Many facts, insights, causes, outcomes, solutions, and evolved behaviors associated with human overshoot have been discussed by many people over many years.
It’s rare for a new idea to emerge in the overshoot space.
Hideaway’s CACTUS theory has some important fresh insights not previously discussed about the biophysical forces that collaborate to create brief blips of modernity in the universe.
Not every idea in CACTUS is new. But CACTUS identifies and integrates all of the important overshoot forces into a coherent unified theory that explains what’s going on better than anything I’ve seen in 20 years of study.
Inside the integrated whole of CACTUS is an important relationship I’ve not seen previously discussed that explains modernity’s dependence on growth of civilization scale for growth of resource use efficiency, and growth of resource extraction technology complexity, which creates self-reinforcing feedback loops, and vulnerabilities, that accelerate both the growth and decline of modernity.
CACTUS shows that the requirement for growth is independent of the type of economic system, or monetary system, or states thereof.
CACTUS shows that overshoot collapse can be triggered by depletion of any of many non-renewable resources, not just the master resource diesel.
CACTUS shows that steady-state and degrowth “solutions”, or any other form of “sustainable” modernity, are impossible, and therefore surviving humans will return to their hunter gatherer origins.
CACTUS shows that a gentle decline is impossible and that modernity will end rapidly.
CACTUS provides a clear prescription on what needs to be done to extend modernity as long as possible, assuming that is your goal.
CACTUS explains what not to do if the goal is to avoid triggering a premature collapse. Our leaders do not understand (or deny) CACTUS, and therefore they are making decisions that will end modernity sooner than was necessary. Citizens also do not understand (or deny) CACTUS, and therefore they are permitting their leaders to get away with the dumbfuckery.
CACTUS shows that broad awareness of overshoot and CACTUS is a good thing if you want to avoid war and violence as growth slows, and you want to avoid triggering a premature collapse.
CACTUS shows that modernity will be rare and brief when it emerges in the universe, and that modernity will never regrow on this planet, and therefore CACTUS provides deep reasons for gratitude and temperance.
These are BIG important ideas.
Elements of CACTUS have been discussed by others elsewhere, but the integrated totality of CACTUS ideas are not in wide circulation, and given their profound implications, deserve widespread debate and discussion.
Yet, what do we observe?
Silence.
Every famous overshoot intellectual, and the sites that focus on overshoot issues, are silent on CACTUS.
How is this possible? Seriously.
If I had learned about CACTUS from say Gail Tverberg, or Tim Morgan, or Tim Watkins, or Nate Hagens, or Alice Friedemann, or Chris Martenson, or Jack Alpert, or B, or Jean-Marc Jancovici, or Quark, or Simon Michaux, or David Korowicz, or Tom Murphy, or Tim Garrett, or Sam Mitchell, or Bill Rees, or Sid Smith, or Dennis Meadows, or William Catton, or Jay Hanson, or Paul Chefurka, or Richard Heinberg, or Charlie Hall, or Joseph Tainter, or James, or Jason Bradford, or xraymike79, etc., etc., instead of stumbling on Hideaway’s CACTUS theory in posts he made at the Peak Oil Barrel site that others, including the site owner, were ignoring or aggressively denying, I would have still discussed CACTUS hundreds of times, because the idea is so important to understanding our reality.
Why is the little un-Denial community the only site discussing CACTUS?
Ditto on the Mind Over Reality Transition (MORT) theory.
After I stumbled on Dr. Ajit Varki’s MORT theory in a 2013 CBC radio interview, I talked about nothing else for 10 years because it was such an important new idea for making sense of the existence and strange behaviors of a uniquely intelligent species, and for people, like myself, trying to find a path to reducing harms from overshoot.
For anyone trying to bring awareness and positive change to any unpleasant issue, including people still trying to find a solution for overshoot, or any of its symptoms like climate change, pollution, species extinction, ecosystem destruction, etc., etc., MORT is the MOST IMPORTANT IDEA they need to understand.
MORT explains why 99.9% of people aggressively deny everything that is unpleasant, including issues that are obvious without an advanced education, and including when denial of the issue will make things even more unpleasant.
MORT explains why famous polymaths who can and do understand many complex issues, are incapable of understand relatively simple overshoot issues, even when spoon-fed the facts.
MORT explains why only one species has evolved an extended theory of mind, despite obviously powerful fitness advantages.
MORT explains why only one species has gods.
MORT explains why behaviorally modern humans rapidly emerged from one small tribe to extinct all close cousins, and to dominate all other species.
These are BIG important ideas.
And yet all of the overshoot experts, including people who have devoted their lives to finding solutions to overshoot or its symptoms, all of whom have failed due to the genetic denial explained by MORT, have been silent on MORT for over 10 years.
Why, for example, don’t the thousands of climate scientists that have totally failed to make a difference, want to to understand why they failed? Why do climate scientists that have a sound understanding of physics still push “solutions” that are physically impossible?
How is this possible? Seriously.
If the reason everyone is silent on MORT and CACTUS is because they think the theories are wrong, then why hasn’t a single expert explained why they are wrong? Or proposed more compelling theories to explain what we observe?
No discussion. No criticism. No debate. Not even acknowledgement that the MORT and CACTUS theories exist.
Just silence.
I believe most of my overshoot colleagues have good intentions, and good integrity, and good intelligence, and so the only explanation I can think of is that ALL of the overshoot experts have normal denial genes, and un-Denial is the only place on the planet that the tiny number of mutants with defective denial genes congregate.
Is this possible?
It seems very improbable, but what other explanation is there?
Inspired by the Limericks of Doom written by the great BenjaminTheDonkey, I kicked off this un-Denial site many years ago with a limerick I wrote to honor Dr. Varki & Dr. Brower for their important MORT theory that explains the existence and behavior of one very unusual animal on this planet.
For explaining why humans are odd To Varki and Brower we applaud A great mystery they solved With denial we evolved And created the Higgs, overshoot, and God
The last line attempts to communicate the three most amazing things about the human brain that MORT explains:
Higgs is a particle we predicted would exist using theories we created to explain how the universe works, and was confirmed to exist 48 years after our prediction. Higgs is a metaphor for our extreme curiosity and intelligence that successfully explained the creation of the universe, origin of life, and one very special brain. No other species comes close to this accomplishment. Varki & Brower’s MORT theory explains how and why our brain evolved across a barrier to enable this unique capability.
Overshoot: We used our unique extended theory of mind and intelligence to dominate all other species, and to create the complexity that enables modernity with a population of more than 8 billion totally dependent on rapidly depleting non-renewable resources, while aggressively denying our obvious overshoot predicament and probable CACTUS ending. Varki & Brower’s MORT theory explains why we are in overshoot and why we deny it.
God: Humans have a near universal belief in life after death, despite zero supporting evidence, and plentiful contradictory evidence. God is a shorthand word we use for life after death. No other animal has Gods and Varki & Brower’s MORT theory explains why.
Gaia suggested we write a limerick for CACTUS.
I think this is a great idea, and a nice way to honor Hideaway’s CACTUS theory, which is the only significant new idea in the overshoot space since Varki’s MORT theory 10 years ago.
You are invited to write a limerick about CACTUS, and to publish it as a comment on this post.
I will then copy them here for better visibility.
After a few weeks, or when new contributions stop, we’ll have a vote to select the best, and I will publish it in the coveted second from the top position of the sidebar favorite quotes.
If it turns out that multiple limericks have “best of” lines, maybe we can collaborate on merging them into one super best limerick .
Here’s a sample of some of my favorite limericks by BenjaminTheDonkey, copied from here.
I’m O.K. with more BAU— It’s better than being all through; The truth is, my friend, I don’t want it to end, And neither, I’m betting, do you.
We’d be smart to shut our damn yaps And keep this doom stuff under wraps: If we kept it hush-hush, We might put off the rush To inevitable collapse.
But it doesn’t take a savant To excuse being nonchalant: Once we admit That we can’t change jack shit, It doesn’t matter what we want.
Rational Animals: An Oxymoron
What logical reasoning gave To us since we came from the cave Sure got lots of ink And changed how we think But not the way we behave.
Define limerick.
A limerick is a specific form of short, humorous, and often nonsensical poetry. It follows a very strict structural and rhythmic pattern that makes it instantly recognizable—and usually quite catchy.
The Structure
A limerick always consists of exactly five lines.
Rhyme Scheme: It follows an AABBA pattern.
Lines 1, 2, and 5 rhyme with each other.
Lines 3 and 4 rhyme with each other (and are usually shorter).
The Rhythm (Meter)
Limericks rely on a bouncy rhythm called anapestic meter. This means two short syllables followed by one long, stressed syllable (da-da-DUM).
Lines 1, 2, and 5 typically have three beats.
Lines 3 and 4 typically have two beats.
Example
To see the anatomy in action, here is a classic example:
There was an Old Man with a beard, (A) Who said, “It is just as I feared!— (A) Two Owls and a Hen, (B) Four Larks and a Wren, (B) Have all built their nests in my beard!” (A)
Common Characteristics
The “Opening”: Most limericks begin by introducing a person and a place (e.g., “There once was a man from Nantucket…”).
The Twist: The final line usually serves as a punchline or a surprising conclusion to the “story.”
Tone: They are almost always lighthearted, whimsical, or even a bit “naughty” (though many are written specifically for children).
Contributions
#1 – By Gaia gardener:
Down under lives a sage we call Uncle, Whose Theory of CACTUS would prickle The masses who deny Modernity’s end is nigh, Yet none can refute nor debunkle!
#2 – By Gaia gardener:
At un-Denial we hold daily practice, led by Rob so nothing distracts us, from the doctrine of MORT, and civilisation cut short, because Seriously, we’re all CACTUS!
#3 – By Renaee:
We gather as we cannot conceive That the masses don’t see what we see But we figured it out It started to sprout! Then the cactus prick set us all free
#4 – By Renaee:
There once was a man from Arizona He saw FIRE then saw it’s all over Coz when humans got lit It all turned to shit But really it’s the BLOB that’s the poser
#5 – By Nick:
It’s clearly our cognitive style To process hard truth with denial We’re not rational actors So ideas like CACTUS Can be safely ignored … for a while
#6 – By Gaia gardener:
Our predicament shouldn’t be hard to explain to a species with a sizable brain, We’re heading off the CACTUS cliff, far too late to cry “what if?”, and it’s not the free fall, but the landing that’s a pain!
#7 – By Flippr:
No problem here says our regime As weather becomes more extreme Tornados blowing! Floods, start rowing! FEMA will make it all peaches and cream
#8 – By el mar:
CACTUS, the truth telling plant, is predicting a Seneca End! Until the terminal end of BAU, carpe diem – enjoy yor life now, don´t expect to receive any rent.
#9 – By nikoB:
It appears that soon we’ll all be cactus No longer is the time just to practice They’ve shut the Straits of Hormuz Now we’re all set to lose The Orange man has certainly Fracked us
#10 – By David H:
The society’s gears are well oiled, The landscapes that were are now spoiled. When there’s naught left to mine, We can only opine, “What a shame that we’ll all soon be broiled”
#11 – By Rob:
Modernity requires growth Of complexity & scale both Experts all missed it None have admitted it Because reality’s too damn gross
#12 – By Rob:
Complexity & scale must gain In a planet wide supply chain Unfortunately infinite Is impossible on finite So expect high but short pain
#13 – By Rob:
Resources decline in quality Forcing up scale & complexity As they deplete Best we first eat Supernova is modernity
#14 – By Rob (with edit by Renaee):
Modernity requires continual growth Resource flows & complexity both Debt can reset But physics is set Only a wish or a dream is degrowth
#15 – By Renaee:
Mind Over Reality Transition Got us into this crazy position The game was rigged from the start With no way to depart From our inevitable Cactus affliction
#15A – By Renaee (with edit by Rob):
Mind Over Reality Transition Created our overshoot position Denied from the start With no way to depart From our CACTUS destination
#15B – By Renaee (with edit by Rob & Renaee):
Mind Over Reality Transition Kickstarted our overshoot condition Denied from the start With no way to depart From our fated CACTUS fruition
#16 – By paqnation:
The blob consumes energy through ingestion Photosynthesis, chemosynthesis and absorption But there’s only one path to CACTUS And it revolves around blasphemous Cooking is the path to this deadly destruction
#17 – By Gaia gardener
A universal truth–we reap what we sow And thus, CACTUS from MORT’s seed did grow, Now a deadly weed in Earth’s garden For which we beg mother Gaia’s pardon, “Forgive us, in our denial we didn’t want to know!”
#18 – By Robin:
A Blockade of the Strait of Hormuz by a President so confused that he hastened the shift off the Seneca Cliff when he thought it was only a ruse.
#18A – By Robin (with edit by Renaee):
A Blockade of the Strait of Hormuz by a President who is so confused that he hastened the shift off the Seneca Cliff when he thought it was only a ruse.
#19 – By Robin:
A prickly cactus of arms near the Strait of Hormuz, it swarms to bottle the flood of black global life-blood as it backfires its economic harms.
#20 – By Hideaway:
I’ve been out limericked by Gaia and Renaee There is nothing much left to say In the fullness of time When civilization is past it’s prime Everyone wishes they’d been hiding away.
#21 – By el mar:
We humans believe to be smart, but this thinking is also a fart! We behave as created, so don´t be frustrated. Anyway entropy lets fall all apart!
#22 – By Robin:
The United States had a plan to shoot up the state of Iran, but they didn’t detect that the guns on their deck pointed backwards and shot their own cans.
#23 – By monk:
There once was a person aware Of her own thoughts she could hear With a start of fright Her death was insight So, she denied it to avoid the despair
#24 – By monk:
People think we can keep growing Destroying the planet without knowing That when the oil’s gone We’ll be forlorn That mass death is the only thing going
#25 – By monk:
There was a man from Mar‑a‑Lago Who was dumber than a bonobo Orange was his face But he won election race And now there’s no more oil cargo
#25A – By monk (with edit by Renaee):
There once was a man from Mar‑a‑Lago Who was wicked dumb with much brovado Orange was his face But he won the election race And now there’s no oil left in cargo
#26 – By Lurker:
In time it got more complicated As supply lines got more integrated Then out came one pin And the whole thing caved in So modernity got truly eliminated.
#27 – By Huldulæki:
There once was a panic in Norway, As leaders moved fast without delay, They reopened old wells, As the loud worry swells, To keep Europe’s lights on night and day.
#28 – By CampbellS:
A software engineer from Vancouver Started an Un-denial maneuver A guy from Australia Made CACTUS the flavour And now we’re all fucked Now it’s the ultimate remover
#29 – By great unwashed:
Our civilisation had become quite trite Extracting oil with all its might Futile prepped and bought Yet billions had naught As our demise drew quickly, goodnight.
#29A – By great unwashed:
Our civilisation had become quite trite Extracting oil with all its might Futile prepped and bought Yet billions had naught As our demise drew quickly in sight
#30 – By monk:
There once was a system that grew On old sunlight’s stores it withdrew Yet growth couldn’t last Once the limits were passed And collapse came much sooner than due
#30A- By monk (with edit by Hideaway):
There once was a system that grew On old sunlight’s stores we went through Yet growth couldn’t last Once the limits were passed And collapse came much sooner than due
#31 – By Renaee:
Denial is the name of the game Everywhere we look it’s the same The planet is trashed While we all worship cash It’s true, the whole world is insane
#32 – By nikoB:
Said Netanyahu to the Trump Go give Iran a thump But with every blow that he threw Iran decisively chewed A bigger piece out of his rump
#33 – By Mark:
Hope is the way The masses pray With the world in despair And so few MORT aware Better get OK, with complexity going away.
#34 – By Gaia gardener:
Denial–a river so wide To cross a challenge untried, Brave Rob captained his motley crew who rowed with conviction true, Alas, ran CACTUS and capsized!
#35 – By Perran:
Humans have an affliction It’s called Mind Over Reality Transition It means that despite being smart They will deny from their heart Any unpleasant condition
Neither Iran, nor the US, nor the mainstream news, nor most of the alternative news, ever mentions conventional oil depletion, or the fact that last year it was officially announced that US fracked oil is peaking, or the empire’s need to sell oil for USD to support its reserve currency.
Instead they blame a tiny country of 10 million with zero resources for controlling a rich country of 300 million, or nuclear weapons that US government security officials testified do not exist, or the need to protect the same citizens they harmed with sanctions and bombs, or 10 other bullshit reasons.
Even insiders with high integrity and intelligence do not speak the truth:
The Islamic Republic will not be intimidated by the Trump regime. It is clear that the orders are coming from the genocidal regime in Tel Aviv and the powerful Zionist lobby in Washington. This is a war of choice for the US but an existential war for Iran.https://t.co/HZOJKtYwRw
We see pundits speculating that US is actually trying to capture business from the gulf states by supplying US oil and LNG to the world, or how the Hormuz closure is good because it will accelerate the energy transition away from oil, or how life will go back to normal the day after Hormuz reopens.
These are not small errors.
The Iran war is the most consequential event since oil was discovered 167 years ago, and will harm every human on the planet, yet almost no one discusses its root cause, or its true implications.
How is this possible? Seriously.
The only person that occasionally admits the true objective is to control Iran’s oil is an elderly person with a failing brain that rants on a social media platform he owns but no one else uses, and most people ignore his rants because he’s a crazy old guy, and they ignore he threatened to genocide a 2500 year old civilization of 90 million people, and they ignore he times his tweets with the market to enable insider trading, and they ignore he thinks he’s Jesus 2.0, and they ignore he has absolute authority over the world’s second largest nuclear weapons arsenal.
How is this possible? Seriously.
Covid, the second most consequential event in decades, followed a similar pattern.
Governments, and healthcare “professionals”, and most intellectuals, and mainstream news, and the majority of citizens, never discussed and denied the obvious bioweapon source of the virus, or the fact that mRNA is a radically new pharma technology with a history of failed trials, or the grossly insufficient testing used to justify the transfection of billions that did not need protection, or the obvious inherent risks associated with mRNA technology, or the data that subsequently proved mRNA did not work and was dangerous.
Not one person has been held to account for the unnecessary deaths of about 20 million people.
How is this possible? Seriously.
Thank you Dr. Ajit Varki for keeping the few of us able to see reality sane with your MORT theory that explains why we are surrounded by 8 billion crazies.
As I said in an earlier essay, about a dozen reasons have been offered for why the US attacked Iran:
prevent nuclear weapons
eliminate conventional missiles that threaten neighbors
stop support for “terrorist” groups
protect Iranian citizens who want a different government
regime change
preempt an attack on US
Israel influence on US politics to achieve regional power goals
Epstein scandal distraction
Evangelical Christians believe middle east conflict required for Jesus to return
western hatred of Muslims
Iranian theocratic regime is evil
revenge for American embassy hostages
I think the most important reason, by far, is not on the list:
US wants Iran to stop accepting yuan for oil and to require USD.
Today about 80% of Iran’s oil is sold to China in exchange for yuan.
The US wants to achieve with Iran the same success they had in forcing Venezuela to stop selling oil to China for yuan.
None of the many mainstream or alt-news channels, nor the many overshoot and energy aware bloggers I follow, consider this a dominant motivation.
Which means I have to subject you to a little AI slop.
Why does the US government and news media never mention Iran’s oil for USD as a key requirement for peace?
That is a sharp observation that cuts through the standard “security” narrative.
The reason you don’t hear this mentioned as a “requirement for peace” is largely because doing so would change the war’s framing from defensive security to economic enforcement.
The move by Iran to settle oil contracts in Chinese Yuan (CNY)—and specifically the reported 2026 demand that ships passing through Hormuz pay in Yuan—is a direct hit to the “Petrodollar” system.
Here is why it isn’t mentioned:
The “Imperialist” Optic: If the US government admitted the war was about forcing a country to use its currency, it would look like a 19th-century colonial resource grab. “Stopping a nuclear bomb” has much higher moral and legal standing in the UN than “protecting the global reserve status of the Greenback.”
Admitting Vulnerability: Explicitly discussing the threat of de-dollarization might actually accelerate it. If the US signals that a single country (Iran) using the Yuan is a “threat to peace,” it signals to the world—and to China—just how fragile the USD-based financial order might actually be.
Media Simplification: Mainstream news excels at “Good Guy vs. Bad Guy” narratives. Explaining the complexities of petrodollar recycling, Treasury bond demand, and the mBridge settlement platform is a “channel-changer” for the average viewer compared to footage of missile silos.
By 2026, with the US having already brought Venezuelan oil back into the USD fold (the “Venezuela Template”), Iran remains China’s last major “unauthorized” energy tap. Forcing Iran back to the USD isn’t just about the currency itself; it’s about the US regaining a “kill switch” over China’s energy supply.
If the oil is sold in USD, the US can see, track, and block the transactions through the SWIFT system. In Yuan, that leverage disappears.
While the “official” peace requirements focus on missiles and enrichment, the “unofficial” requirement—the one the Treasury Department cares about—is ensuring the world’s most essential commodity stays tethered to American banks.
Iran’s oil for USD is important for many reasons, including the one I discussed earlier: US needs leverage over China to get minerals needed by the US military.
Why is US willing to risk global economic collapse?
To those of us that understand the dire implications of Hormuz being closed, as I discussed here, it appears that the US is willing to risk a global economic collapse to defeat Iran.
It’s possible, as Art Berman and many others think, that US leaders are energy blind and do not understand the risks.
What if US leaders are not energy blind and do understand the risks?
A reasonable speculation is that the US is very worried about their own ongoing financial viability due to the combined effects of:
slowing economic growth
extreme and accelerating debt
rising interest rate cause by inflation
more inflation expected
increasing use of yuan for commodity trading
reduced demand for treasuries and increased demand for gold by central banks
US fracked oil about to decline
Maybe US leaders concluded the US empire was at risk of crashing soon, which would also crash the global economy, so they are willing to risk crashing the global economy by forcing Iran to use USD, if that’s what it takes to preserve their empire.
From the perspective of a US leader, they are doing the most good for the most people:
Do nothing and US empire plus global economy crashes.
Attack Iran to save US empire and a global crash can be avoided (for a while).
If this is true, and I think it is, we should expect the US to go all in to achieve their Iran USD goal.
Why is Iran so defiant?
The Persian culture is about 2500 years old and is proudly independent.
Iran does not want to be controlled by a country that they, for many good reasons, associate with evil.
Surviving the US attack is existential for Iran and we should expect them to go all in to not submit.
What are the possible outcomes?
US hoped that decapitating Iran’s leadership during peace negotiations would cause a quick submission.
The plan did not succeed, Iran’s new leaders are really pissed, and Hormuz has been closed for 25 days.
As discussed in the last essay, we may already be facing an economic collapse this year, even if peace is achieved tomorrow, therefore time is of the essence to reopen Hormuz.
If US destroys Iran before it can cause any collateral damage, then Hormuz reopens, the world loses 3-5% of oil, gains 90 million refugees, and a damaged global modernity (possibly) survives for a while longer.
If US destroys Iran, but Iran is able to destroy gulf infrastructure in the process, then modernity ends this year.
If Iran survives and keeps Hormuz closed long enough to cause serious economic and social unrest problems for the US, and pressure on the US from other countries also harmed by the war, then the US may be forced to back off. Unfortunately, damage to the global economy will be worse than a clean quick destruction of Iran.
There’s only one reasonable conclusion from these possible outcomes.
We should expect a massive attack by the US on Iran soon, going for the jugular of critical infrastructure like power and water systems.
Which means Trump’s 48 hour ultimatum was probably real, and he hoped Iran would submit, but when it didn’t, the US needed more time to prepare.
Next weekend after markets close is a good guess.
Next weekend will mark 30 days of Hormuz being closed. Assuming 30 weeks to reopen Hormuz, as discussed in the last essay, we are already in the danger zone.
Iran is plenty smart enough to understand all of this.
They will be ready and if attacked will attempt to destroy the gulf infrastructure.
Something big will be required to stop Iran from destroying the gulf infrastructure because two days ago they proved they can evade US’s best air defenses and delivered a missile on a building next to Israel’s nuclear weapons center.
Maybe the US needed 5 more days to get the nukes ready? Possible, but nuking Iran means geopolitical and social chaos, and lots of risks like reprisals. A huge conventional attack is more likely, but Iran has proven to be resilient, so this path has a big risk of gulf infrastructure destruction.
Maybe the Marine Expeditionary Units will blockade Chinese tankers until China agrees to pay with USD and provide minerals to US military? But this path means Hormuz remains closed for at least another month or two. US leaders may be energy aware, but are probably not CACTUS aware, so they might choose this path to avoid using nukes, in which case we probably collapse this year.
Maybe US will convince itself the empire can survive without Iran’s oil for USD and back down? Not likely.
Maybe Iran will reduce it’s aggressive security demands for peace? Not likely.
Maybe China will offer minerals to US military in exchange for a withdrawal? Possible.
Unfortunately the US has proven on multiple occasions with multiple opponents that it cannot be trusted during a negotiation, and often does not follow through on what it agrees to do. US murdered the father and wife and child of the new supreme leader, plus 160 schoolgirls, in the middle of negotiations. How are any negotiations going forward even possible?
On the other hand, most leaders have families, and nobody wants to collapse modernity and die. So maybe a path to reopening Hormuz will be found.
What a mess.
P.S. Notice that I did not mention a possible ground invasion by US. That would be so stupid a response by the US that it’s not even worth discussing. However, lots of people think boots on the ground are next up.
This is a joint essay by me (Rob) and Hideaway, a contributor here and at other sites that discuss the human overshoot predicament.
Text in normal font is me speaking, and text in italics is Hideaway speaking.
Hideaway was the first to explain a new theory called CACTUS (Complexity Accelerated Collapse of a Thermodynamically Unsustainable System) that explains the conditions that must exist to sustain modernity, and why modernity will eventually end with a rapid collapse.
We discuss challenges associated with CACTUS and world events, and end with an emergency appeal by Hideaway to citizens of the world to force their leaders to attend a peace summit at Hideaway’s home in Australia.
Challenge 1: Modernity is Difficult to Understand
The big picture is that modern civilization behaves like a self-organizing energy dissipative structure.
Ask any AI to confirm this and you will get something back like:
The perspective that modern civilization functions as a self-organizing energy dissipative structure is a cornerstone of non-equilibrium thermodynamics and complex systems theory. This framework suggests that societies aren’t just collections of people and laws, but physical systems governed by the flow of energy.
Here is an analysis of how that comparison holds up under thermodynamic and systemic scrutiny:
1. The Thermodynamic Foundation
In physics, an energy dissipative structure (a concept pioneered by Ilya Prigogine) is a system that maintains its internal order by importing high-quality energy (low entropy) and exporting waste heat (high entropy).
Biological Parallel: Just as a hurricane or a living cell must constantly “burn” energy to prevent falling into a state of equilibrium (death or stillness), a modern city requires a continuous, high-volume throughput of energy to maintain its infrastructure, transport, and digital networks.
The Entropy Trade-off: Complexity is “paid for” by increasing the entropy of the surrounding environment. The more complex the civilization becomes, the faster it must dissipate energy to stay coherent.
2. Self-Organization and the “Maximum Power Principle”
Systems often organize themselves to maximize the rate of energy flow. This is known as the Maximum Power Principle (MPP).
Feedback Loops: As civilization accesses denser energy sources (transitioning from wood to coal, then to oil and gas), it creates positive feedback loops. More energy allows for more specialized labor, which leads to better technology, which in turn allows for the extraction of even more energy.
Emergent Complexity: No single person “designed” the global supply chain to look exactly as it does; it emerged as the most efficient way to dissipate available energy across the globe.
3. The Efficiency-Fragility Paradox
As these structures self-organize, they tend toward extreme optimization. While this makes them highly efficient at dissipating energy in a stable environment, it creates inherent risks:
Tainter’s Complexity: Joseph Tainter argued that societies add layers of complexity to solve problems. Eventually, the energy cost of maintaining these layers yields “diminishing marginal returns.”
Rigidity: To maximize throughput, “buffers” (like local food stores or spare parts) are removed in favor of “just-in-time” systems. This makes the dissipative structure highly sensitive to interruptions in the energy “feed.”
4. Metabolism and Scaling
Modern civilization exhibits Kleiber’s Law-like scaling, similar to biological organisms. Large cities, like large mammals, actually become more “energy efficient” per capita as they grow, but their total energy appetite never stops increasing. If the energy supply plateaus or declines, the “metabolism” of the structure cannot be maintained, often leading to a forced “simplification” or collapse to a lower state of complexity.
Comparison Summary
Feature
Dissipative Structure (e.g., a Storm)
Modern Civilization
Requirement
Constant energy gradient
Constant fuel/electricity input
Organization
Spontaneous/Emergent
Market-driven/Technological
Waste
Heat and turbulence
Pollution and low-grade heat
Endpoint
Dissipates when gradient fails
Simplifies when EROEI drops
This lens effectively moves the conversation from political or economic theory into the realm of biophysical economics, where the physical laws of thermodynamics set the hard boundaries for growth and stability.
Would you like to explore how the Energy Return on Investment (EROEI) of different fuel sources acts as the “pressure” that drives this self-organization?
God dammit, I asked you for a yes or no answer.
The short answer is yes.
From a biophysical and thermodynamic perspective, modern civilization functions exactly like a self-organizing energy dissipative structure. It survives by importing high-quality energy, using it to maintain its complex internal order, and then exporting the resulting waste as high-entropy heat and pollution.
Why the answer is “Yes”:
Thermodynamic Necessity: Like a hurricane or a biological cell, if you cut off the energy gradient (the “fuel”), the structure cannot maintain its complexity and will spontaneously simplify or collapse.
The Maximum Power Principle: Civilization doesn’t just use energy; it self-organizes to maximize the rate at which it dissipates available energy to expand its boundaries and technology.
Metabolic Scaling: Large-scale urban and industrial systems mirror biological organisms in how they consume resources and generate “waste heat” to stay far from equilibrium.
Essentially, “money” and “economics” are just the human-layer interfaces for what is, at its core, a massive physical engine governed by the laws of thermodynamics.
Why did I subject you to that AI slop?
Because when you strip out the hubris it is the governing force behind what’s going on in the Middle East right now.
Our leaders sense via growing debt, slowing growth, worrying energy forecasts, growing inequality, falling living standards, and rising social unrest that the energy gradient that sustains their countries is falling.
Some leaders have decided to capture by force a bigger portion of remaining resources for their countries.
Unfortunately, our leaders do not understand CACTUS which explains that the non-renewable energy and material flows that sustain modernity must grow, which requires the complexity of extraction technologies to increase, to compensate for falling reserve quality as non-renewable resources deplete, which requires a complex 6 continent supply chain, with contributions and cooperation of all countries to function.
CACTUS warns us that stronger countries taking by force resources from weaker countries will damage fragile networked hyper-optimized global supply chains, which will prematurely collapse modernity for all countries, including the stronger countries.
Challenge 2: CACTUS is Difficult to Accept
The ideas of CACTUS are difficult to accept for several reasons.
Our education system and culture teaches that humans have agency over their destiny and therefore political, economic, and personal choices control the destination. Most people believe that innovation, determination, and faith can fix any problem.
Political, economic, and personal choices do indeed influence the rate of growth, the maximum altitude, and the duration modernity exists, however modernity’s dependence on many depleting non-renewable resources guarantees a destination without modernity, no matter what we do. We do however have some control over how long modernity will last.
CACTUS is difficult for most people to accept including:
citizens taught that innovation, determination, and faith can overcome any challenge;
leaders that must believe in and promise a bigger better future to be elected;
overshoot aware activists working to retain modernity and steer civilization towards a sustainable path via green growth, circular economy, steady state economy, degrowth, population reduction, regenerative agriculture, fusion energy, or colonizing Mars.
I, for example, believed for over ten years that if somehow a way could be found to break through our genetic tendency to deny unpleasant realities as explained by Dr. Ajit Varki’s MORT theory, so that a majority of citizens became aware of our (very unpleasant) overshoot predicament, then we could return to a sustainable path and retain some of modernity’s best elements via rapid population reduction policies.
After Hideaway introduced me to CACTUS I resisted accepting that it was true for about a year because it forced me to accept that population growth is a prerequisite for modernity, because the complexity of extraction technologies must grow to sustain flows of non-renewable resources as the quality of their reserves declines, and growing populations are necessary to make advanced technology feasible and economic.
I did not want to believe that population growth is a core requirement for modernity because I had spent over 10 years learning that over-population was the core problem behind almost all of our problems. I wanted to believe a small modernity in balance with other life on the planet was possible.
I did not want to believe that modernity would collapse very quickly in months or years, rather than following a slow decline providing time to adjust over decades or centuries as most overshoot aware people assume.
I understand the human genetic tendency to deny unpleasant realities. Imagine how hard it must be for someone unfamiliar with MORT to accept CACTUS.
The evidence speaks for itself. Almost all of the most talented and famous overshoot intellectuals of the the last 50 years missed CACTUS. The only place on the planet discussing CACTUS is the tiny community of nobodies that frequent un-Denial. We have been unsuccessful to date getting any influential person in the overshoot space to even mention the word CACTUS.
Ditto pretty much for MORT.
Challenge 3: Risks Just Exploded
We are in the late stages of an advanced civilization. Growth has slowed or stopped, there are no new big reserves of high quality resources available to restart growth, and many frictions are building like war, debt, inequality, birthrate, pollution, climate change, and ecosystem loss.
Most of the people who understand our predicament thought we had anywhere from 4 years to a maybe a decade or two before the inevitable decline of modernity began. That meant we had some time to, in a best case, influence society to prepare a softer landing zone, or in a worst case, prepare personally, for the loss of modernity.
The US attack on Iran 23 days ago changed the forecast to a possible worst case scenario of modernity collapsing this year, and because of our recent CACTUS learnings, a total loss of modernity could occur very quickly once the collapse begins.
Ask your favorite AI, “how long can Hormuz remain closed before the global economy collapses?”.
You will get an answer of about 3 months based on energy reserves held by some countries, energy stored in ships in transit, and fertilizer shortages causing a food crisis.
Now ask your AI, “what duration from peace agreement to resumption of normal Hormuz operations did you assume?”.
You should get an answer of about 4-6 weeks based on time to clear the mines, restoration of insurance, and restarting logistics.
My sense is that 4-6 weeks is wildly optimistic to restart a global system of this complexity.
Infrastructure has been damaged, wells have been shut in and possibly damaged because storage tanks are full, bunker fuel is scarce and expensive, 3200 ships and 20,000 mariners have been trapped in the gulf that need to be reprovisioned and rescheduled, there’s a high probability a serious recession will begin shortly making it difficult for customers to pay for higher priced energy, and it will take time for trust and order to return.
Now ask your AI to revise its estimate assuming it takes 30 weeks to restart Hormuz operations.
It will answer that all material buffers in the global economy will deplete and the global economy will collapse before the end of 2026.
Then go back and think about what CACTUS implies and how hard it will be to restart modernity after the complexity that sustains the material and energy flows needed for modernity collapses.
You will conclude that even in a best case scenario, we may already be in big trouble.
Now consider President Trump’s ultimatum to destroy Iran’s critical infrastructure if it does not reopen Hormuz in about 12 hours from now.
Then consider Iran’s reply that it will respond by destroying critical energy extraction infrastructure in other gulf countries. Also consider Iran’s track record over the last year of doing exactly what it said it would do.
If Trump follows through on his threat, a best case that already threatens modernity this year, becomes a worst case too horrible to imagine.
Challenge 4: Hideaway’s Viral Peace Summit
If leaders understood CACTUS they would not be doing what they’re doing.
If citizens understood CACTUS they would force their leaders to also understand CACTUS.
Wars over depleting non-renewable resources, between modern countries dependent on the growing complexity and scale of a hyper-complex networked 6 continent supply chain to sustain them, will not result in a few wealthy victors and many poor losers, rather, wars will shorten the time to collapse of modernity for all countries.
Hideaway, in a moment of lucidity and boldness induced by the combination of prescribed ketamine, and Trump’s dangerous ultimatum, issued a challenge from his hospital bed to all citizens of the world to force their leaders to attend a peace summit at Hideaway’s home in Australia, where he will explain to them how the world actually works, the CACTUS implications of their decisions, and choices that would actually work to extend modernity.
As the price of the spice of all of our lives (oil) goes higher, standing in the back stalls looking at the big picture, our entire super complex system of civilization, is an energy dissipative structure, that runs on an ever increasing amount of energy.
The leaders, that we have chosen to represent us, or have allowed to flow to the top, think it’s a good idea to put it all at jeopardy, over a difference of opinion on how to end civilization, do it now seems like their preferred option, or they could come to some type of peace agreement and wait a bit longer for collapse to get us all.
It’s their decision..
They could all ask their top physicists what less energy will do to their own people, but they wont do that, they are more concerned about the ‘others’, having less than themselves (sorry their people).
They will possibly never consider sharing equally like humans did for 99% of our time of existence on this planet, as that would be inconvenient to their supporters.
The MPP and boundaries are the problem. Lines drawn on maps, you’re either us or them, why ??
Why because us leaders said so.. They are bad, we are good, so we need a line to separate our bit (my bit).
Sorry, I use to know them, they were good people, how did they become bad people?
They live on the wrong side of the line, look their hair is different, their skin is changing colour, they pray to the wrong gods, they are devils, evil.
FFS enough of that everyone gets the picture, we are all led into beliefs of one sort or another, and now we have it at an international scale that can end civilization, if they so chose.
I will bet my last can of sardines, (hang on, I have to save one to send to Rob in a couple of days)… that none of the leaders in this conflict of brinkmanship has all the details or all the answers, and is floundering just like the rest of us.
I put a challenge to the leaders of this conflict, I dare you all to come and meet me, bring your families and best friends, sit down and have a chat about getting rid of boundaries and restrictions on ‘others’ so we can all increase entropy together, instead of fighting over the last resources of the planet.
Then, if there is no agreement, blow it all up, with the first nukes headed towards where we all sit…
I bet my next to last can of sardines, that none will take up that sort of challenge, or anything similar.
Civilization is no different to an animal body, a small choke point on an essential artery, can kill billions of separate cells, because that one blockage stops the rest from working together as intended, and death.
We have a choke point on our civilization called the Strait of Hormuz, we can chose to close it, or to keep it open and keep billions alive now, to die later rather than earlier, your choice…
As stupid as it all sounds, we have a choice of collapse now or later, the headlines I’m reading are suggesting the decision of the leaders is to collapse now instead of later.
The power of the internet, simple words, on a screen, is unlike anything humanity has ever had before, and no-one really understands the power of people power if enough get the message.
My message is simple, stand outside the house of a politician, any politician, and demand they choose peace, not violence and death, and go to my home in Colac.
If the message becomes viral, then people will start doing it, in every country of the world. All the intelligence services have enough smarts to work out who we are and where we are, they can come to us.
We have all the tools at our disposal, to get to just about everyone on the entire planet, in a single short period of time, if people want to choose peace instead of death and violence.
We only need one of the leaders to actually get the message, the rest will follow. So it’s the current big 5 at the centre of this, DT, Vlad, Xi, Bibi and Mojtaba.
We’re in a new world of our own making and none of us have control, but we can try and do our own little bit. I’ve seen no solutions offered anywhere, I have a few that will work, if those involved are willing to come and talk to me, in the name of peace. No-one will really like them, but the alternative is, end it all now..
If that lot are desperate for a solution, come and have a chat altogether. If fighting is the only answer, then the first bomb goes off here, at the peace talks, and new more sensible leaders can come up the ranks.
I have a hope there is a 0.1% chance that leaders will grab at any solution as they all know the consequences of the current line they are taking. Am I a madman, possibly, if de-escalation is considered mad…
The US goal was to control Venezuela’s and Iran’s oil as leverage to force China at the March 31 Trump/Xi summit to supply rare earth minerals that are required by the US military to function.
Plan A failed.
Venezuela’s oil is not enough leverage by itself.
Iran survived the US attack and has lit a fuse on a global bomb by closing Hormuz to all traffic except friends like China.
The US needs time to regroup and has indicated the summit may be delayed.
Plan B is the Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) that has been sent to the gulf and should arrive in 7-10 days.
The MEU does not have the tools to reopen Hormuz, or to invade Iran, but does have the perfect tools for seizing or destroying tankers bound for China.
Since US allies refused to help reopen Hormuz, and probably don’t have the ability even if they tried, the US has a new goal to use the MEU to block China’s oil with an offer to unblock if China asks its friend to reopen Hormuz for all traffic.
This creates a complex negotiation.
Provide rare earth minerals needed by a military that plans to attack you, plus the oil your enemies need to not collapse and will use to attack you, in exchange for the oil needed to prevent your own collapse.
None of our best overshoot intellectuals for the last 50 years figured out Hideaway’s CACTUS theory, therefore it’s probable that neither US nor Chinese planners understand CACTUS, which means they will be gaming out the complex negotiation wondering who will be the last man standing, not realizing that energy shortages will trigger a Complexity Accelerated Collapse of a Thermodynamically Unsustainable System (CACTUS), and the whole world may go down, permanently.
Hideaway informed us that the Gemini AI he has been training to understand his CACTUS theory predicts it will take only 6 months for modernity to collapse, and this will begin after 90 days of Hormuz being closed.
If the war and damage gets worse, with at least 3 months of closures then it’s possible we collapse industrial civilization entirely, world wide according to an A.I. I’ve just been discussing the topic with, once all the feedback loops are taken into account.
Hmm… thought we had longer myself.
Gemini A.I. states it will take 6 months for total collapse of industrial civilization if the straights are closed for over 3 months, so this year.
In my last post I estimated 120 days as the best case for the start of collapse.
I thought I’d try querying Gemini without spending any effort to teach it CACTUS to see if I get an answer consistent with Hideaway’s research, and it roughly agrees.
Question: How long can the Strait of Hormuz remain closed before it causes a total collapse of industrial civilization?
As of March 12, 2026, the Strait of Hormuz is functionally closed due to the ongoing conflict involving Iran, causing immediate and severe global disruptions. Whether this leads to a “total collapse of industrial civilization” is a matter of duration versus resilience.
Based on current strategic data and the actual conditions on the ground:
1. The Survival Window: 20 to 60 Days
Most industrial nations maintain a “safety buffer” through Strategic Petroleum Reserves (SPRs).
The Global Buffer: International Energy Agency (IEA) member states hold roughly 1.8 billion barrels. As of yesterday, the IEA is preparing a release of 300 to 400 million barrels, the largest in history.
Duration: At current disruption rates (losing ~20 million barrels per day), these emergency releases can only bridge the gap for 20 to 25 days before reserves reach critically low levels that threaten basic domestic functions (emergency services, food transport).
Asian Sensitivity: China and Japan are more vulnerable; while China has 90–120 days of import coverage, its massive industrial output would begin to stutter within 30 days due to the logistical lag of rerouting supplies.
2. The Infrastructure “Pressure Cooker”: 10 to 30 Days
The collapse isn’t just about a lack of oil; it’s about a failure of the systems that process and move it.
Storage Saturation: Within the last 48 hours, storage capacity in the Persian Gulf has hit its limit. This has already forced the shut-in of 7 million barrels per day of production. Once a well is “shut-in,” it can take months to safely restart, meaning even if the Strait opened tomorrow, the supply would not immediately return.
The Fertilizer/Food Link: The Strait is a primary artery for urea and ammonia (fertilizer inputs). Prices have already jumped 30% this month. If the closure lasts through the current Northern Hemisphere spring planting season (another 4-6 weeks), global crop yields for 2026 will drop significantly, potentially triggering a global food crisis by autumn.
3. Alternative Routes: The 25% Patch
Total collapse is delayed—but not prevented—by bypass pipelines.
Saudi Arabia’s East-West Pipeline: Can move 5–7 million barrels per day to the Red Sea.
UAE’s Habshan-Fujairah Pipeline: Can move ~1.5 million barrels per day.
The Shortfall: Combined, these only cover about 25% of the typical flow. This is enough to keep essential “life-support” systems (utilities and hospitals) running in some regions, but not enough to sustain a global industrial economy.
4. The Turning Point: 3 to 6 Months
If the Strait remains closed beyond 90 days, the “Total Collapse” scenario becomes a mathematical probability:
Systemic Fragility: Modern “just-in-time” supply chains cannot absorb 3 months of $150+ oil and 70% reduced maritime traffic.
High-Tech Paralyzation: Qatar provides one-third of the world’s helium. This is essential for semiconductor manufacturing and medical imaging (MRIs). Within 3 months, the global tech and medical sectors would face a complete hardware production standstill.
Hyper-Inflation: Developing economies (Pakistan, parts of Africa) are already imposing “austerity measures” like 4-day workweeks. Beyond 3 months, these states face sovereign default and internal civil unrest.
Current Status Summary:
The world is currently at Day 12 of a significant disruption. We are entering the “Strategic Buffer” phase where reserves are being used to mask the impact. If the closure is not resolved by mid-April 2026, the shift from “economic crisis” to “industrial breakdown” will likely begin in earnest.
Question: Assuming Hormuz remains closed and collapse begins, how long will it take for modernity to end?
If the closure of the Strait of Hormuz on February 27, 2026, continues without resolution, the transition from “economic crisis” to the “end of modernity” follows a predictable domino effect. Modernity is not just a collection of gadgets; it is a high-velocity, high-energy system. When that velocity stops, the system “dies” in phases.
Based on current logistical models and the ongoing March 2026 crisis:
Phase 1: The “Financial Dark Age” (Week 3 to Week 6)
The end of modernity begins not with a lack of fuel, but with a lack of insurance and trust.
Insurance Paralysis: We are already seeing this. By late March, the withdrawal of P&I (Protection and Indemnity) insurance will likely ground nearly all global maritime trade, not just in the Gulf. If a ship can’t be insured, it doesn’t sail.
The Just-in-Time Heart Attack: Modern manufacturing operates on “Just-in-Time” (JIT) logistics. Most factories (electronics, automotive, medical devices) carry only 2 to 4 weeks of inventory. By early April, the “Heart Attack” begins: assembly lines in East Asia and Europe will go silent.
Phase 2: The “Grid Fragility” Window (Months 2 to 4)
Modernity is synonymous with stable electricity. Without the 20% of global LNG that passes through the Strait, power grids become “unbalanced.”
The Natural Gas Cliff: Japan, South Korea, and parts of Europe rely on Qatari LNG for baseload power. By May 2026, as strategic reserves deplete, these nations will be forced into “Rolling Blackouts.”
Cascading Failures: A power grid isn’t just for lights; it runs water pumps, sewage treatment, and the internet. Once a grid suffers “uncontrolled shedding,” the hardware (transformers/substations) can be physically damaged by surges. Without new parts from the now-silent factories, parts of the grid may stay down for years.
Phase 3: The “Fertilizer/Famine” Bridge (6 to 12 Months)
This is where the “end of modernity” becomes permanent for billions. Modernity is fueled by the Haber-Bosch process, which turns natural gas into fertilizer.
Agricultural Halt: 18% of global fertilizer exports are currently trapped behind the Strait. If the closure lasts through the 2026 Northern Hemisphere planting and the Southern Hemisphere cycle (August–October), global caloric production will drop by an estimated 30% to 40%.
Modernity ends when the supermarket model fails. Once the expectation of affordable, available food vanishes, urban centers—the hubs of modern civilization—become unmanageable. Mass migration from cities to rural areas typically marks the formal end of an industrial era.
The “Point of No Return”: The 12-Month Mark
If the disruption lasts one full year, the complexity of the global system likely cannot be “restarted.”
Loss of Specialization: Modernity requires millions of people to do highly specific jobs (coding, chip lithography, satellite maintenance). In a prolonged energy/food collapse, these people must pivot to basic survival (farming, security).
The Knowledge Gap: If the internet stays dark for more than a few months and the global transport of specialized parts (like the helium required for high-tech manufacturing) is severed, the “tools to make the tools” are lost.
Question: If US used nuclear weapons to force Iran to unconditionally surrender, how long would it take for normal shipments to resume in the Strait of Hormuz?
While the use of nuclear weapons is a hypothetical escalation, the time required to resume “normal” shipping under an unconditional surrender scenario is governed by physical and logistical constraints that even a total surrender cannot bypass.
If such an event occurred today, normal shipments would likely not resume for 3 to 9 months, depending on the following recovery hurdles:
1. The “Minefield” Problem (30 to 90 Days)
Even if the Iranian government surrenders, the physical threats in the water remain.
Seeded Mines: Reports from March 11 indicate Iran has already deployed naval mines. Unconditional surrender does not provide a “map” of every mine; many are “dumb” contact mines or “smart” influence mines that remain active regardless of a peace treaty.
The Sweep: Clearing a 21-mile-wide, 100-mile-long chokepoint to a “commercial safety” standard is a slow process. Modern sonar and UUVs (Unmanned Underwater Vehicles) are fast, but commercial tankers will not enter the Strait until the U.K. Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) and the U.S. Navy declare it “Safe for Navigation”—a certification that typically takes 1 to 3 months of zero-contact sweeping.
2. The Insurance Lock (2 to 4 Weeks Post-Clearance)
Shipping is an industry of risk management, not just physical movement.
“War Risk” Premiums: Currently, most major carriers (Maersk, Hapag-Lloyd) have suspended transits. After a surrender, insurers (like Lloyd’s of London) will require a “cooling off” period to reassess the risk of rogue actors or unexploded ordnance.
Crew Safety: Global maritime unions will likely refuse to man ships entering the Gulf until they are certain no “suicide USVs” (unmanned surface vessels) or latent coastal batteries are being operated by holdout factions.
3. The Radiological Buffer (1 to 6 Months)
If nuclear weapons were used in or near the Strait (e.g., to destroy coastal silos or naval bases), a new set of logistical barriers emerges:
Atmospheric/Water Contamination: Commercial ships are not radiation-hardened. Any significant fallout over the shipping lanes would lead to a mandatory exclusion zone. Ships would have to wait for “short-lived” isotopes to decay to safe levels for civilian crews.
Port Refusal: Even if a tanker successfully navigates the Strait, most global ports (like Singapore, Rotterdam, or Long Beach) have strict Radiation Portal Monitors. If a ship or its hull tests positive for radioactive particulates, it would be denied entry, effectively “killing” that ship’s commercial utility. Scrubbing a VLCC (Very Large Crude Carrier) for radioactive contamination is a massive undertaking that could take weeks per vessel.
4. The “Logistical Restart” Delay (2 to 3 Months)
Modernity cannot be “turned back on” with a switch.
Shut-in Production: As of today, Persian Gulf storage is nearly full. Because of the closure, production at many wells has been “shut-in.” Restarting an oil field is not immediate; it requires technical teams, chemical treatments to prevent reservoir damage, and weeks of ramp-up time.
Vessel Displacement: The world’s tanker fleet is currently scattered, with dozens of ships “trapped” inside the Gulf and hundreds more diverted around the Cape of Good Hope. It would take 45 to 60 days just to reposition the fleet back into a regular “shuttle” rhythm.
Question: How would China and Russia respond if US attacked Iran with nuclear weapons?
As of March 12, 2026, following the joint US-Israeli strikes that began on February 28, the world is already witnessing a significant shift in the “Axis” of China, Russia, and Iran. While your scenario involving nuclear weapons remains a hypothetical escalation, the current diplomatic and military responses of Beijing and Moscow provide a clear template for how they would likely react.
1. Russia: Tactical Support and Strategic Distraction
Russia’s response to the current conventional war has been described as “vocal but physically restrained.” In the event of a nuclear strike, Russia would likely double down on its current two-pronged strategy:
Targeting Intelligence: Russia is currently providing Iran with real-time intelligence on US military positions. A nuclear escalation would likely see Russia providing advanced electronic warfare (EW) support to protect remaining Iranian assets, or even “looking the other way” as it allows its own satellite data to be used for retaliatory strikes.
The Ukraine Advantage: Moscow views the current crisis as a vital distraction. By drawing US focus and “no-rules” military assets away from Eastern Europe, Russia gains breathing room. A nuclear strike would effectively “freeze” US diplomacy, allowing Russia to consolidate gains in Ukraine while the West is pariahed globally.
The “North-South” Lifeline: Russia is accelerating the International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC). If the US uses nuclear weapons, Russia would likely use its territory as the primary “sanctions-proof” bridge for Iran to maintain basic survival functions.
2. China: The “Quiet Anchor” and Energy Pivot
China’s response has been “restrained,” prioritizing its own stability over Iranian survival. However, a nuclear strike would force a massive shift:
Energy Realignment: China currently imports 45% of its oil through the Strait of Hormuz. A nuclear strike that renders the Strait unusable would force Beijing to immediately pivot to Russia and Central Asia for land-based energy pipelines. This would make China almost entirely dependent on Russia for fuel, a strategic shift that Beijing has historically tried to avoid.
“Nuclear Outcast” Diplomacy: China would likely lead a global diplomatic movement to isolate the US financially. Expect a total freeze on US-China trade and a push for a “Global South” currency that bypasses the US dollar, arguing that the US is no longer a “responsible stakeholder” in the global order.
Strategic Consolidation: While the US is entangled in the radioactive aftermath in the Middle East, China would likely accelerate its own regional objectives in the South China Sea and Taiwan, betting that the US has no appetite—or resources—for a second major conflict.
3. The “Limits of the Axis”
Despite their “Comprehensive Strategic Partnership” agreements (Russia’s in 2025, China’s 25-year pact), both powers have signaled they will not enter a direct hot war with the US to save Iran.
No Mutual Defense: Current treaties with Iran do not contain mutual defense clauses like those with North Korea.
Economic Self-Interest: China is currently suffering from deflation and rising oil prices (Brent crude hit $107 this week). A nuclear-driven collapse of modernity would hurt China’s manufacturing heartland more than it would hurt the US, leading Beijing to act as a “stabilizer” rather than a combatant.
Question: Assuming China continues to block exports of rare earth minerals for US military use, how long before US military is significantly degraded?
As of March 12, 2026, the US military is facing its most critical supply chain vulnerability in decades. China’s decision to block rare earth exports for “military end-use” is not a theoretical threat; it is a functional blockade of the materials required to build and maintain modern weaponry.
The “degradation clock” for the US military is much shorter than many realize, primarily due to the “Just-in-Time” nature of modern defense procurement.
1. The Survival Window: 60 Days
Recent reports from the South China Morning Post (March 10, 2026) and industry analysts indicate that the US military currently holds approximately 60 days of rare earth supplies for active defense production.
Immediate Risk: If China maintains a total blockade, the US defense industrial base will hit a “production wall” by mid-May 2026.
Replenishment Crisis: While the US has stockpiles of some base metals, it has historically lacked a robust strategic reserve of processed rare earth magnets and alloys. Without these, the assembly of new F-35s, Virginia-class submarines, and precision-guided munitions would effectively ground to a halt.
2. The First Systems to Fail
Degradation will not happen all at once; it will target the most sophisticated components first:
Precision Munitions (30–60 Days): Systems like the Tomahawk and JDAM (smart bombs) rely on samarium-cobalt magnets for their guidance fin actuators. These are almost exclusively processed in China. As current bin inventories are exhausted, “smart” arsenals will become finite and irreplaceable.
Fighter Aircraft (F-35): Each F-35 contains roughly 417 kg (920 lbs) of rare earth materials. Production lines are expected to stutter within 2 to 3 months as specialized magnet deliveries fail.
The Drone Gap: This is perhaps the most acute vulnerability. Nearly 100% of the small permanent magnet motors used in military drones are manufactured using Chinese-processed neodymium. Without these, the US “drone revolution” stops.
3. The Domestic “Safety Net” is Still Under Construction
The US is racing to bridge this gap, but the timing is tight:
MP Materials (Mountain Pass): While MP Materials is hitting record production levels (nearly 4,000 MT/year run-rate for NdPr), the US still lacks the full-scale metallization and magnet-making capacity to turn that ore into weapon parts.
January 1, 2027 Deadline: The Pentagon has mandated a total ban on Chinese-origin rare earths in defense systems starting in 2027. China’s current blockade has essentially moved this deadline up by nine months, catching many contractors before their non-Chinese supply chains (like those being built by REalloys or Lynas) are fully operational.
4. Strategic Implications: “The Kill Switch”
Analysts now refer to China’s grip on processing as a “Kill Switch” over Western defense.
Refining vs. Mining: It is a common misconception that the US lacks the minerals; the US has plenty of ore. The bottleneck is the chemical separation and metallization.
Leverage in the Iran Conflict: As of this week, Beijing is using this 60-day supply window as leverage. With US strikes on Iran continuing, China knows that Washington cannot sustain a high-intensity, long-term conflict if it cannot replace the missiles it is currently firing.
Summary Timeline of Degradation:
Weeks 1–8 (Current Phase): Minimal visible impact; production continues using existing “on-hand” inventory.
Month 3 (May 2026): Critical shortages in guidance systems and drone motors; “rationing” of replacement parts for active-duty fleets.
Month 6 (August 2026): Significant degradation; assembly lines for top-tier platforms (subs, jets) begin to go “cold.”
Question: What will be the impact if China takes control of Taiwan and its semiconductor factories?
As of March 12, 2026, the global dependence on Taiwan’s semiconductor industry has reached a “critical mass” point. Taiwan currently produces roughly 92% of the world’s most advanced logic chips (5 nm and smaller), including the brand-new 2 nm nodes that entered mass production at TSMC’s Baoshan and Kaohsiung facilities in late 2025.
If China were to take control of Taiwan and its factories (fabs), the impact would trigger the most severe economic and technological contraction in modern history.
1. The “Scorched Earth” and “Self-Destruct” Scenarios
It is a common misconception that China could simply “turn on” the factories and dominate the world.
Remote Disablement: TSMC has confirmed contingency plans to remotely disable ASML’s EUV (Extreme Ultraviolet) lithography machines. Without these machines—which China cannot currently build or maintain—the fabs become expensive, inert cleanrooms.
The Talent Flight: Semiconductor manufacturing is as much about “know-how” as it is about hardware. In a takeover scenario, thousands of specialized engineers would likely be evacuated or refuse to work, leaving the complex chemical and physical processes unmanaged.
Supply Chain Severance: A fab requires a constant stream of specialized gases, chemicals, and spare parts from the US, Japan, and Europe. Control of the building does not equal control of the supply chain; once the flow of global materials stops, production halts within weeks.
2. Global Economic “Depression” ($10 Trillion Loss)
Mainstream financial models as of March 2026 suggest that a full takeover or blockade of Taiwan would erase roughly 10% of global GDP ($10 trillion) in the first year alone.
Tech Sector Collapse: Without the constant flow of chips for AI data centers, smartphones (Apple has booked over 50% of 2 nm capacity for 2026), and medical devices, the S&P 500 would likely face a 40% crash.
The AI Winter: The global AI boom, which is currently driving the US and Taiwan’s 7.7% GDP growth as of this month, would essentially freeze. Without new H100/H200-equivalent accelerators from TSMC, AI development would hit a “hardware ceiling” that couldn’t be bypassed for years.
3. Geopolitical and Strategic Realignment
The End of the “Silicon Shield”: Historically, Taiwan’s importance to the global economy acted as a deterrent (the “Silicon Shield”). If China ignores this risk, it signals a shift where territorial sovereignty is valued more than economic survival.
China’s Self-Sufficiency Race: China is currently in the middle of its “15th Five-Year Plan,” which prioritizes “extraordinary measures” for chip self-sufficiency. If they seized Taiwan’s fabs and could somehow make them run, they would leapfrog 10 years of R&D, effectively controlling the “brains” of all modern military and civilian technology.
US “Reshoring” vs. Reality: While the US is on track to spend $200 billion on domestic plants through 2030, these facilities (like TSMC Arizona, which just turned its first profit) currently lack the capacity to replace Taiwan. As of today, the US could not sustain its modern military-industrial complex without Taiwan’s output for more than 60 to 90 days.
In my last essay I explained there are 4 primary lenses through which to view our overshoot predicament. I argued that the CACTUS lens (Complexity Accelerated Collapse of a Thermodynamically Unsustainable System) provides the clearest view of what to expect and what we should do.
Unfortunately, what US leaders have decided to do in Iran is the opposite of what CACTUS prescribes, which means we should expect the time to collapse to be shorter now than it was a week ago.
Explanations given by US leaders for why they attacked Iran have been muddled, fluid, and unconvincing. They include:
nuclear weapons need to be obliterated again
conventional missiles threaten nuclear armed Israel
Iran supports people defending their own land (aka terrorists)
protecting protesters harmed by the US attack on Iran’s currency
regime change
pre-empting an attack on US
Counter explanations from justifiably skeptical journalists and analysts are also varied including:
Israel influence on US politics to achieve regional power goals
Epstein distraction
Evangelical Christians believe middle east conflict required for Jesus to return
hatred of Muslims and/or Arabs
revenge for American embassy hostages
Iranian theocratic regime is evil and not supported by most citizens
Each of these explanations no doubt motivates different groups, however none of them are the reason the US attacked Iran.
In this essay I explain the real reason US leaders attacked Iran, why they are lying to us, and why, as CACTUS explains, the US has made things worse for all countries, including themselves.
My explanation does not require US leaders to have extraordinary awareness or intelligence, nor to have rare defective denial genes, and I assume US leaders are mostly good people trying to do the right thing for their citizens, which increases the probability that I am correct.
Risks
The risks US leaders have taken by starting a war with Iran are extraordinarily high. I think they know this. Therefore, their reason for attacking Iran must be existential.
Iran is a much tougher adversary than other countries the US has fought like Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, and Venezuela. Iran is a large technologically advanced country with 90 million people fiercely proud of their independence. Their geography is mountainous and challenging to attack. They have expected an attack from the US and have been preparing for a long time. Many Iranians are willing to die to defend their independence.
The global economy is fragile because the system requires growth to not collapse, limits have slowed growth, the debt we have used to force growth has grown to dangerous levels, and limits to growth are becoming stronger.
In response to being attacked by a much more powerful country, Iran is responding asymmetrically by harming the economies of the US and its allies.
The most significant thing Iran has done so far is to close the Strait of Hormuz through which 20% of global oil produced, and 40% of global oil imported, flows.
Also important, Iran has attacked Qatar forcing it to stop producing 20% of the world’s LNG, and significant quantities of fertilizer and other important materials.
CACTUS explains that a modest persistent degrowth of the economy is sufficient to trigger a cascading collapse of complexity and modernity.
The size of the economy is roughly proportional to oil consumption. Closing the Strait of Hormuz for a period longer than importing countries have oil reserves would roughly reduce global GDP by 20%, which is more than sufficient to trigger an unrecoverable collapse, if Hormuz remains closed long enough.
It’s unlikely anyone accurately knows how long the strait can remain closed without triggering a collapse, however most countries on average have about 90 days of oil in storage, and so 120 days of closure is a reasonable guess.
Note that China is an exception and seems to have anticipated the US attack on Iran by stockpiling about 120 days of oil reserves.
Given that other critical materials like fertilizer, petrochemicals, aluminum, and food to feed middle east countries pass through the strait, and the extreme complexity of global supply chains, and the fragility of our financial bubbles, and the likelihood that some importing countries will not have 90 days of oil and LNG buffers, it is reasonable to assume 120 days is a best case and serious problems will begin before that.
We don’t know for how long Iran wants, or is able, to keep the strait closed. We don’t know if the US can force the strait to reopen, or how long it might take to repair any damage and return to normal operations.
We do know that cumulative damage is being done to the global economy every day the strait remains closed, and the risk of a collapse increases with time.
The US attack on Iran has other significant risks.
Projecting advanced military force a long way from home is expensive and difficult to sustain. Doubly so given recent US support for Ukraine, and the fact the US does not have the industrial capacity it once had.
This means there is a reasonable chance Iran can win simply by surviving and outlasting the US.
A US loss to Iran would be catastrophic for obvious geopolitical reasons. It’s hard to imagine the US would not escalate to nuclear weapons if faced with a loss, and even less hard to imagine if Israel felt its survival was at stake. A nuclear attack on Iran would create a significant risk of nuclear escalation from its allies China and Russia.
Lastly, there are many complex rivalries, hatreds, and interests among middle east countries, and the countries that depend on their oil. Escalation of the Iran war in unpredictable and uncontrollable directions is probable. We can see escalation is already starting.
In summary, by attacking Iran, the US has created extreme risks.
What could be worth these risks?
Certainly not the reasons given by US leaders.
Nor the alternative reasons given by observers.
US Motivation
US power today depends on a strong military, owning the world’s reserve currency, and having access to sufficient energy and materials.
The standard of living for US citizens, and the jobs of most US leaders, depend on sustaining US power.
The industrial capacity of China already far exceeds the US.
The US military is stronger than the Chinese military, however China is using its superior industrial capacity to catch up.
Last month China announced it now intends to compete with the US for “global reserve currency status” and to become a “financial powerhouse”.
To retain its power, the US must defend its reserve currency, and to do so needs the world’s strongest military.
US military strength is dependent on many rare earth minerals, and China controls almost all of them.
Last year China demonstrated its willingness to withhold rare earth minerals exports in retaliation against US tariffs, and is now blocking many exports destined for US military applications.
The US is working to create alternate sources of rare earth minerals, but this is an expensive decade-ish project. Those of us with CACTUS awareness understand this plan for US self-sufficiency may never succeed.
Access to rare earth minerals is therefore an existential issue for the US.
China is the only source of rare earth minerals in the short term and the US needs leverage to force China to provide them.
China is the world’s largest importer of oil at about 12 million barrels a day.
Roughly half of this oil comes from countries the US controls like Saudi Arabia and Iraq. The other half comes from countries the US does not control like Russia and Iran.
The US attempted to get control of Russian oil via the Ukraine war, but that plan failed.
China imports 90% of Iran’s oil, which is about 1.5 million barrels a day, and pays with Chinese Renminbi.
Iran’s oil represents about 13% of China’s oil imports, and while not huge, is strategically important because the US does not control Iran, and because Iran accepts Renminbi as payment, and because China receives a price discount for being Iran’s largest and most reliable customer, and because depletion is making it difficult to find alternate sources of oil.
The reason the US accepted the extreme risks of attacking Iran is now clear.
To retain its military power and reserve currency the US needs leverage to force China to provide it with rare earth minerals, and the US intends to use Iran’s oil as that leverage.
The US aggression has been extreme, including killing 160 young schoolgirls without an apology, suggesting there is an urgency behind the US strategy.
The urgency comes from the dependence of stocks on flows. The US military has a reasonable stock of weapons, but they are being depleted faster than they are being replaced due to the demands of Ukraine, the complexity of US weapons, and the hollowing out of US industrial capacity. In addition, some weapons cannot be replaced until the rare earth minerals problem is solved.
So, the US has decided to go all in with the goal of pounding Iran into quick submission. As stated earlier, this creates a serious risk of nuclear escalation if Iran proves to be tough enough to take the beating and not submit.
Conclusion
Those of us that are overshoot aware and see through the Debt, Energy, Ecology, or CACTUS lenses know that we are facing limits to growth, and big changes are on the horizon.
We know there are much bigger forces in play beneath the surface of the rare earth minerals for oil story.
There are no doubt people in the US government whose job it is to understand the threats of non-renewable energy and mineral depletion, but I expect most US leaders are like 99.9% of all people and aggressively deny these threats exist.
The point is that a coherent story to explain the US attack on Iran does not require overshoot awareness, or even a deep understand of energy.
US leaders are just normal ignorant people in denial trying to do the best they can for their citizens.
The reason US leaders are lying to us about why they attacked Iran is now clear.
US leaders can’t possibly say that if China does not provide rare earth minerals the US military will be weak, and the US will lose reserve currency status, and the standard of living for Americans will fall 50+%, so we have to kill thousands of Iranians, and spend billions of dollars, and risk World War III, and risk collapsing the global economy, to force China to give them to us.
Notice that none of the 6 reasons US leaders have provided for attacking Iran, nor the 6 reasons pundits have provided, that I listed above, are even close to the real reason.
In addition, I follow closely about 20 geopolitical analysts, plus maybe another 20 less closely, all of which I trust have sufficient integrity to at least attempt to accurately report WHAT is going on, however none of these 40 people are even close to accurately explaining WHY the US attacked Iran.
None, not even close! How is this possible?
Notice that all 12 incorrect explanations have one thing in common. They all avoid discussing limits to growth, or non-renewable resource depletion, or scarcity, or bubbles, or living beyond our means.
Anything associated with overshoot is taboo because it is a too unpleasant reality for our brains to accept as explained by the MORT theory.
We are a uniquely smart species capable of understanding many complex topics, unless the topic is really unpleasant.
It’s an amazing phenomenon to observe and is why I started un-Denial.
As a final point I want to repeat a point I made in my last essay.
There is a significant cost to the fact that most leaders do not understand CACTUS. The attack on Iran, even in the best case of the war ending quickly, has done serious damage to the global economy. We are in the end stage of an advanced civilization, and damage does not heal well now. There are too many demands for maintenance and repair, and we don’t have the material wealth to address them all.
Every time we recklessly break something, as the US just did by attacking Iran, we reduce the time to collapse.
A wise species would find a way to spread awareness of CACTUS so that we can extend the time to collapse and use some of our remaining resources to improve the quality of life for the survivors and other species.
Achieving awareness is a challenge because even if CACTUS was explained to our leaders with compelling evidence, most would still deny CACTUS due to the human genetic tendency to deny unpleasant realities as explained by Dr. Ajit Varki’s MORT theory.
I proposed one promising idea for spreading CACTUS awareness in my last essay. Hopefully others reading this will come up with other ideas.
P.S. We now understand why good people like Tulsi Gabbard who campaigned against the war have been silent, and why Trump flip-flopped on war promises.
P.P.S. We now also understand why the US decapitated Venezuela.
In 2025 China imported about 600K barrels per day, representing 80% of Venezuela’s exported oil, in exchange for Renminbi or barter repayment of debt.
After the US kidnapped Venezuela’s president in January 2026, oil exported to China fell to 50K barrels per day or less.
Until recently there have been 3 main lenses through which to view our overshoot predicament: debt, energy, and ecology.
Each lens exposes a different aspect of the picture, but not the complete picture.
Each lens focusses on different threats, with different time frames, and different consequences, and each lens suggests a different optimal response.
Overshoot awareness varies by lens and group within society. Awareness of leaders is generally higher than citizens, and in some cases this is deliberate and warranted because broad citizen awareness of the debt and energy threats would increase the probability of short term collapse.
For leaders and citizens that see through any of the lenses, their understanding tends to be incomplete, which has resulted in plans of action that will not help, or that make the situation worse.
This incomplete understanding is caused in part because the issues are very complex, and in part because some aspects of human overshoot have no acceptable or feasible solution, and in part because of the human tendency to deny unpleasant realities, as explained by Dr. Ajit Varki’s MORT theory.
Hideaway, a frequent contributor at un-Denial, Peak Oil Barrel, Our Finite World and other sites, recently introduced a new lens we have named CACTUS, which focusses on all non-renewable resources and the complexity required to extract them.
I think the CACTUS lens provides the clearest view of what is going on, what we should expect in the short to medium term, and what we should do.
The CACTUS lens changes what is in the best interests of citizens to understand.
The debt and energy lenses suggest citizens should remain in the dark.
The ecology lens suggests it does not matter what citizens understand because the ecology threats are longer term than debt, energy, and CACTUS, and because awareness of ecology issues have not and will not improve anything of substance due to the nature of modernity.
With the introduction of the CACTUS lens, it is now in the best short term interests of all groups: countries, leaders, and citizens, for awareness to be as widespread as possible.
Achieving broad CACTUS awareness will be difficult because it is very unpleasant, and therefore will be blocked by our genetic denial behavior, however I propose one idea to start the discussion on how we might spread CACTUS awareness.
Awareness Lens: Debt
Theory:
Modernity requires abundant credit;
Because most of our mines, machines, technology, and structures require significant up front capital to build;
Which requires a fractional reserve debt backed monetary system;
Which is now used by every country in the world;
Which by design requires economic growth to not collapse;
Because money is loaned into existence and growth is needed to pay interest;
Which means our economic system requires infinite growth on a finite planet;
Which of course is impossible and means we should expect growth to slow and prosperity to decline, as they are;
Culminating in a dramatic and harmful economic reset;
However modernity will survive and will rebuild until the next bubble pops.
Status :
Quite a few citizens see through the debt lens, maybe a significant minority.
Most aware citizens assume the reset is a ways off in the future.
Some people prepare to weather a storm with cash, gold, bitcoin, or sardines.
Others trust or hope that central banks will print enough money to kick the can past their expiry.
Leaders understand and acknowledge the debt problem but are careful to not cause panic because herd emotions could trigger a reset.
Leaders are also careful to not explain the driver of the debt problem, energy depletion, as will be discussed in the next section on the energy lens.
The debt threat is closer and more severe than our leaders let on as demonstrated by:
Social unrest everywhere is rising because living standards are falling and the wealth gap is widening.
Geopolitical tensions are rising.
Democracies are oscillating between wider extremes.
Most countries have historically high levels of growing debt.
Growth has slowed, and the only growth possible now comes at the expense of adding more debt than the growth it buys, which is unsustainable.
No political party in power anywhere reduces their deficit or balances their budget because it’s now impossible without crashing their system. The US DOGE effort lasted 5 months before leaders gave up and juiced the deficit to new record highs.
Central banks work hard behind the curtain to keep our everything bubble inflated, and to prevent any significant correction of stock or asset prices. When I was young it was normal for the economy and stock market to experience cycles. We don’t permit cycles anymore. Today there is so much debt and so little growth that a significant correction will result in a reset (aka crash).
Printing bazookas are used to blast any threat before it builds momentum, like the banking system repo problem that covid provided cover for unprecedented money printing.
Our leaders tried but failed to use covid as an excuse to implement the tools needed to manage an economic reset like digital ids/currencies for rationing scarce necessities, and for enabling negative interest rates, and tried via “The Great Reset” propaganda campaign to get us ready to accept nationalization of assets (aka “you will own nothing and be happy”). They will try again.
Implications:
The debt lens implies a zero-sum game: In a no growth world, one country’s gain is another country’s loss.
Our leaders believe that a country that succeeds in harming its competitors will experience less damage from an economic reset. The goal is to ensure opponents reset before you do, on the assumption that this will prevent or delay your own reset by gaining control of more growth generating assets and markets.
Hence we see the weaponization of tariffs and trade, regime change operations, and proxy wars intended to weaken or capture opponents.
Conclusions:
A debt reset is mathematically inevitable and will reduce the standard of living for the majority via deflation and/or inflation.
Debt resets are hard to predict and control because herd emotions drive the process.
Leaders have good reasons to not want citizens to be aware of the seriousness of the debt problem.
Leaders are operating on the assumption of a zero-sum game.
In the CACTUS lens section we’ll see that the zero-sum game assumption is wrong, which means the current strategy will make things worse for all countries.
Awareness Lens: Energy
Theory:
Modernity requires abundant net energy;
Which is the energy that remains after using energy to extract and refine energy;
Because all of our food, water, minerals, technology, products, and services are produced and delivered by machines powered by energy.
Diesel is the keystone energy that powers our vital mining machines, tractors, combines, trucks, trains, and ships.
Renewable energy is not a solution to non-renewable depletion because renewables require abundant non-renewable energy to build, install, maintain, and augment for 24/7 supply.
Discovery of new fossil energy reserves is much slower than depletion of existing reserves, and the gap is growing.
The quality of non-renewable energy reserves decline as they deplete;
Which means net energy is falling;
Which explains why growth is slowing, and prosperity is declining, and debt is growing faster than GDP everywhere.
We should expect the trend to continue and accelerate.
Leaders believe modernity will continue for those countries that have access to energy.
Status:
Few citizens see through the energy lens.
There are many false energy beliefs in wide circulation including net zero, peak oil demand, abiotic oil, green energy, renewables outpacing fossils, hydrogen economy, nuclear renaissance, space mining, circular economy, etc., etc..
These beliefs are nonsense not grounded in sound science or economics, but the issues are complex, and it is difficult for a citizen to determine the truth, especially with deliberate misdirection from leaders, and with MORT driven hope and denial driving behavior.
Denial is a strong force that fogs the energy lens because, short of a near zero probability miracle, there is no solution, and the outlook is steadily worsening living standards.
Most leaders, with help from their energy aware militaries, understand what is going on, and know the energy threat is imminent. Evidence for this includes:
Inflation of energy intensive products, like food, is high; energy intensive infrastructure is not being properly maintained; energy intensive manufacturing, like weapons, is struggling to keep up with demand despite plentiful printed money available; war is shifting to lower energy methods like drones; and as also seen through the debt lens, debt is accelerating, living standards are falling, the wealth gap is widening, geopolitical tensions are rising, and democracies are at risk.
The EIA this year announced that fracked oil is peaking. Fracked oil is the unexpected savior that bought us an extra decade after conventional oil peaked.
Leaders do not want their citizens to panic, or to spook the stock market bubble which depends on growth, so they do not discuss the energy problem, and work hard to distract citizens with nonsense like optimism for a renewable transition, or by stoking emotions over socially divisive issues.
Trump reversed his no more regime change promises after being sworn in and briefed about US debt and oil forecasts.
Every country with significant exportable oil reserves that is not controlled by the US empire is either under attack or being regime changed including Russia, Iran, Syria, Venezuela, and Nigeria. Even friends with oil, or close to oil, like Canada and Greenland, have been threatened with annexation.
Propaganda is successfully being used to convince citizens that regime change operations are to prevent terrorism or drug trafficking, not to control oil.
China is stockpiling strategic oil reserves.
A few countries, like Germany, made an honest attempt to run their economies with renewable energy, but it’s now obvious to leaders everywhere that the renewable dream has failed. German leaders now want war with energy rich Russia.
The UK, having drained its own oil reserves, now wants war with energy rich Russia.
Hail Mary investments praying for a miracle are being made in AI and nuclear energy.
Implications:
The energy lens implies a zero-sum game: In an energy scarce world, one country’s gain is another country’s loss.
Our leaders understand their country’s prosperity requires non-renewable energy, and that it must be secured by any means necessary, including taking it by force from others.
Countries are preparing for war by increasing military expenditures, even at the expense of social services demanded by citizens.
Nuclear arms treaties are being abandoned, and the arms race is restarting.
Lessons learned during the cold war about the dangers of nuclear war are being ignored, and red lines are increasingly flirted with.
It’s hard to imagine how nuclear war can be avoided given that everyone’s survival depends on oil, and the zero-sum game assumption of our leaders.
Conclusions:
Modernity requires growth, and there is not enough oil left for everyone to grow.
Leaders have good reasons to not want citizens to be aware of the seriousness of the energy problem.
Leaders are operating on the assumption of a zero-sum game.
In the CACTUS lens section we’ll see that the zero-sum game assumption is wrong, which means the current strategy will make things worse for all countries.
Awareness Lens: Ecology
Theory:
The resources consumed, and the wastes generated, and the habitats occupied, by the large and growing population of humans, is displacing other species, and causing damage to ecosystems faster than can be repaired by the planet’s recycling systems.
Status:
The 8,230,000,000 humans, plus their 35,000,000,000 livestock, plus their billions of pets and other freeloaders like rats, now weighs 80 times more than all wild land mammals combined.
Humans use 30-40% of the net primary productivity of all sunlight hitting the planet, plus 16,000,000,000 liters per day of ancient sunlight stored as oil, plus 11,000,000,000 cubic meters per day of ancient sunlight stored as natural gas, plus 24,000,000,000 kilograms per day of ancient sunlight stored as coal.
The sixth mass extinction is underway.
Seven of nine planetary boundaries critical for survival have already been crossed including climate change, biodiversity, deforestation, fresh water, nitrogen cycle, pollution, and ocean acidification.
We have already passed the 1.5C safe limit and are on a path to a 3+C temperature increase that is incompatible with civilization and agriculture by the end of this century.
Biodiverse forests are being replaced with mono-crop agriculture.
Fisheries are in decline.
Sea level rise will damage many cities over the next century.
Glacier loss threatens the survival of several countries.
Chemical toxins and microplastics are harming the health of all life including humans.
Awareness of leaders and citizens about the ecological problems varies widely.
Most people are aware of some of the problems, but also tend to superficially simplify them down to one issue, CO2, that can be fixed with solar panels and electric vehicles.
Few are aware of the breadth and depth of the problems.
Many people deny the severity of the problems and/or that humans have caused the problems.
Almost everyone denies the implications of the ecological problems, and the fact there is almost nothing that can be done to address them while maintaining modernity and our population.
Every effort, by every country, and every organization, and every citizen, to address the above problems, has failed, and will continue to fail, at least until something forces an involuntary change to population and lifestyles.
Implications:
The view through the ecology lens is dire.
The long term implications are worse than those seen through the debt and energy lenses because we are damaging the ability for any human lifestyle to thrive, and are also harming many other species.
Conclusions:
Life threatening ecological problems, for the majority of people, are further in the future than the imminent problems seen through the debt, energy, and soon to be explained, CACTUS lenses.
All of the ecological problems are caused by the human species footprint which is the product of lifestyle and population.
None of the ecological problems can be addressed without reducing per capita consumption or population, and the debt and CACTUS lenses show that modernity requires growth, which means the ecological problems are a classic predicament, a problem without an acceptable solution.
The energy and CACTUS lenses show that growth will not continue, and the human footprint will soon shrink, which means there may be an improvement to future ecology trends.
Many of the ecological problems we have created will repair quickly when the scale of the human enterprise shrinks.
Some ecological problems will take a very long time to repair, and adaptation of surviving species will be required.
As will be discussed in more detail in the next section, if we somehow became aware that the scale of humanity was going to decrease in the not too distant future, no matter what we do, then we might be able to motivate ourselves to address several ecological issues that would improve the quality of life for the survivors, such as burying nuclear waste, and protecting biodiverse forests and marine ecosystems.
Awareness Lens: CACTUS
CACTUS = Complexity Accelerated Collapse of a Thermodynamically Unsustainable System
The phrase “we’re cactus” is Australian slang meaning something is ruined, broken, or finished, often used to describe a situation where progress has stopped, such as a vehicle that won’t start.
The expression likely originated from the infamous prickly pear cactus, which once infested large parts of Australia before being controlled by the introduced Cactoblastis cactorum moth.
This slang is part of a broader set of Australian expressions for something being in disrepair or useless, including terms like “boonted,” “clapped-out,” “had the chad,” “had the bomb,” and “kaput”.
While “cactus” as a metaphor for being broken or ruined is well-established in Australian English, it is not commonly used in other English-speaking regions.
Theory:
Modernity requires abundant minerals and energy.
The majority of minerals and energy we use are non-renewable and finite.
Recycling is economically and/or technically impossible for most minerals.
For those minerals that can be recycled, there are losses in the recycling process that still result in long term depletion.
The quality of mineral and energy reserves decline as they deplete, because we always harvest the best quality reserves first.
Mineral and energy extraction technologies must increase in complexity to compensate for falling reserve quality to maintain flows of resources. For example, compare modern directional drilling now required for fracking with early oil rigs. Or the giant trucks and other machines now required to haul and process low grade copper ore.
Rising complexity increases the materials, processes, skills, locations, and number of people needed to design and manufacture the technologies.
Rising complexity requires a growing market to support the increasing cost of designing and manufacturing technologies. For example, a smaller population would not buy enough phones to make a TSMC factory in Taiwan viable, and therefore the advanced chips needed for oil exploration and extraction would not exist.
A growing market requires a growing economy and population.
A growing economy and population increases the consumption of all minerals and energy.
Wastes generated by the growing economy and population create increasing frictions to further growth.
This self-reinforcing complexity growth system drives an increase in mineral and energy flows until technology, markets, and population can no longer keep up with growing waste frictions and declining reserve qualities, and a critical mineral or energy becomes unavailable in the quantities required.
Scarcity of the critical mineral or energy triggers a system wide technology breakdown cascade because many technologies depend on it, and many other technologies depend on those technologies, via an ultra-complex network of dependencies.
The unavailability of many technologies then causes many more mineral and energy flows to become unavailable in the quantities required because the quality of remaining reserves makes extraction difficult or impossible without the latest technologies.
This self-reinforcing collapse of complexity, technology, and resource flows is certain at some point in the not too distant future and will result in a supernova end to modernity and civilization.
Nothing can be done to prevent this outcome, just as nothing can be done to prevent the collapse of a star.
It’s not possible to have modernity without infinite growth on a finite planet which means modernity will be short lived everywhere in the universe.
Hideaway on the Fermi Paradox:
Hence the logical solution to the Fermi Paradox. Species that reach modernity anywhere do not last long enough to detect others, that have also reached modernity, spread through time.
Given the age of our galaxy of around 13.6B years, and if it took 3.6B years for the first species to reach modernity, then if each lasted from 100 years to say 400 years at best, there could have been 1 every million years giving a total of 10,000 for our galaxy and none would ever detect another.
Even if 10 or 20 had popped up at the one time, just through chance, and were more than 400-500 light years apart, they would never know of the other’s existence.
Just by shear chance, some might detect others, but the odds of any one civilization detecting another is extremely small.
Say we did detect another civilization somewhere in the close area within say 1000 light years. So what? By the time we tried to communicate back to them, the odds of their collapse is high.
Hideaway’s AI on the supernova:
Your analogy of a supernova is thermodynamically perfect. A star collapses because the outward pressure of fusion (surplus energy) can no longer balance the inward pull of gravity (entropy/maintenance). In our case, the “outward pressure” that holds up the 6-continent supply chain is the Energy Profit from fossil fuels. Once that profit vanishes, the “gravity” of our 8-billion-person complexity causes the system to implode, dissipating its last reserves in a final, chaotic burst of attempted “self-sufficiency.”
Status:
A tiny minority of people see through the CACTUS lens.
The CACTUS view of modernity has not been widely discussed.
The closest work that I can recall reading is that by David Korowizc where he discusses the extreme complexity and fragility of modern supply chains, and the risk of their breakdown with energy shortages. Korowizc advocates building more resiliency into our system, but I don’t think he stated clearly that modernity will soon end no matter what we do, as Hideaway’s CACTUS lens does.
The ground breaking Limits to Growth work of Dennis Meadows et. al. assumed collapse could be avoided by adopting a steady state population and economy. CACTUS shows this assumption is incorrect. Any dependence on any resource that is not naturally recycled by ecological systems will eventually result in a collapse back to a state that is not dependent on the resource.
Other important overshoot aware people like Jay Hanson and Jack Alpert discuss the certainty of modernity’s demise, but do not focus on the non-renewable resource extraction complexity growth system to conclude that modernity will end in a supernova.
Implications:
The CACTUS lens provides several profound insights that create a clearer view than the debt, energy, or ecology lenses.
List every non-renewable resource that civilization depends on.
Biological/Ecological Resources (functionally non-renewable): Topsoil, old-growth forests, biodiversity, coral reefs, major fish stocks.
The first key insight is that modernity depends on many non-renewable materials, not just energy, and they are all critical for the technologies that enable modernity. CACTUS is thus a much wider lens than the peak oil view.
The second key insight is that modernity requires growth, not only because of the widely understood need for abundant credit as explained by the debt lens, but also because extraction technologies must increase in complexity to compensate for falling reserve qualities. This growth requirement is physical and non-negotiable, and unlike debt, is not digits in a computer that can be reset.
The third key insight is that the requirement for growth, coupled with the inevitable decline in reserve qualities, creates a self-amplifying feedback loop for every one of the many non-renewable resources we depend on, which creates many possible failure points, and the extreme complexity and interdependencies of the technologies we use to extract minerals and energy guarantees a catastrophic failure of the entire system at some point.
The fourth key insight is that this growth and collapse process is certain for any system that is dependent on non-renewable resources. This means there is no possible sustainable solution for advanced civilization anywhere in the universe, because advanced civilization is not possible without non-renewable resources.
The fifth key insight is that there will be no recovery of modernity after the collapse. The quality of many of the remaining non-renewable resource reserves will be so low after the collapse that many resources will be unavailable without advanced technologies and abundant diesel, and there will be no way of rebuilding those technologies because their development required higher quality resource reserves. Surviving humans will return to their hunter gatherer origins.
The sixth key insight is that the zero-sum game strategy that the debt and energy lenses inform our leaders to use, will reduce the time to collapse, and will not optimize the quality of life for the time that remains. War, for the last 10,000 years, was a good response to scarcity. War, today, will create scarcity for the entire planet.
Conclusions:
Given that our leaders see the world through debt and energy lenses, they are operating on the assumption of a zero-sum game:
My country will do better if I damage the economy of my competitors.
My country will survive or grow if I take energy from my competitors.
The CACTUS lens shows us that a zero-sum game strategy will not achieve the desired outcomes.
Instead, zero-sum game strategies will reduce the time to collapse, or reduce the quality of the time that remains. Examples include:
Wasting resources, fragmenting the market, and decreasing efficiencies by trying to duplicate and reshore manufacturing.
Making it more difficult to maintain complexity by fragmenting the global trade system through the encouragement of BRICS and by imposing trade sanctions.
Wasting resources on bigger militaries that won’t help.
Wasting resources on climate change policies that won’t help.
Wasting resources by subsidizing renewable energy that won’t help.
Increasing the chance of violent harms to many by blaming other countries and/or immigrants for hardship caused by resource depletion.
Ignoring international law when it conflicts with a zero-sum goal.
Sanctioning Russian energy.
Blowing up the Nord Stream pipeline.
Restarting a nuclear arms race.
Risking disruptions to middle east oil flows, and destroying respect for leaders, by supporting the genocide of Palestinians.
Funding a proxy war against Russia in Ukraine.
Provoking China to withhold rare earth minerals.
Provoking China to stockpile oil.
Regime changing Syria.
Regime changing Iran.
Regime changing Venezuela.
Threatening to invade Nigeria.
Pissing off Canadians so not a one will buy a US product. 🙂
The CACTUS lens points us to a positive-sum game strategy.
Modernity is a global system of unimaginable complexity dependent on resources, technologies, processes, and skills sourced from 6 continents. A complex component will often travel back and forth between continents many times in the process of converting its constituent minerals into a finished product. Almost every country plays a roll in the complex web that sustains us.
Modernity depends on millions of interdependent components, each with a uniquely complex supply chain, and modernity’s aggregate supply chain is far too complex for any leader, or even a computer, to predict the consequences of disrupting the matrix to achieve a zero-sum game goal.
The risk of unintended consequences is high given that zero-sum game strategies will tend to focus on depriving energy and thus damaging the entire economy of an opponent country.
Plans to reshore manufacturing will make things worse. We don’t have the surplus capital or debt headroom needed to achieve this without damaging something else, and it will be very wasteful of non-renewable resources by creating capacity greater than the market can absorb, thus reducing the time to collapse.
The CACTUS lens shows us modernity will eventually collapse permanently, taking down every country in the process. There is nowhere to hide, and there is nothing we can do to prevent this. No country will be immune.
With CACTUS awareness and a positive-sum game strategy we could:
Make wise decisions that delay the collapse so we can enjoy more of modernity’s benefits, or at least avoid doing stupid things that accelerate the collapse.
Do some things to optimize quality of life until the end, or at least avoid doing stupid things that worsen quality of life.
Consider doing some things that might improve the quality of life for the post collapse survivors.
Actions that might delay the collapse and optimize quality of life until the end include:
Avoid conflicts and wars that harm citizens, damage supply chains, and waste non-renewable energy and minerals.
Stop the subsidy of renewable energy that wastes non-renewable resources and reduces the time to collapse.
Stop wasting money on climate change policies that will not change the outcome.
Put the Sulphur back into ship fuel.
Strengthen global governance and conflict resolution via UN like organizations.
Renew and improve treaties to reduce the risk of nuclear war.
Remove barriers to trade.
Encourage well regulated immigration to optimize global labor.
Allow market forces to optimize the global economy for maximum efficiency.
Adopt digital currencies to enable fairer and more efficient money printing, and to manage the fair rationing of scarcities.
Provide sound lifestyle and dietary advice with encouragements to help citizens improve their health and quality of life, and to reduce the healthcare drag on economies.
Fairly enforce laws to encourage law & order and good behavior.
Provide open and honest communication to citizens so they know what is going on and why, and no longer feel like they are being gaslit by wizards behind a curtain.
Provide meaningful and rewarding goals to citizens, like asking them to volunteer to rehabilitate habitats and soils to help post-collapse survivors.
When signs of the final collapse become visible, provide a painless end of life kit to any citizen that wants one to reduce their anxiety.
Notice that nothing on the above list requires a change in lifestyle for the majority, or the overriding of evolved behaviors like the Maximum Power Principle, or singing kumbaya, or sharing everything equally, or eating bugs.
Limits to growth are breaking our democracies. Citizens know their standard of living is falling, but do not understand why, so they vote for the politician that most credibly promises a better life, but leaders are powerless to improve living standards, which breeds politicians that are superb at lying, but not well suited to optimizing a complex problem. Then when the leader does not deliver, the citizen is pissed off, and next time votes for someone more extreme that blames the immigrants or the Chinese, and so on, which accelerates us in the wrong direction. The only way to break this path to despots is awareness.
With CACTUS awareness we will understand the comforts we enjoy are rare in the universe, are very fragile, and will soon be gone forever on this planet. This could lead to gratitude and care to not cause a premature collapse.
CACTUS awareness will create strong pressure between countries, and by citizens on leaders, to not break things.
If we understand modernity will soon be gone for everyone no matter what we do, there will be less need to dominate and win, and more need to enjoy and cooperate to extend the good times.
Humans are an innovative species. With CACTUS awareness there would be many people thinking about what could be done to buy more time. Maybe we should use this resource for this rather than that? Opposition to change from people who have to give something up might be muted if they understood the change will buy a few more good years.
Some ideas to improve the quality of life for the post collapse survivors will be difficult to decide and implement because many of these will conflict with the goal of delaying collapse as long as possible. On the other hand, if we collectively understand collapse is inevitable, it might be easier to say set aside some forest or wildlife habitat, or bury nuclear waste, knowing that your children or grandchildren might benefit.
Imagine the effect of CACTUS awareness on philanthropy. What might billionaires with children do with their wealth if they understood modernity will soon be gone? Perhaps they might buy up biodiverse rainforests to protect them.
Shifting from the current zero-sum game strategy to a positive-sum game strategy will be very difficult.
CACTUS is very unpleasant. Genetic denial, as explained by MORT, will be in full force resisting CACTUS awareness.
On the other hand, almost everything going on in the world today is also very unpleasant, and many people are losing their minds because nothing makes sense.
In a strange way, CACTUS may be less unpleasant than what we are currently asked to believe, because the CACTUS story at least agrees with what our eyes see, and provides reasons for gratitude when times are tough, so maybe there’s a chance for CACTUS awareness.
We evolved in small tribes that in times of scarcity had to fight other tribes to survive. There are no attacking aliens to unite us.
The CACTUS lens does point to a common threat that will kill almost everyone, but most people won’t believe it.
When times get tougher, as they surely will, leaders will have zero chance of adopting a positive-sum game strategy unless a majority of citizens see the world through the CACTUS lens.
Those of us that are CACTUS aware should start brainstorming how to spread CACTUS awareness.
Here’s one idea:
We could recruit the powerful institutions that were created by MORT: religions.
CACTUS awareness will be fantastic for the life after death businesses. All religions will boom with growing memberships, donations, and tithes.
Religions therefore could be self-interested and enthusiastic allies for spreading the CACTUS gospel.
Religions also have the perfect infrastructure and skills needed to spread an idea like CACTUS and its positive-sum game belief system.
A likely roadblock to our leaders embracing the CACTUS lens is the big money behind financial institutions that depend on good news for their pump the bubble business model.
I’m thinking that it shouldn’t be too hard to get them on board. The CACTUS lens doesn’t say everyone has to live like poor monks in a cave.
CACTUS tells us the end will be painful but mercifully quick, so those so inclined can party on like it’s 19991 in a glorious bubble until the last day…
1The highest net energy we ever enjoyed was in 1999 when about 4% of energy was needed to extract energy. Today it takes about 10-15% of energy to extract energy, and the ratio is continuing to rise.
Economic: end of growth, declining living standards, widening wealth gap, inflation, accelerating unsustainable debt, asset bubbles.
Environmental: accelerating climate change, species extinction, toxic forever chemicals, plastic waste, sick & dying trees from rising ground level ozone, etc.
Health: increasing obesity, autism, and chronic diseases, declining lifespans, increasing depression and mental illness.
Resources: peak food, peak oil, peak minerals, aquifer depletion, etc.
Energy: reserve depletion, rising extraction costs, falling EROI, export land model, no renewable substitutes for non-renewable fossils, etc.
The common denominator to all of these problems is overshoot.
Very few people are able to see through the lens of overshoot because overshoot is a very unpleasant topic with no painless solutions and no way to avoid its consequences, and because humans evolved to deny unpleasant realities like overshoot.
Grok: Biological overshoot occurs when a population exceeds the carrying capacity of its environment, meaning it consumes resources faster than they can be replenished, leading to ecological imbalance. This is often seen in ecosystems where a species’ population grows beyond what the available resources (e.g., food, water, habitat) can sustainably support.
Causes: Rapid reproduction, lack of predators, abundant resources (temporarily), or human intervention (e.g., removing natural checks).
Consequences: Resource depletion, habitat degradation, population crashes, or ecosystem collapse. For example, a deer population might overshoot due to abundant food, then starve when resources run out.
Quantifying Overshoot: In ecology, overshoot can be measured by comparing population size N to carrying capacity K . If N>K, the system is in overshoot, often leading to a decline until N≤K.
Helpful Responses: Addressing overshoot requires restoring balance between population and resources.
What Should We Do?
I started this un-Denial blog 13 years ago after I became aware of our overshoot predicament, and a plausible theory by Dr. Ajit Varki for why almost no one can see the most important and obvious threat we face.
After a few years of discussing our overshoot issues I got tired of being a pessimist and wrote a prescription for what we should do. I thought it was pretty good at the time and represented a path that might actually help rather than the fantasy solutions with 100% probability of failing being promoted by millions of people with good intentions working on symptoms rather than the core overshoot problem.
My prescription for what we should do was in essence to minimize total suffering for all species by humanely reducing our population as fast as possible, and by planning and managing a controlled economic contraction, rather than allowing nature to force an uncontrolled collapse.
I understood that it would not be possible to implement my prescription unless the majority somehow could be made aware of our overshoot predicament, and this in turn required some method of overriding our genetic tendency to deny unpleasant realities. So I then spent several years promoting Dr. Ajit Varki’s MORT theory in the hope that experts in relevant domains would work discover a method to override MORT.
My efforts were a complete failure. Not only did I not succeed in engaging any brain or behavior experts, I was not even able to recruit any like-minded colleagues in the overshoot space who were also trying to find solutions.
I sadly concluded that it was not possible to override MORT because denial of denial is the strongest form of denial, probably because evolution, for good reasons, ensures that the Maximum Power Principal (MPP) trumps all other behaviors.
What Can We Do?
In recent years the insights of Hideaway on the role of complexity in sustaining our civilization have caused me to question the theoretical feasibility of my or any other prescription.
Hideaway explains that the use of any non-renewable resource degrades the quality of its reserves over time, and this requires increasing complexity to sustain supply of the resource, which requires growing economies and population, which consume more supply, which worsens the reserve quality, which means any civilization dependent on non-renewable resources must grow or it will collapse, which means a hard collapse is unavoidable and no mitigation paths exist.
Hideaway’s probably correct but it’s a tough pill to swallow.
I’m still struggling to accept Hideaway’s conclusion because I can imagine many things we could do to worsen our predicament, like for example starting a nuclear war, or by burning our remaining coal and gas reserves faster by using AI to create more enjoyable porn.
Given that we could do many things to increase the coming suffering, it seems reasonable to assume there must be some things we could do to reduce the coming suffering, which I believe is the only sensible goal left to us.
But what are the things we could do to reduce total suffering for all species?
I would love to see the readers of un-Denial offer their ideas in the comments below. If we get enough good ideas I will collate them into another post with a new prescription representing our collective wisdom.
What Could Someone Do?
I’m a long time follower and admirer of Jack Alpert and have posted some of his best work over the years.
For many years Alpert’s been a lone voice advocating rapid population reduction with the goals of reducing suffering and retaining some of our best accomplishments as the only species with science and advanced technology.
In addition, if you have any doubts about the importance of Alpert’s goal to retain some of the more valuable features of modernity, this video on what life was actually like in ancient Rome will set you straight.
I was pessimistic about the feasibility of Alpert’s plan because it required educating sufficient citizens to vote for population reduction policies and I knew from my MORT observations and failures that his education plan would most certainly fail due to our genetic tendency to deny unpleasant realities.
Nevertheless, I still like Alpert’s plan because setting aside the political feasibility of achieving a quorum, it at least was technically feasible and did not break the laws of physics or deny the reality of non-renewable resources as every other “plan” by every other “expert” does.
There is of course now a new technical feasibility question created by Hideaway’s complexity theory. It may not be possible to retain some of modernity’s most valuable technology without the 8 billion scale of our civilization. Let’s hand wave this away for now because I don’t know the specifics of what Alpert proposes to retain, and we need to think harder about the implications of Hideaway’s complexity theory in the context of a population that falls really fast, perhaps so fast that the requirement for growing complexity to maintain supply no longer applies. Suggest we continue this discussion in the comments below.
I was recently pleased to see a revised plan by Alpert that no longer requires a majority of citizens to vote for population reduction policies.
We are underestimating our predicament and underestimating the behaviors needed to unwind it.
Human civilization maybe sicker than we think. Maybe we should consider stronger medicine.
Abstract:
Consider a line that describes the delivery rate of fossil fuels to civilization. Each higher rate each year supported an ever larger global population with ever grander lifestyles.
Unfortunately, earth’s crustal limitations suggest this rate of energy delivery will decline back to its 1750’s level this century.
Unless energy deliveries from solar, wind, hydro, geo thermal, fission, and fusion can come online and replace lost fossil deliveries, human population and lifestyles will also drop back to the 1750’s levels.
Civilization will experience first scarcity; then conflict; and finally a self-reinforcing feedback loop called a scarcity conflict death spiral which will starve to death or kill in conflict most if the people who live this century.
When the behaviors that prevent this die off cause their own significant injuries the condition is called a predicament because people are injured with or without the prevention behavior.
In the last two minutes of this video I propose a behavior that causes much pain and prevents the injuries during civilization contraction. The video helps the chooser of the potential behavior quantify the injuries on each path.
After you view the video you may have important questions that need answers:
Why do we have to make the transition in the next 80 years?
In this latest plan Alpert proposes that a single expert could engineer a contagious virus to sterilize the human population.
It seems plausible to me that a single scientist with defective denial genes could be found and recruited for this task. People who can see reality are rare but they do exist.
I do have, however, serious doubts about the technical feasibility of engineering a safe and effective sterilization virus given that it’s required to override life’s primary mission, and given that a trillion dollar pharma industry with an army of scientists was unable to engineer or manufacture a safe and effective gene therapy for a virus they created and had the blueprints for.
How is one rogue scientist going to engineer a safe and effective highly contagious virus designed to override the primary objective of DNA honed by 4 billion years of evolution?
Nevertheless, I’m an electrical engineer with limited knowledge of genetic engineering so perhaps Alpert knows something I do not.
What Will We Do?
Our most likely path is the path we are on which is to use every psychological, accounting, and technology trick we can think of to keep growing the size of our economy and the complexity it depends on until we reach the end of the runway and crash with a spectacular collapse of supply chains, complexity, food, and population.
Unfortunately there will be a lot of suffering for humans and other species. The planet and its diversity of life will no doubt recover, but it will never achieve the pinnacle of rare complexity we enjoy today.
As we accelerate down the runway stresses will increase within countries and between countries. You can see these growing stresses everywhere today. There is a high probability that our leaders will do something in desperation that reduces the length of the runway.
It is likely that our most powerful weapons will be used when citizens of a resource unlucky country become envious and angry. As one recent example, a petulant little island nation off the coast of France that is collapsing because its oil and coal reserves are depleted is trying to provoke a nuclear war with a much larger and more powerful country on the opposite side of a large continent because it has some oil and gas that might sustain the lifestyles and entitlements of the island nation a little longer.
There is another darker scenario now being publicly discussed by very competent geopolitical experts like Col. Larry Wilkerson. In this interview last week Wilkerson explained why he is very worried about the growing threat of a nuclear war and that he fears for his grandchildren.
Wilkerson also said he knows powerful people who believe the solution to overpopulation and resource depletion is to kill billions with nuclear weapons. You can listen to these comments at 42:30 but I’d start earlier at around 33:30 for important context.
In this light, Jack Alpert’s sterilization virus starts to look pretty good.
In case you are not aware of it, I recommend the 2013 TV series Utopia which was about a plot to reduce the population with an engineered virus.