• xraymike79
    22
    50301918276_b3db9198fe_b.jpg

    “We must now understand that our own well-being can be achieved only through the well-being of the entire natural world around us.” ~ Thomas Berry

    As governments stared glass-eyed at what was unfolding in China earlier this year, the fragility of modern life’s interconnectedness was soon to be laid bare by a microscopic organism. Within a couple months of the onset of the coronavirus pandemic, airline travel from China had spread the novel virus to more than 60 countries. Despite decades of warnings about the inevitability of such an event, politicians had paid about as much lip service to preventing the next pandemic as they had to dealing with climate change. As has been warned by health experts, the best we can hope for is to blunt the effects of the COVID-19 disease on the global population; eradicating it will be futile. Something similar could be said of the legacy effects of our CO2 emissions which will haunt life on Earth for time immemorial.

    A study from 2014 found the total number of infectious disease outbreaks has more than quadrupled between 1980 and 2010. Approximately 75% of all emerging infectious diseases originate from animals and chances for pandemics are increasing as humanity’s growing assault on the natural world disrupts what remains of the planet’s ecosystems. If you need further evidence that we are annihilating life on Earth, consider that the microscopic mite, among the oldest and most plentiful invertebrates on the planet and a keystone species in many ecosystems, is disappearing at least 1,000 times the natural rate. More novel zoonotic diseases will eventually be unleashed into the bloodstream of the globalized economy as corporations revive parasitic growth at the expense of a habitable planet. The coronavirus pandemic is a symptom of our unfolding Anthropocene Mass Extinction which is accelerating.

    The current pandemic may well mark the beginning of the end for growth as we knew it. In the U.S. right now, there are 29 million unemployed and tens of thousands of small businesses that have closed during the pandemic will never reopen. In the Age of Environmental Breakdown, there can never be a return to normal. For the normal that industrial civilization has become accustomed to is the very thing ripping to pieces those white picket-fenced lives in suburbia. A Biden presidency may bring back some sense of sanity and order to those pursuing the illusion of the American Dream, but it won’t alter global civilization’s current trajectory toward an increasingly chaotic world of never-ending disasters. The synergistic effects of biodiversity collapse, climate change, and industrial pollution will act as a growing weight on the economy.

    We just learned that Greenland’s ice sheets crossed a tipping point two decades ago and will never recover, as far as human timescales are concerned. Nothing will bring them back except another ice age, and humans have managed to erase the next one scheduled to have occurred some 50,000 years hence. 100,000 years will have past before the planet completely rids itself of the CO2 humans have loaded into the atmosphere. Second only to Antarctica in terms of ice volume, Greenland’s melt-off could eventually contribute 23 feet of global sea level rise. Antarctica’s ice sheets have also been found to be much more vulnerable to collapse than previously known, as rising atmospheric temperatures melt their surface and a warming ocean destabilizes them from below. Coastal erosion, flooding, and soil salinization from sea level rise are growing drags on the economy. About 40% of the global population lives near the coast and will account for the largest mass migration in human history. Indeed, billions of U.S. tax dollars are now being used in a new strategy to relocate entire neighborhoods from coastal regions persistently hit by flooding in recent years.

    50302637443_57acbb79ca_b.jpg

    With the meltdown of the Earth’s cryosphere, we are witnessing a large-scale catastrophic disruption to a critical part of the Earth system under which all life has adapted. In particular, the relatively stable climate of the Holocene is what allowed for the development of agriculture and human civilization. We no longer live in that era; We have entered the chaos of the Anthropocene, a time of deadly climate disruption, social upheaval, mass extinction, and ultimately collapse of industrial civilization. With arctic amplification weakening jet streams, larger and more intense heat domes now form over geographic regions to help spark megafires, power grid blackouts, and heat-related deaths. In Phoenix AZ, a heatwave just obliterated a previous record of most days over 110°F (50 plus), and another record-breaking heatwave is on its way as I speak. California’s Death Valley just recorded the highest temperature on Earth since reliable records began. The six most recent years (2014-2019) and 2020 have been the hottest ever recorded, with each decade since 1980 being hotter than the previous.

    The recent heatwave that thawed Siberia’s tundra, set it on fire, and caused an ecological disaster by collapsing a diesel fuel reservoir, could never have happened without the massive spike in CO2 emissions from mankind’s fossil-fuel binge. Summer wildfires in the Arctic set a record this year, emitting 34% more CO2 than in the prior year. Fires in the Amazon jungle are the worst in a decade. Wildfires in Arizona this year have already scarred more land than in the prior two years. Colorado just logged the biggest fire in its history and California’s wildfires are already on track to break records even though the fire season has just begun. Globally, wildfires have increased 13% over the prior record-breaking year of 2019. A more apt name for the Anthropocene might be the Pyrocene – Age of Fire.

    Heatwaves aren’t just striking on land; they are also cooking the oceans. Increasingly severe and frequent marine heatwaves(MHWs) have surged by more than 50% in recent decades. Warming oceans help create more destructive and more frequent hurricanes and typhoons. They also threaten biodiversity and ecosystem function on a global scale. Scientists have observed that stony corals around the world are hunkering down into survival mode, exhibiting the same traits as they did prior to the last great extinction. Let that sink in for a moment…Yes, a relatively primitive organism with a rudimentary nervous system is actually preparing for a mass extinction while the so-called ‘Wise Ape’ blissfully carries on destroying his very own life-support systems.

    “It was incredibly spooky to witness how corals are now exhibiting the same traits as they did at the last major extinction event,” said Professor David Gruber, a researcher and marine biologist with The Graduate Center, CUNY and Baruch College. “Corals seem to be preparing to jump across an extinction boundary, while we are putting our foot further on the pedal.”

    Apparently, coral are not hampered by politics in their decision-making processes. These creatures of the primordial seas will likely outsurvive the Self-Absorbed Ape who has insulated himself in a technological cocoon of false security, oblivious to the harsh physical laws of nature indifferently working to take him down. Hell, scientists are now finding microplastics in every human tissue they examine, and the health effects are unknown. How’s that for forethought?

    50305303826_357f7ae473_b.jpg

    Scientists can issue warnings about our impending demise until they are blue in the face, and they have, but they and the public are at the mercy of economic, financial, and political forces beyond anyone’s power. Couple that with the fact that the average person on the street has a Trump-level of comprehension about these existential crises and is being bombarded on social media by fake news that plays on emotions and deep-rooted inter-group distrust. Cheap energy and the individualistic consumer culture have created an illusion of abundance and destroyed any sort of communal cooperation which was once the basis of everyday life. I’ve walked this Earth for over five decades and have seen a steady and continuous degradation of the natural world; corporate greenwashing is rampant. The growth in ‘green energy’ has not displaced fossil fuel fuel consumption to any great degree; fossil fuels still supply 84% of global energy consumption. Worse yet, just to maintain our current growth in energy consumption would require an unattainable expansion in alternative energies. If one connects all the dots on our current state, then there is no refuting this most clear-eyed of scientific assessments:

    “Given the momentum in both the Earth and human systems, and the growing difference between the ‘reaction time’ needed to steer humanity towards a more sustainable future, and the ‘intervention time’ left to avert a range of catastrophes in both the physical climate system (e.g., melting of Arctic sea ice) and the biosphere (e.g., loss of the Great Barrier Reef), we are already deep into the trajectory towards collapse.”

    The end of the world is the ‘cha-ching’ of a cash register as the last vestiges of nature are converted to dollars. Lest we forget, 71% of global emissions come from just 100 companies and more than half of global industrial emissions since 1988 originated from 25 corporate and state-owned entities. While the ultra-wealthy reap the profits of a poisoned ecology, the rest of the world is left to take the brunt of consequences from a world that grows more dangerous by the day. Those living on the edge who lost their livelihood during this pandemic are the collateral damage of an out-of-control socio-economic system whose incompatibility with life on Earth becomes more evident with each passing year. There’s nowhere to escape for most people because, to one degree or another, we are all entrapped in this system. The immutable laws of biology, physics, and chemistry have set an expiration date on America’s non-negotiable way of life, ensuring that many more will soon fall victim to the short-term greed of capitalism. As Stephen Hawking warned, “Stupidity and greed will kill off humans.”

    50307080276_09528ff559_b.jpg

    For hyperlinks in this essay, go here:

    https://medium.com/@xraymike79/age-of-annihilation-f2629d3bc08b
  • JerseyFlight
    782
    "…all progress in capitalistic agriculture is a progress in the art, not only of robbing the labourer, but of robbing the soil; all progress in increasing the fertility of the soil for a given time, is a progress towards ruining the lasting sources of that fertility." Karl Marx, Capital vol 1

    "The life of the species, both in man and in animals, consists physically in the fact that man (like the animal) lives on organic nature; and the more universal man (or the animal) is, the more universal is the sphere of inorganic nature on which he lives. Just as plants, animals, stones, air, light, etc., constitute theoretically a part of human consciousness, partly as objects of natural science, partly as objects of art – his spiritual inorganic nature, spiritual nourishment which he must first prepare to make palatable and digestible – so also in the realm of practice they constitute a part of human life and human activity. Physically man lives only on these products of nature, whether they appear in the form of food, heating, clothes, a dwelling, etc. The universality of man appears in practice precisely in the universality which makes all nature his inorganic body – both inasmuch as nature is (1) his direct means of life, and (2) the material, the object, and the instrument of his life activity. Nature is man’s inorganic body – nature, that is, insofar as it is not itself human body. Man lives on nature – means that nature is his body, with which he must remain in continuous interchange if he is not to die. That man’s physical and spiritual life is linked to nature means simply that nature is linked to itself, for man is a part of nature." Karl Marx, Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844, from First Manuscript, Estranged Labour

    The reason Marx was able to have this consciousness in 1844, which is truly astounding, is because he escaped the errors of idealism, which allowed him to comprehend reality in concrete terms.
  • unenlightened
    9.2k
    There's not much to say really. Marx could say 'Ha, told yer!' if he was around, the rest of us "So long, it was fun while it lasted." Except for a lot of people it was not much fun at all.

    I've been here before, personally. Back in the cold war, people were dreaming of being one of the few survivors, I decided then to be for preference an early casualty of WW3. Now I'm unexpectedly old, and humanity is if anything more fuck-witted than back in the 60's. Sorry kids, I tried to live green, I didn't go flying, or buy cars, I stopped eating meat. I preached and practiced as best I could. Nobody was listening and not many are still.
  • tim wood
    9.3k
    In trust you preserved your right to good single-malt Scotch.
  • Banno
    24.9k
    “We must now understand that our own well-being can be achieved only through the well-being of the entire natural world around us.” ~ Thomas Berryxraymike79

    We're fuck'd then.

    I find myself increasingly incline towards misanthropy. It's the form of Humanism that realises that all we have is each other, then looks around in despair.
  • JerseyFlight
    782
    One of my favorite quotes by Adorno.

    "If there is any way out of this hellish circle—and I would not wish to exaggerate that possibility, being well aware of the weakness and susceptibility of such consciousness—it is probably the ability of mind to assimilate, to think the last extreme of horror and, in face of this spiritual experience, to gain mastery over it. That is little enough. For, obviously, such an imagination, such an ability to think extreme negativity, is not comparable to what one undergoes if one is oneself caught up in such situations. Nevertheless, I would think that in the ability not to feel manipulated, but to feel that one has gone relentlessly to the furthest extreme, there lies the only respect which is fitting: a respect for the possibility of the mind, despite everything, to raise itself however slightly above that which is. And I think that it really gives more courage (if I can use that formulation) if one is not given courage, and does not feel bamboozled, but has the feeling that even the worst is something which can be thought and, because it falls within reflection, does not confront me as something absolutely alien and different. I imagine that such a thought is probably more comforting than any solace, whereas solace itself is desolate, since it is always attended by its own untruth."
  • unenlightened
    9.2k
    In trust you preserved your right to good single-malt Scotch.tim wood

    If one does not uphold fundamental human rights, mere survival has no merit. :roll:

    ... even the worst is something which can be thought and, because it falls within reflection, does not confront me as something absolutely alien and different. I imagine that such a thought is probably more comforting than any solace, whereas solace itself is desolate, since it is always attended by its own untruth. — Adorno

    This is the real disaster, I fear, that untrue solace has swept the field. "Let's get armageddon done." "Make America uninhabited again." Etc, etc.
  • JerseyFlight
    782


    Serious questions are thrust on the table in the probability of civilization's twilight. What happens to intellectual responsibility? Of course, it is strange to ask this question, because there has never been much of it in the world. It is the socially responsible intellectual who is also the most rare. Can one fight off hedonism at this level of awareness? What becomes of our discourse? (And it should be noted that the religious cannot even enter into this conversation, they do not live in the real world). This matters because they try to pontificate with authority here, claiming that a return to error holds the key to the world's salvation. Nonsense, when the adults enter the room we must think about our plight in terms of concrete circumstances. We do not have time to play these kind of games. Can intelligence still proceed forward though it perceives the negation of history? At which point does revolutionary resistance find itself negated by material impossibilities? The thinker can think until his last breath, but this doesn't make it wise.
  • bert1
    2k
    I'd like to hear @Hanover's thoughts on this.
  • unenlightened
    9.2k
    And it should be noted that the religious cannot even enter into this conversation, they do not live in the real world).JerseyFlight

    Do you think so? Perhaps your experience is with exploiters of religion, or perhaps you are fundamentalist yourself. In any case, the conversations I have been having for many years with anyone who cared to engage have been singularly unfruitful, or so it seems to me. If not religion, do you imagine that science can solve the problems it has created?. I laugh that impossible idea to scorn! What else do you have then?
  • JerseyFlight
    782


    Why do I say this? Because religion is based on the denial of reality. Let me repeat: religion is based on the denial of reality. One cannot rightly discuss the potential end of the world with people who believe there is a magical world they will be carried to after. One cannot discuss the death of a planet whose vitality they believe lies in the hands of God. These are not adult conversations, these are confusions.

    You asked about solving problems? You get me wrong, I am all about concrete and contextual questions that strive in this direction. We must begin having adult conversations, not conversations about phantoms and afterworlds. These only get in the way, they waste time.
  • Janus
    16.2k
    Do you think it is likely that the vast majority of people will be able to participate in this conversation anyway, regardless of religion? I think many, if not most people cannot live without their opiates, whether those opiates consist in religious beliefs or otherwise.

    If a general belief in religion yields a more harmonious, stable, integrated and better-intentioned populace, then where is the harm in such beliefs, as long as they are not manipulated by the plutocrats?

    I think it is naive to imagine that all, or even most, or even many, of us are cut out to be intellectuals. The other thing is that it is arguable that most people wish to be led rather than to lead. With leadership (or at least decent leadership) comes great responsibility.
  • JerseyFlight
    782
    Do you think it is likely that the vast majority of people will be able to participate in this conversation anyway, regardless of religion?Janus

    No. I agree with you. Denial is not just confined to religion, it is the normative process of human psychology.

    If a general belief in religion yields a more harmonious, stable, integrated and better-intentioned populace, then where is the harm in such beliefs, as long as they are not manipulated by the plutocrats?Janus

    I should simply be able to say to a person like yourself, that you know better than to ask a question like this. Seriously, come on. Religion keeps people enslaved to power structures. You already know this. There are many many other problems with the innocent notion of "general belief." Now I suspect you are talking in the context of life at the end of the world? If that is the case, then your question is not a religious one, but a philosophical one, it has to do with hedonism, which I mentioned earlier. It is a serious question and one that must be addressed.

    I think it is naive to imagine that all, or even most, or even many, of us are cut out to be intellectuals.Janus

    I agree with this. Thinking is the most psychologically difficult and painful act a person can do. To be a thinker one must be capable of suffering.

    The other thing is that it is arguable that most people wish to be led rather than to lead. With leadership (or at least decent leadership) comes great responsibility.Janus

    We are back to the axiom of education.
  • Changeling
    1.4k
    _114299929_wwf_decline_gra640-nc.png

    As can be seen in this chart wildlife made a small comeback around the time of the Second Summer of Love.
    Smiley_head_happy.png

    Maybe it's time for a Third Summer of Love next year, as opposed to a Third World War.
  • unenlightened
    9.2k
    Because religion is based on the denial of reality. Let me repeat: religion is based on the denial of reality. One cannot rightly discuss the potential end of the world with people who believe there is a magical world they will be carried to after. One cannot discuss the death of a planet whose vitality they believe lies in the hands of God. These are not adult conversations, these are confusions.JerseyFlight

    Oh, Well if you won't discuss, then you won't discuss. I'll leave the thread and saving the world to you. I have enough environmental threads already.
  • xraymike79
    22

    Over 140 years ago, Friedrich Engels noted how the private ownership of the land, the drive for profit and the degradation of nature go hand in hand. “To make earth an object of huckstering — the earth which is our one and all, the first condition of our existence — was the last step towards making oneself an object of huckstering. It was and is to this very day an immorality surpassed only by the immorality of self-alienation. And the original appropriation — the monopolization of the earth by a few, the exclusion of the rest from that which is the condition of their life — yields nothing in immorality to the subsequent huckstering of the earth.” Once the earth becomes commodified by capital, it is subject to just as much exploitation as labour.

    Yes, science helps us to understand what is happening. As Engels said, “ with every day that passes we are learning to understand these laws more correctly and getting to know both the more immediate and the more remote consequences of our interference with the traditional course of nature. … But the more this happens, the more will men not only feel, but also know, their unity with nature, and thus the more impossible will become the senseless and antinatural idea of a contradiction between mind and matter, man and nature, soul and body.”
    https://thenextrecession.wordpress.com/2020/09/06/pandemics-prevention-before-cure/
  • xraymike79
    22
    I find myself saying, "How many different ways can I say humanity is fucked?"
  • xraymike79
    22


    A commentator on my blog some time back...

    "I don’t think humanity in general will adopt any kind of remediation practices until long after they are actually needed (i.e. after the population and consumption rates have begun to crash). I don’t think it is possible for a a group as large as 7 billion people to agree that such proactive measures is necessary. After the crisis has begun, yes we’ll do all kinds of things, but remember that by then we will be hampered by the climate crisis and severe shortages of both resources and the technology needed to use them. I have given up speculating on possible outcomes, because they are so inherently unpredictable. But what I’m discovering about the way life works at a deep level makes me continually less optimistic....We can’t manage de-growth, the recognition of limits, or even the application of the Precautionary Principle, because as a collective organism humanity doesn’t have free will. Instead we have an emergent behavior that is entirely oriented towards growth. The game is pretty well over."
  • xraymike79
    22


    And we have a president who has never read the bible, much less anything else, holding the book up as a prop for the evangelical vote. And they believe he is the chosen, but imperfect, vessel of God's will. Keep in mind Trump used tear gas and state police to suppress lawful protestors and clear a path to said church. The irony, hypocrisy, and fakery in all this is too much to fathom.
  • unenlightened
    9.2k
    I find myself saying, "How many different ways can I say humanity is fucked?"xraymike79

    I find myself wondering why we bother saying it? There are things that could be done in partial mitigation; preparations could be made to clean up the many cities that are going to become ocean, for instance. There are people doing what they can, and other people grabbing what they can. Personally I think it is a fundamental failure of philosophy to defend itself from a mechanistic moral nihilism that has come so to dominate, that humanity has lost sight of the immense value of truth, and prefers comfortable lies. It is the Tower of Babel story re-enacted. Our leaders are unbelievable, the media are unbelievable, and even scientists can be be bought and sold, and cannot be trusted.

    Communication is dead, because there is no trust and therefore no truth. Words no longer communicate a meaning; we carry on talking in so many different ways, but no one is listening.
  • xraymike79
    22
    There are people doing what they can, and other people grabbing what they can.



    I take that to mean a few people are trying to be sustainable (while the vast majority are not), and those in power are, for the most part, extracting what wealth they can get their hands on. Looters, you could say, but at a much more vaulted and protected place in society. Certainly there are things that can be done, but governments need to step up and level with the public.
  • unenlightened
    9.2k
    but governments need to step up and level with the public.xraymike79

    We have had politicians level with the public, and they lost the elections. the people voted for populists liars and charlatans.
  • Janus
    16.2k
    If a general belief in religion yields a more harmonious, stable, integrated and better-intentioned populace, then where is the harm in such beliefs, as long as they are not manipulated by the plutocrats?Janus

    I should simply be able to say to a person like yourself, that you know better than to ask a question like this. Seriously, come on. Religion keeps people enslaved to power structures. You already know this. There are many many other problems with the innocent notion of "general belief." Now I suspect you are talking in the context of life at the end of the world? If that is the case, then your question is not a religious one, but a philosophical one, it has to do with hedonism, which I mentioned earlier. It is a serious question and one that must be addressed.JerseyFlight

    I would say that religion does not inherently consist in enslavement to power structures. People, the great majority of people, who do not want to think for themselves, who do not want to lead but would rather be led, are not necessarily enslaved by their act of following. Of course they may be coerced, their desire to be entertained, to consume, manipulated, by all kinds of corruption, but that is something else.

    When you say you "suspect I am talking in the context of the end of the world", I can't decipher your meaning, and nor do I understand what you had in mind when you introduced the question of hedonism. More explanation may help.
  • JerseyFlight
    782
    I would say that religion does not inherently consist in enslavement to power structures.Janus

    Concretely, it is belief in delusion, fake being that is projected for reasons of comfort and control. You are free to project your own fake ideals about it.
  • xraymike79
    22
    Yes, sadly you are correct.
  • Janus
    16.2k
    I think you are referring to fundamentalist religion. I think it is arguable that most religious people are not fundamentalists. They just entertain some comforting thoughts and are happy to immerse themselves in communion with others who entertain similar thoughts.

    For me the problem with what you seem to be proposing is that it would require everyone to be a highly critical thinker. I just don't believe most people have the capacity for that; it is not merely a matter of lack of education. And even if it were that, how would you ever convince power to engineer its own undoing?

    And even if you could do that, how would all this be done in time to save the biosphere? It is arguable that only a small proportion of the current population could be fed by non-industrial farming methods. We desperately need to stop industrial agricultural practice if we want to halt catastrophic destruction of the soil, deforestation, salination, depletion of aquifers, pollution of the oceans, species extinctions etc, etc, etc.

    But we can't stop industrial farming if we want to end, or at least minimize, human starvation. This is a choice conundrum, or is it merely a dilemma? Do you have an answer?
  • fdrake
    6.6k
    @Banno

    You gotta be adapted to the unreality that is killing us all to live a successful life.
  • unenlightened
    9.2k
    a successful life.fdrake

    I take it that successful adaptation to being killed is to die? I'm working on it.
  • TheMadFool
    13.8k
    I take it that successful adaptation to being killed is to die? I'm working on it.unenlightened

    :smile: Who's not dying?
  • Janus
    16.2k
    In that dimension of adaption we have no choice.

    I think what @fdrake had in mind with his comment is something like 'you have to work within the system to live a successful life' where "successful life" means something like contributing to the overall betterment of human life.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.