I'm reflecting today on the coming apocalypse, or collapse of the social order, or whatever... and thinking of Mad Max from 1979, as well as some of the other apocalyptic movies which depict a lawless and violent land.
One of the things that strikes me about Mad Max and the rest of the genre, is that the cause of social collapse is almost always the loss off fossil fuels. No gas, society goes mad.
In '79 and before that, I could understand that... and in some areas (I'm looking at you, Texas!) I can still see Mad Max happening. But I also see that we have so many alternatives to fossil fuels now, I wonder how much tech and convenience we'd really lose, and why anyone would fight over gas that won't last.
I know these days some liberals are arming themselves, afraid to be robbed by the right wing, road warrior wanna-be types. I understand that. But I also wonder whether or not conclaves of peaceful liberals couldn't exist without threat from these potential future raiders.
One thing loss of fossil fuels will do is isolate communities. If we don't have any fuel sources (gas stations or storage) between the solar and wind powered communities and the fossil fuel powered communities, it's going to make raiding difficult if not impossible. And even in areas where renewable energy is less prevalent, the human race (and human societies) have lived without electricity and powered vehicles for a long time up until now without going Mad Max.
I'd like to think if things fall apart that people will come together. It might mean the collapse of the nation (or even states) into smaller self governing units, but it could also mean that societies will value the land and the individual talents of all the citizens as a means to survive. We would have smaller "cities", with family instead of corporate farming, more skill and home based industry, and a sense of interdependence built on valuing each other and our abilities rather than fear and pure profit.
The thing is, the idea that everything will collapse into chaos if we lose fossil fuels seems to be deeper and deeper ingrained into our collective psyche. It accounts for the fear of the Green New Deal. It accounts for a lot of fear. "They" want to take away our cars... and that's terrifying because we equate that with freedom... something we fight to maintain. It's a story that benefits the fossil fuel industry, but doesn't benefit us.
Eventually fossil fuels will run out. Whether it happens before an environmental catastrophe causes a social collapse or after, there is a limit to fossil fuel. The story we've created is the story that's going to drive us off the cliff. It's a self fulfilling prophesy. So long as we cling to fossil fuel and base our entire infrastructure on it, we are going to have a total collapse of infrastructure when it runs out.
How much we have to adapt once we reach that point is going to depend on how much renewable energy sources have been integrated before any apocalyptic energy event. And if we chose to continue with fossil fuels, there is only so long road warrior gangs can continue on raiding whatever fuel remains and is already processed, before they have to cooperate in a more productive society or face extinction.
The business men in the fossil fuel industry are gambling on the profits that they will make on our fear until the day that the industry collapses totally, and gambling on the likelihood that they as individuals will be gone before the last oil well runs dry. It's not a good survival strategy for our species to follow those who will be gone before we actually reach the cliff and tumble over.
Maybe we need to start telling different stories about after the fossil fuel collapse. Stories where communities spring up and utilize land practices based on the work of Aldo Leopold. Where we produce our own goods in the community, and trade with nearby communities rather than rely on container boats to bring our Amazon orders from China. Maybe a trade system that runs on a standard other than gold... perhaps labor hours. What if the story were about adventure or exploration, or learning rather than violent conflict?
Comments
Post a Comment