Collapse As The Framework Which Now Surrounds Us

 

People enjoying the Rough Ridge Lookout at Grandfather Mountain, North Carolina

Before we get started on today's article, I'd like to thank everyone who commented on my last article, Our Way of Life Is Coming To An End. I really appreciate my readers letting me know their thoughts. The one regarding our lack of agency was really on point, as he replied to his earlier comment after thinking more about it. I remember coming to terms with it myself, which isn't easy. As humans, we are more or less condemned to act as if we do have agency regardless of the facts surrounding it. We like to think we have agency and make up all kinds of narratives surrounding it and rationalize anything away that points out the reality that we don't.

This conveniently leads into today's article and the fact that many people clearly do not comprehend the fact that we lack agency to "save" species and that land conservation doesn't equal "saving" anything. Lots of folks talk about preserving species by mandating property a nature preserve to "protect" it. Lyle Lewis explains how that land has already begun simplification before it ever became a nature preserve and that attempting to conserve the land by prohibiting development activities doesn't prevent invasive species from inhabiting the land and simplifying it further by reducing biodiversity and changing how the land functions within the web of life.

The larger issue is that all these ideas to save species and conserve property and attempts to reduce the symptom predicaments of overshoot such as climate change, pollution loading, disease, biodiversity decline, extinction, energy and resource decline all tend to be based on today's realities and not the realities of the future. Those preserves are based on today's legal system. The likelihood that this system will remain intact 25 or 50 years from now is fairly remote, and with collapse happening now, many of these preserves will probably not remain protected from much of anything. In fact, in one recent article, it is pointed out that one cannot just cut off a property from the surrounding landbase it is part of - this is an anthropocentric viewpoint not based in reality. 

I see these ideas (regenerative agriculture, permaculture, rebuilding soils, land conservation, saving species, and on and on) as noble ideas based in fantasyland. Most all of them are based on how life is today (or yesterday, for that matter), not what life will be like 25 years from now, let alone 50 or even 100 years from now. The systems which sustain us today are slowly disappearing in one way or another. This means that the frameworks which support the current systems which keep the fabric woven together so to speak is rapidly unraveling. The infrastructure, the financial systems, the governments, the legal systems, the neighborhood codes, and even civilization itself is collapsing as I type this. 

Knowing how the extinction process unfolds can help people understand how the predicaments we face interact and act as threat multipliers. Just the microplastics threat alone could render many species extinct within a human lifetime. While we don't know that this will happen, we can see the trajectory of these threats; and these threats are not being reduced, they are being increased. This means that the chances of extinction are going up, not down. 

The trouble tends to be focused on our thinking and the chosen behaviors we execute. Most people try to find a way for technology to "save" us because of the cultural mindset of technology being used to solve problems. When we were on the upswing of energy availability (constantly more energy being made available as surplus energy), new technologies did come in handy in many respects. Now, however, as surplus energy is in constant decline, new or more technologies will be unable to help much becuase the energy and resources to build, install, maintain, and decommission new technologies won't be available as more and more energy and resources are devoted instead to basic needs rather than simple desires (food, shelter, clothing, and medical needs). This scenario will continue to unfold as more and more technologies are abandoned once it is realized that they can no longer be maintained. 

As I have explained time and again, the predicaments we face are not problems, so they don't have solutions and being that technology use is precisely the cause, no technology will be able to have any positive effect. The ideas in the first three paragraphs of this article are notable for being what many people prescribe next once they realize technology or more complex technology won't help. Biomimicry, attempts at increasing biodiversity, and all the other attempts at regenerating life are not pointless - but what most people think the intended effects will be are also not likely. 

Generally, only ideas that can be implemented in a sustainable manner (without the use of fossil energy or resources derived from it) will be useful. What most people don't realize is that utilizing energy and or resources that didn't exist before the Industrial Revolution (human and animal labor, wood and/or wood products, and natural sources of energy [sugars from food] are what existed before the discovery of fossil fuels and the subsequent boom in alternative energies derived from fossil fuels) can only draw down the resources we (and the rest of life) require by increasing overshoot. In other words, attempting regenerative agriculture utilizing fossil fuel energy is a moot point - it is self-sacrificing by causing damage in one area to "fix" damage in another, making the entire act illusory in nature (no differently than most all ideas labeled "green", "clean", "renewable", and "sustainable" or those used for conservation or to "save" species). Basically, we've become experts in self-deception. A new article from Richard Martin describes this illusory nature rather well; once again highlighting that we face a predicament, not a problem.

Just like Thomas Dolby sang in the 1980's, we've been blinded by science and hit with technology. That same technology has "separated" us from nature by making us think that we depend upon our own ingenuity and not the nature underlying our existence. It is true that we have come to depend upon the technology that we built, but this does not negate our dependence upon the nature which surrounds us - we often fail to see that said nature is the basis of both our existence and the existence of the technology that we've built. Tom Murphy, DJ White, and Nate Hagens discuss the fantasies that I have long ridiculed (because they are unsustainable) here, and this goes way deeper than just space travel/Mars/Moon colonies. This conversation is one of the best ones I've heard recently, as it brings a considerable amount of material to think about with regard to how our species thinks and what it values, sometimes hilariously irrationally. One of the great qualities of this particular video is that both Tom and DJ disclose their neurodivergence and discuss how it has affected them and I couldn't help but identify with everything they said. For those of us who have suffered from being on the spectrum, this video brings forth some spectacular gems. One additional item of importance that I routinely hear is the idea of a much smaller population of humans on the planet but still utilizing high technology, which Tom Murphy dispenses with at this point in the video.

In similar fashion to the mind-bending thoughts provided in the video above, an equally thought-provoking read by Lyle Fass is available here. The only blind spot is that females are also subject (albeit perhaps not the same extent as males) to becoming imbued with dark triad psychopathies, something that one must keep in mind. As such, a matriarchal society in today's world would be far different than one in most of our history prior to the dawn of civilization, where in previous communities (pre-civilizational), people with dark triad qualities were scorned and/or ex-communicated from groups, limiting any power they could accumulate. This kept communities strong and those people with these dark triad qualities either kept those qualities muted to fit in or got booted out.

I've strayed from the original topic of collapse somewhat, so trying to get back to that topic, Dave Pollard wrote this insightful article about the psychology of collapse and how it is changing our brains. One of the more poignant quotes:

"And that is precisely the reason that I’m becoming more and more pessimistic about how most people are going to handle deepening chaos and civilizational collapse. We are already seeing the ‘alpha’ rats in the overcrowded, increasingly resource-constrained cage hoarding everything for themselves, and the rest of the rat colony cowering in the corners of the cage, scared shitless.

So what’s happening in the brains of our ‘leaders’ and other members of the Epstein Class/Patriciate — the human equivalent of the ‘alpha’ rats in the overcrowded cage? As a result of their lifelong conditioning, the ‘mirror neurons’ in their brains (the ones that enable us to imagine ourselves in someone else’s shoes) have shut down (or in the case of those with inherited wealth and privilege, never developed in the first place), to the point they’ve become incapable of empathy. You can see this in most presidents, the tech bros, and other corporate ‘leaders’. Extreme wealth and power, over time, physically damages your brain’s ability to relate to other people."

Dave almost always has great articles that bring a lot of wisdom to the forefront, and this one actually discusses our lack of agency and sense of self and how he deals with it. I find articles like this to be helpful in a variety of ways; but if you're not into them, just skip over.

Certain things can be guaranteed as we collapse, and pollution loading is one of them. Some folks think that collapse will lessen pollution loading, and some pollutants will indeed begin to be produced less. However, as collapse proceeds, some pollutants will be produced dramatically more, such as those produced by burning plastics. There will continue to be a lag time between the time specific items/chemicals are produced and the time they present as environmental pollutants, and this can easily be a generation or more. 

According to a new study, methylsiloxanes are widely used synthetic silicones in personal care products and industry, with evidence indicating potential risks, including endocrine disruption, liver damage, and reproductive toxicity. They reside in air and attach to microparticulates, they are environmentally persistent and bio-accumulative, and they are ubiquitous in indoor and outdoor air. Found in water and soil, their main outdoor source is vehicle exhaust (engine oil additives). These synthetic hydrophobic molecules exist as linear or cyclic compounds used extensively in personal care products, lubricants, and materials due to their low surface tension, flexibility, and high thermal stability. 

Another airborne toxin, MCCP, has been detected for the first time in the U.S. While this shouldn't surprise anyone (it is thought that it originates from sewage sludge), the effects are as of yet unknown, but are related to the class of chemicals known as PFAS (the "forever" chemicals). These chemicals are commonly used in industrial processes, including metalworking fluids and the production of PVC and textiles. They frequently appear in wastewater and can end up in biosolid fertilizer, also called sewage sludge, which is produced during wastewater treatment. MCCPs are closely related to Short Chain Chlorinated Paraffins (SCCPs), which are already regulated under the Stockholm Convention and by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency since 2009. Those earlier regulations followed evidence that SCCPs can travel long distances, persist in the environment, and pose risks to human health.

Once one considers the larger picture, one realizes that as pollution loading continues to increase, more disease will follow. With the collapse of medical treatments (and the industry as a whole) as time moves forward, we can expect more people to die from these diseases far more frequently than they do today. In fact, the Iran War is giving us a preview of all of these collapses as pointed out here.

I don't know if all of this will help you or not; but to get the best out of what life has to offer us at this point, I certainly do wish it will. Almost last but certainly not least today is this particularly critical article from William Rees which he sums up perfectly here:

"This is a true predicament, not a solvable problem.

In this light, it makes no sense to try to save the modern world. We are living a madness and must let it go.

But then what? The best of scenarios might see: a) individuals helping each other to learn the essential skills they will need to survive the coming contraction; b) small-scale community groups self-organizing, pooling their skills and resources and developing plans to lessen the impact of the crash. Such groups would also have to focus on ‘writing’ a new tribal narrative. If any form of sustainable human society is to emerge from the ashes of the MTI burn-out there must be a personal to civilizational transformation of how we think about ourselves and humanity’s place in nature. What are cultural beliefs, values, assumptions and behaviours that precipitated the fatal meta-crisis? And what are their opposites that might help us to avoid a ‘next time’? We have to socially construct a less abstracted, more immediately-relational, even mutualistic way of being on Earth. Can we imagine small-community life-styles by which fewer people can live materially adequate and spiritually satisfying lives, more equitably, within the biophysical means of nature?

And if so, the crucial question becomes ‘how do we make this happen?’ How do we catalyze the necessary transformation in a world of self-interested, competitive nations fractiously divided by socially-constructed political, economic and religious narratives that do not ‘map well’ to either social or biophysical reality? What would motivate today’s self-absorbed, often individualistic upper and middle classes to agree to an 80% reduction in energy and material consumption and embark in solidarity on an unprecedented journey of voluntary simplicity? I am not aware of any theory of deliberate social change that could rise to these challenges in the time we likely have available. Even the well-known, moderate, but at least explicitly contractionist degrowth ‘movement’ has gained little traction after several decades. And if there is such a strategy, need it be deployable all at once on a global scale or could local groups go it alone, hoping that the sparks they make will set the world on fire?"

We must let it go. Outside of the people who understand this simple fact, will society let it go or will it attempt to continue extending civilization? Are there any current plans demonstrating an acceptance of the facts I have laid out here outside of the Overshoot Community? Considering all the plans that remain bargaining (ultimately), I don't see it. 8 years after we hit peak oil, one would think folks would have begun to realize that growth is over. There are many who will argue that higher numbers of extracted crude contradicts 2018, and they might even be correct.  :

"Analysis of global crude oil production confirms that November 2018 remains the all-time monthly high for world crude oil extraction at 84.6 million barrels per day (mb/d). While institutions often report "total liquid fuel" growth, this includes non-crude sources like biofuels and natural gas liquids (NGLs), which have lower energy densities and cannot always substitute for crude oil in critical transport sectors like diesel trucking or shipping."

I was unable to find current rates, but considering the Iran War and the fact that many wells have had to be shut-in, even if higher amounts had been forecasted, they aren't likely to be higher than 2018 or 2026, and most of the time between those two years were spent below 2018 figures. John Peach says that we are most likely beyond peak now either way. Moving forward, this is what the important part is. One can argue either year but it matters very little now. Growth is over, period.

What we now have to look forward to may be bleak, but not everything is dark. There is still time to enjoy nature with your loved ones, your friends, and your pets (if any). Today's featured posts are Grove Campground and Middle Fork Falls and Cloudland Canyon State Park and Reflection Riding Arboretum and Nature Center!