The enormous energies that go into making a civilization and hurling it through time, interacting with its resource base in so many complex ways, aren’t yet understood. We can hope to learn from our mistakes if we preserve some precious conclusions carefully I think, but the creation of paradigms in humanity is not a wave of events that’s altogether the result of conscious engineering. I hold an intention for a new way, and watch our chance to influence the process. But I think civilizations grow, I don’t think we design them.

Yes, the ‘unveiling! Very helpful concept. Religiously speaking, it removes the veil that separates the wished-for and the non-physical from material reality, and says it has gone for good. That’s the gambit of every cornucopian: we can have our ideas in their perfection here on earth. All they are doing is ignoring the way this earth works, and going against the very ecology that describes it — stages and energies that go into the way nature writes ’stories’ aren’t based on endless growth, nor simplistic triumphant conclusions… things weave in a very complex and beautiful manner.

That veil is in place for a reason.

What’s a pleasure is seeing you call for reality as the basic principle, rather than wishful thinking. The economy is wishful thinking right now. Wishful thinking and greed, as you suggest, are often not that different for our species…

One cannot both plan to prevent collapse and also mitigate its effects. To mitigate the effects of something accepts its reality; that’s what Carolyn means by not trying to prevent the collapse — or the decline, or whatever other vocabularies are apt.

Again and again I come across this muddied thinking. Why are you assuming that ‘collapse’ means ‘worst case’? Have you defined both of these terms with the care such a decision deserves or are you simply emotionally reacting to them?

As Carolyn mentions we are going to be rolling down a bumpy hill. That’s what’s happening. To yell “We should be at the top of this hill!” as we pound down it helps nothing. But to accept we are rolling down and build some wheels that make the journey less bumpy, and maybe a parachute to slow the rate of descent — that helps a lot.

There’s nothing ‘apocalyptic’ about this idea. It is common sense. The apocalypse (and the old testament fear of god) is *inside the heads* of those who cannot see that things do sometimes come to an end, and that this end doesn’t mean the universe itself stops. This is what unacknowledged fear of death does to the soul. That idea of ‘the end of this civilization’ suddenly equating to judgment day is pure mythology.

Nobody is suggesting we are returning to a preindustrial world — haven’t you noticed that Greer’s next book is called ‘The Eco-Technic Future’. Does that sound like 1580 to you? You want to “adapt to the damage once you survive it” — so therefore there will be damage, and why should pretend there won’t be? Will this help us to survive? Hardly!

What we want is something that will *work* — civilization as we have it now is not going to, and greater simplicity *will* be required. You say you know systems theory — have you been paying attention to Greer’s ideas about systems, and did you notice his recent mention of Ilya Prigogine? Greater energy running through a system causes greater complexity in that system. What do you think less energy running through it will cause?

‘Developing skills for a post-apocalyptic world’ is not what Transition is doing, it’s pure Mad Max thinking! Not only in a gradual cultural descent in the west, but actually everywhere and at all times, the ability to feed and clothe oneself isn’t some exotic post-holocaust technique, it’s just mundane reality. A hundred years ago, by far the majority of people had a hand in feeding and clothing themselves. There’s nothing remotely ‘post-apocalyptic’ about these abilities — except in a mind that is still expecting the ever-greater tech progress of these last decades to continue without the fuels that powered it. That world is vanishing.

Do you feel that ‘communicating climate science and whole systems thinking’ is frowned upon in Transition? Why, for goodness sake? Who is going to object? No-one I know. But if you know about ecology and our current economic complex systems, you will know they are in for a shakedown. The idea that knowing enough about that shakedown will prevent it is what Kubler-Ross used to call ‘denial’. Carolyn’s book is intended to get you a little further, on to the stage of ‘acceptance’ — which does not mean powerless doom to any but the irrational.

http://initforthegold.blogspot.com/2007/11/cliff-runaway-train.html

How should we “prevent” collapse? If there were a one-line answer I would tell you.

Not by running away from the problem, that is for sure. Developing skills for a post-apocalyptic world is a harmless pursuit, but since none of us can imagine what that world will look like and very few of us will survive to see it, it’s not better than harmless. Avoiding the crunch and minimizing the crunch are what we need to do. My own focus is outreach.

You’ve certainly confirmed Alex’s view that American Transition folks tend to the apocalyptic. I think there may be a carryover from the more bombastic evangelistic religions where the collapse is a sort of vindication of the righteous.

But even if there is a crash, it is far from clear how bad a crash, how sudden, how debilitating. So just cheering the crash on is immoral.

The practice is very difficult but the principle is very simple. Do everything you can to reduce or avoid the damage. I can’t imagine understanding the problems and not doing anything to ameliorate any of them.

Adapt to the damage once you survive it and know what it looks like. I can’t fathom people putting this cart before this horse. It’s just as crazy and lazy to resign yourself to catastrophe as to shrug and expect that “they” will figure it out. There is no “they”. There is just “us”, and every one of us is responsible for the outcome.

What I spend my efforts on is trying to communicate climate science and whole systems thinking. What you should do is not clear to me. Developing alternative forms of energy, transportation, food, distribution of goods, or entertainment might be good examples. But I promise you that putting the word “prevent” in scare quotes isn’t it.

yup.

“Our challenge is not to try to prevent the collapse of the larger systems”

I couldn’t be more totally in disagreement with this. It most certainly IS our main challenge to prevent the collapse of the larger systems.

Anything else is mystification and begging for disaster. I get the sense that you are practically begging for the death and suffering of billions of people on an unprecedented scale just so you can have a chance to try out your beet and turnip pie recipe.

We don’t have a choice but to precent the collapse. Every single thing we do has to be directed toward the soft landing, not the post-apocalyptic scenario. We have to steer, not to bail out, because there is no lifeboat. If worse comes to worst a few survivors will probably swim to some distant shore, but the Transition movement will not get to pick them.

“What do I and my loved ones and my community need to do to prepare? ”

You are a free person; what happens is therefore in part up to you.

What you need to do is lend a hand to avoid the catastrophe, not to “prepare” for it. There is no preparation for the worst case, and if we do avoid the worst case it won;t be because people have been upping their skills for a preindustrial world that can never be returned to us. “Preparing” rather than “repairing” is hugely irresponsible.

Please get real. It’s like you’re in a car falling asleep at the wheel and your only thought is to make sure your airbag is charged. What you need to do is to pull over. You need to acknowledge that the tragedies we might face will be your own fault as much as anyone else’s if you don’t bend your will toward avoiding them. I am sorry but I read your position as deeply and terrifyingly selfish and immoral. I’m sure you don’t think that of yourself, but our responses to the current predicament couldn’t be more different.

Count me with Alex.

I don’t blame anyone for being upset when trying to deal with our situation of course. But that is what it is: it is simply being upset. ‘All you transitioners are heartless’ is a wail from the soul about the loss of a dream. Still, lashing out at others who are dealing with it is no way to lead! Nice to see your level-headed response — and many other good ones too.