He looks at a variety of societies which have disappeared, and draws the conclusion that they made one or more of five classic errors:
- We damaged our environment (Easter Island)
- We had hostile neighbours who we were unable to contain (Rome)
- We lost the support of friendly neighbours (Greenland)
- The climate changed and we did not adapt fast enough (the Mayans, Greenland)
- We responded to these issues in the wrong way
He then draws the threads together with some almost prophetic thoughts and describes our inability to adapt as often being rational behavior (sic - after all, he is American) ... that is some people may reason correctly that they can advance their own interests by behavior harmful to other people. Scientists term such behavior rational precisely because it employs correct reasoning, even though it may be morally reprehensible.
The perpetrators know that they will often get away with their bad behavior especially if there is no law against it or if the law isn't effectively enforced. They feel safe because the perpetrators are typically concentrated (few in number) and highly motivated by the prospect of reaping big, certain and immediate profits, while the losses are spread over large numbers of individuals. That gives the losers little motivation to go to the hassle of fighting back, because each loser loses only a little and would receive only small uncertain, distant profits even from a successfully undoing the minority's grab.
If this is not a description of the Brexit cabal at work then I wonder what is. A small group: tick. Big certain rewards: tick. Losses spread widely to others: tick. Uncertain profits to the majority: tick.
He goes on: A frequent type of rational behavior is 'good for me, bad for you and for everybody else' - to put it bluntly 'selfish'.
After looking at the problems of the commons - it is not in an individual's interest to limit their take of a resource held in common - he goes on:
A further conflict of interest involving rational behavior arises when the interests of the decision-making elite in power clash with the interests of the rest of society. Especially if the elite can insulate themselves from the consequences of their actions, they are likely to do things that profit themselves, regardless of whether those actions hurt everybody else. ...
Throughout recorded history, actions or inactions by self-absorbed kings, chiefs, and politicians have been a regular causes of societal collapses ...
He then quotes Washington insider who said that after the 2000 elections there was a 90-day focus: they talked only about those problems with the potential to cause a disaster within the next 90 days. So much for long-term thinking.
He goes on to mention group think (crowd psychology) as yet another potential problem as it causes people to be swept along by a tide to accept a group's decision uncritically. He quotes Schiller: Anyone taken as an individual is tolerably sensible and reasonable - as a member of a crowd, he at once becomes a blockhead. Added to psychological denial, this makes a dangerous cocktail.
What a selfish, self-centred, self-seeking and irrational society Mrs T created. Now her heirs seems determined to carry on her work fulfilling at least three of the conditions for a society to collapse (four in the case of Donald Trump).
Only by working together with others, in a shared endeavour, will we solve the major world problems. To go our own selfish way is to take the road to collapse. If that means that we knowingly and willingly share some of our so-called sovereignty then bring it on.
