Collapse

“What does systemic collapse mean?

In this context, collapse refers to a significant negative shift in which a system moves from an established state of higher complexity towards a much simpler one. This process can unfold in different ways and across different domains—orderly or chaotic, deliberate or unintended.

It does not necessarily entail the extinction of the human species, nor does it have to take the form of a single, sudden, global event. In fact, the more prolonged the process, the more collapse comes to resemble long-term decline.

By collapse, I mean a drastic reduction – over a substantial area and for an extended period – in the size of the human population and/or in the political, economic, and social complexity of human societies.”

Jared Diamond, Collapse: How Societies
Choose to Fail or Succeed (2005)

“Collapse must be rapid

– that is, it must unfold over no more than a few decades and involve a substantial breakdown of social, economic, and political systems. Processes that are less severe, or that unfold over longer periods, should be understood as decline rather than collapse.

Collapse or decline manifests in developments such as:

• reduced social stratification and differentiation;
• lower levels of economic and occupational specialisation among individuals, groups, and regions;
• diminished centralised control, reflected in weaker regulation and integration of economic and political groups by elites;
• the erosion of behavioural norms and of their observance and enforcement;
• declining investment in the defining elements of civilisation, such as architecture, art, and literature;
• growing distance between centres and peripheries, alongside increasingly uneven and diminishing distribution, sharing, trade, and redistribution of resources;
• lower levels of coordination and organisation between individuals and groups;
• and a reduction in the territory integrated within a given political entity.

A society can be considered to have collapsed when it exhibits a rapid and significant breakdown of its complex, mature social, economic, and political systems. The term mature is important here: it indicates that a society on the brink of collapse has existed at this level of complexity for more than one or two generations—or has at least been moving decisively in that direction.”

Joseph Tainter, The Collapse of Complex Societies (1988)

“Many assume that collapse follows directly after the first major wave of crisis.

In reality, it is more likely that periods of crisis will be followed by partial and uneven recovery, only to give way to further, deeper crises – again and again. For this reason, collapse cannot be meaningfully examined through a single parameter.

Collapse is a process, not an event. The collapse of industrial civilisation has been unfolding around us for some time, and it will continue long after none of us are alive.”

John Michael Greer, Decline and Fall (2014)

When might collapse occur?

“Collapse arrives at different times for different people. In truth, we can never be entirely certain whether it has occurred on a global scale. What we will know, however, is whether it has reached us, our family, our home.

The wider picture often becomes clear only much later, through the work of historians. As individuals, we can never fully know what is happening everywhere; as groups, we rarely agree on a single shared interpretation.

Given the extraordinary complexity of these processes and the wide range of possible scenarios, collapse cannot be pinned down as a precisely timed event. As William Gibson observed,

“the collapse has already arrived, it’s just not evenly distributed yet”.

Ecological collapse is already under way, profoundly affecting many forms of life on Earth. For some, this registers as minor inconvenience; for others, it barely registers at all.

When it comes to timing, it is more useful to rely on projections rather than predictions, and to recognise the difference between the two. Predictions carry little weight, as they are not grounded in observation and rest largely on belief.

Projections, by contrast, draw on existing data to outline realistic scenarios and timeframes based on observable trends.”

Dmitry Orlov, Sociaties that Collapse (2014)

“The Earth is a physically finite, self-regulating, organic and complex system

within which humanity, as a subsystem, has abandoned cooperative and compatible strategies with its environment. We have disabled parts of the planet’s regulatory processes and pursued exponential growth by appropriating the resources of other living beings. Yet the biological feedback mechanisms and regulators we have dismantled have not been replaced by ethical or rational forms of social regulation.

As a result, the system’s initial dynamic equilibrium is gradually destabilised and can only be sustained through ever-increasing inputs of energy.

Once exponential growth reaches the limits of available resources, the system will inevitably collapse, reorganise, and enter a new cycle. In my view, this will occur within a foreseeable timeframe, as we have reached the end of a ‘developmental dead end.’”

Klára Hajnal, Limits and Constraints (2010)

How can I cope?

Coming to terms with the approaching reality of collapse is an ongoing process. Processing information while protecting our mental wellbeing is critical, as anxiety and depression are natural responses. When it comes to understanding the unfolding global crisis, we all seem to fall somewhere along a continuum of awareness, which can be broadly described in five stages:

Dead asleep

At this stage, there are no fundamental problems, only aspects of human nature and behaviour that seem manageable. People living in this phase tend to move through life with cheerful indifference, getting worked up about – or delighted by – what feel like the “real” and “important” things.

Awareness of one fundamental problem

Whether it is climate change, overpopulation, pollution, energy scarcity, or social injustice, a single issue comes to dominate one’s attention. At this stage, people often become passionate activists, campaigning loudly for a cause they have embraced, while remaining largely indifferent to other problems.

Awareness of many problems

As people encounter compelling information across different issues, the scale and significance of complexity become clearer. At this stage, a dilemma emerges around prioritisation, judging which problems are more severe or more immediate.

People may become saturated and resistant to recognising additional issues. For example, someone committed to tackling social injustice and climate change may overlook resource depletion. The set of problems can feel complex enough already, and adding further concerns may seem to dilute efforts focused on what is seen as the “highest priority”.

Awareness of the interconnections between the many problems

Realising that attempts to solve one problem can worsen another marks the beginning of broader, systems-level thinking. This shift also occurs when people move from seeing a collection of isolated issues to understanding a chain of causes and consequences that lead to unavoidable outcomes.

This is often the point at which the possibility first arises that there may be no reassuring solution.

Those at this stage tend to seek out others with similar perspectives to exchange knowledge and deepen understanding. These groups are typically small, both because meaningful dialogue is essential at this level, and because very few people reach this degree of systemic insight.

Awareness that the predicament encompasses all aspects of life

This understanding extends to everything we do and how we do it – to our relationships with one another, with other living beings, and with the physical world itself. From this point on, no question escapes being reconsidered in light of this awareness. The idea of a “solution” takes on an entirely different meaning; it ceases to be central, and may even come to feel like a concept no longer worth the effort invested in it.

And where are you now, on this path? Answering this question is the first step towards a realistic sense of self-understanding.

For those who reach the final stage of awareness described above, depression becomes a genuine risk. After all, throughout our lives we are taught that hope for tomorrow lies in our ability to solve today’s problems. When the belief in human ingenuity – the force that might rescue us from difficulty – falls away, hope itself can seem to vanish, like a candle flame extinguished by the suffocating darkness of despair.

How each person copes with despair is, of course, deeply personal. Yet it appears that there are typically two paths we follow in order to come to terms with the situation.

These paths are not mutually exclusive; most of us will live some combination of the two. Much depends on emotional and intellectual maturity, as well as on individual temperament.

Actor or observer.

Preparing and adapting, or coming to terms with and accepting. Each person is free to make their own choices about how to live – less so, perhaps, if they are a parent – and those choices are neither right nor wrong; they are simply their own.

But they can only be made with integrity if one has first faced reality clearly, and decided in light of that understanding.

As time moves on and these processes continue to unfold before us, more and more people will turn to us – uncertain, searching for answers. How many of us are able to offer support to others may, in the end, prove decisive.

“When philosophy dies, action is born.

When we no longer hope that someone, somehow, will solve this problem for us; when we no longer believe that the terrible situation we are in will simply turn out fine; when we no longer trust that conditions will not continue to worsen…

…then we are finally free. Truly free to act honestly in pursuit of a more liveable life. When hope dies, action is born.”

Derrick Jensen, Beyond Hope (2006)

“A sombre sense of relief can emerge when we accept that climate change – with all its catastrophic consequences – is, in essence, unavoidable.

Letting go of false hopes requires both intellectual and emotional understanding. The former can be acquired. The latter is far more difficult, as it means facing the reality that those we love – including our children – may be headed towards uncertainty, suffering, and hardship within decades, if not years. That is an extraordinarily hard truth to carry.

Emotionally processing an approaching catastrophe, and recognising that the power structures governing our world are unlikely to respond consciously or rationally to ecological destruction, is as difficult as accepting our own mortality.

The most daunting existential struggle of our time lies in fully taking in this truth – both intellectually and emotionally – and resisting the forces that slowly wear us down mentally.”

Chris Hedges, The Myth of Human Progress and the Collapse of Complex Societies (2013)