It's a Trap, Don't Do It

My last article focused on mindsets and how they can lead us into traps. One of the most pervasive of these traps is the energy trap. People are constantly searching for new types of energy, new energy generation, and/or ways to improve energy efficiency, ALL of which unfortunately are ultimately dead ends. The search for this energy is often with the idea to reduce emissions in an effort to reduce the effects of climate change. The trouble is in the fact that this ignores the root predicament of ecological overshoot and that producing more energy requires destruction of our planet resulting in MORE ecological overshoot, not less. Ultimately, the only way to reduce emissions is to consume less globally, period. I pointed this out in my article, What Would it Take for Humanity to Experience Radical Transformation? and added that continuing civilization is a non-starter. Yet, practically every single idea we see to "solve" climate change consists of ideas to ramp up energy production in one way or another or to continue civilization, the very continuation of which is driving us to the edge of extinction. Why do we still fail to see that what most all of our ideas attempt is impossible and only leads to ruination? Why can we not see that degrowth and contraction are the only options? Why not instead focus on ideas which help and support the only two options that are actually possible, feasible, and practical? Politically speaking, mentioning ideas that would conform to this trajectory would be a death sentence for the politician, and so we continue on unsustainable paths and continue kicking the can down the road.

I thought I was done with the mindsets and traps theme, but this article caused me to change my mind. Utilizing mining to "solve" the predicaments mining has caused seems a bit ridiculous to me. When will people wake up to the fact that using methods causing destruction CANNOT help to solve the predicaments those same methods of destruction are CAUSING? Mining requires the same extraction, the same energy use, and the same industrial civilization killing life on this planet that technology use does. They are interdependent on one another; mining utilizes technological devices to perform the work of mining, and those technological devices are brought about through the resources mining extracts. How do people, ESPECIALLY scientists, miss these facts? Denial of reality? 

An article along the same lines of faulty logic recently caused me to have a hearty chuckle. The very first mistake made is the idea that success has been reached. Yes, success has been had TODAY, but will that success continue into tomorrow? The sad answer to that is NO. Conditions in the future will not be like they are today and all large organisms are slated for extinction dictated by the laws of biology and brought into existence by the predicaments we have put into place through ecological overshoot. These bears can only maintain their presence while civilization remains intact. In a collapse scenario (unfolding slowly as I type this), the means to transport resources into cities and towns begins to erode and more and more people filter out of cities to find resources on their own. As I pointed out in my article about ecological overshoot, what happens as time moves forward is that humans will be forced to find water, food, and needed resources locally. This is encapsulated by the following quote regarding climate migrations: 

"The trouble with thinking that moving to locations which aren't CURRENTLY suffering the effects that other areas are is that millions of other people will also see this as a potential "solution" and overwhelm the existing habitat (infrastructure, food systems, housing, water supply, etc.) in those locations. The effect will look similar to an area suffering from the effects of millions of grasshoppers or billions of locusts devastating an area or region once climate migrations become commonplace as time moves forward."

This article (based upon this paper) provides more information regarding climate migrations.

Another new study points out the inevitable conflict which will occur between humans and wildlife as climate change proceeds to alter and/or reduce habitat for different species. 

In other words, every idea that we utilize to attempt to continue civilization is short-sighted because it comes at the expense of all these other species which are in the process of being wiped out by civilization, the collapse of which will most likely cause most large animals to be wiped out by a combination of lack of other meat sources which were previously transported into large cities and towns from hundreds if not thousands of miles away and biodiversity and ecological collapse. Even ideas which don't necessarily benefit civilization, but REQUIRE civilization in order to be accomplished; such as most attempts at conservation, still benefit the power brokers at the top of the scheme of civilization. View this 1 minute video and tell me I'm wrong.  

As time moves forward and these facts become evermore difficult to deny, some people will begin to accept the truth and some will double down into stronger denial, as can be seen by the increasing divide in the American public over COVID-19, political ideologies, climate change, infrastructure, and all sorts of other topics, all based upon the same underlying foundation of collapse. Those who are open to learning about these predicaments will see the light; those who have a worldview opposed to such information will not. Most people do agree that the predicaments are happening, where so many disagree is on what to do about it. The trouble is ascertaining what CAN be done that will actually help and what only fuels further destruction at worst or accomplishes nothing at best. Most people fail to see where we lack agency which promulgates a large amount of ignorance, arrogance, denial, and optimism bias. 

Right here is another prime example of the short-sightedness of the idea behind providing artificial habitat for species. Most articles and studies regarding these ideas tend to have similar outcomes - "more study is needed." This is because at the end of the day, humans do not have the agency to provide habitat; only nature can do this sustainably. That which is unsustainable CAN NOT BE SUSTAINED. We all too frequently forget that tomorrow's conditions will not be like those of today. Perhaps a better way to explain the scenario of the mindsets and traps we find ourselves enmeshed in is located in section D.6 in Tom Murphy's book, Too Smart To Succeed. Please make sure to read section D.6.1 as well.

As one can see, our experiment isn't yet finished; although it is very clear that conditions conducive to our success are winding down. Considering all the ways our minds are leading us into traps, and considering how long changing our collective behavior requires (at least a single generation if not more), is it possible for us to dig out of the collective hole we continue digging deeper? Perhaps it is the framing of the questions we ask or the results we seek which need changing. Either way, right now is no better time to Live Now!