Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected]
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
A knife. Futuristic in that it will be handy for hunting and self-defense after the future collapse of civilization that results from our insatiable appetite for consumption - of, among other things, useless gadgets.
It's interesting the difference in what people think a collapsed civilization will look like.
Some people think we will "return to monke" where wilderness survival skills will be essential and people who have them will be the "main characters." That would probably be the easier and better future.
The more likely option will be technofeudalism where rich people have small, brutal armies and control localized power grids, farming operations, and politics with tech as mass migrations happen and wildlife becomes all but extinct outside of human cultivation. Survival skills won't matter when all land and food scarcity is controlled by a rich few with absolute control. The average survivalist will be wiped out with the first natural disaster or by the feudal lords with drones. Return to nature might only come after 50 years when chip supplies and power grids have dried up and fallen apart, but it would just as likely be mad-max as oil could likely still be used.
Who knows. Fascism might take over with how it is going now and solve the climate crisis with mass genocide and forcing green energy for all we know.
I see you've read Yanis Varoufakis. In all realism though, a fallen society is most likely to be a result of climate change. First it gets too hot for Africans, so their only option is to move northward and eastward to the Middle East. This results in tightened borders and the death of many due to heatstroke and dehydration - I also don't doubt a slave trade-like and human exploitation era might come about because of this. Increased demand for AC's in the west will also be a byproduct of this. Melting ice caps will also increase the danger to many of those living in coastal regions - Florida probably sinks faster than we'd predicted.
All of this I project to happen within the next 50 years where the problems are left for Gen Z and further generations to deal with.
It's more or less an inevitability at this point, regardless of what we do. Really we're just trying to get corporations and countries to make changes so it will be Gen A's (or the following generation's) problem instead of Z.
Normalcy now has an unavoidable term limit. The question is if we're going to shorten how long that timespan is by desperately holding onto normalcy now for as long as we can, or if we're going to start making things harder, more challenging, and less normal sooner to make the transition less painful and give it a longer on-ramp.
Currently we seem to be choosing option A.
For what it's worth, I've seen some friends take things a little more seriously when I've explained that currently we're going to see abrupt and incredibly disruptive changes at the point in our (Gen Z and Millenials) lives when we're at the age when we'll be least able to tolerate the changes and most reliant on others. In 40-50 years, Z and M are going to be senior citizens at best. While we may be full of distracted, dopamine-seeking denial now, by the time shit really starts hitting the fan, we're going to be extra weight on the generations struggling desperately to survive.
Don't expect a happy retirement.