#6 - The Conclusion for an Altered Perception of Climate Change

(This is the eighth of a nine-part installment, offering a fresh new perspective on Climate Change.  For the big picture summary, see Turning Climate Change on its Head.)

Putting all of the preceding Laws, Myth, Reality, and Possibilities together, I propose the following conclusion:

Climate Change is negative feedback that nature is imposing on our exponential growth and out-of-control consumption.  As awful as it will be, that negative feedback shuts down our suicidal behaviours and gives us precisely the opportunity we need right now to survive into the distant future.  Climate Change is therefore a critical part of the solution for the continuance of the human species - a force strong enough to cause us to question our value systems and change course with whatever is left of civilization.

Climate Change is the most effective kind of negative feedback, with both of the characteristics we discussed earlier:  Firstly, it is a force that becomes stronger as a consequence of the force it's counteracting getting stronger.  The impacts of Climate Change do indeed have the potential to halt exponential economic growth (and even, tragically, exponential population growth).  In doing so, it will also address our out-of-control consumption of resources.  Secondly, climate change, at this point, will happen faster than our species can adapt to it.  We have already seen the debilitating effects of forest fires, flooding, weather extremes, and more around the world.  Those will get worse.

Some readers will be appalled that I could think of this as a positive force.  The critical point to keep in mind is that I am thinking in terms of the survival of our species and of the possibility for the best elements of human civilization to continue into the future.  As bleak as the picture I paint might be, my key argument is that the alternative would be far, far worse.

My specific area of interest is in human value systems.  I believe that a value crisis is at the core of our most dangerous pending global disasters.  When considering the impossibility of effective climate change action, I presented my Value Change Conundrum, repeated here:

You won't change your predominant value system until you see the benefits for doing so.
And yet the benefits may only be apparent after you have made the change. 

There is a way out of that dilemma.  When your existing predominant value system is no longer working for you, when the rug is pulled out from under the house of cards and the dominoes all go down, then you have the possibility of changing that system to something else.  Climate Change could easily be that force.

This is a radical thought but hear me out.  Will a climate emergency signal the beginning of the end of civilization as we know it?  Yes, and that is actually our objective - civilization as we know it isn't working.  Will much of our modern techno-industrial society infrastructure be destroyed beyond repair?  Probably.  Will there be chaos and anarchy and deadly conflict as fights erupt over dwindling resources?  Without question.  Will there be suffering and tragic death rates?  I fear so.

No species likes nature's negative feedback.  The snowshoe hare does not look at the growing population of hares in its territory and pray for a food shortage or deadly disease outbreak.  The more we, as humans, denied the legitimacy of natural forces as being important to our own ways of life, the more our negative feedback is going to hurt when it finally arrives.

Was all of this inevitable?  I'm not sure. Given the nature of exponential curves (and where we are on them now), I suspect that much of our current poor prognosis could theoretically have been avoided had we taken action 20 or 30 years ago, if our predominant value system had allowed that.  However, that is, of course, water under the bridge.

Is there an alternative today?  Yes, I suppose we could convince ourselves that climate change (i.e. nature) is a force to be battled with in the hopes of mitigating its overwhelming power and keeping our status quo economy going.  Again, I suggest that alternative would be catastrophically worse.

Consider:  If negative feedback is an imperative, and it isn't climate change, what will it be?

NOTE that I do NOT suggest that we do nothing - not at all.  There is much work to be done, right now.  We'll explore that in the final part of this series of blog posts.

Perhaps the outcome that I describe is unthinkable.  What does that mean?  Does that mean we can’t think of it, or won’t?

(Continue to part 9 of 9)

#5b - Consequences of Effective Climate Change Action?

 (This is the seventh of a nine-part installment, offering a fresh new perspective on Climate Change.  For the big picture summary, see Turning Climate Change on its Head.)

Either effective action to halt or mitigate climate change is possible, or it’s not.  We've already considered the second option - the impossibility of effective climate change action.  Now let’s consider the first.

It’s even more interesting when we explore what happens if halting or mitigating climate change IS possible - and we do it.  Yes, the effort would be huge beyond belief, but imagine we could actually do it.  So what about the other complex crises currently looming over us?  Even if effective action on Climate Change were possible, we are still subject to all the other crises.  Indeed, while solving Climate Change would probably help with some of them (e.g. the Sixth mass extinction and food insecurity), it would merely allow every other complex crisis - the ones without the present stature and focus of Climate Change - to worsen.  We'd be putting society back on track to its own destruction!

We already touched on this dilemma in part 5 (The Complex Crises of Current Reality).  Let's say we managed to get the entire world on board with reducing our dependence on fossil fuels, using some solution that did not require a massive spike in manufacturing for energy alternatives.  We further convinced everyone to reduce energy usage and resource consumption.  We re-structured our societies to use guaranteed basic income models as an alternative to full employment as the general survival imperative.  We took more drastic measures to bring down the birth rate globally.  Yes, all of this is theoretically possible.

What does all of that do for the current rise in viral epidemics (or even another pandemic)?  Will we set aside our growing reliance on artificial intelligence?  Will social media no longer be used to spread misinformation or divide people into oppositional camps of thought?  Will the threat of global conflict (perhaps involving nuclear arms) go away?  Once rampant consumption is brought under control, will such lifestyle changes be applied equally or equitably?

Given the massive effort and focus required to make even a dent in climate change, would we still have the energy and resolve to address all of the other crises tugging at the fabric of civilization?  OR would removing the threat of climate change actually make the other situations worse?

I suggest that if we could remove the climate-related floods, fires, mega-storms, sea-rise, heatwaves, crop failures, etc. then there is a danger that we are simply removing the alarm from the alarm clock, and the other global challenges will catch us totally unawares.  Or worse...

Consider what is now happening as the threat of CoViD-19 decimating whole populations fades away from our collective radar screens.  The greatest push is for our economies to come roaring back to make up for all of the losses.  Economic growth is the only measure of success that we know.  If we were to somehow discover a technological solution for the mitigation of climate change, would our economy not go surging forward again, even less restrained than before?  Such a reaction would spell doom for civilization even more assuredly than climate change.  Why?  Because we would be removing yet another component of nature's negative feedback.

Every species needs some kind of negative feedback, and humans are no exception.

So, if I'm right, does that mean we are damned if we DO take climate change action and damned if we DON'T?

No.

I don't consider myself a doomsayer.  Indeed, I see all of this as a source of great optimism and hope.  In order to understand that, you have to understand the conclusion that all of this has been leading up to.

(Continue to part 8 of 9)