You assume that there would be an infrastructure collapse to the point where the energy economy cannot sustain post-Borlaug farming.
That won't happen unless the disruption happens so instantly that the energy sector doesn't have time to backslide to Victorian era technologies that could sustain it (like bringing back coal gasification for example).
You don't get the yeoman farmer back unless the entire energy sector is an instant smoking crater. And even that will only be temporary.
Then we have a semantic issue. You introduced collapse; I now think you meant slowly deflate. I have no horse in that race. If it became clear that this was the trajectory, I would sympathize with the accelerationists and redpin aquafers, nuclear powered facilities, dams, and grid tied energy production as barriers to progress.
Yeah I'm still trying to figure out what race you're running.
My perception is that you want to return to a pre-Borlaug yeoman farmer America. But you're being evasive on how the fuck that would happen.
That hasn't even happened in fucking South Africa. WAR IS NOT ENOUGH to bring that kind of backslide. It's too slow.
If you want Amish America, great as that may sound, you need to explain what you are envisioning will happen to make it so. Because I don't see any way of that happening short of OVERWHELMINGLY catastrophic instantaneous damage that knocks out the energy economy on a global scale. War alone won't do that.
Supply chain collapse, and or extended down comms occuring simultaneously with a biological weapon capable of > 30% mortality. The devastation from sudden unexpected disruption of pharmaceutical dependency and substance abuse withdrawl alone would be unprecedented. I know many people under 30 years old, who cannot tell the time on an analog clock face, or cook a nutritious meal, let alone kill one. I am personally terrified how presently fragile and interdependent ascendant and peaking generations are currently. The simple detatchment from nature in its totality leads me to believe it would require precious little to decimate the majority of 2 standing generations.
Id settle for societal collapse. Participation isn’t prerequisite to suffering. You seem to envision an equatorial or sub saharran scenario. A collapse of western society would be of such novelty, prognosticating is almost pointless. Id be more apt to imagine escape from new york than the killing fields.
I agree with most of this, on its face alone. I think the distinction is whether we’re talking civilizational vs societal collapse. I would expect business as usual in Latin America despite it all, and likely upward mobility and expansion northward. Granted, the vacuum created in the absence of the Empire would be felt worldwide, but there are multiple able and chomping at the bit to fill it.
Yellowstone will never erupt. Its a pyroclastic impossibility. A modern civil war involving hundreds of millions of humans is infinitely more likely.
You missed my point entirely.
You assume that there would be an infrastructure collapse to the point where the energy economy cannot sustain post-Borlaug farming.
That won't happen unless the disruption happens so instantly that the energy sector doesn't have time to backslide to Victorian era technologies that could sustain it (like bringing back coal gasification for example).
You don't get the yeoman farmer back unless the entire energy sector is an instant smoking crater. And even that will only be temporary.
Then we have a semantic issue. You introduced collapse; I now think you meant slowly deflate. I have no horse in that race. If it became clear that this was the trajectory, I would sympathize with the accelerationists and redpin aquafers, nuclear powered facilities, dams, and grid tied energy production as barriers to progress.
Yeah I'm still trying to figure out what race you're running.
My perception is that you want to return to a pre-Borlaug yeoman farmer America. But you're being evasive on how the fuck that would happen.
That hasn't even happened in fucking South Africa. WAR IS NOT ENOUGH to bring that kind of backslide. It's too slow.
If you want Amish America, great as that may sound, you need to explain what you are envisioning will happen to make it so. Because I don't see any way of that happening short of OVERWHELMINGLY catastrophic instantaneous damage that knocks out the energy economy on a global scale. War alone won't do that.
Supply chain collapse, and or extended down comms occuring simultaneously with a biological weapon capable of > 30% mortality. The devastation from sudden unexpected disruption of pharmaceutical dependency and substance abuse withdrawl alone would be unprecedented. I know many people under 30 years old, who cannot tell the time on an analog clock face, or cook a nutritious meal, let alone kill one. I am personally terrified how presently fragile and interdependent ascendant and peaking generations are currently. The simple detatchment from nature in its totality leads me to believe it would require precious little to decimate the majority of 2 standing generations.
CME
Id settle for societal collapse. Participation isn’t prerequisite to suffering. You seem to envision an equatorial or sub saharran scenario. A collapse of western society would be of such novelty, prognosticating is almost pointless. Id be more apt to imagine escape from new york than the killing fields.
I agree with most of this, on its face alone. I think the distinction is whether we’re talking civilizational vs societal collapse. I would expect business as usual in Latin America despite it all, and likely upward mobility and expansion northward. Granted, the vacuum created in the absence of the Empire would be felt worldwide, but there are multiple able and chomping at the bit to fill it.