Year of nineteen hundred and twelve April the fourteenth day Great Titanic struck an iceberg People had to run and pray – Blind Willie Johnson, God Moves on the Water How do we get to the genuinely other side of modernity, and hopefully to some good version of that? Thus far we have looked at what we might term ‘constructive’ approaches. A radical critique of modernity coupled with a vision of a better alternative to work toward. Blind Willie Johnson’s song points to another possible path. To many at the time, the sinking of the Titanic was a warning against the human hubris embodied in the industrial age. She was to be one of the greatest accomplishments of that age, was named after Greek divinities, and was vaunted to be ‘unsinkable’. She was a symbol of humanity pushing too far. She was also an indication that, despite its great power and confidence, perhaps the modern world was more fragile than it looked. Perhaps modernity is strong enough to close off constructive efforts to transcend it, but perhaps not strong enough to preserve itself indefinitely. It is possessed of an incurable inner dynamic to transcend all limits and to always produce and consume more. Neither limited and fallible human beings nor a finite planet can sustain that forever (could not ‘transhumanism’ be seen as the attempt to transcend the limits of the human in fulfillment of the modern idol?). There is the sense that it must collapse under its own weight.
His books have been on my reading list for a while. Peak oil is so unfashionable now, I don't think many grasp that the end is written in stone. Jim likes to ask which if the straining structures will break first but they are all faces of the same thing; the economics depends on the physics and the violence (including the risk of nuclear conflagration) springs naturally from the strain produced there..
Paul wrote in a comment (on the last of his own articles) that he takes heart from the fact that the AI prison world cannot truly come into being as envisioned. There's so much of that ilk we can let go of. Technocracy is shit, no doubt, but it's also so dumb it's comical. This is what I meant when I suggested we focus on what is physically possible. A world made by hand is, while a world made by robots is not.
I find Jim somewhat limited by his political imagination but it's a consoling vision nonetheless (aside from the billions who have to die!)
"Modernity, industrialism, capitalism, globalism, the whole shebang collapses before it can be constructively transformed. That would not be a fun time. It could be a time of opportunities for humanity though."
I've heard many saying this, that we are at a dead-end situation and that collapse would probably be better for the overall vitality of humanity than the continued existence of the present order. Probably some truth to this, although everyone assumes that what comes after is better or has greater potential. This is not guaranteed, though.
Post-apocalyptic fiction is always an interesting way to explore certain "types" of society, allowing the author to formulate little societies that reflect larger truths in our own day. I do think that post-apocalyptic fiction tends to harken back to Dark Age order and organization and presents the post-apocalypse as having a sort of noble simplicity and hope to it. It's a nice thought, but I sometimes think that the capacity for complete chaos and evil is downplayed.
All interesting thoughts though, and certainly a hope for a more human future can be found here.
Thanks for the reply. To be fair to Kunstler, there are darker aspects to collapse in his books. When the novels pick up there has been some years for things to 'settle down' around upstate New York. Nevertheless, there are bandits and marauders about and other parts of the country are less settled down. It isn't as dark a world as Cormac McCarthy'sy "The Road" though (another of my favorite post-apocalyptic lit pieces).
His books have been on my reading list for a while. Peak oil is so unfashionable now, I don't think many grasp that the end is written in stone. Jim likes to ask which if the straining structures will break first but they are all faces of the same thing; the economics depends on the physics and the violence (including the risk of nuclear conflagration) springs naturally from the strain produced there..
Paul wrote in a comment (on the last of his own articles) that he takes heart from the fact that the AI prison world cannot truly come into being as envisioned. There's so much of that ilk we can let go of. Technocracy is shit, no doubt, but it's also so dumb it's comical. This is what I meant when I suggested we focus on what is physically possible. A world made by hand is, while a world made by robots is not.
I find Jim somewhat limited by his political imagination but it's a consoling vision nonetheless (aside from the billions who have to die!)
"Modernity, industrialism, capitalism, globalism, the whole shebang collapses before it can be constructively transformed. That would not be a fun time. It could be a time of opportunities for humanity though."
I've heard many saying this, that we are at a dead-end situation and that collapse would probably be better for the overall vitality of humanity than the continued existence of the present order. Probably some truth to this, although everyone assumes that what comes after is better or has greater potential. This is not guaranteed, though.
Post-apocalyptic fiction is always an interesting way to explore certain "types" of society, allowing the author to formulate little societies that reflect larger truths in our own day. I do think that post-apocalyptic fiction tends to harken back to Dark Age order and organization and presents the post-apocalypse as having a sort of noble simplicity and hope to it. It's a nice thought, but I sometimes think that the capacity for complete chaos and evil is downplayed.
All interesting thoughts though, and certainly a hope for a more human future can be found here.
Forest Rebel,
Thanks for the reply. To be fair to Kunstler, there are darker aspects to collapse in his books. When the novels pick up there has been some years for things to 'settle down' around upstate New York. Nevertheless, there are bandits and marauders about and other parts of the country are less settled down. It isn't as dark a world as Cormac McCarthy'sy "The Road" though (another of my favorite post-apocalyptic lit pieces).