Comments on: Some Convenient Bullshit: a summary for policy makers

By: Idetrorce

Idetrorce — Sun, 16 Dec 2007 00:28:59 +0000

very interesting, but I don’t agree with you
Idetrorce

By: Supernatural Things » Me, The Moaners, and Stuff.

Supernatural Things » Me, The Moaners, and Stuff. — Sat, 21 Jul 2007 02:15:03 +0000

[...] preminitory dreams, new friends, old friends, neverending heat-wave, more things, more stuff, new perspectives, what not and what have [...]

By: Ted Heistman

Ted Heistman — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 17:10:00 +0000

Hey Cadeveo,

I just posted an article on my blog that kind of paints the same scenario you painted in your first comment. I really see that scenario playing out. I am just trying to find my place in it.

I think this global warming scare and also some peak oil stuff may be being used to create the type of world you describe.

Its not that oil isn’t really running out, it just that the strategy may be to have a planned, controlled crash, that will not upset the balance of power and shake things up so much, so that the new Market State Neo Feudalism order can be put in place.

Kind of like a planned burn to prevent a huge blazing out of controlforest fire.

By: cadeveo

cadeveo — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 05:40:05 +0000

I wouldn’t bank on any sort of liberatory breakthrough in technology just over the bend. My advice: if you don’t know or talk to your neighbors and family much, now’s the time. You may of necessity realize how much you need each other in the near future.

I *sometimes* suspect some sinister oligarchical agenda, astepoutside, but I sometimes suspect a whole bunch of other things. I reserve my right to not fully believe any speculation, whether from “experts” or from myself (or the several myselfs).

I think I was more trying to get at zac’s point of “getting people to embrace” a low-energy lifestyle to offset things “without embracing the real issue.” I just tend to get wordy, a detriment to clarity at times.
That being said, if the biggest consumers/despoilers (that is, those who run the factories, drill the oil, etc., profit from the armaments production, etc.) thought that somehow they could ensure their own survival, and with a semblance of their present lifestyles, power and position by getting the 4 billion plus other people not within their ranks to make the big sacrifices in resource useage, perhaps they might do so. And the present spin on global warming would perhaps fit such an agenda. But, obviously, I’m not in a position to know if “they” (whoever “they” are) have such an agenda. I can speculate based upon other assumptions quite well, this was simply one scenario felt warranted a little discussion.
But I could be wrong about that, too!

By: astepoutside

astepoutside — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 23:15:45 +0000

Yes this is going down the road of Anthropik, and that path doesn’t lead to any meaningful or helpful conclusions.

It really feels like everybody is just sitting around waiting for something big to happen lately, at least to me.
From physics to global politics, computer science to entertainment it looks like we are in a technological and cultural trough, waiting for some new breakthrough just over the horizon.

By: zac

zac — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 23:00:38 +0000

until the mass starvation starts.

if you presume a very optimistic 2% contraction in oil production each year, it’s not very long until you’ve eaten any savings you might derive from conservation and efficiency-based demand destruction. eventually the supply chains for fertilizer and food transport start to break down.

I know full well one can live off of weeds and squirrels if need be, but I don’t imagine that will go over in the suburbs so well. not that they will have to bite the bullet very quickly.

but this is somewhat off topic, I suppose.

By: astepoutside

astepoutside — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 22:40:13 +0000

Yes thats true about the contracting pie.

One scenario could be that they are close to 100% sure that the energy pie down to the crumbs, and they all want us to exit the building in a clear and organized manner. No riots, no mass panic.

Just a clean and efficient shutdown.

By: zac

zac — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 22:15:23 +0000

no such assumption on my part. can’t speak for cadevo.

I’m sure there are plenty of rich folks on both sides of the fence.

but if the energy pie were contracting anyway, getting people to embrace a low energy lifestyle would be nice way to offset it, without talking about the real issue.

By: astepoutside

astepoutside — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 22:07:08 +0000

There seems to be an underlying assumption here that the debate has gone in the direction it has due to some oligarchical agenda setting. But when you think about it why would major corporations and governments want people to downgrade their energy usage?
Less development and population group means that the slave masters get a) less slaves or b) less future consumers for their shiny gadgets and soda.

Just playing devils advocate here, but it does make you think about the media and celebrity agenda behind it all

By: cadeveo

cadeveo — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 20:02:29 +0000

You’ve said a lot of things I’ve only obscurely hinted at when I discuss this stuff. A very much needed rant.
The one other thing I’m suspicious of in the agenda of the Peak Oil/Climate Change “opinion leaders” is the dependence on these celebrities to buoy it up: it’s like the miserable mutant child of the 1970’s radical chic. And the end result may be what the late Jim Keith talked about, lots of “primitives with lap tops” and not just in the so-called third world, but here also. The majority of the non-elite/non-billionaire population in the so-called first world as well stands to be reduced to the level of the serfs of the middle ages, living in shanties, foraging for food and herded and managed by nobles/military patrols.
Meanwhile, Madonna and Bono and Al Gore, along with their supposed ideological nemeses in the Oil Industry and the Far Right get to keep their mansions, their jets and everything else. They don’t have to change, not really–everyone else does. (For it is the job of a temple god to be live it up while the lowly worshippers sacrifice.) It feels very similar to when business propagandized for people not littering (not a bad thing in and of itself) while at the same time the major polluters, the Corporate Egregores, didn’t have to change a goddamned thing (very much a bad thing, in and of itself). That’s one of the more cynical things I sometimes suspect lies behind the managed debate on this topic. But I could be totally wrong.