Doom and Gloom? Technology to the Rescue?

[kmo]

I recorded an interview with a professor of public policy (not yet aired on C-Realm) who advanced a moderate version of "technology to the rescue." He seemed to take the position that a breakdown, contraction, and re-organization of our society at a lower level of complexity constitutes "doom," and that if anything can prevent that from happening,

Comments

[victoriapandora]

It could all happen gradualy. This is our lives, not some fast internet connection. We can ease into this change.
I am not even sure it has to be that difficult, course I stipped years ago. So maybe I am out of touch.

[victoriapandora]

OK, disregard that comment, never listen to anyone who hits send while attempting to close the page.
And FYI "stipped" is still not a word:)

I agree with Jim though, I am willing to try again.

[katuah]

I've had a great deal of difficulty with Mr. Kunstler ever since I heard his opinions on those of us with tattoos. i don't think he's got nearly as deep a grasp as he thinks he does on the potential for positive social change embodied in the resurgence of neo-tribalist inclusive youth cultures like Burners and such. However, that said, I agree strongly with you and with him on this one. I don't like the label "doomer" because I don't think it has to feel like "doom" to change our way of life away from the exploitative and capital-centric toward the sustainable and community-engaged. contraction of economies? sure... but expansion of heart. cheesey, but hey.

[peristaltor]

I think they're both right. What's missing is for someone to actually define which tech should be considered "crucial" for survival, and which is expendable.

"Lower level of complexity?" Once one delves into what that means, parsing as one goes, it might just be easier to sustain that what we have, but without the assumed loss of functionality. For that reason I tend to discount anyone with blanket statements that lack specificity.