[Duende]

I think most of us agree that its important to inform people about the realities of resource depletion. For me personally, I feel obligated to get the word out there, even if I acknowledge few will "get it".

I'm curious how many of us have approached friends and family about resource depletion, and how many of us have gone the next step in making community presentations, speaking as concerned citizens on various development projects in your area, speaking at public hearings, or creating local action groups. For instance, does anyone have a good powerpoint presentation that they've found to be persuasive?

I'm really not interested in discussing "success rates" per se; I'm convinced that some people will be open to the concepts and others won't. I'd like to talk about ways you've spurred others to work with you in informing, volunteering, presenting, etc. in the hopes of locally addressing the effects of resource depletion.

[Ferretlover]

Good luck.
I, too, asked this question, in various forms I might add, when I first posted here at PO.
Nearly everyone asks these questions.
I would guess that your chances of interesting anyone in the reality of a peak world--well, you MIGHT find one person in, oh, say, a thousand (maybe more) who won't think you are completely nuts.
Read some of the other threads....The perception others have of you will change dramatically, and not for the better.
Then, when things get worse, and they will, you will suddenly have all kinds of people who know you were prepared and probably have all kinds of supplies that they want....
It is not a pretty picture, but go ahead and try......

[pup55]

http://peakoil.com/fortopic9891-0-asc-30.html

There are some links on this thread

[Grifter]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ferretlover', 'G')ood luck.
I, too, asked this question, in various forms I might add, when I first posted here at PO.
Nearly everyone asks these questions.
I would guess that your chances of interesting anyone in the reality of a peak world--well, you MIGHT find one person in, oh, say, a thousand (maybe more) who won't think you are completely nuts.
Read some of the other threads....The perception others have of you will change dramatically, and not for the better.
Then, when things get worse, and they will, you will suddenly have all kinds of people who know you were prepared and probably have all kinds of supplies that they want....
It is not a pretty picture, but go ahead and try......

[seahorse2]

Duende,

Unfortunately, most of us here have learned the hard emotional lesson that the only ones that will talk to you or listen to you about PO are the people here on these boards. You're probably wasting your time trying to talk to anyone in person, and all you'll do is make people think you are crazy.

The fact that no one in society will listen, even consider the issue (despite oil at $100 pb when it was $19 a barrel in 1999) is concerning, and leads me to believe the more doomerish aspects of PO. I tend to believe that all problems have solutions, if people are willing to actually try and solve the problem. The problem I see with arguing PO solutions is the fact that no one cares and probably won't care until its too late to mitigate reasonably. I always look to the social security issue in the U.S. for guidance. It is a known and accepted fact that our Social Security program will go bankrupt, its all math. All the US accepts that fact and even debates it. Its always a political issue, but does anyone do anything about it? No. It means reducing "entitlements" which no one wants to do. So, why would the world treat PO any differently?

In the end, Michael Klare, author of "Blood and Oil" is probably right about how PO will resolve - the world will end up resolving the oil depletion like it has solved every other resource depletion issue, by fighting for the remaining drops of oil. After all, wars are the easiest solution to implement. Wars don't require consent of the people, and, if too many people is ultimately the cause behind too much demand, simply kill the people off and reduce demand. During the war, countries can also justify rationing what remaining resources there are to help with the war effort. It will be everyone's patriotic duty to do so.

[Duende]

Thanks for the link pup55.

I suspect that the way you discuss resource depletion is just as important as the actual subject material. For example, an extremely cogent, rational, compelling powerpoint presentation with reliable sources would be more persuasive than an off-the-cuff rant about our soulless consumerist culture followed by a doomeristic quip like "we're all screwed".

Further, I think that focusing on how resource depletion affects the subjects at hand is critical.

[namenick]

seahorse2 wrote: $this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he fact that no one in society will listen, even consider the issue (despite oil at $100 pb when it was $19 a barrel in 1999) is concerning, and leads me to believe the more doomerish aspects of PO. I tend to believe that all problems have solutions, if people are willing to actually try and solve the problem. The problem I see with arguing PO solutions is the fact that no one cares and probably won't care until its too late to mitigate reasonably. I always look to the social security issue in the U.S. for guidance. It is a known and accepted fact that our Social Security program will go bankrupt, its all math. All the US accepts that fact and even debates it. Its always a political issue, but does anyone do anything about it? No. It means reducing "entitlements" which no one wants to do. So, why would the world treat PO any differently?

[like_the_dinosaurs]

Choose the people you think will respond well. No good trying to convince well most people i guess. Maybe this is all part of the strongest survive way of life which we have left behind long ago.

You can't stop it now anyway. Besides governments havent even put the brakes on yet, goddam interest rate cuts is there answer.

[vision-master]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('namenick', 's')eahorse2 wrote: $this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he fact that no one in society will listen, even consider the issue (despite oil at $100 pb when it was $19 a barrel in 1999) is concerning, and leads me to believe the more doomerish aspects of PO. I tend to believe that all problems have solutions, if people are willing to actually try and solve the problem. The problem I see with arguing PO solutions is the fact that no one cares and probably won't care until its too late to mitigate reasonably. I always look to the social security issue in the U.S. for guidance. It is a known and accepted fact that our Social Security program will go bankrupt, its all math. All the US accepts that fact and even debates it. Its always a political issue, but does anyone do anything about it? No. It means reducing "entitlements" which no one wants to do. So, why would the world treat PO any differently?

[threadbear]

There is a Darwinian survival component here. If people haven't figured out by now, that the planet is overpopulated and that they will live in constrained circumstances for the rest of their lives, partly as a result, why walk them through the process? Believe me, they're going to find out soon enough.

[Concerned]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Duende', 'T')hanks for the link pup55.

I suspect that the way you discuss resource depletion is just as important as the actual subject material. For example, an extremely cogent, rational, compelling powerpoint presentation with reliable sources would be more persuasive than an off-the-cuff rant about our soulless consumerist culture followed by a doomeristic quip like "we're all screwed".

Further, I think that focusing on how resource depletion affects the subjects at hand is critical.

[mos6507]

I had a talk with my dad in the car when I last visited him. He SELLS CARS for a living. So it went in ear and out the other. It was like talking to a brick wall.

An oil-dependent life is the foundation of everyone's reality. Having that epiphany is really like a religious conversion. It takes a lot to get pushed over the edge, but once you do, you aren't the same anymore.

I think only certain brainy types of people can "get it" at this early stage, based on the logic of it, and the statistics that reinforce it. For everyone else, it's going to have to wait until the crash is hitting them in the face to see it for what it is.

[Newfie]

Interesting topic. I have a couple of thoughts.

1. Peak Oil is only part of the problem, the root cause is over population.

2. I belong to a small religious society (well sorta), very progressive and very left leaning. Our "Leader" recently did a Sunday platform on the perils of over population and how it is the real culprit behind the UN Millennium Goals. It went over very well. Good presenter with a lot of creed to a friendly, intellectual (not techie) crowd. Did they "get" it? Some did, others not. Maybe 50/50.

3. Being the (lame duck) president of said group I get to do a monthly newsletter piece. I have brushed by this once or twice before. People generally want to hear something "heart warming" and "up lifting." Not a lot of congrats about these pieces. This month I hit them pretty hard with my message, it has not gone out yet. We will see if I get lynched.

4. Once I shared a rail ride with a self proclaimed environmental activist who controlled the web site of BIG environmental group. You know them, trust me. I pressed her on over-population as the core issue. After arguing with me about how it can be fixed she let her guard down and, in a low and angry voice said "Look, that is just too negative a message. We need to get people to listen and if we tell them that they will just turn off."

My experience is that about a third to two-thirds of the people I deal with, mostly engineers and similar professionals with a left leaning bent, get it to some degree. Most feel there is still time to keep really bad things from happening. In this group maybe something like 10% really, really get it.

[jedinvest]

I usually get to the point where I think I am succeeding with a close friend or, my wife, for instance. I lay the groundwork, that the economy is sinking, essential resources like oil are becoming scarce and expensive, that we should be ready for the consequences and what will happen. It appears that I have succeeded, but their last comment is invariably: But everything will be better in a couple of years! This cycle concept is so ingrained in people that they don't realize that sometimes there is a beginning and an end and we certainly are not at the beginning. I don't know, I think quiet preparation and getting people involved in the prep process is the best thing to do. Trying to explain the real reason for it all is probably useless.

[Pixie]

I showed "The Community Solution: How Cuba Survived Peak Oil" to the Human Dignity Group, my local liberal causes group. They thought it was pretty interesting. I've also showed it to all my best friends. It's a good video, because it introduces peak oil, but keeps a very positive, here's-what-we-can-do focus. So people are willing to watch.

I haven't gotten through to everyone yet, but my best friend is now really into home vegetable growing, so it is not a lost cause.

[DrBang]

I have developed a new method for doing this that doesn't drive me nuts and still does the job.

Instead of trying to beat the concept into them with facts and figures (which invariably inspires an emotional, almost irrational response that results in a bit of character assassination as opposed to discussing the actual issue).

Now I casually mention it that that is what I believe and certain things are inevitable. This is what I think, then change the subject. I may mention casually some of the symptoms but in a really offhand low key manner. If they are going to be receptive to the idea they will pick up on that. They can then see those same symptoms (yeah, now that you mention it that has been really strange...). They go away and think about it and if their gut tells them that there is something going down, they come back to you and ask you about it. At that point I give them the short concise summary and give them several references for them to check it out for themselves.

I don't try and force them to change their view. i allow them to change their own thinking. On something as scary as this that requires such a fundamental paradigm shift, they must feel they are in charge or they will dig in/run away.

No more wearing down people at the expense of my friendships to them. Those that are OK with the concept approach me and we have a good conversation about it. The network grows.

Those friends o mine who refuse and debunk the idea, I just leave thm to it and they leave me to it (most of the time).

[threadbear]

Sorry to throw the thread like that.

When you attempt to break through to people, try to appeal to the goodness in them, if they are good people, not the fear, necessarily. A good question for them would be, "How can we most effectively help others when tshtf?" It enhances a feeling of control, diffuses fear and anger, and allows you to communicate hope without encouraging bliss ninny blinkered idiocy.

[Duende]

threadbear wrote:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')hen you attempt to break through to people, try to appeal to the goodness in them, if they are good people, not the fear, necessarily. A good question for them would be, "How can we most effectively help others when tshtf?"

[namenick]

threadbear wrote: $this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')here is a Darwinian survival component here. If people haven't figured out by now, that the planet is overpopulated and that they will live in constrained circumstances for the rest of their lives, partly as a result, why walk them through the process? Believe me, they're going to find out soon enough.

[Newfie]

Jarred Diamond just did an op-ed piece for the NY Times and touched on this. He calls it the Consumption Factor. I humbly admit to having the same thought and calling it the Expectation Factor.

Quoting Diamond
"The estimated one billion people who live in developed countries have a relative per capita consumption rate of 32. Most of the world’s other 5.5 billion people constitute the developing world, with relative per capita consumption rates below 32, mostly down toward 1."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/02/opini ... ref=slogin

While it is true that only we "luckies" consume most resources the "others" expect that they will have their chance to do so. Ergo, when China and India crank up, which they are doing NOW, and find out we ate all the cake, they are going to be pissssssssssssed.