The forum is useful because it might - just might - give us an early warning of any sudden "failure mode" in the system.
24 hours head start would be worthwhile ... if only to bulk buy at the supermarket before the hordes sweep them clean.
More generally, the topics allow you to build up a broad picture of the whole PO ... and related .. problems.
It's hard work 'tho ... so much chit-chat, flaming, showing off and general shite to plough through in order to find the odd snippet of mega valuable information or advice.
PeakOil is You
Cornucopians vs Doomers
Re: Cornucopians vs Doomers
by WebHubbleTelescope » Mon 19 Jun 2006, 22:42:55
To understand this dichotomy you have to understand politics.
Cornucopians derive from right-wing, dominionist beliefs -- republicans and libertarians.
Doomers are largely composed of progressives -- democrats and greens.
If you don't believe this link to activist politics, point me first to a popular blog run by right-wingers who acknowledge the threat of peak oil. And then do the converse. Every significant topic boils down to partisan politics. Peak oil has yet to have devolved into a wedge issue for either side of the political spectrum. A specific subset of energy issues may be nearing a wedge (biodiesel, ethanol, China, and a few others) but that is not enough to bifurcate the following. So in effect, you have found another political issue where the progressives are right, and the righties are wrong, and can't be swayed due to years of indoctrination.
Cornucopians derive from right-wing, dominionist beliefs -- republicans and libertarians.
Doomers are largely composed of progressives -- democrats and greens.
If you don't believe this link to activist politics, point me first to a popular blog run by right-wingers who acknowledge the threat of peak oil. And then do the converse. Every significant topic boils down to partisan politics. Peak oil has yet to have devolved into a wedge issue for either side of the political spectrum. A specific subset of energy issues may be nearing a wedge (biodiesel, ethanol, China, and a few others) but that is not enough to bifurcate the following. So in effect, you have found another political issue where the progressives are right, and the righties are wrong, and can't be swayed due to years of indoctrination.
-
WebHubbleTelescope - Tar Sands
- Posts: 950
- Joined: Thu 08 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
Re: Cornucopians vs Doomers
by Jack » Mon 19 Jun 2006, 23:28:10
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('WebHubbleTelescope', '
')Cornucopians derive from right-wing, dominionist beliefs -- republicans and libertarians.
Doomers are largely composed of progressives -- democrats and greens.
')Cornucopians derive from right-wing, dominionist beliefs -- republicans and libertarians.
Doomers are largely composed of progressives -- democrats and greens.
Umm...I'm about as right-wing as one can get...and very much a doomer. I know some other folks, likewise right-wing - and they, too, are doomers.
So I question your conclusion...
![[smilie=new_popcornsmiley.gif]](https://udev.peakoil.com/forums/images/smilies/new_popcornsmiley.gif "new_popcornsmiley")
- Jack
- Light Sweet Crude
- Posts: 4929
- Joined: Wed 11 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Re: Cornucopians vs Doomers
by jdumars » Tue 20 Jun 2006, 00:51:47
I don't think it's right wing/left wing or even optimist/pessimist. I think the gulf that separates doomers from the cornucopians is pragmatism.
I might also make the distinction here that generic doomerism is often misapplied. This was my take on the various types of doomers:
Eco-doomer: A person who subscribes to the belief that human abuse of the Earth's ecosystem will (or is already beginning to) result in catastrophic conditions unfavorable to continued human (and other) life.
Econ-doomer: A person who believes the US (or world) economy is in eminent threat of complete collapse, such that the only acceptable form of future currency will be real goods, bartered skills or precious metals.
PO-doomer: A person who firmly believes that PO will trigger a complete breakdown in world finance (see Econ-doomer), social order, public infrastructure, government and virtually all forms of modern convenience. There are subsets of the PO-doomer profile that predict the speed and extent of breakdown -- these are the hard and soft landers.
Hard Lander: A person who believes that the post-peak transition will be both rapid and utterly devastating. This person believes a large part of the population will not survive the transition without additional, extensive preparation that may already be too late.
Soft Lander: A person who believes the post-peak transition will be relatively slow and relatively orderly. Most still qualify as doomers because they feel the transition is inevitable.
Schadenfreudoomer: A doomer of any variety that takes pleasure knowing that society (or elements of society such as consumerism or corporate monoculture) will cease to exist as we know it.
LATOC-doomer: A person that bases their outlook largely on Matt Savinar's site and book. This is a particular mix of the various doomer-profiles.
Doer-doomer: A doomer that believes a societal/energy/monetary crash is coming soon and is actively preparing their lives to avoid the most damaging anticipated aspects of it. This typically involves buying arable or remote land, learning trades, growing food and preparing for a life independent of third-party energy providers. Typically a doer-doomer is middle to upper class with the financial resources and motivation to actually accomplish preparations.
Festering-doomer: A doomer of any variety that does nothing to prepare for what they believe is coming, yet complains, frets and talks about it incessantly. The festering doomer typically feels helpless in the face of the threat due to circumstances beyond their immediate control such as finances, relationships, or family obligations. Many festering doomers are married to spouses who do not believe in PO and dismiss their ideas.
Happy-doomer: A doomer who is typically a happy person but has a tendency to assume that the worst case scenario is the most likely. This doesn't imply negativity as a personality trait, just a tendency to focus on the arguments or data that points toward the most severe outcome. Happy-doomers watch commodoties prices every day, watch CNN (and occasionally Fox for another viewpoint) endlessly, and have a regular suite of self-reinforcing blogs that they visit (such as deconsumption or depletion). Happy doomers can be very optimistic about lots of things -- except PO or anything to do with it.
My guess is cornucopians have similar subclasses. Any of these doomer subtypes would view cornucopians differently.
As far as political leanings, I am pro-nature, but anti-environmentalist. I am conservative but anti-republican. I am socially liberal but pro-gun. I'm an atheist but spritual.
I might also make the distinction here that generic doomerism is often misapplied. This was my take on the various types of doomers:
Eco-doomer: A person who subscribes to the belief that human abuse of the Earth's ecosystem will (or is already beginning to) result in catastrophic conditions unfavorable to continued human (and other) life.
Econ-doomer: A person who believes the US (or world) economy is in eminent threat of complete collapse, such that the only acceptable form of future currency will be real goods, bartered skills or precious metals.
PO-doomer: A person who firmly believes that PO will trigger a complete breakdown in world finance (see Econ-doomer), social order, public infrastructure, government and virtually all forms of modern convenience. There are subsets of the PO-doomer profile that predict the speed and extent of breakdown -- these are the hard and soft landers.
Hard Lander: A person who believes that the post-peak transition will be both rapid and utterly devastating. This person believes a large part of the population will not survive the transition without additional, extensive preparation that may already be too late.
Soft Lander: A person who believes the post-peak transition will be relatively slow and relatively orderly. Most still qualify as doomers because they feel the transition is inevitable.
Schadenfreudoomer: A doomer of any variety that takes pleasure knowing that society (or elements of society such as consumerism or corporate monoculture) will cease to exist as we know it.
LATOC-doomer: A person that bases their outlook largely on Matt Savinar's site and book. This is a particular mix of the various doomer-profiles.
Doer-doomer: A doomer that believes a societal/energy/monetary crash is coming soon and is actively preparing their lives to avoid the most damaging anticipated aspects of it. This typically involves buying arable or remote land, learning trades, growing food and preparing for a life independent of third-party energy providers. Typically a doer-doomer is middle to upper class with the financial resources and motivation to actually accomplish preparations.
Festering-doomer: A doomer of any variety that does nothing to prepare for what they believe is coming, yet complains, frets and talks about it incessantly. The festering doomer typically feels helpless in the face of the threat due to circumstances beyond their immediate control such as finances, relationships, or family obligations. Many festering doomers are married to spouses who do not believe in PO and dismiss their ideas.
Happy-doomer: A doomer who is typically a happy person but has a tendency to assume that the worst case scenario is the most likely. This doesn't imply negativity as a personality trait, just a tendency to focus on the arguments or data that points toward the most severe outcome. Happy-doomers watch commodoties prices every day, watch CNN (and occasionally Fox for another viewpoint) endlessly, and have a regular suite of self-reinforcing blogs that they visit (such as deconsumption or depletion). Happy doomers can be very optimistic about lots of things -- except PO or anything to do with it.
My guess is cornucopians have similar subclasses. Any of these doomer subtypes would view cornucopians differently.
As far as political leanings, I am pro-nature, but anti-environmentalist. I am conservative but anti-republican. I am socially liberal but pro-gun. I'm an atheist but spritual.
-
jdumars - Coal
- Posts: 438
- Joined: Sat 02 Apr 2005, 04:00:00
- Location: Portland, Oregon
Re: Cornucopians vs Doomers
by rwwff » Tue 20 Jun 2006, 01:08:50
Hey, I like these.
I guess that makes me a right wing, pro-gun, religious, econo-dooming soft lander who none the less has put in place reasonable hedges against a full hard lander outcome.
Expect the best, prepare for the worst, and enjoy the A/C till they finally turn off the juice.
I guess that makes me a right wing, pro-gun, religious, econo-dooming soft lander who none the less has put in place reasonable hedges against a full hard lander outcome.
Expect the best, prepare for the worst, and enjoy the A/C till they finally turn off the juice.
-
rwwff - Intermediate Crude
- Posts: 2601
- Joined: Fri 28 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
- Location: East Texas
Re: Cornucopians vs Doomers
by Zardoz » Tue 20 Jun 2006, 01:37:32
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jdumars', '.')..I might also make the distinction here that generic doomerism is often misapplied. This was my take on the various types of doomers...
Helluva list. Quite accurate, all in all.
"Thank you for attending the oil age. We're going to scrape what we can out of these tar pits in Alberta and then shut down the machines and turn out the lights. Goodnight." - seldom_seen
-
Zardoz - Expert
- Posts: 6323
- Joined: Fri 02 Dec 2005, 04:00:00
- Location: Oil-addicted Southern Californucopia
Re: Cornucopians vs Doomers
by DefiledEngine » Tue 20 Jun 2006, 01:59:40
Yes, people often scale problems in the way that they want.
In the good old days we only had doomers or cornucopians. I wonder which came first?
In the good old days we only had doomers or cornucopians. I wonder which came first?
-
DefiledEngine - Lignite
- Posts: 344
- Joined: Thu 19 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Re: Cornucopians vs Doomers
by IslandCrow » Tue 20 Jun 2006, 02:17:31
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smiley', '
')It seems to me that the main problem between Cornucopians and Doomers is one of scale.
If you look at a typical debate. It starts of with a problem of a certain scale. The Cornucopian starts to break down the problem to smaller problems which he can handle, and the Doomer starts to enlarge the problem to a scale which he thinks is appropriate. ....
')It seems to me that the main problem between Cornucopians and Doomers is one of scale.
If you look at a typical debate. It starts of with a problem of a certain scale. The Cornucopian starts to break down the problem to smaller problems which he can handle, and the Doomer starts to enlarge the problem to a scale which he thinks is appropriate. ....
With my skill and training in computer programming I must be hard-wired to be a cornucopian...To write a computer program one must break the problem down into smaller and smaller steps until one can code it one line at a time ...and so that is how I tend to approach the problem of PO.
But does the way I think (rather than what I think) make me a Cornucopian rather than a doomer? Well I believe that we are in for hard times, and that as the flow of oil supplies slows down then humanity is in for a hard ride until some new level can be sorted out...yet I believe that there are smaller parts of the problem that can be handled and that will make it easier for communities to survive the upheaval of the slide - See that shows while I am pessimistic about the future I am not a doomer in the sense that I do not expect a sudden collapse with all society breaking down at one time.
I am not a doomer, but then the idea of Cornucopia is one of plenty, and I do not see that in the future... so I am somewhere on the scale between the two.
We are facing a downward hill. My hope is that on working on smaller projects I can help (at a small local level) the 'car of society' to apply the breaks to slow its decent enough that there is not a crash and total wreck, and that when it gets to the bottom of the hill there is still something of value left [at least in a car without petrol one can still keep out of the rain, but a tangled wreck is no good for even that]. I honestly don't know if the hill will be too steep (or even if there is a cliff) so that whatever pressure I put on the breaks it is not enough, but I feel that I should do what I can.
We should teach our children the 4-Rs: Reduce, Reuse, Recycle and Rejoice.
-
IslandCrow - Heavy Crude
- Posts: 1272
- Joined: Mon 12 Sep 2005, 03:00:00
- Location: Finland
Re: Cornucopians vs Doomers
by MonteQuest » Tue 20 Jun 2006, 02:22:19
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smiley', ' ')Doomers acknowledge this inter-linkage, in fact it is central to their theories. They not only view PO as one big problem, but PO itself as a part of a much bigger problem, usually referred to as The Big Picture (TBP). As the TBP encompasses economical, sociological, environmental as well as geological factors it is an extremely hard issue to define. Doomers therefore tend to speak in general terms, like Techno-Fix, Powerdown, Die-Off.
The danger of this approach is that (partial) solutions seem insignificant to the size and extend of the problem and are therefore ignored. Thinking in like general terms leads to general conclusions like "Techo-Fixes won't work", an opinion which is based on the average assessment of proposed technical solutions and ignores individual solutions.
The danger of this approach is that (partial) solutions seem insignificant to the size and extend of the problem and are therefore ignored. Thinking in like general terms leads to general conclusions like "Techo-Fixes won't work", an opinion which is based on the average assessment of proposed technical solutions and ignores individual solutions.
No, it's not that techno-fixes won't work. It is that a techno-fix doesn't exist that will solve this issue. Techno-fixes just kick the can down the road and will make things worse. Remember, the definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over again an expecting different results. Techno-fixes presume that what we are doing is sustainable and it just needs a "tune-up." And few techno-fixers believe we must reduce the population.
Infinite growth in a finite world...forever. There are no limits.
Peak oil is not about finding solutions to bits and pieces of the puzzle, it is about changing the way we look and view life and the world about us. Band-aids for symptoms does little to address the cause.
And no, contrary to what you wrote, I believe most people in this camp believe individual solutions, especially on a local basis, will be key to effective mitigation efforts.
I've said it many times on here:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Montequest', 'I')deologically, we need an ecological worldview; a paradigm shift in our thinking about the world about us. Which brings us to a conundrum: it is difficult, if almost impossible (even in scientific discussions) for people of one paradigm to communicate with those who perceive and reason in terms dictated by another different paradigm. We all need to be on the same page and we are not.
That is why there is such polarity.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')t seems to me that the main problem between Cornucopians and Doomers is one of scale.
Yes, I agree. But not in the scale of the discussion, but in the scalability of the solutions the cornucopians posit. Look at reality, it's like watching grass grow to see the implementation of alternative energies. It will be decades before any of them or all of them together will contribute any sigificant amount of energy to the mix. It's like they just ignore the exponential growth of the population and energy hungry countries like China and India. What part of Dr. Albert Bartlett's presentation did they not grasp?
I doubt we could keep up with the growth if oil was infinite! Even when the USA was the world's #1 producer of oil we could not keep up with domestic demand. We all know this. We have all seen the historical charts.
To assume we can meet terawatt demand with megawatt solutions is ludicrous. No one I know is seriously planning to meet this demand with alternatives. Look at the wedge solutions in the Hirsch Report:
Vehicle Efficiency
Gas-To-Liquids
Heavy Oils / Oil Sands
Coal Liquids
Enhanced Oil Recovery
Let's be practical: the only remaining large source of fossil fuels is the American economy and affluence. To mitigate peakoil the American standard of living will have to come down a long, long, way...forever.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
. But is it something worthwhile that you would like to try again ? 
