Quote:
Originally Posted by Oberon
Bingo. And one could think of it as a very brutal and primitive form of Darwins law, survival of the fittest. Those who are able to slash and cut their way to the top will live, those who cannot, will die, and thus the cycle will begin again.
Primitive, but the basic things are.
|
I am afraid history very often shows not the cycle starting new, but that cultures behaving like this sooner or later reached a level where they extincted themselves. surviving only those regional cultures did who managed to run their business in a way that maintained the basis of supply with natural ressources, and that were able to understand that the country/place they were living in only could afford so and so many people using its ressoruces, and not more. There are several other factors as well deciding whether or not a civilisation falls. Interaction with others, for example, and the availability of needed ressources in the place one was living, and the dependence or independence from others. But where ressources were rare or one depended on others or overpoluation was allowed while not seeing the need to stockpile reserves instead of wasting ressources for ever-continuing growth and population explosions, such cultures were doomed to vanish, and often the way in which they did was everything from peaceful and unspectaclar.
Once again, for the fourth or fifth time, I recommend this great book by Jared Diamond, "Collapse - How Societies Choose To Fail Or Succeed". It really is an eye opener. It should become mandatory reading in schools and for every politician and business boss. The truths it outlines and then proves by the examples from history, are so obvious, and so simple. A whole lot of deep insight into the reasons behind civilisational collapse or survival you get in just one book. It could not become much more pragmatic. His narration style is such that it pulls you through the book, although it is no small one.
Next week I plan to start again with his former book, "Guns, Germs and Steel - The Fates of Human Societies", which won the Pulitzer. Both books are somewhat supplementary to each other, focussing on the same general theme - why civilisations fall or survive - but explaining them by focussing on different factors if the general answer to this question.
We are on a terrible road to hell where we believe that we must always grow, especially this suicidal idea of every growing economies just seals our death sentence in the long run. Birth control, and reaching a state of dynamic homeostasis on a size level were our consummation of ressopurces does not deplete the planetary ressources, but where the planet can refill and compensate them - this instead of everlasting growth should be our focus. But history nows not a single example where a civilisation growing beyond this critical point ever reduced itself and than maintained it's existence on that standard. Civilisations either took care to not step beyond this red line, and survived for long periods of times, or they stepped beyomnd this red line, and collapsed some time later. that's why realiostic attitude leads toeards seeing the chances for civilisational survbial of man in a globalised world extremely pessimistic. Many have been before where we are today - but nobody ever succeeded, as far as I know. Sicne we today are the first truly gloobal civilisational our species has ever formed, the collapse we head for at racing speed - demanding to press the gas pedal even faster! - will not be a regional one, but a global one.
Total collapse.