Collapse

569 readers

29 users here now

This is the place for discussing the potential collapse of modern civilization and the environment.

Collapse, in this context, refers to the significant loss of an established level or complexity towards a much simpler state. It can occur differently within many areas, orderly or chaotically, and be willing or unwilling. It does not necessarily imply human extinction or a singular, global event. Although, the longer the duration, the more it resembles a ‘decline’ instead of collapse.

RULES

1 - Remember the human

2 - Link posts should come from a reputable source

3 - All opinions are allowed but discussion must be in good faith.

4 - No low effort, high volume and low relevance posts.

Related lemmys:

founded 9 months ago

MODERATORS

eleitl@lemm.ee

maketotaldestr0i@lemm.ee

eris@lemm.ee

Are we living through a ‘polycrisis’ or is it ‘just history happening’? (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) by hanrahan@slrpnk.net to c/collapse@lemm.ee

6 comments fedilink hide all child comments

In much the same way, it’s often unclear even to experts how global systems interact because they are siloed in their disciplines. That limits our ability to confront intersecting problems: the climate crisis forces migration; xenophobia fuels the rise of the far right in receiving countries; far-right governments undermine environmental protections; natural disasters are more destructive. Yet migration experts may not be experts on the climate crisis, and climate experts may have limited knowledge of geopolitics.

That’s why Homer-Dixon thinks better communication is essential – not just to create consensus around what we call our current predicament but also how to address it.

I don't agree better communication will help at all. It doesn't overcome willful ignorance and stupidity.

These are Cipolla's five fundamental laws of stupidity:

1. Always and inevitably, everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation.

The probability that a certain person (will) be stupid is independent of any other characteristic of that person.

3. A stupid person is a person who causes losses to another person or to a group of persons while himself deriving no gain and even possibly incurring losses.

Non-stupid people always underestimate the damaging power of stupid individuals. In particular, non-stupid people constantly forget that at all times and places, and under any circumstances, to deal and/or associate with stupid people always turns out to be a costly mistake.
A stupid person is the most dangerous type of person.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] fake_meows@lemm.ee 2 points 20 hours ago

There is a whole branch of management theory about "narcissistic leadership".

Narcissistic leaders are not always dysfunctional narcissist personalities...it's also a style of leadership where the people in charge push their own ideas / agenda and dont really care about other people. Its essentially a leader who is in the job for their own selfish personal gains.

The benefit of narcissistic leaders is that they can be very magnetic people who become very popular. In management schools they basically accept that these people are useful for rallying support.

The danger is that if there is a power vacuum, they often step into top positions where there is no longer oversight / supervision. This is the cardinal rule: you NEVER let these people run anything. NEVER.

Once in a top position, they tend to discard rules, disregard others, do a lot of bad things in secret, sabotage all rivals etc etc, eventually leading to major corruption problems for any organization they head.