creators have to be smart.

you do need a society full of people with high enough intellect and will to figure out which "priests and creators" are completely full of horse crap though. Otherwise, you have a Jonestown scenario on a much larger scale.

[Ibon]

We do not need a society full of cerebral high IQ individuals. Just the priests and the creators have to be smart.

you do need a society full of people with high enough intellect and will to figure out which "priests and creators" are completely full of horse crap though. Otherwise, you have a Jonestown scenario on a much larger scale.

Societies are built around myths. Look at how resilient consumption culture is and the irrational premise it is based on. I assure you there are many high IQ individuals totally duped by the mythology of consumption culture. And I can also assure you that this is a slow motion Jonestown happening before our eyes.

NO, we really do just need smart mythologies.

[rockdoc123]

NO, we really do just need smart mythologies.

and who is the self-proclaimed arbiter of that? There is the problem, you have someone telling everyone..."I have the right answer" and if the masses are too stupid to figure out he has his head up his backside chaos ensues.

[Ibon]

NO, we really do just need smart mythologies.

and who is the self-proclaimed arbiter of that? There is the problem, you have someone telling everyone..."I have the right answer" and if the masses are too stupid to figure out he has his head up his backside chaos ensues.

We have well functioning arbiters today that can function as guideposts. Our constitution for example. Parts of the bible. I am a secular atheist and I recognize that!

You first need a society humbled into submission with natural consequences to get back to a less cynical baseline. At the same time, as in our constitution, a set of checks and balances in place to prevent the chaos you speak of.

Like most of our generation, you hold a high level of cynical suspicion toward those who would be arbiters. That makes sense when you consider that all the pillars of our civilization have been corrupted; Our current religions, politics, private and public enterprise, media, etc. .etc.

I can understand it is hard to imagine an unbiased arbiter at this moment.

That may change with forces external of human agency acting as a giant humble pie in the face of our current set of beliefs.

[Newfie]

We do not need a society full of cerebral high IQ individuals. Just the priests and the creators have to be smart.

you do need a society full of people with high enough intellect and will to figure out which "priests and creators" are completely full of horse crap though. Otherwise, you have a Jonestown scenario on a much larger scale.

Which is about where we are.

[Newfie]

NO, we really do just need smart mythologies.

and who is the self-proclaimed arbiter of that? There is the problem, you have someone telling everyone..."I have the right answer" and if the masses are too stupid to figure out he has his head up his backside chaos ensues.

We have well functioning arbiters today that can function as guideposts. Our constitution for example. Parts of the bible. I am a secular atheist and I recognize that!

You first need a society humbled into submission with natural consequences to get back to a less cynical baseline. At the same time, as in our constitution, a set of checks and balances in place to prevent the chaos you speak of.

Like most of our generation, you hold a high level of cynical suspicion toward those who would be arbiters. That makes sense when you consider that all the pillars of our civilization have been corrupted; Our current religions, politics, private and public enterprise, media, etc. .etc.

I can understand it is hard to imagine an unbiased arbiter at this moment.

That may change with forces external of human agency acting as a giant humble pie in the face of our current set of beliefs.

Ibon,

As I’ve noted before, I hope you are correct but I’m having trouble seeing the feedback looks that make this work.

[Ibon]

NO, we really do just need smart mythologies.

and who is the self-proclaimed arbiter of that? There is the problem, you have someone telling everyone..."I have the right answer" and if the masses are too stupid to figure out he has his head up his backside chaos ensues.

We have well functioning arbiters today that can function as guideposts. Our constitution for example. Parts of the bible. I am a secular atheist and I recognize that!

You first need a society humbled into submission with natural consequences to get back to a less cynical baseline. At the same time, as in our constitution, a set of checks and balances in place to prevent the chaos you speak of.

Like most of our generation, you hold a high level of cynical suspicion toward those who would be arbiters. That makes sense when you consider that all the pillars of our civilization have been corrupted; Our current religions, politics, private and public enterprise, media, etc. .etc.

I can understand it is hard to imagine an unbiased arbiter at this moment.

That may change with forces external of human agency acting as a giant humble pie in the face of our current set of beliefs.

Ibon,

As I’ve noted before, I hope you are correct but I’m having trouble seeing the feedback looks that make this work.

Think how niclear war acted as a detente to global powers during the cold war. It restricted and constrained the impulse to a war nobody could win.

Similarly, consequences external of human agency can possibly act the same, the resulting instabilities hammering home the lesson that the only pathway to stability is constraining and restricting consumption and breeding. The road we take, the high road of thoughtful mitigated planning or the low road of brutal resource wars both lead to the same conclusion.

I can well imagine that the required sobriety and humility of the high road will only follow after we plunge head first into the low road response.

Nothing utopian but learn we may.

I can well see the feedback loops socializing population to sacrifice unrestricted personal freedoms of consumption for the sake of stability.

[The_Toecutter]

There are freedoms other than the ability to consume things. If Americans were actually allowed to express those freedoms, I would hazard a guess that consumption culture would not be as much of a thing as it is today.

Consumption culture is a symptom of a lack of real freedom combined with a shortage of real money forcing credit to be used as a substitute. People buy crap because it is the only expression of "individuality" they're allowed to have on a consistent basis.

Get rid of all the restrictions on drug use, all of the restrictions on protest, all of the rules that allow government defacto ownership over people(such as the forced Selective Service registration to force men into slavery to fight wars), stop forcing people to submit to biometric ID cards to go about their lives, outlaw property taxes on primary residences and gut the authority of HOAs/local governments to limit how one uses one's property and let people truly own their own homes, end all the endless money printing and end the use of credit so that prices on homes/college/healthcare can be allowed to plummet, and overall, let people have actual freedom for a change and not just the "freedom" to buy things, "freedom" to buy things which turns out not to be freedom at all to those who have no money and serves as shackles to everyone else thanks to interest charged on the use of credit, and consumption culture may lose its resilience.

Then there is all the consumption done by government. War machines, surveillance states, bloated legal systems that enforce every law, and a massive prison-industrial complex are very resource intensive to maintain. We could do without those things.

Counterculture figures like Carlos Castaneda and Timothy Leary and science fiction authors like Frederick Pohl and John Brunner, and even the much reviled manifesto author Theodore Kaczynski, all had good ideas to follow and understood this.

[asg70]

Consumption culture is a symptom of a lack of real freedom

No. Consumption culture is a symptom of TOO MUCH freedom, aka tragedy of the commons.

People buy crap because it is the only expression of "individuality" they're allowed to have on a consistent basis.

I see plenty of individuality out there, really too much (tats and piercings and what not). It's not individuality that's in short supply, it's any sort of spiritual grounding or purpose in life beyond narcissism.

Get rid of all the restrictions on drug use, all of the restrictions on protest

Huh? Marijuana is being legalized across the US and were you asleep during Occupy Wallstreet and Pussy-hat mania? You're complaining about things that aren't in any way a problem.

Besides, what exactly does people getting high or protesting accomplish, really, besides a lot of broken windows with bricks in them and stoners?

Counterculture figures like Carlos Castaneda and Timothy Leary and science fiction authors like Frederick Pohl and John Brunner, and even the much reviled manifesto author Theodore Kaczynski, all had good ideas to follow and understood this.

The more I read of your posts the less respect I have for you, especially when you hold a murderer like the unabomber up as an idol. I really think your mentality is part of the problem, not the solution, although you'll never acknowledge this, because you've developed an angry revolutionary mindset as you search for something external to blame for your own personal life circumstances.

[EnergyUnlimited]

The more I read of your posts the less respect I have for you, especially when you hold a murderer like the unabomber up as an idol. I really think your mentality is part of the problem, not the solution, although you'll never acknowledge this, because you've developed an angry revolutionary mindset as you search for something external to blame for your own personal life circumstances.

Unabomber have managed to kill few, so he is a murderer.
Should he manage to murder at least few thousands or preferably few millions and yet hold to power, very much like most of american presidents did between many other similar people, he would be a hero.
There are far more dangerous people out there comparing to TC or his hero Unabomber and yet they are revered idols of masses.
Psycholgists and medical doctors advising sex change for few years old kids in the US and elsewhere are far more dangerous to society than people like Ted Kaczynsky (Unabomber) could ever possibly be and yet they are somehow tolerated and actually treated as authority in United States and many other places.
Besides other very destructive characteriscts in longer term they are also murderers because their actions will drive many to suicides and they are well aware of it and accept it as a possible outcome, all for ideological reasons.

[asg70]

I think there are two types of people in a world gradually winding down, those who focus on tending their garden and those who throw molotov cocktails. I just don't relate to the latter because I think in most cases conflict leads to equal or worse outcomes vs. the status quo. You can see Trump as a symbol of this in a way, as he was a protest candidate, sort of the equivalent of throwing the brick through a window. Many of his supporters knew he'd be a bull in a china shop but they felt that by allowing him to trash Washington it would "drain the swamp", as it were. That didn't work out that well, did it? But that tends to be how society falls apart. The mob is a very blunt instrument. They suffer from dunning kruger insofar as they think they have a plan, but they really don't. And so all it does is sort of further the process of collapse. Really, outside of the American Revolution I can think of any other that was mounted by intellectuals who really had a firm grasp of what they wanted to build after the dust settled and actually achieved it in a way that pretty much lived up to the hype. These days people are filled with a lot of rage and magical thinking but not a lot of workable ideas.

In summary, while I don't like autocracies, I am an anti-populist. I have a very low opinion of the rabble.

[Ibon]

Many of his supporters knew he'd be a bull in a china shop but they felt that by allowing him to trash Washington it would "drain the swamp", as it were. That didn't work out that well, did it? But that tends to be how society falls apart. The mob is a very blunt instrument.

In summary, while I don't like autocracies, I am an anti-populist. I have a very low opinion of the mob

Ecological constraints are leading us to this winding down. Human agency will struggle to adapt taking the low road of mob rule and the high road trying to maintain some semblance of civic unity and a greatly reduced social safety net.

Maybe we need both. The panic of mob rule to scare the majority into sacrifice in the name of security.

The high road alone wont work with an indolent and entitled society deep in the religion of consumption culture.

[EnergyUnlimited]

I think there are two types of people in a world gradually winding down, those who focus on tending their garden and those who throw molotov cocktails. I just don't relate to the latter because I think in most cases conflict leads to equal or worse outcomes vs. the status quo.

The older you are, the more reluctant you are to adopt Molotov's coctail solutions. That is because you are more and more likely to lose this game with those younger.
I agree that most of uprisings are making situation worse, nevertheless sometimes system is sufficiently defunct to dismantle it regardless of means.
West is approaching this situation as we speak. Maybe not there yet but close to.
Sometimes things just must turn for the worse before they could get any better.

Current economic situation is long term untenable.
You will hear only more of bitchings about Rockefellers, Rotschilds, Bildenbergs, Waltons and other similar.
Not long from now a breaking point will be crossed, mobs will go ballistic, some clever peoples will exploit it to get power and all current world order as we know it will simply cease to exist.

Did you hear about mexican Mafia soldiers successfuly challenging in battle government forces to release their boss, son of El Chapo?
You will see more of it, also in US and soon enough and brutality on both sides will be enormous.

Mobs which have absolutely nothing to loose will destroy anything and everything and even if government defeat them, there is only burned wasteland left. One way or another society collapses.
If mob win then organizing structures are gone and a period of mindless violence and infrastructure collapse ensues.
If government win then there are hardly any means left to run/maintain infrastructure which crumbles, provinces are gradually fading out of radar screen and rule of government becomes to be a remnant present only in capitol city and closest surroundings. Provinces becoming to be lands of the lawless ruled by warlords/rebels etc.
That is how "natural collapse" of any civilization proceed.

I can well imagine that the required sobriety and humility of the high road will only follow after we plunge head first into the low road response.

Assuming that we are living in the world of diminishing resources low road path is a one way path.
Once low road have been selected, there wont be any return to high road until population correction is complete.
Return to high road would call for resurces and these will be not only in increasingly short supply in foreseable future but also devastated by mobs to produce far worse overall outcome.
Analyze any failed state situation for support of my thesis.
Any return to high road is only possible due to external assistance (which won't be there once collapse is global) or once equlibrium with environment is achieved.
Some countries like China may well manage to power down while on high road though.
But once high road is abandoned there will be no fast return there.

[Ibon]

Social stability and security will rise as a priority of the citizenry directly proportional to the volatility of mob rule. For example, today where you choose to live is often based on issues like climate, access to culture, nature, diversity, clean air, etc. Etc.

These assets will continue to be valid measures but low crime rate and security will rise above all other assets as a priority. This will effect viability of communities to attract wealth and employment. This will put pressure on states to become more oppressive against mob rule.

We have to become, unfortunately, more
Socialized to a police state . I don't like that but it is what it is.

Unavoidable consequence of human overshoot.

[EnergyUnlimited]

These assets will continue to be valid measures but low crime rate and security will rise above all other assets as a priority. This will effect viability of communities to attract wealth and employment. This will put pressure on states to become more oppressive against mob rule.

Men who have nothing to loose fear nothing, even oppressive government.
If they are to die - lets be it but meantime they will do what they please.
Opressive state rule and mob rule produces very much the same outcome as well.
NK with their oppressive state rule does not attract wealth and employment, albeit most of people there are employed.
Phillippines with Duterte are not an eldorado either and civil war is well and kicking there.
Neither Venezuela is coping any better.
In the world of dimishing resources and societal collapse authoritarian rule in long term is untenable.
Governments are also running out of resources and growing numbers of officials are struggling to become a Cesar. That is how civil society ends.

But of course an authoritarian state will be tried, only to fail once a no return point to a mob rule is crossed.