by SevenTen » Mon 21 May 2007, 20:33:43
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('RdSnt', 'W')ell, some of the damage could be mitigated, but only to a very limited extent.
I'll answer it with a question to you.
How do you shut down New York? The whole thing, turn off the water, the sewage systems, the electricity, everything. How many people would cooperate? Who would pay for it? What are the ramifications of such a shut-down. What happens to the rest of the state? The country? And in the case of New York, the world?
This is the sort of complexity we are discussing.
And we haven't even addressed what happens
after you shut down New York.
A large part of New Orleans was involuntarily shut down two years ago. With an entire country intact around it, New Orleans still hasn't recovered.
With so many people in power that would lose so much in a power-down or a shut-down, there would be virtually no political will to even discuss something like this, much less implement it. Only a grass-roots public movement would have a chance at addressing it ... and have you tried talking to anyone about "peak oil", or "overpopulation", watch their eyes glaze over, watch them lose interest, or watch them get angry.
A transition to a "new way of life" would be an inherently traumatic event for most people. In the best case scenario, getting people to do something they don't want to is like getting them to eat a shit sandwich: they may eat it, but they won't like it, or you afterward.
How do you go about selling someone an end to their way of life, their hopes and dreams? "Follow me, and I promise you that your standard of living will rapidly decline and things will get continually worse. And expect a dramatically shorter life span. And you'll have to actually talk to your neighbors and learn to get along with them. And get off your fat ass and do something. And use your brain."
Buy a lottery ticket, better chance of success.