-----Original Message-----
From: Eva Durant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: list futurework <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tuesday, August 04, 1998 7:13 AM
Subject: Re: BUT WHAT DOES IT MEAN?
Eva Durant, in response to my posting on the decline of our high- energy
based system:
>We have the means to make people aware, >once they are there is an immense
pool of >creativeness to get us through. We yet have the resources.
>Shouldn't we try whatever we can? >Shouldn't we go for a massive
cooperation, >rather than die? >Have you really so full of contempt for
people >that you are content at the thought of us >disappearing without a
whimper? >Perhaps this small probability coincidence of >all space
conditions so steady in a corner of the universe >won't come together again,
conscious life >won't ever happen again.
Eva,
I did not say people will disappear. I said that a system which uses
resources as though there were no tomorrow will inevitably decline and have
to be replaced by a new system which will no longer have the luxury of
believing that limited resources are unlimited.
I also argued that we may, subconsciously, already be sensing our system's
decline, and that the decline may indeed already be taking place. There is
a feeling abroad that the control mechanisms (the brakes, if you will) are
slipping. The global industrial plant is capable of producing far more
goods than the market will clear. The economic miracles of just a few years
if not months ago are in tatters. Bailouts via the IMF are at best short
term solutions which may only slightly delay the inevitable. OPEC is dead
and the world is awash with cheap oil. Governments which depend on oil
revenues are finding it increasingly difficult to maintain programs, which
leads to civil unrest. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the uneasy
detente which provided some stability following World War II is in shambles.
Only one truly global power, the United States, now exists, but even the US
is not strong enough to play the role of global policeman. Moreover, it may
not be interested in doing so. Americans in a position of power and
influence are, it would seem, far more interested in keeping their lifeboat
afloat and getting as rich as they can.
Given the increasing disjointedness of the world, the multiplicity of
self-interests, and the increasing irrelevance of institutions that could
play a role in reaching some form of global accord, such as the UN, I fail
to see how anything important that requires massive cooperation could be
implemented. The only prospects for cooperation that I see are on a
regional basis - NAFTA, the European Union, Mercosur, and ASEAN - and even
organizations such as these will find it difficult to hold together as each
participant tries to find the most comfortable place on the lifeboat.
Canada is a member of NAFTA. Rightly or wrongly, many Canadians have felt
that this is not a good thing - that it has shifted jobs away from Canada
and to Mexico and the United States.
And believe me, my attitude toward people is not one of contempt. I have a
very strong faith that people will make it through the current crisis and
any future crisis. Systems, societies, cultures, whatever you want to call
them, have declined before, but people have continued. While our system may
not be the first to have been based on non-renewable energy resources, it is
certainly unique in its intensity of their use and dependence on them. This
dependence has been something of a double edged sword. On the one hand, it
has provided a basis for a very high standard of living and permitted us to
indulge ourselves in the illusion that there are no limits to what we can do
if we but put a tiger in our tank. On the other, it has provided the basis
for a very high rate of population growth, thereby creating an accelerating
demand for non-renewable energy resources. We are now reaching the point
where it will become more and more difficult to fulfill that demand. We may
soon reach the point where fulfilling it will prove impossible.
Ed Weick
