It’s serious. Time to #TalkCollapse
If we don’t talk, we won’t know, and we can’t plan.
As the world hurtles into an unplanned reactive collapse, calls for eternal positivity and faith in yet-to-be-invented technologies, are precluding necessary planning and preparation. Join us as we #TalkCollapse and set the ground work for taking realistic and meaningful action commensurate with the severity of our predicament.
Kate Booth, PhD.: Kate is a Senior Lecturer in Human Geography at the University of Tasmania. Her research on insurance in a changing climate is driven by concern for growing patterns of inequity and inequality, and the injustice of unmitigated climate-ecological collapse. In 2021, she received the University’s CoSE Sustainability Award.
Richard Heinberg: Richard is Senior Fellow of Post Carbon Institute, and is regarded as one of the world’s foremost advocates for a shift away from our current reliance on fossil fuels. He is the author of fourteen books, including some of the seminal works on society’s current energy and environmental sustainability crisis.
Tristan Sykes: Tristan is co-founder of Just Collapse – an activist platform dedicated to justice in face of inevitable and irreversible global collapse. He is a long-time social justice, environment, and truth activist, having founded Extinction Rebellion and Occupy in Tasmania, Australia.
Just Collapse 
Hi, for some reason Eventbrite won’t let me register. I click on the “register” button and nothing happens. regards Paul Tudor-Stackph 0490083070
LikeLike
Hi Paul. We just checked and its working fine at our end. Sometimes it won’t work if you haven’t clicked the ‘accept terms and conditions’ button. Or maybe try refreshing.
LikeLike
Hello you all. I’ve been meaning to write since shortly after the event to thank you and let you know that I (and hopefully a few of my friends) really appreciate all of the work that you put into it, and the opportunity listen, even though we couldn’t comment. So I will offer my comment to you now.
As I have said before in previous comments on a couple of your posts, I agree with you that a planned collapse would be much better for all than just reacting improvisationally to chaos. What I would like to discuss and hear more from you about is what a “just” collapse would actually entail and what would be some possible impacts to all life on Earth from accomplishing that–both positive and negative impacts. Most human rights and social activists that I know and have long worked with are focused primarily on “equality,” mutual respect and “fairness” in human societies, especially here in the U.S. I would also say that most of these activists are anthropocentric in their focal points, not eco-centric. That would describe myself as well, about ten years ago, before I became more aware of the depth of our biosphere’s crucial predicament and how the customary lifeways and short-term goals of the vast majority of modern humans exacerbate the crisis.
Many people would probably agree that our most urgent human rights and justice issues are economic and systemic at their roots. In order to have economic equality while simultaneously trying to reverse ecological overshoot, we would have to reduce the material production and consumption of the wealthiest ten to fifteen percent of modern humans by somewhere near 90% (collectively, and individually according to their rates of excess, and proportionately a little less as you move down the overconsumption chain). Earth cannot sustain any “just” economic elevation or increased consumption for the poor and oppressed of our species unless we also simultaneously carry out such a reduction for those with the largest environmental footprints. How could that possibly be accomplished? Can rational appeals to reason and conscience work, or would we need to resort to some sort of force? If force is necessary, could that take the form of the most massive international boycott of the international industrial capitalist system ever imagined? Most likely, that could only be done if we were growing our own food, etc., and living independently from the prevailing system first. What do you all think?
I’ll hold back my other questions until later, since this is probably enough for now.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks. Excellent questions.
Yes. Good question – Unfortunately people aren’t rational. No. I’m afraid any revolutionary effort against the magic rainbow unicorn of infinite growth and progress is heavily opposed by the general public.
Yes. A globally socio-ecologically just planned collapse may be ideal, but impossible politically to implement which is why we advocate for #InsurgentPlanning.
Yes. Boycotting the system has a long tradition but ultimately there is no true escape but growing food is still a worthwhile endeavor for a whole range of reasons.
LikeLike
In the third sentence of my second paragraph I meant to say “social justice activists,” not social activists. Sorry.
LikeLike
Watching the coverage of this COP 27 on Democracy Now!, I see (repeatedly) an illustration of my point. The “climate justice” activists keep talking about the need for wealthy nations with the largest climate footprints to compensate the poor, small footprint people who are experiencing some of the worst impacts of global heating with large amounts of money. That is a just proposal or even a just demand, but it would only provide small, temporary comfort and do nothing to address the real crisis of overshoot–the point that everybody at COP 27 (and all of the rest of the COPs before this one) is missing. Increasing the ability of the poor to consume without also greatly reducing the consumption of the world’s fat cats and over-consumers only deepens our (including non-human species) dire predicament. Compassion for all of the beings (human and others) who are suffering from overshoot and its consequences is a healthy and natural response, but it must be combined with action towards shutting down the life-destroying systems of capitalism, industrialism and destructive technologies.
LikeLike