A Long Story With A Short ending
By Dennis Lyons
28 April, 2012
Countercurrents.org
An imaginary scenario of scenes from the future. How we may progress over the rest of the 21st century, and what are the questions we should be asking.
It's New Years Day 2020. Overnight the world's media has been fed a top secret item which they have been requested to release on all their bulletins at prime times, and that all stations and programs will carry it simultaneously.
As countries wake up to the New Year, people are surprised and somewhat shocked to be jolted severely into a stark sense of distant danger. This is not what they are used to! The usual glad tidings and fresh hopes of a better year ahead – what?! Where are they? For many it's like the hangover from last night's celebrations is still very much with them.
"Good Morning, G'day, Bonjour, Guten Morgan .... Today we are suspending our normal transmission to bring you the most important message ever issued to the population of our planet. This is issued from the United Nations with the cooperation of every government."
During the previous decade there had been many warnings issued from reputable sources and organisations, but inevitably most of them had been ignored, sidelined, rubbished, denied, or just not listened to by 98% of the planet. Some folks did remember Al Gore's 'An Inconvenient Truth' presentation, others just turned off their TV, closed down their phones and tablets, or switched off their virtual reality eye wear. However there was to be no escape from this unwelcome (inconvenient?) intrusion into their lives, for it had by now become quite obvious that severe and startling changes were now commonplace.
Immediate rationing of food, fuel, energy...strict limits on the use of private vehicles that were not carrying a full complement of passengers, and many other measures that would previously only been imposed in times of war- these were just not on at the start of a bright new decade. And it was just a century from the lovingly remembered stories of the decadent and hedonistic 1920's. They, too, ignored the rumbling of the distant thunder of the oncoming spectre of WW2.
But now that the global administrative machine was being taken out of it's wraps, and put into gear, there was no longer any room for deniers, or rebels. If we didn't all pull together, then there would not be enough momentum in the machine to cope with the deteriorating environmental, political, commercial , and social machinery of our human civilisation.
Why did the politicians, the industrialists, the military, even the ordinary people, choose to ignore the problems that were predicted to worsen?
Common-sense ("nous" ) should have prevailed and 'prevention is better than cure' should have been the watchword, but no one seemed able to grasp the enormity of what would happen!
2030 - the past decade has seen the gradual deterioration of the environment with the accompanying dilution of those essential home comforts we all took for granted way back in those heady, happy days of the first 12 or 15 years of this millennium. We have now been forced to accept that we can no longer expect to have our cake and eat it. Nor can we ever again enjoy those unfettered pleasures of the profligate years. The older ones among us can just about remember, or at least understand, why we have to be economical, do without certain little luxuries (like constant reliable electricity supplies, water always on tap, food from all round the globe on our supermarket shelves). And then there's the need to get a permit to drive your car - if you can afford to do so - otherwise you will have to use your Segway to go shopping. Hell, that's fun anyway - until it rains that is! Oh! your next door neighbour has a fuel cell bike, eh? Lucky him. Oh! I forgot, he's the local doctor!
So although we are adapting, we feel very resentful that all this might have been avoided if only action had been taken sooner. The recurring riots protesting about shortages and the ensuing price rises only serve to stiffen the reserve of government to impose order upon us, and in a democracy we are not going to take all this economising without a massive protest movement. You will perhaps remember in the early days of protest when Greek and Spanish populations forced the governments out of power, only to find themselves in exactly the same position with the incoming new rulers. Nothing has changed except the increasing frequency of changes.
It actually requires more finance (which we no longer have due to the 25 year recession) to support the failing health, education and social services sectors. And we are much better off than those unlucky populations that have been affected by the permanent flooding of coastal cities, and the ensuing mass evacuation of whole populations to higher ground where we are rebuilding our cities. Hopefully the shift away from stagnant water will lessen the now ubiquitous plagues of mosquitoes and other insects and the spread of tropical diseases further into the temperate zones.
Why was better planning not put into place when it was obvious that these conditions would lead to dramatic deterioration in our ability to look after ourselves- less workers, less commodities, less energy, less arable land and many other effects of overpopulation.
Why was the Catholic Church in Rome allowed to go on resisting population control planning?
2040 - The balance of trade is now so distorted by the death of billions in those countries most affected by the current uncontrollable weather, the resource shortages, almost complete lack of portable energy (remember oil tankers?), and the toll of the new pandemics which have decimated populations weakened by lack of adequate nutrition.
The recent solving of the safe nuclear technology (thorium reactors, efficient desalination plants, those wonderful high capacity batteries which can be fully recharged in two minutes, and our ability to keep the global internet running at full speed) have at least avoided the worst outcomes of total global war. If it hadn't been for the 2035 World Agreement On Global Solutions (WAOGS) which was organised by the Net Alliance of Google, Apple and Microsoft we might by now be destroying ourselves in the final war (WW3). So technology has been useful after all!
Why didn't governments stop and think about the future 25 years ago? A wasted generation. Now we have to work twice as hard to save ourselves as best we can.
2050 - Recent news reports and all those grim documentaries dwelling on the loss of some 5 billion people, and the almost total loss of all seafood, bring home a realisation that we are the lucky ones to have survived so far. Now that all the major shipping ports are submerged, we are so lucky to have concentrated on educating our youth and giving them the total wisdom of our species. At least they are young and strong, and so willing to adapt.
We are lucky to be resettling our own lands in a new way (which is the old traditional way), but we are lucky to have the benefit of these marvellous new resins to replace our now unavailable steel and concrete. If it hadn't been for the WOAGS and the internet we'd never have done it. The XNA (remember when we tried but failed to manipulate DNA and RNA?) is so flexible and safe in creating new artificial bacilli and viruses which actually benefit us with no danger! If we hadn't developed the World Of Virtual Reality (WOVR) which enables everyone to be in an integrated World Social Society (WSS) none of the recent Solutions To Save The Planet (STSTP) would have been possible.
Whilst there were many many idiots up there in control of the world 35 years ago, their disappearance has only been a benefit for us survivors. Without them we are better off. But we still ask, WHY DIDN'T THEY DO THE RIGHT THING WHEN THERE WAS TIME TO CREATE A BETTER FUTURE?
A SHORT ENDING
2065 We've been lucky. Our common-sense and a good dose of luck, coupled with perseverance and good science have given us a window of opportunity to adapt ourselves and our way of life to the changing conditions. although we are only a fractional remnant of mankind's former glory, we HAVE adapted, moulded ourselves and our environment and created a much reduced but brilliant model in which to create a liveable existence.
If we had learned our lessons earlier we would be even better off - procrastination is not only the thief of time but a petard we have hoisted upon ourselves
AN ALTERNATIVE SHORT ENDING
2065 In spite of our best efforts the rapidly deteriorating environment of our planet is thwarting all our best efforts and attempts to adapt to impossible conditions. In spite of all we do there is not enough food and water to support more than a paltry 500,000 on the whole planet, and even if there were the searing heat and atrocious climate is swamping all our efforts. We must hang on and hope that we can produce enough to keep us going.
Most unfortunately mankind's basest instincts have overwhelmed us and stifled our efforts to adapt. War and dissension have prevailed, and a fatal stalemate has developed from which there is no turning back.
We had the opportunity once to grasp the benefits of science and rational behaviour in order to adapt, but we spent too much time bickering like spoiled children, and now tall the windows of opportunity are firmly closed by forces which are now beyond our control.
We have no option other than to just hang on and hope that we can think of some way of preserving our own failing communities.
CODA
2100 A CHANGED PLANET
Global conditions have reached a crisis point in spite of all the efforts of humanity to control not only their activities, but to match their demands on planetary resources to compatible and compliant limits.
The climate has long ago passed the triggers for uncontrolled warming, and 5 deg c increase has occurred, partly through human emissions and partly through feedback from methane released from oceans and permafrost.
The sterile oceans have not produced any edible harvest now for several decades, and extinction of most plants and animal species has so limited available food that only very small communities of humans are hanging on in remote and sheltered places.
Evolution unfortunately equipped humans to survive by survival of the fittest. Evolution selected physical and not mental attributes as a measure of fitness. The development of amplification of effort via the industrial revolution favoured growth and greed as the characteristics which generated the most benefits. The invention of computers and the internet failed to make any impact on the inherited drive to survive, and therefore arrived too late in the process to stave off global self destruction.
Why didn't homo sapiens listen to the voices of science and logic to guide itself away from a no exit strategy, and lead into a sustainable management of its own and the planet's ability to stabilise and survive?
Dennis Lyons is a retired dental surgeon in his 80's. He studied science as a subject at the core of clinical training. During the 1970's he became a member the Conservation Society, and the local Coventry group (UK) studied the Limits to Growth report. Subsequently he joined Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace. Since retirement he has read widely on environment and global issues, with particular interest in technology, environment, politics and energy. He has now condensed the complexity of the environmental challenges we face with this fictional rear view mirror. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand, and can be contacted at dennly28 [at] gmail.com
Due to a recent spate of abusive, racist and xenophobic comments we are forced to revise our comment policy and has put all comments on moderation que.
