The Argument for Assisted Collapse

As ancient as it is, and however many centuries it may have lasted, this unsustainable economic system was always destined to destroy itself.  The narratives of our Civilisational Lie may have normalised unsustainable growth and unsustainable population, but what we, humans, consider “normal” is an impossible fantasy of our imagination.  The laws of physics disagree with the existence of all types and shapes of unsustainable phenomena in our universe: this includes unsustainable civilisations whenever and wherever these may have existed.  To put it simply, the very existence of humans, as they see themselves today, is a physical and cosmic impossibility.  What is “unsustainable” does, after all, what it says on the tin:  it ultimately ceases to sustain itself. 

As the planet finally begins to invoice us for thousands of years of environmental degradation the Civilisational Lie, the grandest delusion that this species ever created, may have a chance of being shattered.  Capitalism is beginning to run dangerously low on one of its most fundamental fuel sources: the delusion of abundance.  But the hype is still there.  It is almost impossible for people to ever entertain the thought that this whole civilisation has been nothing but an exercise in the most absurd, ludicrous fantasy that human imagination ever invented: perpetual growth.  We find ourselves unable to dare to contemplate, even for a second, that this society we put together is a fairy tale we all subscribed to, hoping that as long as we can get each other to believe in it, maybe it is real after all.  But challenging the basis of civilisation is almost like challenging reality itself.  So we’d rather keep on believing the lie.  It’s a beautiful lie anyway, more vivid than life itself. Maybe, just maybe, “all of this” will last forever.  

Thousands of years of indoctrination by the church, populist leaders and businessmen who just wanted to get paid amounted to a Civilisational Lie with 8 billion paid subscribers.  It is tragic, frightening, and stupid beyond belief that we refuse to acknowledge that there are limits to growth.

So, systemic and global collapse is not a debate but a certainty, as we head with almost mundane mathematical accuracy towards an unliveable future with unliveable temperatures and an unliveable food supply.  The latest UN and climate science forecasts predict a runaway climate crisis that transforms this planet more or less into an unliveable hell. There is very little value in discussing different severities and permutations of hell, or ways of “adaptation” to something which will be a runaway phenomenon.  If we are unable to adapt to overshoot while it is still “mild”, it is a given that we will be wholly incapable, let alone in the right frame of mind by any stretch of the imagination, to address it as it enters “free fall” status. 

Degrowth is the best suggested strategy out there, but most degrowth models foolishly assume a civilisational contraction conceived and implemented by today’s useless social and economic institutions, which follow norms adhering to growth-based capitalist economic systems supported by government collusion and corruption. We are stuck in a conundrum whereby the more ambitious degrowth goals become, the more hopelessly idealistic it is to think we can implement them using current economic and governance structures.  If you want to be serious in formulating elaborate strategies around degrowth, you need first and foremost to be equally meticulous in explaining how these policies would be implemented in a world rife not only with climate denial, but lack of any awareness whatsoever of the big picture of overshoot and unsustainable growth.

Others suggest a “managed collapse”, which is yet another oxymoron.  If we have been unable to manage the unsustainability of this civilisation thus far, and while we still had resources and a healthy-ish society, what makes us think that we will be able to do anything in an organised, “managed” fashion under much more challenging conditions of complete economic, social and climate mayhem?

Given that any chances to mitigate, adapt, and normalise what will essentially be an unliveable hell seem unrealistic, perhaps the answer is Assisted Collapse:  to actually give this bankrupted, unsustainable civilisation “a little push” towards the cliff, and see which parts of it survive the fall.  Sounds extreme?  Perhaps not so much.  Because the earlier we crash, the more reserves of resilience both our planet and this dysfunctional “thing” we call civilisation will have left in them in order to move on.  It is time to dump the Rolls Royce off the cliff and make a fine-looking Tuk Tuk from the spare parts.  Since Capitalism will “off itself” either way, shouldn’t we be helping it?  It is better to wake up earlier while the house is still on fire, rather than wake up when the burning roof is falling on us.

Then again, it is quite possible we will never wake up.  A species that has normalised each and every civilisational collapse it has gone through is most likely perfectly capable of normalising its final collapse.  The argument for Assisted Collapse is not only based on our chances of survival.  It is based on the need for us to finally live in truth: to be able to step out of the Civilisational Lie, and into the light.

George is an author, researcher, molecular biologist and food scientist.

Follow me on tsakraklides.bsky.social

Discover my Books Here

Note to my readers: I keep my site FREE because it’s not right to paywall existentially important content during an existential crisis.  But if you appreciate any of the work I’ve done over the years, please consider joining as a paid subscriber so it can continue!  I have minimal overheads, no sponsors to sell myself to, bosses who tell me what to write, or staff I have to pay.  It’s just me.  This freedom does mean though that your support is vital. Thank you so much.