I think, no matter how hard you try, you can't produce something like this without it being biased toward your own opinions on the topic. And those of us with different opinions would phrase things differently. I suppose I would fit in his Pessimist/Defeatist category, though I wouldn't call it that. (And I guess deniers wouldn't call themselves deniers either.) I would probably refer to my own take on collapse as depressive realism rooted in observations of climate change. As one observation, take the latest IPCC report.
U.N. Secretary-General, António Guterres described the latest IPCC report as "a code red for humanity." "The alarm bells are deafening, and the evidence is irrefutable: greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel burning and deforestation are choking our planet and putting billions of people at immediate risk," Guterres said. [1]
The more you look the worse it gets. We aren't going to be able to reduce atmospheric CO2 without some sort of drastic uncomfortable change. The lockdowns during the pandemic reduced emissions by about 17% at one point. But despite that, CO2 in the atmosphere continued to increase. Whatever we do has to be more drastic than the pandemic lockdowns, and permanent, or it will keep getting worse. I just don't see people being willing to go along with that, especially those of us in comfortable Western societies. I don't know, is that pessimism, defeatism, or realism?
All good points. Another clear lesson from the pandemic: Achieving optimum outcomes is severely bounded by practical political realities - Consider if every single country had hard locked down, everywhere, for 6+ weeks. Perhaps complete elimination could have been achieved. But politically, impossible.
That equally applies to climate change as a similar tragedy of the commons played out on a longer timescale. So there are some learnings to be applied if you're looking, as I think many people now are, to identify how things might play out and then make your own life choices accordingly.
Something I'm increasingly certain of is that the future will be boring. By which I mean trends are likely correct but will play out over longer timescales than expected. Visions of sudden collapse and apocalypse are mostly anxiety-fuelled inventions of the mind aimed at spurring action in the present day. Reality is more like economic stagnation, decreasing freedoms, and continual smaller crises that gradually bring us to the predicted future state. Nothing that can be ridden out in a bunker with a few years supply of oats.
Honestly, I'm surprised we had as much mask/social distancing compliance in the early parts of the pandemic as we did. It's encouraging how much people will put up as long as they understand why. But that seems to only work for a limited time, and we haven't been doing so well on vaccinations.
As for the future being boring... I suppose if 2020 is a representative sample of what the future has to offer, it won't be. But I agree that a lot of things may just gradually get worse, if we don't figure out how to deal with them. And in terms of climate, the best possible outcome isn't great.
