Generational Dynamics Forum - New Site

Conclusion

Population growth, resource scarcity,
technological evolution, cultural shifts,
environmental changes, and war, trade and
immigration – all these developments have
bothered people both today and in the past as
causes of social decay. Yet on analysis none of
them is revealed as truly problematic. None of
them has been crucial to past instances of decline.

The defect of these concerns is that they focus
on observable things (such as population size)
rather than on underlying principles (such as
scale). They also have little or no time depth, and
ignore historical experience. The result is some
superficially plausible scenarios that fail to match
what occurs in practice. This emphasises the
importance of a model based on political,
economic and social relationships for attaining a
genuine understanding both of how societies
change in general and of the prospects for any real
society. These are more reliable guides than any
surface features. They possess well-defined
properties, and are where the true contradictions
are to be found. Societies decline not because of
too many births or a change in the weather, but
because they lose integration, organisation
and cohesion. It is as simple and as subtle as that.

The approach to a dark age is paradoxically a
time when things seem to be getting better in many
respects. Political authorities seem less oppressive.
Economic activity is more elaborate than ever.
Social attitudes become more enlightened. On the
surface, everything can appear to be excellent.
Behind the scenes, though, the contradictions are
growing and they threaten all this wondrous
achievement. It is not when you think you have a
problem that you actually have one – for having
identified it you can do something about it. The
real worry is when things seem to be going
swimmingly well. Let those who say ‘preposterous!’
and ‘how pessimistic!’ reflect on that.

MARC WIDDOWSON
Bedford, 2001

Higgenbotham wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 10, 2024 9:23 pm

This is a list of the types of specialists who might think about collapse.

1. Archaeologists - Done enough digging to realize that much of what they are digging up resulted from the collapse of civilizations
2. Historians - Looked at enough history to conclude that there are patterns of rise and fall that civilizations follow
3. Systems Thinkers - Look at the world as a complex system that is inherently unstable and will break down as limits are hit
4. Theologians - Study religious prophecy and compare to current events to conclude that end times prophecy is being fulfilled
5. Ecologists - Look at population dynamics of other species and conclude that humans are on an unsustainable population trajectory
6. Environmentalists - Look at enough environmental measures (resources, health, climate, etc.) to think collapse is on the near term horizon
7. Whistleblowers - Believe that things are morally and ethically much worse than people realize based on perception of their personal experience
8. Traders - Have studied market collapses and believe these types of collapses are applicable harbingers and models of civilizational collapse
9. Dabblers - Often former professionals and retirees who are widely read and concerned about the future based on personal experience and study

Fifty Years After ‘The Limits to Growth’: Dennis Meadows interviewed by Juan Bordera

Juan Bodera: It’s been 50 years since the publication of your book, and your World3 standard scenario is very similar to reality; you predicted that growth would stop around 2020. Is that what we’re starting to see now?

Dennis Meadows: We did not make predictions, we said it is impossible to accurately “predict” anything in which human behaviour is a factor, what we did is to model 12 scenarios consistent with physical and social rules. 12 possible futures. One of them, the “standard”, as you know, showed that growth was going to stop around 2020. Then all variables (industrial production, food production, etc) would peak and in about 15 years they would start to decline inexorably.

Does this resemble what we are experiencing? I would say yes. The world is showing more and more consequences of a crash against the limits.

What we did take great care, as early as 1972, was to make it clear that after the peak of any variable everything becomes even more unpredictable as factors come into play that could not be represented in our model. At this point it is obvious that we are going to be driven more by psychological, social and political factors than by physical constraints.

JB: The myth of progress, that technology will always come to the rescue (Hydrogen, Carbon Capture & Storage…), is one of the most paralyzing ideas to face the real problem (that degrowth is inevitable) because what we need is a cultural, moral and ethical change?

DM: Yes, I agree, that was one of the crucial points of our work already 50 years ago. Ideally, technology can give you more time, but it won’t solve the problem. It can give you the opportunity to make the political and social changes that are necessary. But as long as you have a system that relies on growth to solve every problem, technology will not be able to prevent many crucial limits from being overstepped, as we are already seeing.

JB: According to the HANDY model, a fundamental parameter for causing collapses is inequality, which increases in parallel to the lack of trust among peers, another reason for a collapse. The design of our economic system causes both to increase every year. And it makes it impossible to adjust to the limits, because the elite–which is usually detached from reality and therefore does not detect the alarms–is the one that serves as a model. How to untangle such a mess?

DM: The truth is not to be found in a few equations, obviously. It is to be found in history. And our history over thousands of years shows that the powerful seek more power, and have an easier time finding it because of their situation–it’s a positive feedback loop. In system dynamics this is called “success for the already successful”. We rarely deviate from this phenomenon.

No one can untangle this tangle. I don’t think there is any action or law that can do that. In a few cultures, however, evolved redistribution mechanisms have been seen. In the northwest of the United States there are some tribes that have a custom called “Potlatch”, a ceremony in which the chiefs of the tribe, the richest, would give away part of their possessions–I’m simplifying for sure. In Buddhism there is also a tradition of material detachment in many of its practitioners. But these are rare exceptions. In our world the tendency is to accumulate power and, as you say, that helps to be detached from reality. Then you may end up with a collapse–even of your power–and everything starts all over again. It’s a process that happens in response to limits.

And inequality is growing in all countries.

JB: Do you believe a coalition of gifted elites could change course in those circles?

DM: Gifted elites? Sounds like an Oxymoron to me.