Nate, this podcast is a repository of the greatest minds in human history. Not just of the people interviewed, but of the people, both living and dead, whose ideas, work, cultures, and deeds that have most impacted the world are called forth. I often imagine what it would be like to discover the content here hundreds or thousands of years in the future, the collection of creativity and thought and life represented here would be considered such a priceless archaeological, historical (and perhaps spiritual) goldmine. So amazing.
In order to "fix" what is wrong now, we must listen to the people who are harmed by our ways, past & present. To not listen and respond with compassion is folly.
Thanks very much for having someone on who knows history and realizes how important that knowledge is. I've been saying you should interrupt the flow of scientists on your podcast with some people from the humanities. Roman shows how fruitful that can be.
"HOPE", as ennobled as that concept has become, in many ways functions as a soporific. Every sane person on the planet wishes that things could be different. We HOPE for World Peace.We HOPE for a pristine environment. We HOPE for economic equity amongst all people. It would be the sane way to proceed. But when you compare the things that most of us HOPE for to the way things actually ARE, then HOPE becomes merely delusional, enervating, wishful thinking. I personally HOPE that a benign space alien would land in Washington to warn humanity about the error of its ways (as depicted in "The Day the Earth Stood Still") but I am not holding my breath in anticipation. As ludicrous as that wish may seem to many, I don't think that it is any more outlandish than the HOPE for World Peace, meaningful ecological improvements, or economic fairness. HOPE only postpones meaningful action.
i "hope" the hairless-talking-monkey exits quickly & efficiently this arena of Life/Heaven which it has invaded and destroyed. Thus actual Life can again one day live. Action: Crystal's Edict "The Point" -Is so far reaching that it is nearly impossible to say in words. Speaking and lecturing or listening to speaking and or lecturing about "living; life/Nature" are mostly just received as some kind of esoteric truth and a longing for something more meaningful. The actual meaning of the same Truth is that only Heaven exists and humans are the only thing lost to it and from it. Servitude to Nature alone is the only road to redemption. Inside or outside. Death / life are just misnomers, change of state. The Purpose remains constant. One Soul many faces. No one form is superior to another. Civilization it's self is the cause of all life's destruction. Accepting this as some kind of necessary phase or step TO something is delusion. Now is always constant. All and every essence is always dying & being born. Action is now. Preservation of complexity for the sake of All beings NOT civilization at all And not humans first 1billion humans to dismantle all infrastructure and returning ALL mined/drilled materials to their inertial place of origin by order of density and toxicity. 1billion humans to create "Earth-Ship" type self generating environments from as much earthen material as possible. As many species as possible must be able to migrate to & from these .... All the rest to support the the first two. One Soul Many beings /faces/species Crystal's Law
I took it to mean hope as an impulse to positive action as the only way forward. It might work - it might not - but without hope where’s the incentive to do anything to fix this mess?
Nate & Roman: Thanks to you both for an inspiring discussion. I really hope the two of you will get together to do another one real soon, because I loved every minute of this, and could happily go deeper with you into any of these topics. All talk of hope as a soporific aside (and it is a valid concern, though not in alignment with what Roman is really pointing to, as I heard him), listening to your conversation today for me felt like coming upon an oasis in the desert. So much of what's being expressed on the internet currently is all based in fixed binary linear time: All is lost, humans are too screwed up to change, the cake is baked. "Doom. Doom, Doom!" (In case people are getting lost now, those are the drums beating accompaniment deep in Khazad-Dun.) Before any more Khazad-dun defenders are tempted to pile on here, I'm not denying any facts, tipping points, or recent research into human neuropsychology. I am however, asserting that we fare better when we learn to discern facts from interpretation. Because it's interpretation that generally determines the way the facts show up. The media has been training us for decades to make fixed predictions about the future based on inflexible predetermined interpretations of the past, and now it seems that's all we ever do. This is counter to everything we've been learning lately about nondual reality, which btw, is still reality, no matter the global environmental economic everything crisis. (It doesn't disappear and suddenly cease to be because bad stuff might happen. But that's the nature of scare-mongering which the media loves to perpetrate, isn't it: It jerks you back into survival mode even when you don't need to be there, which is a state of mind that only functions well in fixed binary linear time.) With regards to the future, we need to remember this: The cat is still in the box. The future only ever exists as potential. Nothing is fixed until it has happened. Therefore prepare for the worst contingency as you are able, and work for the best of all possible outcomes. It really is that simple. And meanwhile, be the best version of who you want to be, now. I really think a lot of what we're seeing being expressed here in response to the concept of hope is simply unresolved discomfort with the experience of uncertainty. Anyway, it's totally refreshing to come upon someone like Roman talking in positive and constructive terms about gleaning experiences from the past as possibilities we can use to help us begin to reshape and redirect whatever we can of what may yet come. I really like the idea of these dinner conversations. This is something people can easily do from anywhere. Does Roman know of somewhere we can connect with people who've done this to get an idea of how to get started? I have experience working with groups, but I'm wondering what kinds of questions people have asked these groups in the past. I want to learn more about citizen assemblies and sortition, too. I have a friend in London who is really into sortition and assemblies who has been talking about this for ages. It's the first thing I've ever heard of that seems like it could be viable as something to transition to out of the system we have now in the US. So for now, as I await another episode with you two, I'm on my way to the bookstore... 👋💛
Brilliant episode. Thanks Roman and Nate :) As a long-time admirer of the work of E O Wilson, I couldn't agree more regarding biophilia. I believe that a complete transition from anthropocentrism to ecocentrism, individually and collectively, is a requirement for human futures. No transition, no futures. It can happen and is happening, but the transition needs to accelerate dramatically, preferably by choice rather than forced by necessity. I also think we must acknowledge that collapse isn't something for the future. Collapse is happening already. Humans are nature, nature is beauty, and beauty is truth. We are not separate from nature. Separation is an illusion. We've lost 70% of wildlife (bioabundance) in 50 years (in the UK). Globally, humans and domestic animals account for 32% and 64% of mammalian biomass, and wild animals account for only 4%. The biomass of poultry is more than double the biomass of all wild birds. We are causing and experiencing the sixth great extinction. This is truly shocking and depressing if we allow ourselves to process it and genuinely engage with the emotions. If we are nature, we're already in collapse! This may seem counter-intuitive because the human enterprise (population, production, consumption, waste generation; see William Rees) is still expanding, but it soon won't be. The general narrative is that expansion of the human enterprise is a good thing, and arguing against it makes you a misanthrope. I'd counter that if the desire for contraction is grounded in empathy for other species (to allow them space and resources to survive and thrive alongside us), that's noble and loving, and honestly, I'd rather be a misanthrope than an expansionist, colonialist, human supremacist. Also, despite this expansion, I'd argue that we're increasingly distracted and disconnected, from ourselves, each other, and the rest of nature, and therefore losing more and more of our humanity. We're losing what's truly valuable (life, which is sacred). We're becoming increasingly left hemisphere-dominated and machine-like (see Iain McGilchrist). John Vervaeke (a potentially interesting guest Nate!) talks about the meaning crisis alongside the metacrisis. He suggests asking ourselves the following three questions to test for meaning: (1) What do you want to exist even if you don’t? (2) How real is it? Is it really real? (3) How much of a difference do you make to it right now? He argues that how we answer those questions reflects to what degree we have meaning in life (distinct from meaning of life). Hope is discussed elsewhere in this comments thread. Hope may be important but only if it facilitates action because it's change that we need. It is our individual and collective behaviours that are causing the problems, underpinned by our biology and psychology, and buttressed by our history, culture, and the stories we tell ourselves. Stories are important, but not as important as what we feel. My advice, for what it's worth, is to get out in nature, remember and feel that you are nature, and remember that you love nature and you love yourself, not as an individual "self" but as a wholly interconnected, interdependent part of nature; as an agent, with agency, to partake in and serve the continuity of this miracle of life.
I am always amazed by listening to great thinkers and readers like Nate ana Roman, here looking for examples to learn from, that don’t seem to read from the billions of natural examples. The lives of organisms, cultures, and other natural forms of working organization. There are great similarities in the succession of events and processes for such systems surviving their own growth, their common start-ups. Growth is their self-organization process, and to survive it, its powerful access to resources and ever faster acceleration both will urgently need a new purpose. Generally that shift is reorienting growth from multiplying past design to focusing on maturing physically, developing new relationships, learning and coordinating with the new contexts growth opens the gate to and leads then into.
Roman’s conclusion that the failure of sustainability goals, like the greater than doubling of CO2, was due to bad government is very mistaken. The fault is more directly that of science, organizing our view of nature around formulate, one in the things self-animated systems, like growth, don’t do. Natural systems rely on their growth as an exploratory process, that we see still with us throuought our lives. What has kept our growth system from discovering the reward of maturing seems to mainly due to the free choice of investors reinvest their profits, called ‘compounding, even as it becomes as very clear to be driving both itself and most other systems we all rely on.
Buddy, life only survives by the ingestion and assimilation of other life into its own body. You're gonna have to toughen up a little. Personally I think fishing is the most mind-numbingly boring activity you could ever do. I'm happy to eat fish, but I'll stick to playing basketball or going for bike rides.
@@kated3165 Oh yeah, that's true. I forgot about that. Maybe that's why plants exist, to perfectly co-exist with animals, on some level we don't yet understand. We don't have to eat each other, and we can eat them instead. And they don't mind, we hope. Still, I feel like we gotta be willing to eat other animals, and be true to our natures, and just don't get carried away with it. Like in the movie 'Avatar'. They seemed to have a good attitude about eating meat.
Nate, every episode of your podcast is utterly fascinating; this one with Roman especially so, for me. It left me flying, and brimming with ideas. Thank you both so much!!! There is a book by a German historian, Annette Kehnel, about sustainability/regeneration in medieval times in Europe. An eye-opening book. (German title: Wir konnten auch anders - Eine kurze Geschichte der Nachhaltigkeit. It was first published in 2021 and already is in its fifth run. It is now also available in an English translation: The Green Ages: Medieval Innovations in Sustainability.) Reading it I had the same kind of "why did I not know about any of this before!? - experience that Roman reported. I thought I might share, maybe someone is interested in reading it. Again, thank you both for this incredible episode!
Great interview. You should read The Dawn of Everything by David Graeber and David Wengrow next. It opened my eyes to the political history of prehistory
I totally agree. I live my life doing everything possible to make things a little less shit for my kids and the next generation. Currently that means doing a lot of work on biochar to offset emissions.
A great conversation ❤ I have lots of experience in the world of politics and think it is unbelievably easy to make major improvements , but we have to be positive about dropping our egos and taking a design led approach which brings a diverse range of people together to share ideas and express creativity
@@HidingFromFate Simply put, Use a design engineering problem solving, outcomes based scrutiny process to reevaluate all the processes within the electrical system using an Engineering Design approach and then fix. I was a Product Design Engineer who became the "Political " head of scrutiny on a billion pound budgeted regional council. I was also indipendent. I saw everything literally with different eyes and was able to do very interesting and progressive things. I didn't even see my self as a politician and was able to build really constructive relationships with the various political parties. I had worked for decades solving product design problems and using various techniques to create products. It was a bit like inadvertently not playing the political game and inadvertently being able to quickly make real policy changes . I also maintain that compared to product design challenges it is paradoxically really easy to fix all the problems of politics. That is if the special interest, dogmatic, tribal men behind the curtain will let you!!
@@HidingFromFate I have a very different perspective to most people about the political system and it is very focused on what design changes can be made to achieve a true "Peoples Democracy " including clearly defining what this actually is. It the current presidential political system in the US, the so called " greatest democracy in the world" , were a toaster manufacturer it would have gone bust in 1980. Our western political systems are actually deliberately configured to be dysfunctional to allow back door controllers to manipulate for their own tribal or financial gain. Fixing it is not an issue, overcoming these controllers is potentially an invite to be be politically destroyed or murdered. Another problem is that media is not designed to help people solve problems. All media, including some independents and most legacy is tuned to tribalism to get readers, watchers, likes etc. or to spread attractive tribal propaganda. We are wired to see ourselves as the good guys against the bad guys and we create stories to reflect this. We are all a combination of good and bad. Realising this and standing in the shoes of the other is one of the core requirements for successful problem dolving. The good one bad one virus is a poison to design led problem solving but there are things that can be done to significantly reduce its influence.
I could go on and on and most people don't like what I am saying because ego gets in the way and they can not accept that political issues can easily be solved, but absolutely no doubt in my mind that even the Gaza, Israel conflict is solvable if a very different approach is taken. Just look at the devolved parliament in Northern Ireland. People who murdered and bombed eachother for decades living in relative peace. No need for war, terrorism, 2 state solution or UN resolutions. The problem is not the problem. it is the people who control the gateway to the solutions.
The People’s History of the United States by Howard Zinn. There are other works on the People’s History of the World, etc. An Indigenous perspective as well.
I think Mr. Krznarics ideas will be viable after collapse when humans exist on a much smaller scale than today. It might just come naturally then under the circumstances
Unfortunately it is a multi crisis, there are far too many scientifically challenged people who have optimism regarding humanities future due to human ingenuity. Humanity is already screwed. The time for action was over 50 years ago. Global warming of 4 C and sea level rise of 2-3 m is locked in already. Depletion of essential commodities including fossil fuels is already in play especially crude oil that is set to halve within a decade, that powers transport, agriculture, and materials.
I'm curious why you felt the need to point this out. If we're screwed, why does this video, or this comment matter? i.e. why did you invest the time to watch the video and comment? 🙌
Dear Nate, the theme of temporal wisdom requires a paradigm shift from linear to cyclic, understanding our planet within the temporal cycles of the solar system. The scientific framing of the Milankovitch orbital cycles of glaciation integrated into mythological understanding, with terrestrial cosmologies holding a deep intuitive wisdom about our planetary structure of time and trajectory. Seeing how to reverse the trajectory from descent to ascent, from destruction to construction, can be presented within a scientific cosmology framed around the question of how our planet is connected to the cosmos.
43:48 I doubt you're reading this comment Mr. Krznaric, so if there's a historian in the house maybe they can answer: Does this biophilia (tree planting, nature journals, etc...) correspond with the onset of romanticism? This is probably a dumb question, but, I have little fear of making myself look stupid in public, so... 🙃
i think you could see the german romantic period for reference and see how society was. I think it was a cultural counter thing to growing urbanization and "development" but can't tell you for sure
I'm here reading your comment! Some of the rise of the interest in the living world in the 17th-19th centuries in Europe was certainly linked to the romantic movement (think of the poet Coleridge's nature writings based on his walks through the Lake District in England). As such, it was often a limited and highly idealised view of nature, lacking the deep sense of interdependence with the living world found in so many indigenous cultures. Similary the rise of interest in recreational gardening during the same period (which I mention in my conversation with Nate) had its limits: much of it was about controlling and taming nature (all those neatly clipped lawns...). So not a dumb question at all. The point I really wanted to make was that the industrial revolution was not simply a one-way street that divorced the Western mind from the natural world. There was a strong desire amongst some to hold on to some aspects of the pre-industrial culture of connection with nature. And I think this offers something important we can still build on today. Thanks so much for your comment, Anthony. Roman
Great conversation but it's a "safe" conversation because it is no threat to the hegemony of the ruling class or the foundation of the two class social system - wage-labour & capital and it's immutable dynamic - the accumulation of capital which must prioritize profit over everything else. Marx's materialist conception of history is science based and describes how change occurred ancient chattel slavery to feudalism to wage-labour & capital. All these systems based on the property career of humankind - approx 10,000 years. Clearly the next revolution of social system must be common ownership of the means of production & distribution with full democratic administration for all and by all. This next system is reliant on the abundance of the necessities of life - still theoretically achievable despite the damage that has been wrought on the natural world by this current system - but no doubt a tipping point is approaching where this capability will disappear.
I don't get bermans logic sometimes. Recently art asked one of the commenters on his blog this: "What is your evidence for oil becoming scarce? Markets expect the opposite" All of the sudden art doesnt believe in peak oil even though his analysis shows it peaked in 2018? I dont get it. Oil's eroi was 100:1 a century ago, and now it's like 10:1. Isnt that evidence of increasing scarcity? He defintely needs to do some interviews to clean up the wishy-washiness. His blog posts are great but he treats peak oilers like crap in his comments for some reason... I dont get it.
@@willwallace7894 hmmm good question! Ive recently started Steve Keens Rebel Economist course featuring the role of Energy & the laws of thermodynamics that mainstream economics is blind to. I saw on Decouple media last night an interview with Mark P Mills who also goes on about thermodynamics & energy regarding oil, minerals & transition & seems to claim that there's "the Bottomless Well" no peak oil, & as if no climate chaos to deal with{although suspiciously cant find him mentioning anything on climate change🤔} Complains alot about the green transition's cost to consumers & how voters wont go for it ... with proposing anything...except drill baby drill, but my gut is say 2 things & they yinyang each other ! 1 hes some sort of useful insight im missing, 2 hes simply a freemarket growth shrill & tranistion troll. So what going on with Art
In the Jewish faith they have Tu B'Shevat the Festival for the Trees. Indeed many tradition were tied to nature but have lost some of this connection as people moved into cities. The rebirth of Israel rebooted the holiday above is why so many trees were planted since Israel's birth. Also Passover teaching freeing others from slavery and was given by rabbis from a prison why they stood along side the black brother and sisters. Traditions of history exist, we just have to remember them. Also Honor Harrington in the books based on those theories does a great job in bringing up historical references and its finny to hear others response to this. I reminded me of this conversation. Lastly our church community is looking for ideas for growing and being more connected, these conversation idea is amazing. I thinking of mentioning for our spaghetti dinner next month. Got to come up with ideas but I think this would be fun! I love this!
Awesome guest whos advice I liked more than usual. However I think his advice for young people misses that most of us should defenitively learn how to grow our own food and eventually start or be part of a local community that tries to live self suffieciently, simple and locally. I think of this a bit like an emergency in an airplane, first put on your own oxygen mask before trying to help others: you will want you and your loved ones to be safe and you'll want to know what the real challenges are before helping others follow your path. I argue a populace which made itself more self suffiecient is way better equipped to deal with radical change and gametheoretically or socially more incentivised to cooperate and act collectively for common cause.
interesting discussion, when all is said and done, there will always be more said than done, until a boiling point is reached, change seldom come about peacefully….
Totally. And the solution seems so easy. Just scale back our consumption back by like, 80%. So we're no longer in 'overshoot'. And still live a good quality of life, if we manage our remaining means prudently. But of course we would never follow through on that. If anything, it's a time for totally comprehensive, sweeping, badass new paradigms, and not small but effective incremental changes, which would fall under the category of way too little too late, to the point where they're not really even in good faith. More like an empty gesture, which human beings are very practiced at, not so much anything else. But they would have to be like, socialist, more or less. So that we could have societal stability in some brave new world we create for ourselves. But that just doesn't seem like it's in the cards. Too much social inertia in the opposite direction. And if we do manage to survive and adjust to greatly reduced circumstances, it will be under the auspices of an appalling dystopia. And definitely not people growing their own food and living happily like hobbits.
I am only halfway through this episode and I can relate on so many levels. I feel like Golan Trevize in that I love my individualism but I also realize that without a Gaian revelation mankind cannot survive much longer and how much of the world will we take down with us. I also think about the upcoming 🇺🇸 election and how one candidate has the desire and ability to bring us back together and rebuild some degree of trust in our democracy and society that is necessary to prevent what looks like an impending collapse. We all have our opinions about the candidates but one is clearly divisive while the other is clearly inclusive.
'communal government' probably works on maintaining the mountain path - but what about economic and ecosystem management, eg global warming requires chemistry and thermodynamics knowledge just to understand the question (all current politicians are clueless).
Yes. What about it? It would have to be some hybrid combination then, wouldn't it? IF we're still managing complex sophisticated technologies for relatively large populations, that is, that have the power to continue to affect the planet's biomes globally. What do you think that kind of hybrid government might look like? How would you organize it?
Thank you very much for the beautifully produced interview. With all due respect to the guests for a couple of recent interview, maybe, they were a tiny bit out of touch with the common humans, 90% of the populace, who spend all their time to make ends meet for the families. It was said here, previously, maybe, the money is a right of use of energy in the future, including the right to waste energy.
Citing the fall of tthe Berlin but omitting that the reunification is seen as a disaster by a majority east and west and that there is no "Asabiyyah" at all is only half the story... Another fun fact about Germany: In the region i come from a good part of the agriculture is now growing massive monocultures of corn, with all implications: fertilizer, fungi- and peesticides, erosion etc., and then to shredder it and ferment it for "Bio-Gas" in massive silos they built. This is how we make "Green Energy"
For some extensive writing on an alternative to international markets and capitalism and also containing a critique of what he calls the multidimensional crises, I would like Nate to have a close look at inclusive democracy, principally developed by Takis Fotopoulos. I realize there have been many other attempts at outlining alternatives, but I'm particularly compelled by this one. The 64000 dollar question is how to implement change and there are also suggested tactics for that which have evolved over time
Cooperatives in Emilia Romagna are all but organizations run by workers. Smaller ones tends to treat workers very badly. Bigger ones are our kind of corporations but with left politics baking. They work because they pay less taxes than the competition and are run very efficiently in BAU terms.
Pretty much. And there's just absolutely no reason to think at all, that people are going to change the behavior sufficiently to meet the crisis. Mainly because I guess people can change their behavior, upon request or demand, it's not impossible. But the scale of the request/demand in this instance, is probably way too much to ask of people, and they will balk. Or be in denial or whatever. The task at hand, to transition to some ecologically sustainable society and in the process very significantly if not entirely abandon our current lifestyles, is too overwhelmingly vast, and too upsetting to the status quo. Not merely to the comfortable and high and mighty, but to everyone in society at all levels. So all hell will break loose well before some reasonably orderly and effective change ever takes place. Even if it's theoretically possible to do so. We got the tools and the talent, but the flesh is too weak, I suppose. So pretty much hopium is what we're left with. And this guy seems like a hopium salesman, however nuanced. Right up until the end, making his living, peddling his book, working the angles. And now he can pay his mortgage. And that's human society, that's the free market. And that's why we're going down....
1:22:00 usually communism breeds an economy based on recirculation at the citizen level where people have to be creative, repair and make use of everything due to scarcity. This is how Cuba works right now, this is how eastern European countries worked during communism.
The governmental systems are not dysfunctional. They function for (human) governance, not ecological well-being. The economic systems are, equally, not dysfunctional. They work to drive human economic activity. Ecological concerns are **external** to these, which is why (at least in economics) they are referred to as externalities. These systems are working fine, but they are **disinterested** in solving this issue. If you can think in terms of systems, rather than one's own needs, or a collective human need, or a national need (you get the picture) you might begin to see that we need systems that are actually built to consider ecology. Fancy descriptions of historical gardening might provide some instruction here, but the fundemental action is one of system design. These things will not emerge spontaneously - if they could have they would have by now, given that we have been hoping for about 30 years. Collective action is a great, no issue with it, but it isn't generating new systems, rather it is floundering while the existing systems continue to operate regardless. I know, I used the word 'system' way too many times, but I simply can't understand why there isn't more appreciation of this type of perspective. I suppose it has something to do with human self-involvement, or perhaps a need to feel connected to something that already exists.
Yeah, dude. I totally agree. Man, if I had a dollar for every time we were encouraged to grow our own food, and I don't know, get in touch with nature or something, I would probably have enough money to just ride it out, whenever the crunch comes. I'll tell you why there's no appreciation for the need for new systems, because it's like an impossible task. On every possible level. If anything coming up with some cool new paradigm where we cover all our bases and can live sustainably if we stick with it is totally the easy part. It's the sticking with it that's impossible. People are just not going to do it. They wouldn't even know how. On account of the changes would be so vast, and involve the complete shattering of every possible illusion and habit of body and mind that has defined our lives, that we just won't do it. We're too invested in our current paradigm, almost more on the psychic and moral level than the material one. And people are going to have to check themselves like they never have before. And we're just not up to it. Just too much upheaval involved to possibly amicably survive. Our current doomed society is just too evil and too profoundly unjust and depraved and mind-bogglingly dishonest and manipulative and exploitative to extricate ourselves from. Way too many scores to settle when the day of reckoning comes. But people are survivors so you never know....
@@Joeyjojoshabbadoo Hey, thanks for the reply. Perhaps I am being naive, but I would say that I agree with about half of what you wrote - especially the inertia of the current ways and the scale of the task at hand. You are right as well that we are so morally and psychologically invested that it feels very destabilising to set off in a new direction. However... I do not think it is impossible at all, for two reasons: first, most people can see the damage the current systems are doing and (most?) have probably had a conversation about ecology/nature and our impact on it. Basically I think there is an undercurrent that is stronger than we imagine, because it is necessarily hidden. Second, I think that people have a strong tendency for laziness (myself included) and following authority, so new systems would need to be backed by social leaders and be able to fit around some (but not all) of people existing needs. This wouldn't be a one-shot solution, but rather an open process of collaboratively evolving new structures, since we have seen that they will produce powerful emergent incentives, which would need to be observed and discussed. The key thing is iteration; we build processes that are self-reflective. This means that those who aren't into it can go with the flow, and those who want to engage have a template for systemic steering, seeing the system itself as a (non-agential) contributor. This might help with sticking to it. Mind you, this is all quite idealistic and I fully expect some form of collapse before people are ready to consider it. I just hope it doesn't get too bad before we decide to get started. I'll be working on this anyway, in anticipation of the day when someone will answer my emails...
@@wholebodysneeze I'm not sure it's possible to not be 'naive' with something like this. This is some pretty cataclysmic stuff to be contemplating about. For me, the part that I find to be so conspicuously absent from any sort of 'real talk' about our looming, impending, terrifying future, is the socioeconomic aspect, and the moral aspect for lack of a better word. We got the hard science, I'm gonna say, and we can run the numbers and see how much oil we have left, and precious metals, and topsoil and whatnot. The weather part is trickier to account for, but we know it's going to be hotter.... The impossible part, or the part not being suitably addressed, at least by my lights, is the socioeconomic part. The political part, the moral part, which really does seem totally insurmountable, notwithstanding some Spanish ritual from feudal times where everyone comes together and respectfully scolds people for using too much water. I get the idea, but this isn't the 1600s. And it isn't going to be enough. I guess because such topics are so taboo, they can't even be broached let alone acted on. And the intellectual/academic caste benefits from the status quo as much as anyone, and would be just as loath to relinquish their privileges, that are entirely made possible by this wildly unsustainable and indeed unjust way of life. And so I guess there might be some pretty heavy duty naivety when it comes to any expectation that the vast majority of the population, even in rich countries, is just going to continue to be dictated to, and quietly accept their humble lot in life, which presumably will get even more humble. In the midst of some epochal upheaval. Malaise is already at an all-time high as it is. They probably would revolt in some form or other, understandably so And then all bets are off. Life in modern industrial society comes down to who has money and who doesn't. All the rest is details, and idealistic talk. And you're going to be asking people to take even less, a lot less, without any kind of plan other than assuming everyone will just continue to behave themselves, and dutifully show up for work as always. I would say the only reason people behave themselves as well as they do is because they have all the stuff to console themselves with, and that's the real social contract. Even the poor have a high standard of living, made possible of course by all the rampant consumption. You take that away... I don't know what you're going to get. So a major socioecomimc re-ordering would seemingly be in order, given the level of restraint and cooperation required for some new sustainable paradigm, so the proles have something to live for. And mainly crickets is what I see. Other than hifalutin or non-threatening notions from academics where I can barely follow what they're even talking about, let alone pragmatically visualize playing out in real life. And naturally the truly rich and powerful want nothing to do with any kind of radical, yet wholesome societal transformation. And probably have their own ideas about how to deal with all this, which one could imagine might be quite dystopian and appalling. And with the means to carry them out. So we're screwed I guess is what I'm saying. Anyway, nice chatting with you....
Didn't all the biggest civilizations of the past collapse in horrible ways, leaving only dusty ruins? I'm wary of people with such optimism as it is easy to forget the wisdom of Ozymandias... "My name is Ozymandias, the King who rules over even other Kings. Behold what I have built, all you who think of yourselves as powerful, and despair at the magnificence and superiority of my accomplishments." And all that was around this stone was sand as far as the eye can see.... There is optimism and hope for change, it is small, but there is no hope to maintain the status quo... But good conversation .... I bought the book.
The point was made that “changes” (fixes, remedies) have happened in the past so don’t doubt that the trajectory of this civilization can likewise change. Two points. 1) the current challenge is on a planetary scale this time so getting some 100s or 1000s or millions of people on board won’t move the needle an inch. There’s no way to get 8 billion people to agree and act promptly in unison. We 😮have no agency as a species. It’s a pipe dream. The example was given of life in ancient Japan. A population of a few million I think it was. That’s a far cry from 8 billion. And no mention of the fact that there are way, way, way, way too many humans. We are in overshoot. The best “fix” would be to reduce our numbers very drastically (by 6 billion say) and very fast (within a few decades max). There’s no way. Homo sapiens are in overshoot. At this stage what happens next is extreme dieback if not extinction. When I heard the phrase “great, great, great grandchildren” I immediately thought: on what planet!? Not this one! We’d be “lucky” to get to just one generation of “great.”
18th Century coffee houses also facilitated discussions of pooled risk in financial ventures leading to the rise of the joint stock company and ownership by share. Suggesting, that inclusive democratic practices risks empowering populists to innovate new ways to accelerate environmental decline. In fact, elite institutions such as the central bank may provide a better model for collective limits where there is always temptation for excess. The other interesting proposal could be to rely on minority rights, by constituting nature reverence as a religion, not because it is a perfect fit, but because it offers judicial protections to nature through constitutionally protected freedom of belief. A devoted community exists, and a historic recognition of nature as sacred can be demonstrated, so harm to the biosphere, and web of life, could be argued to violate the beliefs and values of an extremely large religious community. But the more i think about it, ideas that appeal to liberal governance, instead of challenging and replacing it, are likely to be de-radicalized, and distorted to maintain the status-quo.😊
Regarding alternative/local currencies: My buddy created a local coin for Asheville 15 years ago. He was promptly detained by the feds for a few years and eventually deported back to Canada. I'm not trying to be a party pooper but proceed with caution! They* are watching.
Often "grassroots local control" in rural areas has been co-opted by the extreme right to reject environmental regulations, incipient climate policies and protection of wildlife.
The Valencian water tribunal is no example of contemporary sustainability. It has had no objections to massive pesticide and herbicide use, the elimination of biodiversity margins of fields and unsustainable river transfers for increasing irrigation.
Stopped listening when he called NATO lover and WW2 revisionist Tymothy Snyder a "great historian" . Sorry, but all the talk about community and ecology wont matter if we support militarism which will lead to great power war.
OMG tell me about. Timothy Snyder is one of the most repulsive 'public intellectuals' I've ever seen. His big book was called, I believe, 'The Road to UNfreedom', which has got to be one of the worst titles I've ever heard. From an Ivy League professor no less. So, point well taken.
Every one..wants to DO something. Solutions like .biochar or planting trees ...or permaculture ..Well . these are all great .BUT if we are doing these things....but, the CULTURE / Economics do not chamge..they won't matter, they won't amount ro a hill of beans . - The militray is still spewing massive amounts if GHG . - We allow the widespread continuation of foolishness like professional sports , manufacturing of cosmetics., massive fashion industry destruction .massive mining ..massive waste of water as in fracking etc . And..well ..how about this for example .profession football . not only are we winging the butts of athletes all over the place..but THE RICH are flying their PRIVATE JETS to Super Bowls . one Super Bowl could have 1500 private jets fly in. Why, if our planet/ biosphere is dying are we still allowing this kind of thing to happen .?? It isnt just about DOING THINGS, it has to also be about NOT doing destructive things..so that the good things can COUNT
Repair is the opposite of capital. Everyone loves to build. The repair of pyramids was of culture, not plans, there is no plans to repair them because the ancient human culture was lost and stolen. Improvisation doesn’t have time to write it down.
even when we remember history we repeat it... what's that other quote? "history doesn't repeat but it often rhymes" and yet another one.. "the past will set you free but only once it's finished with you"
I often wonder just how much of a disproportionate influence sociopaths have had on the course of civilization and human history. Given what civilization is ecologically up against, it does not bode well for the future.
Today's Valencian Water Court oversees terribly polluted irrigation canals that when they empty into the sea without sufficient treatment and filtering nearby beaches must be closed for bathers. The commons, yes but romanization of the past, no
Right, that's what I would say. That anecdote wasn't compelling to me. I remember watching a documentary, on the German PBS, focusing on Spain's alarming water crisis and desertification. I don't remember if they covered traditional water mgt. practices like the one they still do in Valencia. But it sounded like things weren't going too well.
an incredible talk in this regard is Lyla June's ted talk: ua-cam.com/video/eH5zJxQETl4/v-deo.htmlsi=oiX05A32VdDG0gnO love it because it provides hope and next steps in the same speech. best wishes to all as we move forward.
What i can't get over is the statement we supposedly have to "become less individualistic"? Based on Edward Bernays's great trick to correlate individualism with consumption of lifestyle products? I would say more true individualism is necessary to know who we are and what we need in order to be able to reject mindless consumerism, social pressure to follow trends and fashion etc and truly reconnect with our short existence as part of the web of life
@@dameongeppetto Absolutely yes. But people still need to have initiative, self-confidence, excellent life habits, etc., etc. And that's JP's forte. 12 rules for life and all that. I'm not sure what they all are, but that's the idea. And it's indispensable. In fact it's so indispensable that we don't even have a hair of a notion of a chance if we're lacking in the initiative, confidence, work habits, etc. And probably a fair degree of individual agency and sovereignty, whatever exactly is meant by that. 'Case we're dead in the water without that. And then we'll get to the collectivism, which we will . But first things first. We have a pretty depraved society, and a lot of broken people. You get it?
Nate, this podcast is a repository of the greatest minds in human history. Not just of the people interviewed, but of the people, both living and dead, whose ideas, work, cultures, and deeds that have most impacted the world are called forth. I often imagine what it would be like to discover the content here hundreds or thousands of years in the future, the collection of creativity and thought and life represented here would be considered such a priceless archaeological, historical (and perhaps spiritual) goldmine. So amazing.
This is the best thing ever! Please put on notifications or leave these up to watch later.
In order to "fix" what is wrong now, we must listen to the people who are harmed by our ways, past & present. To not listen and respond with compassion is folly.
Beautifully said.
Thanks Nate and Roman another fascinating interview and another book to read 👍
Thanks very much for having someone on who knows history and realizes how important that knowledge is. I've been saying you should interrupt the flow of scientists on your podcast with some people from the humanities. Roman shows how fruitful that can be.
Sitting right now at a talk by Kate Raworth in Brussels. Enjoying very
Much after
This great podcast. Thanks
"HOPE", as ennobled as that concept has become, in many ways functions as a soporific. Every sane person on the planet wishes that things could be different. We HOPE for World Peace.We HOPE for a pristine environment. We HOPE for economic equity amongst all people. It would be the sane way to proceed. But when you compare the things that most of us HOPE for to the way things actually ARE, then HOPE becomes merely delusional, enervating, wishful thinking. I personally HOPE that a benign space alien would land in Washington to warn humanity about the error of its ways (as depicted in "The Day the Earth Stood Still") but I am not holding my breath in anticipation. As ludicrous as that wish may seem to many, I don't think that it is any more outlandish than the HOPE for World Peace, meaningful ecological improvements, or economic fairness. HOPE only postpones meaningful action.
i "hope" the hairless-talking-monkey exits quickly & efficiently this arena of Life/Heaven which it has invaded and destroyed.
Thus actual Life can again one day live.
Action:
Crystal's Edict
"The Point" -Is so far reaching that it is nearly impossible to say in words. Speaking and lecturing or listening to speaking and or
lecturing about "living; life/Nature" are mostly just received as some kind of esoteric truth and a longing for something more meaningful.
The actual meaning of the same Truth is that only Heaven exists and humans are the only thing lost to it and from it. Servitude to Nature
alone is the only road to redemption. Inside or outside. Death / life are just misnomers, change of state. The Purpose remains constant.
One Soul many faces. No one form is superior to another. Civilization it's self is the cause of all life's destruction. Accepting this as
some kind of necessary phase or step TO something is delusion. Now is always constant. All and every essence is always dying & being born.
Action is now. Preservation of complexity for the sake of All beings NOT civilization at all And not humans first
1billion humans to dismantle all infrastructure and returning ALL mined/drilled materials to their inertial place of origin by order of density and toxicity.
1billion humans to create "Earth-Ship" type self generating environments from as much earthen material as possible. As many species as possible must be able to migrate to & from these ....
All the rest to support the the first two.
One Soul Many beings /faces/species
Crystal's Law
I took it to mean hope as an impulse to positive action as the only way forward. It might work - it might not - but without hope where’s the incentive to do anything to fix this mess?
Well I just heard an asteroid is heading towards Earth,that’s the good news. Bad news is it’s going to miss us.
@@rmsekora509 My point is that there are a whole lot more people doing a whole lot of hoping to merely assuage their own fears
@@treefrog3349Hope is a moral obligation.
Thank you ! for Interesting conversation .
Roman seemed to ask more questions of Nate, than the usual interviewee. That is refreshing.
Nate & Roman: Thanks to you both for an inspiring discussion. I really hope the two of you will get together to do another one real soon, because I loved every minute of this, and could happily go deeper with you into any of these topics.
All talk of hope as a soporific aside (and it is a valid concern, though not in alignment with what Roman is really pointing to, as I heard him), listening to your conversation today for me felt like coming upon an oasis in the desert. So much of what's being expressed on the internet currently is all based in fixed binary linear time: All is lost, humans are too screwed up to change, the cake is baked. "Doom. Doom, Doom!" (In case people are getting lost now, those are the drums beating accompaniment deep in Khazad-Dun.)
Before any more Khazad-dun defenders are tempted to pile on here, I'm not denying any facts, tipping points, or recent research into human neuropsychology. I am however, asserting that we fare better when we learn to discern facts from interpretation. Because it's interpretation that generally determines the way the facts show up.
The media has been training us for decades to make fixed predictions about the future based on inflexible predetermined interpretations of the past, and now it seems that's all we ever do. This is counter to everything we've been learning lately about nondual reality, which btw, is still reality, no matter the global environmental economic everything crisis. (It doesn't disappear and suddenly cease to be because bad stuff might happen. But that's the nature of scare-mongering which the media loves to perpetrate, isn't it: It jerks you back into survival mode even when you don't need to be there, which is a state of mind that only functions well in fixed binary linear time.)
With regards to the future, we need to remember this: The cat is still in the box.
The future only ever exists as potential. Nothing is fixed until it has happened. Therefore prepare for the worst contingency as you are able, and work for the best of all possible outcomes. It really is that simple. And meanwhile, be the best version of who you want to be, now.
I really think a lot of what we're seeing being expressed here in response to the concept of hope is simply unresolved discomfort with the experience of uncertainty.
Anyway, it's totally refreshing to come upon someone like Roman talking in positive and constructive terms about gleaning experiences from the past as possibilities we can use to help us begin to reshape and redirect whatever we can of what may yet come.
I really like the idea of these dinner conversations. This is something people can easily do from anywhere. Does Roman know of somewhere we can connect with people who've done this to get an idea of how to get started? I have experience working with groups, but I'm wondering what kinds of questions people have asked these groups in the past. I want to learn more about citizen assemblies and sortition, too. I have a friend in London who is really into sortition and assemblies who has been talking about this for ages. It's the first thing I've ever heard of that seems like it could be viable as something to transition to out of the system we have now in the US.
So for now, as I await another episode with you two, I'm on my way to the bookstore... 👋💛
Brilliant episode. Thanks Roman and Nate :)
As a long-time admirer of the work of E O Wilson, I couldn't agree more regarding biophilia. I believe that a complete transition from anthropocentrism to ecocentrism, individually and collectively, is a requirement for human futures. No transition, no futures. It can happen and is happening, but the transition needs to accelerate dramatically, preferably by choice rather than forced by necessity.
I also think we must acknowledge that collapse isn't something for the future. Collapse is happening already. Humans are nature, nature is beauty, and beauty is truth. We are not separate from nature. Separation is an illusion. We've lost 70% of wildlife (bioabundance) in 50 years (in the UK). Globally, humans and domestic animals account for 32% and 64% of mammalian biomass, and wild animals account for only 4%. The biomass of poultry is more than double the biomass of all wild birds. We are causing and experiencing the sixth great extinction. This is truly shocking and depressing if we allow ourselves to process it and genuinely engage with the emotions. If we are nature, we're already in collapse!
This may seem counter-intuitive because the human enterprise (population, production, consumption, waste generation; see William Rees) is still expanding, but it soon won't be. The general narrative is that expansion of the human enterprise is a good thing, and arguing against it makes you a misanthrope. I'd counter that if the desire for contraction is grounded in empathy for other species (to allow them space and resources to survive and thrive alongside us), that's noble and loving, and honestly, I'd rather be a misanthrope than an expansionist, colonialist, human supremacist. Also, despite this expansion, I'd argue that we're increasingly distracted and disconnected, from ourselves, each other, and the rest of nature, and therefore losing more and more of our humanity. We're losing what's truly valuable (life, which is sacred). We're becoming increasingly left hemisphere-dominated and machine-like (see Iain McGilchrist).
John Vervaeke (a potentially interesting guest Nate!) talks about the meaning crisis alongside the metacrisis. He suggests asking ourselves the following three questions to test for meaning:
(1) What do you want to exist even if you don’t?
(2) How real is it? Is it really real?
(3) How much of a difference do you make to it right now?
He argues that how we answer those questions reflects to what degree we have meaning in life (distinct from meaning of life).
Hope is discussed elsewhere in this comments thread. Hope may be important but only if it facilitates action because it's change that we need. It is our individual and collective behaviours that are causing the problems, underpinned by our biology and psychology, and buttressed by our history, culture, and the stories we tell ourselves. Stories are important, but not as important as what we feel. My advice, for what it's worth, is to get out in nature, remember and feel that you are nature, and remember that you love nature and you love yourself, not as an individual "self" but as a wholly interconnected, interdependent part of nature; as an agent, with agency, to partake in and serve the continuity of this miracle of life.
Thank you for this interesting interview. ❤
So delighted you got Roman on the show Nate! x
I am always amazed by listening to great thinkers and readers like Nate ana Roman, here looking for examples to learn from, that don’t seem to read from the billions of natural examples.
The lives of organisms, cultures, and other natural forms of working organization. There are great similarities in the succession of events and processes for such systems surviving their own growth, their common start-ups. Growth is their self-organization process, and to survive it, its powerful access to resources and ever faster acceleration both will urgently need a new purpose. Generally that shift is reorienting growth from multiplying past design to focusing on maturing physically, developing new relationships, learning and coordinating with the new contexts growth opens the gate to and leads then into.
Roman’s conclusion that the failure of sustainability goals, like the greater than doubling of CO2, was due to bad government is very mistaken. The fault is more directly that of science, organizing our view of nature around formulate, one in the things self-animated systems, like growth, don’t do. Natural systems rely on their growth as an exploratory process, that we see still with us throuought our lives.
What has kept our growth system from discovering the reward of maturing seems to mainly due to the free choice of investors reinvest their profits, called ‘compounding, even as it becomes as very clear to be driving both itself and most other systems we all rely on.
I used to LOVE fishing. Then I started to feel terrible for the fish and that took all the fun out. Haven't fished in years...
According to previous expert it is best to eat sardines as being so small they find it easier to come back from near extinction over-fishing.
Buddy, life only survives by the ingestion and assimilation of other life into its own body. You're gonna have to toughen up a little. Personally I think fishing is the most mind-numbingly boring activity you could ever do. I'm happy to eat fish, but I'll stick to playing basketball or going for bike rides.
@@peterdollins3610 Probably also have less micro plastics accumulated...
@@Joeyjojoshabbadoo Plenty to eat that is plant-based though, it's not like I NEED to force myself to eat animals I don't feel like eating. 🤷♀️
@@kated3165 Oh yeah, that's true. I forgot about that. Maybe that's why plants exist, to perfectly co-exist with animals, on some level we don't yet understand. We don't have to eat each other, and we can eat them instead. And they don't mind, we hope. Still, I feel like we gotta be willing to eat other animals, and be true to our natures, and just don't get carried away with it. Like in the movie 'Avatar'. They seemed to have a good attitude about eating meat.
Breaking through the “baselines of our imaginations,” how absolutely brilliant and exhilarating… I loved this conversation!
Thank You Both every Discussion helps.
"What have I done today to be a good ancestor?" - love that!. I'll add that to my "what am I grateful for today?" Ritual.
Nate, every episode of your podcast is utterly fascinating; this one with Roman especially so, for me. It left me flying, and brimming with ideas. Thank you both so much!!!
There is a book by a German historian, Annette Kehnel, about sustainability/regeneration in medieval times in Europe. An eye-opening book. (German title: Wir konnten auch anders - Eine kurze Geschichte der Nachhaltigkeit. It was first published in 2021 and already is in its fifth run. It is now also available in an English translation: The Green Ages: Medieval Innovations in Sustainability.) Reading it I had the same kind of "why did I not know about any of this before!? - experience that Roman reported. I thought I might share, maybe someone is interested in reading it.
Again, thank you both for this incredible episode!
Great interview. You should read The Dawn of Everything by David Graeber and David Wengrow next. It opened my eyes to the political history of prehistory
It was a great read, highly recommend as well!
Agree with a lot that was said here, some angles I hadn't thought of before as well. Lovely interview!
Great episode. The concept of Citizens Assemblies is brilliant.
I totally agree. I live my life doing everything possible to make things a little less shit for my kids and the next generation. Currently that means doing a lot of work on biochar to offset emissions.
There are a fair few recordings I've seen but this is the best. May I suggest you get this guy back a few times?
Outstanding conversation
A great conversation ❤
I have lots of experience in the world of politics and think it is unbelievably easy to make major improvements , but we have to be positive about dropping our egos and taking a design led approach which brings a diverse range of people together to share ideas and express creativity
Please flesh out a design led approach a little more. A few sentences is fine, just looking to understand what you meant with that statement.
😅77😅😅😅i😅8i😢😮😅7😮 7:35 7😅😅😅k😅😅ii😅😢😅,the 809SHOLMES 8I😮 7:35 I B😅😅I😅😅😅😅😅😅😅🎉IIJ😅😅😅Y😢😅8😅Iiki😅😅I😅😅😅oakland k😅i😅😅😅i888😅😅😅😅😅
@@HidingFromFate
Simply put, Use a design engineering problem solving, outcomes based scrutiny process to reevaluate all the processes within the electrical system using an Engineering Design approach and then fix.
I was a Product Design Engineer who became the "Political " head of scrutiny on a billion pound budgeted regional council. I was also indipendent. I saw everything literally with different eyes and was able to do very interesting and progressive things. I didn't even see my self as a politician and was able to build really constructive relationships with the various political parties. I had worked for decades solving product design problems and using various techniques to create products.
It was a bit like inadvertently not playing the political game and inadvertently being able to quickly make real policy changes .
I also maintain that compared to product design challenges it is paradoxically really easy to fix all the problems of politics.
That is if the special interest, dogmatic, tribal men behind the curtain will let you!!
@@HidingFromFate I have a very different perspective to most people about the political system and it is very focused on what design changes can be made to achieve a true "Peoples Democracy " including clearly defining what this actually is.
It the current presidential political system in the US, the so called " greatest democracy in the world" , were a toaster manufacturer it would have gone bust in 1980.
Our western political systems are actually deliberately configured to be dysfunctional to allow back door controllers to manipulate for their own tribal or financial gain. Fixing it is not an issue, overcoming these controllers is potentially an invite to be be politically destroyed or murdered.
Another problem is that media is not designed to help people solve problems. All media, including some independents and most legacy is tuned to tribalism to get readers, watchers, likes etc. or to spread attractive tribal propaganda.
We are wired to see ourselves as the good guys against the bad guys and we create stories to reflect this. We are all a combination of good and bad. Realising this and standing in the shoes of the other is one of the core requirements for successful problem dolving. The good one bad one virus is a poison to design led problem solving but there are things that can be done to significantly reduce its influence.
I could go on and on and most people don't like what I am saying because ego gets in the way and they can not accept that political issues can easily be solved, but absolutely no doubt in my mind that even the Gaza, Israel conflict is solvable if a very different approach is taken.
Just look at the devolved parliament in Northern Ireland.
People who murdered and bombed eachother for decades living in relative peace. No need for war, terrorism, 2 state solution or UN resolutions.
The problem is not the problem. it is the people who control the gateway to the solutions.
That’s it!! You had me forever with the mention of Asimov!!!!
I got to help facilitate a citizen assembly, I love the concept ❤
Brilliant, thank you!
sustainable greetings, Gernot
The People’s History of the United States by Howard Zinn.
There are other works on the People’s History of the World, etc.
An Indigenous perspective as well.
Gave it to my kids when they were in grade school. Know your enemies.
I think Mr. Krznarics ideas will be viable after collapse when humans exist on a much smaller scale than today. It might just come naturally then under the circumstances
Either that or it’s Mad Max Redux.
Unfortunately it is a multi crisis, there are far too many scientifically challenged people who have optimism regarding humanities future due to human ingenuity. Humanity is already screwed. The time for action was over 50 years ago. Global warming of 4 C and sea level rise of 2-3 m is locked in already. Depletion of essential commodities including fossil fuels is already in play especially crude oil that is set to halve within a decade, that powers transport, agriculture, and materials.
I'm curious why you felt the need to point this out. If we're screwed, why does this video, or this comment matter? i.e. why did you invest the time to watch the video and comment? 🙌
Gotta pass the time to countdown somehow :)
@@anthonytroia1 because it's accurate. Hope only delays meaningful action, i.e. what's the point of investing time in hopium?
@@HansHorst-fu2il There's no "meaningful action" if we are unequivocally "screwed". I'm smelling some cognitive dissonance.
@@anthonytroia1 wrong, on peut imagine sysiphe comme un homme heureux or something
Great talk as always!
Thank you. Evokes William James.
Dear Nate, the theme of temporal wisdom requires a paradigm shift from linear to cyclic, understanding our planet within the temporal cycles of the solar system. The scientific framing of the Milankovitch orbital cycles of glaciation integrated into mythological understanding, with terrestrial cosmologies holding a deep intuitive wisdom about our planetary structure of time and trajectory. Seeing how to reverse the trajectory from descent to ascent, from destruction to construction, can be presented within a scientific cosmology framed around the question of how our planet is connected to the cosmos.
Mycelium beneath our feet. Tells me so much about my connection to Gia.
43:48 I doubt you're reading this comment Mr. Krznaric, so if there's a historian in the house maybe they can answer: Does this biophilia (tree planting, nature journals, etc...) correspond with the onset of romanticism? This is probably a dumb question, but, I have little fear of making myself look stupid in public, so... 🙃
i think you could see the german romantic period for reference and see how society was. I think it was a cultural counter thing to growing urbanization and "development" but can't tell you for sure
I'm here reading your comment! Some of the rise of the interest in the living world in the 17th-19th centuries in Europe was certainly linked to the romantic movement (think of the poet Coleridge's nature writings based on his walks through the Lake District in England). As such, it was often a limited and highly idealised view of nature, lacking the deep sense of interdependence with the living world found in so many indigenous cultures. Similary the rise of interest in recreational gardening during the same period (which I mention in my conversation with Nate) had its limits: much of it was about controlling and taming nature (all those neatly clipped lawns...). So not a dumb question at all. The point I really wanted to make was that the industrial revolution was not simply a one-way street that divorced the Western mind from the natural world. There was a strong desire amongst some to hold on to some aspects of the pre-industrial culture of connection with nature. And I think this offers something important we can still build on today. Thanks so much for your comment, Anthony. Roman
not a dumb question at all and the short answer is yes. the long answer is very long indeed.
The science of human nature is boundless. Feels better to think the possibilities than ponder the current trajectory. ShakeUp XR
Great conversation but it's a "safe" conversation because it is no threat to the hegemony of the ruling class or the foundation of the two class social system - wage-labour & capital and it's immutable dynamic - the accumulation of capital which must prioritize profit over everything else.
Marx's materialist conception of history is science based and describes how change occurred ancient chattel slavery to feudalism to wage-labour & capital. All these systems based on the property career of humankind - approx 10,000 years. Clearly the next revolution of social system must be common ownership of the means of production & distribution with full democratic administration for all and by all. This next system is reliant on the abundance of the necessities of life - still theoretically achievable despite the damage that has been wrought on the natural world by this current system - but no doubt a tipping point is approaching where this capability will disappear.
I guess that tells on the host and his guest - likely sitting comfortably with their capital assets.
Is it time for another interview with Dr. Art Berman on the oil situation? He has had some interesting blog posts lately.
I don't get bermans logic sometimes. Recently art asked one of the commenters on his blog this:
"What is your evidence for oil becoming scarce? Markets expect the opposite"
All of the sudden art doesnt believe in peak oil even though his analysis shows it peaked in 2018? I dont get it. Oil's eroi was 100:1 a century ago, and now it's like 10:1. Isnt that evidence of increasing scarcity? He defintely needs to do some interviews to clean up the wishy-washiness. His blog posts are great but he treats peak oilers like crap in his comments for some reason... I dont get it.
@@willwallace7894 hmmm good question! Ive recently started Steve Keens Rebel Economist course featuring the role of Energy & the laws of thermodynamics that mainstream economics is blind to. I saw on Decouple media last night an interview with Mark P Mills who also goes on about thermodynamics & energy regarding oil, minerals & transition & seems to claim that there's "the Bottomless Well" no peak oil, & as if no climate chaos to deal with{although suspiciously cant find him mentioning anything on climate change🤔}
Complains alot about the green transition's cost to consumers & how voters wont go for it ... with proposing anything...except drill baby drill, but my gut is say 2 things & they yinyang each other ! 1 hes some sort of useful insight im missing, 2 hes simply a freemarket growth shrill & tranistion troll.
So what going on with Art
@willwallace7894 He now is on the side of Doomberg
@@willwallace7894 US petroleum geologist Art Berman was in conversation with Johan Landgren in the UA-cam video titled 𝗔𝗿𝘁𝗵𝘂𝗿 𝗕𝗲𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗻: 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗣𝗲𝗿𝗳𝗲𝗰𝘁 𝗘𝗻𝗲𝗿𝗴𝘆 𝗦𝘁𝗼𝗿𝗺 - 𝗣𝗲𝗮𝗸 𝗖𝗵𝗲𝗮𝗽 𝗢𝗶𝗹 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗡𝗮𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗮𝗹 𝗚𝗮𝘀 𝗶𝘀 𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲, published 16 Feb 2024, duration 55 minutes. On when the US shale oil & gas decline is likely, Art Berman said (bold text my emphasis):
“𝘙𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵, 𝘪𝘵’𝘴, 𝘪𝘵’𝘴, 𝘪𝘵’𝘴 𝘢𝘭𝘮𝘰𝘴𝘵 𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴, 𝘢𝘯𝘥, 𝘢𝘯𝘥, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘐, 𝘭𝘦𝘵 𝘮𝘦 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵, 𝘶𝘮, 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘪𝘯 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘢 𝘮𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘪𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘲𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘺, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘶𝘢𝘭 𝘸𝘦𝘭𝘭𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘥𝘦𝘤𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨, 𝘢𝘩, 𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘦𝘺 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘦𝘴 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘬 𝘣𝘦𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳. 𝘐𝘧 𝘸𝘦 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘥𝘳𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘸𝘦𝘭𝘭𝘴, 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘸𝘦𝘭𝘭𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘰𝘳𝘦𝘳, 𝘢𝘩, 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘨𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘬𝘦𝘦𝘱 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘥𝘶𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘶𝘱, 𝘖𝘒? 𝘚𝘰, 𝘴𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦, 𝘴𝘰 𝘢𝘴 𝘢𝘯 𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘩 𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘴𝘵, 𝘶𝘮, 𝘐’𝘮 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘨𝘦𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘨𝘺, 𝘰𝘧, 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘥𝘶𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘣𝘶𝘵, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘸𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘯’𝘵 𝘥𝘪𝘷𝘰𝘳𝘤𝘦 𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘴𝘦𝘭𝘷𝘦𝘴 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮, 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘬𝘦𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘢𝘱𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘭, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘴𝘰 𝘪𝘧 𝘸𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘢 𝘭𝘰𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘤𝘢𝘱𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘭 𝘢𝘷𝘢𝘪𝘭𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘸𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘵𝘦𝘮𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘭𝘺, 𝘢𝘩, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸, 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘴𝘦 𝘴𝘶𝘱𝘱𝘭𝘺 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘴 𝘴𝘦𝘦𝘮 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺’𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘭𝘦𝘮. 𝘞𝘦 𝘣𝘢𝘴𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘮𝘰𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘶𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦. 𝘜𝘮, 𝘯𝘰𝘸 𝘶𝘯𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘶𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘺, 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘧𝘧𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘴 𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘰-𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘥 𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘳𝘨𝘺 𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘺 𝘭𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘤𝘢𝘱𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘭 𝘢𝘷𝘢𝘪𝘭𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘪𝘭 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘨𝘢𝘴 𝘣𝘶𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘴𝘴, 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘢 𝘧𝘦𝘸 𝘺𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘴 𝘢𝘨𝘰, 𝘣𝘢𝘤𝘬 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘸𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘣𝘰𝘰𝘬 𝘪𝘯 2015, 𝘑𝘰𝘩𝘢𝘯, 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺𝘣𝘰𝘥𝘺 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘪𝘯𝘷𝘦𝘴𝘵 𝘪𝘯 𝘰𝘪𝘭 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘨𝘢𝘴. 𝘜𝘮, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸, 𝘢𝘯𝘥, 𝘢𝘯𝘥, 𝘢𝘯𝘥, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘸𝘦 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘜𝘚, 𝘸𝘦 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘥𝘳𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸, 𝘴𝘰 𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘴𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘸𝘦𝘭𝘭𝘴 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺, 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘩, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘴, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸, 𝘢 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘸𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸, 𝘸𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥, 𝘸𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘯𝘦𝘸 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘳𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘷𝘢𝘪𝘭𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘢, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸, 𝘪𝘯 𝘢 𝘴𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘥𝘢𝘳𝘺 𝘰𝘧𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘸𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘳𝘢𝘪𝘴𝘦 𝘣𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘥𝘰𝘭𝘭𝘢𝘳𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘢 𝘧𝘦𝘸 𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨, 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺𝘣𝘰𝘥𝘺 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘶𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘤𝘬, 𝘶𝘮, 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺, 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘴𝘢𝘸 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘦𝘦𝘥 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘨𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘨𝘳𝘰𝘸. 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘴𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘺𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦, 𝘖𝘒, 𝘢𝘯𝘥, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘐 𝘥𝘰𝘯’𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘶𝘮, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸, 𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘤𝘶𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘸𝘩𝘺. 𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘦𝘮𝘱𝘪𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵, 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦’𝘴 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘴𝘰 𝘮𝘶𝘤𝘩, 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦’𝘴 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘵𝘭𝘦 𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦 𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘦𝘺 𝘢𝘷𝘢𝘪𝘭𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘰𝘪𝘭 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘨𝘢𝘴 𝘥𝘳𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘥𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘭𝘰𝘱𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘮𝘰𝘴𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘪𝘵 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘧𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘴. 𝘚𝘰, 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘢, 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘢, 𝘢 𝘮𝘢𝘫𝘰𝘳 𝘴𝘦𝘢 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘢 𝘥𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘢𝘨𝘰, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘴𝘰 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘢𝘴𝘵 𝘸𝘦 𝘮𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘰𝘳𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘴𝘮𝘰𝘰𝘵𝘩 𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳, 𝘢𝘩, 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘥𝘦𝘤𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘪𝘯, 𝘪𝘯 𝘸𝘦𝘭𝘭 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘥𝘶𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦, 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘥𝘳𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨, 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘰𝘥𝘢𝘺. 𝘞𝘦 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘥𝘰𝘯’𝘵 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘱𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘭, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘪𝘧 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘥𝘰, 𝘢𝘩, 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘯𝘦𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘴𝘧𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘳𝘦𝘩𝘰𝘭𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘳𝘦𝘩𝘰𝘭𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘥𝘰𝘯’𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮 𝘵𝘰 𝘨𝘳𝘰𝘸. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘥𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘴. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘤𝘬 𝘣𝘶𝘺𝘣𝘢𝘤𝘬𝘴. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵, 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘦𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘤𝘬 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘦 𝘨𝘰 𝘶𝘱, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘴𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦’𝘴 𝘢 𝘭𝘰𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘧𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘱𝘪𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰, 𝘵𝘰 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘧𝘪𝘹 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘭𝘦𝘮, 𝘖𝘒. 𝘼𝙣𝙙, 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙚𝙛𝙤𝙧𝙚, 𝙞𝙣 𝙖𝙣𝙨𝙬𝙚𝙧 𝙩𝙤 𝙮𝙤𝙪𝙧 𝙦𝙪𝙚𝙨𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣, 𝙄’𝙢 𝙦𝙪𝙞𝙩𝙚 𝙘𝙤𝙣𝙛𝙞𝙙𝙚𝙣𝙩 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙗𝙚𝙛𝙤𝙧𝙚 𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙨 𝙙𝙚𝙘𝙖𝙙𝙚 𝙞𝙨 𝙤𝙫𝙚𝙧 𝙬𝙚’𝙧𝙚 𝙜𝙤𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙩𝙤 𝙨𝙚𝙚 𝙨𝙤𝙢𝙚 𝙨𝙚𝙧𝙞𝙤𝙪𝙨 𝙨𝙪𝙥𝙥𝙡𝙮 𝙘𝙤𝙣𝙘𝙚𝙧𝙣𝙨 𝙗𝙮 𝙢𝙖𝙧𝙠𝙚𝙩𝙨 𝙛𝙤𝙧 𝙗𝙤𝙩𝙝 𝙤𝙞𝙡 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙣𝙖𝙩𝙪𝙧𝙖𝙡 𝙜𝙖𝙨, 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙞𝙩 𝙬𝙤𝙪𝙡𝙙 𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙨𝙪𝙧𝙥𝙧𝙞𝙨𝙚 𝙢𝙚 𝙞𝙛 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙝𝙖𝙥𝙥𝙚𝙣𝙚𝙙 𝙞𝙣 𝙖 𝙮𝙚𝙖𝙧 𝙤𝙧 𝙩𝙬𝙤, 𝙖𝙝, 𝙖𝙨 𝙤𝙥𝙥𝙤𝙨𝙚𝙙 𝙩𝙤, 𝙮𝙤𝙪 𝙠𝙣𝙤𝙬, 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙛𝙞𝙫𝙚 𝙤𝙧 𝙨𝙞𝙭 𝙮𝙚𝙖𝙧𝙨 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙬𝙚 𝙝𝙖𝙫𝙚 𝙧𝙚𝙢𝙖𝙞𝙣𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙞𝙣 𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙨 𝙙𝙚𝙘𝙖𝙙𝙚.”
ua-cam.com/video/rv85LTMO8TQ/v-deo.html
It seems to me we won’t need to wait long to see whether Art Berman’s expectations are correct, or not.
In the Jewish faith they have Tu B'Shevat the Festival for the Trees. Indeed many tradition were tied to nature but have lost some of this connection as people moved into cities. The rebirth of Israel rebooted the holiday above is why so many trees were planted since Israel's birth.
Also Passover teaching freeing others from slavery and was given by rabbis from a prison why they stood along side the black brother and sisters. Traditions of history exist, we just have to remember them.
Also Honor Harrington in the books based on those theories does a great job in bringing up historical references and its finny to hear others response to this. I reminded me of this conversation.
Lastly our church community is looking for ideas for growing and being more connected, these conversation idea is amazing. I thinking of mentioning for our spaghetti dinner next month. Got to come up with ideas but I think this would be fun! I love this!
Awesome guest whos advice I liked more than usual. However I think his advice for young people misses that most of us should defenitively learn how to grow our own food and eventually start or be part of a local community that tries to live self suffieciently, simple and locally. I think of this a bit like an emergency in an airplane, first put on your own oxygen mask before trying to help others: you will want you and your loved ones to be safe and you'll want to know what the real challenges are before helping others follow your path. I argue a populace which made itself more self suffiecient is way better equipped to deal with radical change and gametheoretically or socially more incentivised to cooperate and act collectively for common cause.
How can we get more universities to act on thier research?
interesting discussion, when all is said and done, there will always be more said than done, until a boiling point is reached, change seldom come about peacefully….
Totally. And the solution seems so easy. Just scale back our consumption back by like, 80%. So we're no longer in 'overshoot'. And still live a good quality of life, if we manage our remaining means prudently. But of course we would never follow through on that. If anything, it's a time for totally comprehensive, sweeping, badass new paradigms, and not small but effective incremental changes, which would fall under the category of way too little too late, to the point where they're not really even in good faith. More like an empty gesture, which human beings are very practiced at, not so much anything else. But they would have to be like, socialist, more or less. So that we could have societal stability in some brave new world we create for ourselves. But that just doesn't seem like it's in the cards. Too much social inertia in the opposite direction. And if we do manage to survive and adjust to greatly reduced circumstances, it will be under the auspices of an appalling dystopia. And definitely not people growing their own food and living happily like hobbits.
I am only halfway through this episode and I can relate on so many levels.
I feel like Golan Trevize in that I love my individualism but I also realize that without a Gaian revelation mankind cannot survive much longer and how much of the world will we take down with us.
I also think about the upcoming 🇺🇸 election and how one candidate has the desire and ability to bring us back together and rebuild some degree of trust in our democracy and society that is necessary to prevent what looks like an impending collapse.
We all have our opinions about the candidates but one is clearly divisive while the other is clearly inclusive.
'communal government' probably works on maintaining the mountain path - but what about economic and ecosystem management, eg global warming requires chemistry and thermodynamics knowledge just to understand the question (all current politicians are clueless).
Yes. What about it? It would have to be some hybrid combination then, wouldn't it? IF we're still managing complex sophisticated technologies for relatively large populations, that is, that have the power to continue to affect the planet's biomes globally. What do you think that kind of hybrid government might look like? How would you organize it?
This man has some great ideas. I can't help thinking he ought to have mentioned David Graeber once or twice, and Joanna Macy ("active hope").
Thank you very much for the beautifully produced interview. With all due respect to the guests for a couple of recent interview, maybe, they were a tiny bit out of touch with the common humans, 90% of the populace, who spend all their time to make ends meet for the families. It was said here, previously, maybe, the money is a right of use of energy in the future, including the right to waste energy.
Citing the fall of tthe Berlin but omitting that the reunification is seen as a disaster by a majority east and west and that there is no "Asabiyyah" at all is only half the story...
Another fun fact about Germany: In the region i come from a good part of the agriculture is now growing massive monocultures of corn, with all implications: fertilizer, fungi- and peesticides, erosion etc., and then to shredder it and ferment it for "Bio-Gas" in massive silos they built. This is how we make "Green Energy"
For some extensive writing on an alternative to international markets and capitalism and also containing a critique of what he calls the multidimensional crises, I would like Nate to have a close look at inclusive democracy, principally developed by Takis Fotopoulos. I realize there have been many other attempts at outlining alternatives, but I'm particularly compelled by this one.
The 64000 dollar question is how to implement change and there are also suggested tactics for that which have evolved over time
Cooperatives in Emilia Romagna are all but organizations run by workers. Smaller ones tends to treat workers very badly. Bigger ones are our kind of corporations but with left politics baking. They work because they pay less taxes than the competition and are run very efficiently in BAU terms.
Hope without practical realism and power relationships can be "hopium".
Pretty much. And there's just absolutely no reason to think at all, that people are going to change the behavior sufficiently to meet the crisis. Mainly because I guess people can change their behavior, upon request or demand, it's not impossible. But the scale of the request/demand in this instance, is probably way too much to ask of people, and they will balk. Or be in denial or whatever. The task at hand, to transition to some ecologically sustainable society and in the process very significantly if not entirely abandon our current lifestyles, is too overwhelmingly vast, and too upsetting to the status quo. Not merely to the comfortable and high and mighty, but to everyone in society at all levels. So all hell will break loose well before some reasonably orderly and effective change ever takes place. Even if it's theoretically possible to do so. We got the tools and the talent, but the flesh is too weak, I suppose. So pretty much hopium is what we're left with. And this guy seems like a hopium salesman, however nuanced. Right up until the end, making his living, peddling his book, working the angles. And now he can pay his mortgage. And that's human society, that's the free market. And that's why we're going down....
what happened to the last Daniel S talk ? I wanted to share the heck out of it.
1:22:00 usually communism breeds an economy based on recirculation at the citizen level where people have to be creative, repair and make use of everything due to scarcity. This is how Cuba works right now, this is how eastern European countries worked during communism.
Commons. Return the people to the land and the land to the people.
David Suzuki kicks ass.
The governmental systems are not dysfunctional. They function for (human) governance, not ecological well-being. The economic systems are, equally, not dysfunctional. They work to drive human economic activity. Ecological concerns are **external** to these, which is why (at least in economics) they are referred to as externalities. These systems are working fine, but they are **disinterested** in solving this issue.
If you can think in terms of systems, rather than one's own needs, or a collective human need, or a national need (you get the picture) you might begin to see that we need systems that are actually built to consider ecology. Fancy descriptions of historical gardening might provide some instruction here, but the fundemental action is one of system design. These things will not emerge spontaneously - if they could have they would have by now, given that we have been hoping for about 30 years.
Collective action is a great, no issue with it, but it isn't generating new systems, rather it is floundering while the existing systems continue to operate regardless. I know, I used the word 'system' way too many times, but I simply can't understand why there isn't more appreciation of this type of perspective. I suppose it has something to do with human self-involvement, or perhaps a need to feel connected to something that already exists.
Yeah, dude. I totally agree. Man, if I had a dollar for every time we were encouraged to grow our own food, and I don't know, get in touch with nature or something, I would probably have enough money to just ride it out, whenever the crunch comes. I'll tell you why there's no appreciation for the need for new systems, because it's like an impossible task. On every possible level. If anything coming up with some cool new paradigm where we cover all our bases and can live sustainably if we stick with it is totally the easy part. It's the sticking with it that's impossible. People are just not going to do it. They wouldn't even know how. On account of the changes would be so vast, and involve the complete shattering of every possible illusion and habit of body and mind that has defined our lives, that we just won't do it. We're too invested in our current paradigm, almost more on the psychic and moral level than the material one. And people are going to have to check themselves like they never have before. And we're just not up to it. Just too much upheaval involved to possibly amicably survive. Our current doomed society is just too evil and too profoundly unjust and depraved and mind-bogglingly dishonest and manipulative and exploitative to extricate ourselves from. Way too many scores to settle when the day of reckoning comes. But people are survivors so you never know....
@@Joeyjojoshabbadoo Hey, thanks for the reply. Perhaps I am being naive, but I would say that I agree with about half of what you wrote - especially the inertia of the current ways and the scale of the task at hand. You are right as well that we are so morally and psychologically invested that it feels very destabilising to set off in a new direction. However...
I do not think it is impossible at all, for two reasons: first, most people can see the damage the current systems are doing and (most?) have probably had a conversation about ecology/nature and our impact on it. Basically I think there is an undercurrent that is stronger than we imagine, because it is necessarily hidden. Second, I think that people have a strong tendency for laziness (myself included) and following authority, so new systems would need to be backed by social leaders and be able to fit around some (but not all) of people existing needs.
This wouldn't be a one-shot solution, but rather an open process of collaboratively evolving new structures, since we have seen that they will produce powerful emergent incentives, which would need to be observed and discussed. The key thing is iteration; we build processes that are self-reflective. This means that those who aren't into it can go with the flow, and those who want to engage have a template for systemic steering, seeing the system itself as a (non-agential) contributor. This might help with sticking to it.
Mind you, this is all quite idealistic and I fully expect some form of collapse before people are ready to consider it. I just hope it doesn't get too bad before we decide to get started. I'll be working on this anyway, in anticipation of the day when someone will answer my emails...
@@wholebodysneeze I'm not sure it's possible to not be 'naive' with something like this. This is some pretty cataclysmic stuff to be contemplating about. For me, the part that I find to be so conspicuously absent from any sort of 'real talk' about our looming, impending, terrifying future, is the socioeconomic aspect, and the moral aspect for lack of a better word. We got the hard science, I'm gonna say, and we can run the numbers and see how much oil we have left, and precious metals, and topsoil and whatnot. The weather part is trickier to account for, but we know it's going to be hotter....
The impossible part, or the part not being suitably addressed, at least by my lights, is the socioeconomic part. The political part, the moral part, which really does seem totally insurmountable, notwithstanding some Spanish ritual from feudal times where everyone comes together and respectfully scolds people for using too much water. I get the idea, but this isn't the 1600s. And it isn't going to be enough. I guess because such topics are so taboo, they can't even be broached let alone acted on. And the intellectual/academic caste benefits from the status quo as much as anyone, and would be just as loath to relinquish their privileges, that are entirely made possible by this wildly unsustainable and indeed unjust way of life. And so I guess there might be some pretty heavy duty naivety when it comes to any expectation that the vast majority of the population, even in rich countries, is just going to continue to be dictated to, and quietly accept their humble lot in life, which presumably will get even more humble. In the midst of some epochal upheaval. Malaise is already at an all-time high as it is. They probably would revolt in some form or other, understandably so And then all bets are off.
Life in modern industrial society comes down to who has money and who doesn't. All the rest is details, and idealistic talk. And you're going to be asking people to take even less, a lot less, without any kind of plan other than assuming everyone will just continue to behave themselves, and dutifully show up for work as always. I would say the only reason people behave themselves as well as they do is because they have all the stuff to console themselves with, and that's the real social contract. Even the poor have a high standard of living, made possible of course by all the rampant consumption. You take that away... I don't know what you're going to get. So a major socioecomimc re-ordering would seemingly be in order, given the level of restraint and cooperation required for some new sustainable paradigm, so the proles have something to live for. And mainly crickets is what I see. Other than hifalutin or non-threatening notions from academics where I can barely follow what they're even talking about, let alone pragmatically visualize playing out in real life. And naturally the truly rich and powerful want nothing to do with any kind of radical, yet wholesome societal transformation. And probably have their own ideas about how to deal with all this, which one could imagine might be quite dystopian and appalling. And with the means to carry them out. So we're screwed I guess is what I'm saying.
Anyway, nice chatting with you....
Radical hope is right
Didn't all the biggest civilizations of the past collapse in horrible ways, leaving only dusty ruins?
I'm wary of people with such optimism as it is easy to forget the wisdom of Ozymandias...
"My name is Ozymandias, the King who rules over even other Kings. Behold what I have built, all you who think of yourselves as powerful, and despair at the magnificence and superiority of my accomplishments."
And all that was around this stone was sand as far as the eye can see....
There is optimism and hope for change, it is small, but there is no hope to maintain the status quo...
But good conversation .... I bought the book.
The point was made that “changes” (fixes, remedies) have happened in the past so don’t doubt that the trajectory of this civilization can likewise change. Two points. 1) the current challenge is on a planetary scale this time so getting some 100s or 1000s or millions of people on board won’t move the needle an inch. There’s no way to get 8 billion people to agree and act promptly in unison. We 😮have no agency as a species. It’s a pipe dream. The example was given of life in ancient Japan. A population of a few million I think it was. That’s a far cry from 8 billion.
And no mention of the fact that there are way, way, way, way too many humans. We are in overshoot. The best “fix” would be to reduce our numbers very drastically (by 6 billion say) and very fast (within a few decades max). There’s no way. Homo sapiens are in overshoot. At this stage what happens next is extreme dieback if not extinction.
When I heard the phrase “great, great, great grandchildren” I immediately thought: on what planet!? Not this one! We’d be “lucky” to get to just one generation of “great.”
18th Century coffee houses also facilitated discussions of pooled risk in financial ventures leading to the rise of the joint stock company and ownership by share. Suggesting, that inclusive democratic practices risks empowering populists to innovate new ways to accelerate environmental decline. In fact, elite institutions such as the central bank may provide a better model for collective limits where there is always temptation for excess.
The other interesting proposal could be to rely on minority rights, by constituting nature reverence as a religion, not because it is a perfect fit, but because it offers judicial protections to nature through constitutionally protected freedom of belief. A devoted community exists, and a historic recognition of nature as sacred can be demonstrated, so harm to the biosphere, and web of life, could be argued to violate the beliefs and values of an extremely large religious community.
But the more i think about it, ideas that appeal to liberal governance, instead of challenging and replacing it, are likely to be de-radicalized, and distorted to maintain the status-quo.😊
Regarding alternative/local currencies: My buddy created a local coin for Asheville 15 years ago. He was promptly detained by the feds for a few years and eventually deported back to Canada. I'm not trying to be a party pooper but proceed with caution! They* are watching.
Often "grassroots local control" in rural areas has been co-opted by the extreme right to reject environmental regulations, incipient climate policies and protection of wildlife.
The Valencian water tribunal is no example of contemporary sustainability. It has had no objections to massive pesticide and herbicide use, the elimination of biodiversity margins of fields and unsustainable river transfers for increasing irrigation.
I posted in discord, XRs guide on assemblies
Stopped listening when he called NATO lover and WW2 revisionist Tymothy Snyder a "great historian" .
Sorry, but all the talk about community and ecology wont matter if we support militarism which will lead to great power war.
OMG tell me about. Timothy Snyder is one of the most repulsive 'public intellectuals' I've ever seen. His big book was called, I believe, 'The Road to UNfreedom', which has got to be one of the worst titles I've ever heard. From an Ivy League professor no less.
So, point well taken.
Please talk with david wengrow
Every one..wants to DO something. Solutions like .biochar or planting trees ...or permaculture ..Well . these are all great .BUT if we are doing these things....but, the CULTURE / Economics do not chamge..they won't matter, they won't amount ro a hill of beans .
- The militray is still spewing massive amounts if GHG .
- We allow the widespread continuation of foolishness like professional sports , manufacturing of cosmetics., massive fashion industry destruction .massive mining ..massive waste of water as in fracking etc . And..well ..how about this for example .profession football . not only are we winging the butts of athletes all over the place..but THE RICH are flying their PRIVATE JETS to Super Bowls . one Super Bowl could have 1500 private jets fly in. Why, if our planet/ biosphere is dying are we still allowing this kind of thing to happen .?? It isnt just about DOING THINGS, it has to also be about NOT doing destructive things..so that the good things can COUNT
Don't forget to join the discord community to discuss these topics and more 🎉
no talking on discord, only texting.
Is Rojava still functional? I'd assumed the Turks wiped them out (or some other force).
Repair is the opposite of capital.
Everyone loves to build.
The repair of pyramids was of culture, not plans, there is no plans to repair them because the ancient human culture was lost and stolen.
Improvisation doesn’t have time to write it down.
even when we remember history we repeat it... what's that other quote? "history doesn't repeat but it often rhymes" and yet another one.. "the past will set you free but only once it's finished with you"
Twain
😎✌️
I often wonder just how much of a disproportionate influence sociopaths have had on the course of civilization and human history. Given what civilization is ecologically up against, it does not bode well for the future.
it sounds like we need to bring back lottocracy into our direct democracy
Crisis of unaccountable political class
Today's Valencian Water Court oversees terribly polluted irrigation canals that when they empty into the sea without sufficient treatment and filtering nearby beaches must be closed for bathers. The commons, yes but romanization of the past, no
Right, that's what I would say. That anecdote wasn't compelling to me. I remember watching a documentary, on the German PBS, focusing on Spain's alarming water crisis and desertification. I don't remember if they covered traditional water mgt. practices like the one they still do in Valencia. But it sounded like things weren't going too well.
I like these podcasts but today it feels especially pretentious.
🤔 Why pretentious?
an incredible talk in this regard is Lyla June's ted talk: ua-cam.com/video/eH5zJxQETl4/v-deo.htmlsi=oiX05A32VdDG0gnO
love it because it provides hope and next steps in the same speech. best wishes to all as we move forward.
Libraries have tables
Gaia Vs. Moloch
What i can't get over is the statement we supposedly have to "become less individualistic"? Based on Edward Bernays's great trick to correlate individualism with consumption of lifestyle products? I would say more true individualism is necessary to know who we are and what we need in order to be able to reject mindless consumerism, social pressure to follow trends and fashion etc and truly reconnect with our short existence as part of the web of life
😊
53:30 'clearly disfunctional government' - absolutely.
There are enough clues in the first 20 minutes of this interview to suggest that his book leans heavily toward wokism.
Roman's bookshelf is collapsing.
testing testing
Ohoh major commie right there lol
"shift to new energy systems". Like what?
magnets!
@@buriedintime Of course. How could I forget.
Duck’s flapping their wings. Lots of ducks.
The block trigger word “ The Club Of Rome” sorry it has taken this long to see through this BS channel 😮
I don’t understand (btw you made similar comment 9 months ago). BS channel????
As Jordan Peterson often reminds us: Individual agency & sovereignty are the keys to change. Solzhenitsyn revisited.
Jordan Peterson is a right wing pipeline tool
lols. ugh. petereson.. no thanks.
Absolute bollocks. Individualism is the problem, not the solution. Collectivism is what is needed to solve the systemic crises we face.
Peterson sounds like someone’s nanny.
@@dameongeppetto Absolutely yes. But people still need to have initiative, self-confidence, excellent life habits, etc., etc. And that's JP's forte. 12 rules for life and all that. I'm not sure what they all are, but that's the idea. And it's indispensable. In fact it's so indispensable that we don't even have a hair of a notion of a chance if we're lacking in the initiative, confidence, work habits, etc. And probably a fair degree of individual agency and sovereignty, whatever exactly is meant by that. 'Case we're dead in the water without that. And then we'll get to the collectivism, which we will . But first things first. We have a pretty depraved society, and a lot of broken people. You get it?
BOOK OF REVELATION IS COMING TO PASS
Anti-Christ 2024🇺🇸
cooool 😎 (Norwegian black metal plays*)
@@anthonytroia1
Gosh Garrels’ WATCHMAN is how I roll.
You should try it because there’s nothing better!🕊
the bible is made up.
He’s here name is Netanyahu.
He’s here name is NeT@nyahoo.
🪙🪙🪙 change