Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

gnagorez OP t1_j4whlbh wrote

Interesting analysis. I think that when we imagine the end of the world or a catastrophic event, we only imagine one option and maybe the most possible is a combination of everything.

For example, in global warming, the sea level rise, and the soil spoiling globally into famine are two options that can happen simultaneously or one after another. And this problem could cause a health problem that could lead us to a new pandemic.

Maybe the only possible scenario where we can unite us is after all the problems, after a population reduction follow it of the disappearing of some government structures.

1

irpugboss t1_j4x4omq wrote

I would like to imagine it would be possible then but even if so for how long?

I imagine our willingness to fight is biologically driven and cooperation as well but only up until a point until you're needs (even if trivial or imagined) are met.

I guess a non-doomer take for unification would be absolute end to scarcity and all basic needs are met then conflict transforms to something else. It becomes violence or the threat of violence to maintain unity as the clear way to keep ones abundance, so important to maintain the end of scarcity that the act of strengthening unity (and staving off scarcity problems) becomes a form of power/appeal.

2