this post was submitted on 29 Nov 2024
10 points (100.0% liked)

Collapse

891 readers
11 users here now

This is the place for discussing the potential collapse of modern civilization and the environment.


Collapse, in this context, refers to the significant loss of an established level or complexity towards a much simpler state. It can occur differently within many areas, orderly or chaotically, and be willing or unwilling. It does not necessarily imply human extinction or a singular, global event. Although, the longer the duration, the more it resembles a ‘decline’ instead of collapse.


RULES

1 - Remember the human

2 - Link posts should come from a reputable source

3 - All opinions are allowed but discussion must be in good faith.

4 - No low effort, high volume and low relevance posts.


Related lemmys:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Abstract

Some narratives in international development hold that ending poverty and achieving good lives for all will require every country to reach the levels of GDP per capita that currently characterise high-income countries. However, this would require increasing total global output and resource use several times over, dramatically exacerbating ecological breakdown. Furthermore, universal convergence along these lines is unlikely within the imperialist structure of the existing world economy. Here we demonstrate that this dilemma can be resolved with a different approach, rooted in recent needs-based analyses of poverty and development. Strategies for development should not pursue capitalist growth and increased aggregate production as such, but should rather increase the specific forms of production that are necessary to improve capabilities and meet human needs at a high standard, while ensuring universal access to key goods and services through public provisioning and decommodification. At the same time, in high-income countries, less-necessary production should be scaled down to enable faster decarbonization and to help bring resource use back within planetary boundaries. With this approach, good lives can be achieved for all without requiring large increases in total global throughput and output. Provisioning decent living standards (DLS) for 8.5 billion people would require only 30% of current global resource and energy use, leaving a substantial surplus for additional consumption, public luxury, scientific advancement, and other social investments. Such a future requires planning to provision public services, to deploy efficient technology, and to build sovereign industrial capacity in the global South.

top 5 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] paysrenttobirds@sh.itjust.works 5 points 8 months ago

less-necessary production should be scaled down to enable faster decarbonization and to help bring resource use back within planetary boundaries

This is why the current lopsided distribution of wealth is a climate problem, because the only ways to get some money back out of those deep pockets seems to be through production and sale of unnecessary products, or with taxes. In other words, capitalism might work fine if no one got rich, and the simplest single big thing to do as a people is just to prevent (and dismantle) extreme richness through highly progressive taxation of both people and "entities".

[–] maketotaldestr0i@lemm.ee 4 points 8 months ago

we should do it voluntarily but we wont, so we will do it the worst uncontrolled way possible with the most chance for cascading failure and a final wipeout of the remaining large mammals

[–] eleitl@lemm.ee 2 points 8 months ago

This is, obviously, a fantasy. There is no surplus at the tail end of fossil, and "only 30% of current global resource and energy use" is far nearer than we think.

[–] hanrahan@slrpnk.net 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

A contra view that I think is a more sensible and sane look at this is ... no, nothing can, see here

https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2024/07/metastatic-modernity-launch/

[–] eleitl@lemm.ee 1 points 8 months ago

Yes, I've posted some select posts from that thread before.