Ask Me Anything - Your Questions About TGS Answered | Frankly 70

[@anitashore5050]

I found your material a few years ago, and I intuitively recognized the truth of it. As a fellow Midwesterner, I found you very relatable. I continue to listen because of your honesty, integrity, and genuine love for the natural world. Thanks for all you do.

[@luisrosado4899]

?×

[@dermotmeuchner2416]

Thanks for being a good human Nate first and foremost. You’ve opened my eyes and heart and for that I’m eternally grateful.

[@rgsteinman4842]

More and more, I find comfort in 'Deep Time' - after all, humans are a very recent 'evolutionary experiment,' and it may fizzle out in the end. But the Earth will endure. However, in the meantime (the short-term in which I exist), I must do all I can to conserve, restore and rewild what fragments remain, and live as close to the Earth as I am able to. Because life feels right in a healthy ecosystem. Thanks for knitting this Earth Loving community together. ♥🙏🌏♥

[@johnrobichaud6401]

I definitely believe that more Frankly episodes of this bent will only strengthen and broaden your audience, Nate. All of us here, appreciate your commitment, honest/integrity and humanity.

[@johnjorgensen-tu4fw]

⁷77⁷77⁷7⁷⁷u7⁷u⁷ù⁷7⁷7⁷ù7⁷ù⁷u77⁷ù⁷7⁷⁷⁷⁷ù777⁷⁷⁷⁷ÿ6⁶y⁶ÿÿ⁶ÿ⁶y6666ÿÿ7⁷⁷77⁷⁷⁷ù⁷⁷⁷⁷⁷⁷ù⁷ù⅞yuuÿÿyÿu7⁷ÿÿÿy7⅞ÿÿyÿÿyÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ 39:36 39:38 39:39

[@johnjorgensen-tu4fw]

40:01

[@johnjorgensen-tu4fw]

u

[@TheFletchgizzard]

I found your pod about two months ago and feel like I've found my people. Thank you 🙏 I see your heart. Keep doing what you're doing. I'll be your local voice up here in Small Town, Ontario, Canada ❤

[@madshorn5826]

I'll recommend the channel Belle and Beau From The Fifth Column too. They have a knack for breaking down complex topics for non-experts. Their topics are more traditional politics, but they have the occasional climate video.

[@jacquelinehogler5477]

Originally I'm from Toronto, I now live in New Zealand...I like your term, feel like I've found my people...me too. Anyway G'day or Kia Ora as we say here. cheers

[@June-unearthed2150]

You are a good man Nate. Thank you xx

[@TheGhungFu]

How do we get past the sense of consumption entitlement that so many people, especially Americans, have? Being off-grid passive / active solar for 25 years now, many folks over the years have approached me about our lifestyle, how we've managed to succeed at this, etc. . When I start out about curbing expectations, consumption and 'living smaller/smarter,' folks will generally lose interest; start bargaining, even criticizing.. They fully expect that they'll be able to keep living as they always have. Non-negotiable for most. NOT an option. Further, as we already see, when reality forces these changes, many (most?) folks don't handle it well (think covid restrictions). Blame, resentment and anger will be the (dis) order of the day. I rarely share what I've discovered these days. So glad that folks like you still are.

[@annibjrkmann8464]

Do more of this! It's very helpful for my understanding of the changes that are occurring. Nate is not a guru but he is a inspiration for me.

[@maudie6095]

Yes - a 2 hour primer then “discuss” for a community trying to develop in the prosocial prepping movement. We’re having a go at that where I am and are just at the beginning. A starter like that would really shape our trajectory.

[@marxxthespot]

Thank you 🙏🌞 Great questions and great answers! I disagree with the comment that this channel is over regular folks head. I’m a regular guy and not an academic or intellectual and it has been crystal clear. The real barrier, in my opinion, to a wider audience is that most people aren’t ready and can’t handle our predicament. That’s devastating because it’s hard to imagine us improving our outcomes if everyone has their head buried in the sand, but that’s my experience. One of my favorite things you ever did was the youth panel as it was so encouraging to listen to young people who know the truth and can handle the truth🌞🤝🌞 I agree with more diversity. Specifically I notice a lot of the indigenous leaders from around the world are speaking out right now on social media and they have a very similar message: “we belong to the earth and the earth doesn’t belong to us” but have a very different way of expressing it that I think would resonate with you and this channel. I also remember that you said music is the greatest human invention! There are musicians out there that are on this wave length and would be great guests! Most importantly I want to hear more from the young people 🌞🤝🌞🤝🌞

[@davidbegone3577]

Thank you for offering a mindful framework of information on our global energy crisis. I used to be a techo-optimist, and I believed that we could innovate our way out of the mess we created. You have definitely changed the way I see the world's energy crisis. I will continue to try to implement small changes based upon the information you have dispersed as well as from others. I, like yourself, believe you would like to see a much more healthy and beneficial implementation of technology that contributes to the wellness of the planet and its species. I will continue to learn as best as I can.

[@alexdamman6805]

Nate, do what you do. It is real and authentic. It is obvious that you are eager for others to step up and do what they do.

[@cdineaglecollapsecenter4672]

It's head, heart, health and hands. Former 4-H mom.

[@jonathanrider4417]

I have been following your series for some time - I would like for you to post a kind of testimonial about your personal journey - bio type stuff and how you have evolved personally. I cannot say how much I appreciate the work you are doing - please keep it up!

[@Kqiros4447]

This was great, look forward to episode # 2!

[@treefrog3349]

The immediacy and poignancy of the conversations that are featured on this podcast seem to largely absent on the "mainstream". America is suffering from naiveté and ignorance as a result. I think it would be worthwhile to have a knowledgeable media person or a Roundtable with media-savvy people to discuss the dearth of truth that the American People are subjected to. The exposition of uncomfortable truths by experts has been the back bone of the Great Simplification, in my naive humble and grateful opinion.

[@naughtachance3960]

You mean Military Psy-ops people

[@kassfischer5146]

Thank you Nate for all that you bring to us!

[@staudingerk]

You are awesome, Nathan, so happy to find your channel.

[@guapochino140]

My family of 4 gets by on off-grid solar. The battery is 10 times smaller than that of a luxury EV and it's not lithium. Yes, there are sacrifices. But not in any of the metrics that provide a higher quality, more meaningful life. Over the last 5 years only a handful of people have asked me about the setup. Most people are not interested. You become very aware of your consumption and have to decide if it's a good moment to pump water, run the washing machine, charge the power tools, etc. If more people could adapt to this mode, then we could leave the always-on 24/7 grid for things like hospitals and ..... well, I struggle to think of other essentials in a non-overshoot society.

[@thegreatsimplification]

Pls email us

[@mr.makeit4037]

Nate your comment regarding the large number of gadgets plugged into an average home is so true. But that certainly can change for the better and be more sustainable. As an example, I have replaced nearly every appliance with usb rechargeable ones or those that use rechargeable batteries, all of which are now solar charged. I started this 6 years ago, but I'm certain, with the proliferation of online rechargeable appliances available, most people can accomplish this so much faster. Even air-conditioning, hot water heating and home heating overall regarding these types of appliances utilizing solar/rechargeable battery tech is becoming common place. This is a real thing now.

[@timeenoughforart]

We could build underground homes that don't need air-conditioning and minimal heating. We could give up 24-7 hot water and shift to simple solar water heating. Save massive amounts by engineering for durability and not obsolescence. We are trying to build electric cars modeled after fossil fueled vehicles. Lowering the speed limit to 45 could enable light weight vehicles using bike technology. I'd prefer 35 mph, but what do I know. It isn't a popular opinion but removing tax deductions for children could go a long way in lowering population. Making credit much more difficult would significantly slow the economy. From my view credit is given out like heroin at a playground. Businesses should deserve credit based on merit rather than just hoping for economic growth. Sorry for my rant on your comment, but I've wondered about a shelter with a 12 volt power supply (or 48 volt) using the plug ins truck drivers use, tiny refrigerators, small fans, lighting, and all the hand held electrical devices you mentioned.

[@mr.makeit4037]

@@timeenoughforart I think that you have really good ideas. Actually I believe that many of the things that you mentioned are already happening out of necessity, or at least in the minds of many. I just received my etrike last week enabling me to utilize around my homestead for gardening. Also will be good to get me to the store or gas station down the road. P.S. instead of underground, would it not be better to use local soil to fill bags and build structures. My wife and myself may move to nw az where here family is. I was thinking about utilizing those soil bags to build up within a metal building/small shop for insulation value. Temps are very high there now.

[@timeenoughforart]

@@mr.makeit4037 Depending on water level. I'm southern Idaho desert so close to Arizona conditions. I built my root cellar half under ground and half piled dirt above ground. I used left over feed bags filled with soil for the walls. literally dirt cheap. It is always cool in the heat of summer and cool, but not freezing. My house is a straw bail with cob exterior. We have had multiple plus 100 degree days and the house was always under 80. Even when we baked bread. I made plenty of mistakes and never managed to include solar. It would have been nice to be off grid, but my cabinet shop was already connected and it sucks massive amounts of electricity. What I missed was having a tradition to follow. I've been in construction my whole life and never got to work on a house that wasn't "normal". It would have been nice to have someone to tell me mortar falls apart in a cobble stone floor. Good luck being a dirt bag!

[@mr.makeit4037]

@@timeenoughforart Great comment and life story. Best of luck to you.

[@dermotmeuchner2416]

I need sun.

[@jonathantrautman]

Thank you for keeping it real

[@iankoeklenberg3280]

Thanks to your work I am more awake and less blind, I recently discovered the work of a Flemisch filosofer Etienne Vermeersch who wrote a well constructed essay on enviromental ethics which also had a similar effect on me , becoming aware of current time issues through constructive thinking and presenting viewpoints and interrelationships ( his essay:' the eyes of the panda' ...unfortunately not translated and writen in Dutch). Nevertheless I am greatfull to you to share your thoughts and insights. it is neither a pessimists narrative nor a optimistiscal aproache, It is your realisme which I appreciate and your persistence in covering vast topics and introducing so many wonderfull persons, thoughts and insights on your podcast. Therefor I want to express my gratitude for your immens efforts and the confrontation with reality, the unpleasant side of knowing and the pleasant aspects of getting to know Frank through your Frankly's.

[@Carbonbank]

Truth, wisdom and knowledge seems to just pour out of your mouth…

[@PACotnoir1]

Some suggestions of guests from French culture: Isabelle Delannoy, Yves Cochet, Victor Court, Thimothée Parrique, Fred Vargas, Lucie Pagé, Vincent Mignerot, Arthur Keller, Sébastien Bohler, Gaël Derive, Isabelle Attard, Pablo Servigne, Nicolas Hulot, Laurent Testot, Gauthier Chapelle, Raphaël Stevens, Alain Deneault.

[@fabricechoquet3887]

... Aurore Stephant, Philippe Bihouix, Emma Haziza too.

[@Seawithinyou]

HiNate and All from Aotearoa New Zealand! I would Love to see you bring back on our wonderful young people back on to your KZbin podcast? As I being a caring mother to my beloved Generation z daughter Regards Trasea 🕊🌏😇

[@Seigo]

Thanks for answering the question Nate! ❤

[@garrenosborne9623]

Thanks Nate, profoundly insightful & at various moments shockingly coffee spilling funny ( thanks for the coding & straw sandal making moment😂😂😂)

[@cmonc1984]

26:40 I think The Great Simplification is just fine the way it is. It is not for the masses, it's not for convincing people about the reality we face, it's for people who are already thinking about these issues and want to learn more. Yes, sometimes the language is difficult and sometimes I have to pause and google words to understand their meaning, but that's exactly the point. I want to learn more, I want to understand all of this in more detail. And I like to listen to 1.5 - 3 hour talks and suck up all this detailed knowledge and wisdom. So indeed it's for other people and platforms to convince people about the reality we face, and explain it in simple ways, and then they could start listening to TGS. It would be a shame if TGS tried to dumb things down and/or be restricted to 30 minute talks just to attract more people.

[@c.s.102]

Hope is a killer just like having expectations. Trees yes l believe in summer, fall, winter and spring blossem flowers

[@BobQuigley]

To the fella asking about a complicated message. That's life my friend. I and my family members have been through many tough spots health wise over the years. In healthcare you must be your own advocate. Gain as much understanding as possible about treatments and outcomes as you can. Ignorance is bliss so the saying goes. A significant number of Americans in particular are blissfully self ignorant. This includes a significant number of highly educated individuals.

[@mikeecker146]

Speaking of freedom of speech, please look into the imprisonment of Roger Hallam. Even if you disagree with his views or protest methods the fact that he was unable to present any defense to a jury seems like a slip towards fascism.

[@andywilliams7989]

Hey, that's what the people on the far right say too. Damn if we could only all come together on that

[@tomchristianson858]

Unfortunately Roger is NUTS If big old wanted to discredit the greens, they couldn't have picked a better people

[@francoissaintpierre4506]

How about Paul Watson ? Crazy too? Greta? We do need to hear their voices.

[@kenpentel3396]

Thanks Nate

[@emilymiller1792]

2nd Question about required skills: not exactly skills, but imagination and flexibility/adaptability and being a knowledge generalist. And gaining wisdom from past knowledge and experience.

[@timveromusic875]

Maybe it’s not a skill but the ability to ask the question of yourself “what am I willing to give up” will be important I think for TGS

[@bobcva3627]

First, let me add my thanks to you for the great information and heartfelt ideas through your Podcast. I watch them all and pass them on. I noted your use of "renewables" in your discussion. I think we need to eliminate the use of that feel good but otherwise useless term, although the tech companies love it. I think we need to talk about "harvesting" solar energy, which is what plants have done for billions of years through photosynthesis and what was the primary source of energy pre-fossil fuels (although fossil fuels embody the energy harvested tens of billions of years ago of course.) Photosynthesis captures carbon and energy through an astounding physical process, and we are downstream beneficiaries in many ways. Wind and water power derive from the sun's heating of the atmosphere, which we then harvest with turbines and water driven equipment. And of course, solar panels directly harvest solar radiation from the sun and convert it to electricity. I think people of all levels of environmental awareness could get excited about "harvesting" energy, both as a metaphor and as a reality. (And solar energy passed down the trophic chain through food are giving me the energy to write this!)

[@sallyjohnstone8535]

thanx, excellent, scary but necessary to know

[@57stapler]

Two things -First is to say that I am happy to hear you occasionally mention that your tax-deductible non-profit accepts donations, and to state that I DO NOT object to you turning ads on for your content. I don't think anybody feels that an ad for Taco Bell is going to influence anything here, and there is speculation that KZbin might struggle to recommend videos/creators that do not have ads turned on. I would find it funny if I could click a link to some bizarre prescription drug, and get your efforts paid. Second, with regards to seeming "not simple enough for general audiences"; Animations/visualizations/graphics can go a long way defining concepts that otherwise take a long time, and can be "wordy" to describe. Two examples are your brief use of an animation regards The AMOC which was really nice, and an animation I recently saw showing how ridiculous Sun/Moon cycles are if The Earth was flat. I can't tell you how expensive/inexpensive/time consuming such things are to have prepared, but I do feel it's worth considering the process, and how detailed/simple you'd find to be useful. As relates to the vocabulary needed to follow discussions sometimes, perhaps an off-interview "Field Guide" to terms that frequently pop up would be helpful. Simple examples might be where I may know what "The Overton Window" is, and "Dunbar'sNumber", but you might not be happy with Wikipedia coverage -and Daniel Schmachtenberger has thrown out concepts faster than I can find a pen/paper, which I imagine he'd like others to better follow.

[@laramorrison1198]

I offer myself as a potential guest for your show. I studied ecology in the 1970s at the University of Washington. I became a student of Sufism. Then I moved to Milwaukee where I received an MA in Bioethics from the Medical College of Wisconsin in the 1990s. In 1998 I focused my efforts on manifesting the LA Ecovillage. That is still a major focus. I started teaching Bioethics at Mount Saint Mary's University a few years ago. Our paths have been different, our understanding is similar. My intention is to be a Fractal for the Future that is Desirable.

[@wholebodysneeze]

My personal experience on how to tackle bias (my own) is two-fold. First to train yourself in the art of neutral observation of the ideas that come out of your brain (you are not your thoughts, you have a brain that produces them) and, second, to be generally suspicious of ideas that initially seem good. After this, everything gets a little bit easier. Not easy, but a little easier.

[@mellonglass]

Thank you for beginning the conversation (public) and reducing the lecture. Please don’t fear the public interface (streaming a hosted show) I am 100% certain you have enough moderators within your fans (self policing network) to have an amazing and light hearted experience to choose the popcorn of questions, comments and interrelated chat. It’s a fantastic process of human mind humility (learning), not the convention of ‘teaching’ and ‘testing’ for the egocentric privilege gained by knowledge, less experience. Ie, the garden is useless without our attention to it, we are a part of nature, not even the Hugel bed of wartime will ‘sort itself’ or the multicast of seeds in soil intelligence v straight rows, can fully gain our desires unattended. Permaculture says, smartness first, don’t move heavy soil around unnecessarily, the mind also, let others do the lifting of wisdom, where the word ‘wisdom’ is unidentifiable in the collective want for individualism. Can’t buy me love, when did anyone ever say it? Care before value, when did anyone ever say it?

[@riffking2651]

I'm not sure how much all this can become dumbed down so that the majority gets it. I think more likely is that we create cultural processes which give people the space and tools to grapple with this, while also having some reasonable sense of direction to head as they come to grips with it. This stuff is what it is, talked about at the level it needs to be with the language that is appropriate to be accurate and insightful about the matters. I think the "diverse perspectives" is a bit of a mess in terms of what is hoped for, and what actually makes sense. The incentive landscapes around the world which lead to people becoming really well informed and clear at thinking about these matters probably means that we're going to see a very narrow group who are at the same level being able to communicate well about this. That being said - to the degree that we can see a wider representation participating while also maintaining quality discussions about these things, we should be finding those voices. While it was a "western epistemology" which got us into this mess in a broad sense, an extension on that foundation is the most likely to get us out of it

[@dianewallace6064]

I watch this TV series called Chuck (2007-2012). Chuck worked at the fictional Buy More Store (supposed to be Best Buy or Circuit City). The slogan of the Buy More Store was "You save more when you buy more."

[@FermiDeck]

Nate, i have been following your channel for almost as long as it has existed. Thank you for the work you do! Keep doing it, even if supporters like me take you to task! I am really confused by one statement that really stands out in this video. You say that you believe that overpopulation is not the biggest problems we face. While I understand the audience you are trying to reach might be averse to an honest assessment of why overpopulation is definitely the most important problem we face, by making the statement denying the truth, you throw the rest of us under the bus. Perhaps, simply not making such an obviously dishonest statement might be better. Because all the math leads to population crash/reduction in our future. You know this. You have stated it. The math is unequivocal. If you want to double down on your statement that it is not the most important problem, then please provide a math/science based justification for your statement. Let’s make an over simplified statement: going from 7 billion humans to 8 billion humans causes more environmental harm, uses proportionally more energy, causes more extinctions, etc. than going from 6billion to 7 billion. The same will be true for the next billion and the following billion. Your last guest made it abundantly clear, that if one does absolutely everything (short of starving oneself to death) to reduce their ecological footprint, it is still at least an order of magnitude more beneficial for the environment to have one fewer child than to not drive, not eat meat, not travel, grow one’s own food, etc. The rate of nitrogen fertilizer use will increase more than linearly to the population increase as humans are forced to farm more marginal land. The same for energy consumption, resource use, habitat depletion, over fishing the oceans, etc. if i am wrong, please show me the science and math. Worse, the economic crash you clearly see in the future, energy crash, food production crash, available fertile soil (requiring more habitat depletion) and so much more … only gets worse the longer it is put off. But for some reason, you seem to argue that economic crash now would be worse than one later…. How do you come to that conclusion? It seems that if it happens 25 years from now with even less nitrogen fertilizers available and less fertile lands, fewer fish in the oceans, 2 billion more people and far far far more animals extinct that the amount of human suffering will be far far worse (to say little about the arguably worse outcome for the fellow creatures we share this planet with). How can you say it will be better to have the economic crash later? I really do understand your audience claims to need hope. But you already know the problem of providing hope. What you seem to argue for was appropriate eighty years ago. But now, people need to emotionally prepare for what is coming. No platitudes. I also want to applaud your returning to the subject of nuclear war. I hope you do continue to bring it up. If you wish to understand why it may be unavoidable, I can offer some insights based on the work of Daniel Ellsberg who wrote the book The Doomsday Machine, Confessions of a Nuclear War Planner. The short of it: the war planners of Nato need to have a simultaneous war with Russia and China in order to justify nuking both. The flip side is that threat must be real enough in order to get both nations to the bargaining table and have new nuclear arms reduction treaties with all nuclear armed parties.(India, Pakistan, Iran, North Korea included) The previous nuclear arms treaties were bipolar between Russia and Nato. No other major nuclear armed nations had such treaties. This, I believe is their goal. I also seem to see the belief that nuclear war is winnable in the mindset of Nato leaders. I hope you explore this topic in more depth. The threat of nuclear war is far greater than most believe. Once again, I support the work you are doing! Thank you! I hope you understand I take you to task because i respect your message and the work you do and I respect your audience. Even the ones who fear hearing an honest assessment. The flip side is I also am willing to have you reverse this and take me to task by providing a detailed list of reasons population is not the major problem and if the crash happens later how it might produce less suffering overall and make it possible that fewer species to go extinct. Sincerely, Ron

[@buddyneher9359]

That statement also stood out to me. Thank you for such a thorough and respectful critique, and open willingness to be critiqued back. I hope that Nate will reply to you here so I can read it!

[@FermiDeck]

Thanks! I hope so too.

[@thegreatsimplification]

hi Ron, I never said overpopulation wasn't a major problem, I said a) it wasnt the focus of this site/my work and b) at the margin whether we 'solve' the population problem or we don't we STILL face the 5 horsemen in next decade or so -so that is focus of my work. IF we DO solve overpopulation (by eg switching net births from +80 million per year to -80 million per year due to family planning, awareness, change in values/aspirations, change in ecological consciousness etc, then we face the Wile E Coyote moment of financial catastrophe even sooner. Let me try explaining a different way. You go to a doctor and she says you have very advanced metabolic disorder - diabetes, high blood pressure, high cholesterol etc. Before she puts you on a protocol (meds, exercise, better nutrition, less stress etc) she sends you to a specialist who determines you have heart disease and require a bypass operation. I am trying to say our energy/financial situation in global west is the triple bypass surgery that IS coming in next decade - regardless of whether there are 6 billion or 10 billion people. Yes we also need to fix our 'metabolic disorder' -but unless this 'surgery' is managed and responded to, the whole 'body' could collapse (by my research). As to 8 billions living at one time on planet this is not what caused our predicament - the root cause is social species finding huge stores of fossil sunlight - the population is the RESULT of that. 8 billion people is CLEARLY unsustainable - that is obvious to anyone paying attention who has taken cursory dive into the data - I assume most people watching this program are aware of that - Im looking at interventions that will be needed or are possible in the next decade or so. Your concern about population being THE issue is more longer term than risk of society collapsing. Ergo I don't think we disagree, our timelines and purposes are different - I am hoping society bends and doesnt break - because a break would dramatically increase odds of nuclear exchange - and the 2nd half of your message on nuclear risks is spot on. I hope this clarifies a bit. We're just using different time scales of how to heal the patient as it were. Having said all that, I have little hope that 'reducing population' message will gain any meaningful traction in next 5-7 years which is my window of financial recalibration. I think we are headed for more humans, and much poorer humans in material sense. I disagree with Corey Bradshaw on the inevitability of 10B because if eg US undergoes a Great Simplification (rhyming w 1930s) the food and global distribution systems will change forever - any prediction is only as good as its weakest input. Thanks for your critique - I hope this answers our divergence a bit.

[@FermiDeck]

@@thegreatsimplification Thank you for the reply. In a meaningful way, we agree. There is not a big appetite for public dialogue about population. And we agree that population at 8 billion is not sustainable. And we agree that no meaningful policies will be put forward towards addressing the problems of population. And we agree that the world’s economy will collapse under its own weight. And we agree that overpopulation is a long term problem. I just view it as an immediate problem as well. Especially for the other forms of life we share this planet with. We also agree on a whole host of other things. But i am not understanding how you propose to have a soft landing for the economy? Or how putting off the Great Simplification a few years or a decade will prevent suffering or cause fewer extinctions or prevent nuclear war or any of the bad effects of the coming crash? (The 1930s crash will seem quite small compared to what’s coming.) Many say WW2 started in the mid 1930s, if not before. There is a very reasonable case to be made that WW3 had already started and putting it off a few months or a year or two won’t change the outcome very much. The West has carefully decoupled its economy from their intended adversaries, and it is hard to imagine that Thucydides’ trap is not already in full swing. Whether the war gets going in full swing this year or in ten, the outcome will still be the nation states involved want only one superpower to dominate at the end. Your repeated reference to The One Ring of Tolkien is appropriate. I think your concern with Corey Bradshaw making the statement that we will get to 10 billion isn’t vital to either of your arguments. In the 1960s the population discussion was in full swing and if no other changes were to take place, the problem would have presented itself by the 1980s. But nitrogen based fertilizers came into the picture in the 1970s and made it possible for another 4 billion humans to live on Earth temporarily until that resource runs out. Who knows what innovation might make another 2 billion possible. In truth, it won’t matter. The new innovation is unlikely to be sustainable. And in either case, Bradshaw is concerned about habitat, biodiversity, extinctions and other ecological problems. I think he isn’t concerned about being right about predicting the max population we get to. Nor do I think it is important to your own arguments. You have laid out an incredible case for collapse due to the energy economy. The size of the population will speed it up, but won’t really change the outcome. At least this is how i have taken your main topics of conversation about the Great Simplification. I love your channel. And look forward to more conversations! Thanks again.

[@johnmitchell8925]

This is gonna be one hell of a ride 🥳🥳

[@passwordprotectedd]

this was great, thanks.

[@allonesame6467]

Humans are adaptable. Things can be different.

[@soulaestheta]

Great video Nate! I think it's such a good idea to do AMAs given how complex all of this can be. I have a question for a future one if that's ok - particularly related to Daniel Schmactenberger's work but, given your systems background, I wonder if you could answer it. I intuitively resonate with Daniel Schmactenberger talking about how an important piece of the metacrisis is our tendency to pursue narrow goals. The way I understand that, narrow goals necessarily create externalities because they optimise for certain metrics and, therefore, are blind to/dismiss their impact on other parts of the system. What is the alternative way of setting goals/orienting a system? I appreciate that you define narrow goals in contradistinction to wide boundary goals but I'm not sure how you'd even frame wide-boundary goals - especially when Daniel talks about how even a large metric-set (rather than just one) can still create this problem. What should we be optimising/setting an intention for?

[@delburnwalter2024]

I'd like to see a roundtable discussion about what the carrying capacity of the planet is for humans, one that allows for the restoration and flourishing of the rest of the biosphere. Questions to be discussed would include "what percentage of the Earth's renewable resources should be allocated to human use," and "what would a truly sustainable human economy look like at that level of environmental exploitation." It seems to me that any discussion about how to 'solve' our current problems is pointless without having an achievable, effective end goal in mind.

[@ronalddecker8498]

I second everything you say! This round table would be most useful!

[@martinpurcell6126]

It is worth remaining cognisant that the true answer to ‘how many’ is not so much numerical but more existential, as in, ‘how that number goes about living their lives’

[@fleetinghopes6448]

​@@martinpurcell6126 exactly. And it needs to be considered that the more consumptive (or less frugal) that number lives then there is more or less for others, where others may be more humans (for richer culture and communities) or more habitat and species diversity or resilient ecosystems. That is, these decisions will always be trade-offs. And this needs wisdom, a more spiritual/compassionate/empathic and holistic outlook than a numerical or scientific calculating approach. That is, it will need to come from ordinary people everywhere being more aware of the richness and value of other people and of the ecosystem in order to better understand the true cost of having a "more comfortable or exciting lifestyle" or of having a larger house. This comes down to being prepared to share. This needs to occur in the neighbourhood, local ecosystem as well as at the state, regional, national and continental and global scales. In our current (especially Western) world where there is lots of competition and having more than others is the goal then I'm afraid that no effective end goal will be achievable. As Nate says, we need to be thinking in terms of the future. The head might do all the calculations, but unless the heart has compassion for others and the environment/Earth then the numbers won't mean anything. It is important to know what the numbers of available/accessible resources are, but for most people they won't be relevant to their local situation. And it all depends on *_where_* the *decision-making* takes place. I don't think top-down diktats are going to work and will just be a recipe for conflict. Our current systems of governance don't allow decision-making at the grassroots and I think this is a big problem stopping us from getting to where we need to go. (Nate mentioned the big capital buying all the land and the locals having little(no) say in that. This is the problem in a nutshell... Big capital will ignore whatever number you say because they need to be bigger than last quarter. The "small people" and locals have the greater appreciation of the local conditions and values and limits, but have no say/power to decide/enforce their decisions of lower numbers and better sharing of the local (clearly very finite) resources. To the OP: while what you suggest seems obvious and necessary we are missing the most important pre-requisite. There is little point determining what "size" "the pie" should be unless we have first worked out how to share/divide the pie between all the parties. This is the biggest problem in the world today, both within countries and between countries. Until we work this out all of the resources, energy (oil) will go into building weapons and having wars and destroying infrastructure and lives that get ever more costly to replace. Our current decision-making/governance systems have been designed to maximise the interests, comforts and power of one group or country over the others - to take more "pie" than anyone else. That is, to assume competition at every turn. Implicit in your suggestion is the expectation that everyone and every country will abide by the fair sharing of the sacrifices that will need to be made to get to whatever number your roundtable comes up with. We can't even do this with "carbon" let alone arable land, water, fish, food, forests, population growth, "strategic minerals", etc. I am suggesting that your suggestion has within it a need for sharing and cooperation (and humility and compassion) and if the numbers are to have any meaning or utility then we will need new systems of decision-making/governance that can meet these new (i.e. different from now) requirements so that "rightsizing the pie" can actually be implemented on the ground without endless war and conflict. As long as we keep expecting our current system to be the same system used into the future then we will be in trouble. The current system says if you have more pie than the others you can get even more pie (i.e. positive feedback/snowball) and that getting all the pie for yourself is the ultimate goal. Such an approach will fail no matter what "roundtable number" you put in front of it. Not all people operate like this. And many people that are in "the rat race" scrambling for more pie are getting sick of it. Choosing the future world (e.g. of the 4 projected worlds of Nate) (for me) comes down to choosing the future decision-making/governance system that we decide to use (clearly I consider that the system of decision-making/governance will significantly determine the sorts of decisions that can be made and thus the worlds built out of all of those decisions). Sorry, but the "roundtable number" you want is meaningless in/to the current "no limits"/"no constraints" economic and political system we are operating. And for the system we need it be done "bottom-up" not top-down - or rather it would continually flow from the bottom to the top then come down then back up, side-to-side (hokey-pokey) that is, a continual process of renegotiation and fitment in an ongoing mutual-conformance process that ends up fitting in (and/or revising (e.g. people working out they can live with a bit less and still live good, meaningful, productive (perhaps even richer) lives) all the constraints such that the needs and interests and aspirations of all entities involved can be satisfied within the finite reality that is our Earth. More like quantum computing than our current digital command by command calculations.

[@delburnwalter2024]

@@fleetinghopes6448 The human population some 50,000 years ago has been estimated to have been approximately 2 million. I take that number to be the realistic carrying capacity of the planet for our species in a pre-modernity environment where *all* species are able to optimally survive and flourish. I'm suggesting a roundtable discussion of what the near term optimum human population size and economic systems would have to be to eventually allow the restoration of the biodiversity and relative population sizes of 50,000 years ago. Any figures arrived at by the roundtable could then be used as guidelines for either top-down or bottom-up actions to mitigate the worst case effects of overshoot. As for your concerns about how to divide the pie, I can only respond "what pie?"

[@dan2304]

Nate, while I respect your motives and efforts. My journey started in 1996 with a talk by the author of The Decline Of The Age Of Oil. Being engineering and science trained and skeptical I started researching coming to the conclusion in February 2001 that civilisation is fucked. Humanity may survive into 2100 but not in its current form or numbers. May be a few million may survive into next century. The reasons; global supplies of commodities will become economically depleted within a decade or so, when the cost of supply of commodities is more than the ability to pay. And largely depleted well before the end of the century, this includes food production/distribution. Global warming will continue accelerating well into next century due to increasing consumption of fossil fuels and positive feed back. Only rapid global population reduction to about 2 billion is there any probability of civilised societies surviving into next century.

[@jenniferreinbrecht7125]

Rapid depopulation...who decides? Should I kill myself now? Vance has made it clear childless women and postmenopausal women are worthless other than as breeding stock and caring for the children of their children of their children. I chose not to have children over 60 years ago. Fortunately the choice was available to me - the current religious, white male political demogogery is abhorrent.

[@ronalddecker8498]

It will happen one way or another before the end of this century. Soil depletion, running out of nitrogen fertilizers, ocean fish stocks running out, habitat destruction causing mass extinctions …. Among many other limits. The longer the crash is put off, the worse it will be and the more suffering caused. It breaks my heart.

[@fleetinghopes6448]

You are correct. If we keep doing the same thing (i.e. BAU) then we are indeed fucked. That is why some us are suggesting we actually change our collective behaviour to get different - not so disastrous, hopefully sustainable - outcomes. By Nate presenting the 4 likely different possible outcome worlds he is making clear that we do actually have a choice. And that we can avoid where the current BAU system gets us to. Those of us that want a non-fucked future for our grandchildren and future Humanity are working to introduce new ideas and new ways of decision-making and governance in order to avoid the worst expected outcomes. Introducing something new is difficult. People always say "nothing will (can) change" - but history has proved this sentiment wrong time and time again. Homo sapiens is a very behaviourally adaptive animal - we just have to get our head, our heart and hands in the right places to understand, motivate and actuate the new behaviours that best adapt to the new circumstances (as noted, that we have hit many global hard limits).

[@johnmitchell8925]

This was pretty cool nate 😊

[@rhobot75]

My big question is, where slash how can I meet virtually or in person with like minded people? Zoom, telegram, meet up etc. Lol.. you should start a dating app!

[@rgsteinman4842]

Here's my question: What is your understanding how our monetary system requires our economy to expand consumption of resources, and the role that interest rates, as well as other factors (social/cultural), play in this Monetary Growth Imperative. I understand money creation (I have a Ph.D. in Economics- Macroeconomics/ Money & Banking). Thank you!

[@nathanbigler]

I bought Indian Runner ducklings this summer. They're free ranging in my backyard now. I really enjoy them.

[@eyesofthecervino3366]

Not a gardening expert, but I always try to mulch things super super heavily, so even if I get overwhelmed later on they don't get too dry or weedy.

[@RubenKemp]

Thoughts on 'how to make things local again' would be greatly appreciated

[@garrenosborne9623]

The "Transition Town Movements" is a great model, we started one in my home town, but the simplest way is check whats going on already in your neighbourhood & join in on what appeals to your priorities & if theres a glaring gap start something your self to fill it or at least contribute & stimulate things in that direction. I was shocked ( in my ignorance & ego) just how much is happening in most places

[@francoissaintpierre4506]

I had two oil spills in front of my appartment here in the St-Lawrence (St-Laurent) river. I'm quite depressed. Your voice and your tone help me. Don't change anything.

[@user-pm7ck6ij9s]

Loved this, like it or not you are a role model for so many of us and we want to hear about how you are adapting and adjusting. Unlike your potatoes, I am in for a huge harvest this fall (but the hail got all my squash which is an enormous disappointment. I invested in more hail netting to be better prepared next year).

[@mikeroberts4260]

Near the end, there was this comment from Nate (as per the transcript): "So I think solar could be a big part of a more sustainable future with less consumption." This kind of language is so frustrating. "More sustainable" is the same as "less unsustainable" and both are technically meaningless (something is either sustainable or it isn't) but the idea seems to be that a society can magically last if it consumes less. This is not true. It may be able to last for longer but it won't last. Why do so many commentators who seem to get that we're in a predicament, with an unsustainable way of life, think that consuming less is going to fix it? When it comes down to it, a sustainable society will have to consume resources only at or, preferably, below the renewal rates of those resources (for non-renewable resources, that rate is zero) and will have to cause damage to the environment at or below the rate that the environment can assimilate that damage. That anything else is worth talking about is only of temporary interest, knowing that whatever we can come up with will still be unsustainable unless it meets those sustainability conditions. So I'd love to see some episodes of TGS that grab the bull by the horns. What kind of society, if any, can be truly sustainable (not "more sustainable")? If there isn't such a society that could be described as "modern" should be still try to get there or should we just try for a nice society and deal with the catastrophic collapse when it happens, in whatever way we can?

[@EmmaSolomano]

Ted Trainer writes about these ideas in his Simpler Way framework. I've got a couple of narrations of his articles on my channel, his website is a full of this sort of thinking. What the world would actually look like if it was sustainable.

[@dbadagna]

He believes that there will be such a thing as "Goldilocks technology," which will supposedly serve humanity during the Great Simplification, which is neither too complex nor too primitive.

[@mikeroberts4260]

@@dbadagna Right. I've never been one for beliefs; I like to see the data, the reality, however bad.

[@mikeroberts4260]

@@EmmaSolomano I replied to this but it appears to have gone. Briefly, Ted Trainer's site uses phrases like "Consider having to go to work for money only two days a week" and "There is no need to sacrifice modern technology" which demonstrates that he starts with his desires, rather than what is actually possible. I'll read a bit more to check but I think he's likely to frustrate me as much as Nate does. Using less is not the same as sustainable. It might be worth checking Tom Murphy's Do the Math blog, which includes a post "Can Modernity Last" in which he clearly shows that it cannot.

[@dbadagna]

@@mikeroberts4260 You've probably watched Michael Dowd's videos. His advocacy of the acceptance of the inevitable collapse of our industrial civilization (due to overshoot), which he says couldn't have been avoided no matter what anyone may have tried to do, is, for me, paradoxically somewhat comforting.

[@chrberge7732]

Bigg Brither meat Idiocracy hadd me roling on flor laughing =) Thanks for your Love for the world, it shows Sir

[@alexanderleuchte5132]

I think where it can actually help to generally further "awareness" is to point out that a lot of the feared "loss" is from the perspective of addiction. Just like a smoker or a sugar addict "can't imagine a life without" their addiction and can only imagine a constant state of withdrawal symptoms a lot of people have the "living like a caveman would be awful" mindset but we have so much to win back in actual life quality too.

[@fleetinghopes6448]

absolutely!

[@piltdownman5592]

Hey Prof. Hagens! This isn't so much a question but a suggestion: if you haven't done so already (but I bet you have), please check out the writings of Scott Nearing AND check out the work of The Good Life Center. Kinship. Take care.

[@adydanger1149]

I thought it was going to be more along the lines of 'what star sign are you?' or 'peanut butter and jelly - yes or no?' etc.

[@yvonnereed167]

I’d like you to have a discussion with an evolutionary biologist who is expert in population about the drop in especially “first world” populations and how that is likely to change society over the next 50 to 100 years (assuming we make it through AI, Carrington+ like solar storms and climate change with not too much damage). I know that’s not in the next 10 years but that means we have more time to do something about it re “I wish I started earlier” and I’m not suggesting manipulation of population but rather understanding what it will look like and how we can best manage the changes it will cause.

[@kushalpanchal4951]

Ignorance should be cleared, the answer is right on our nose.

[@John-s1u2v]

Please get on the Lex Fridman Show. Lex is the best, you would get great quality exposure.

[@stephenboyington630]

Re: bringing in opponents. It has happened in ways. Doomberg dismissed most of what Nate cared about, for instance.

[@sibeguy]

You need to expand outside the academic/scientific ecosystem. Innovation is blocked by the biases in these Institutions!

[@fleetinghopes6448]

from where do the biases originate?

[@pookah9938]

Something to start with is: Retreat from appetite. The mind and the opportunities begin to show up. Everything happens at the edge, the edge between nature and the burgeoning waste from consumerism. As nature expands and waste recedes, something changes. What?

[@michaelganshirt8795]

We need educational materials for teachers to be able to simplify the great simplification for middle school and high school. I have been thinking about how I can do this for my eighth graders, and I hope to try some things out this school year. I'm going to use real-world data and graphing exercises in order to present some of these important trends and then have them reflect on that in writing and discussion.

[@adyankov]

On the nuclear war, I fully support your general dread and anxiety of thermonuclear weapons (partly borne I am sure of the realization that this is the only kind of war that can directly wreak destruction to your home on Wyoming, NOT the situation of many of the rest of us located closer to active frontlines), but I think you should get out of the fruitless loop of "learned helplessness" and fatalism on the issue. It would be great do a podcast episode with someone like Anne Applebaum, with whose political and geopolitical views you might not particularly agree (as you come from your specific mix of libertarian and left liberal background), but who can actually and forcefully argue about the potential and agency of other nations and even flawed democracy to collectively work out and solve problems of armed conflict, peace and diplomacy, without giving in and appeasing dictators. You might still have qualms about Ukraine and NATO support after that, but maybe you could shift to a psychological acceptance of nuclear risks without holding a grudge about it.

[@TennesseeJed]

❤

[@alexanderleuchte5132]

Concerning the "Dopamine problem" there is an interesting story about experiments with rats and mice and addictive sustances which were all done with caged lab animals but when they were repeated with animals which had a stimulating enviroment showed very different outcomes in the tendency to show addict behaviours

[@maver1cs384]

Love this, resonates with the feedback I received from one of my short stories called "Lucifer's Steed" in my book Hammerhead, A Collection of Short Stories. Perhaps storytelling has value in today's world.

[@hagbardc623]

"this is not a normal time to be a human" interesting statement, made me think.

[@pookah9938]

Harvest the Wild lettuce (Lactuca virosa) , the yellow flowered thistle look alike in your potato patch...natures "morphine". Videos abound.

[@davehendricks4824]

Hi Nate. I’ve got a suggestion for a guest on your podcast, if you can get him: Professor Jeffrey Sachs.

[@thegreatsimplification]

Scheduled

[@davehendricks4824]

@@thegreatsimplificationwow, that was quick!😂

[@DetectiveSwanson]

I would love to see an interview with you and Lex.

[@stevebreedlove9760]

27:19 about this time I cheered the question and Nate did too. How can we simplify the message and mainstream it?

[@wadeinn463]

It’s only going to get hotter each year. Crops are already dying off I can’t imagine us living at 3C.

[@johnbanach3875]

How funny. I was thinking about how you would do with someone like Joe Rogan or Lex Fridman exactly 10 seconds before you mentioned them! I've been following you, as a big fan needless to say, for at least three years now, and I love (almost) every video you've put out even though I haven't been able to get any young family members, who are generally thoughtful, intelligent individuals, to take an interest. Current lifestyles are too addictive. I've been told that I'm (an old man with a headset) addicted to KZbin, so there you go! In my defense, I used to be an avid reader, but then I started to have vision problems, so I've substituted "listening."

[@monkeyfist.348]

On the issue of a nuclear exchange, we might have to go there, to finally get in the proper position to eliminate nuclear weapons from all arsenals. We need some serious changes on the weapondry stage. When confronted with choices I cannot see us choosing, I consider events as the more likely route. That is not saying that we have more than one used. It could happen that the first use condemns the country that uses it, that the world responds to the event. There could be an attempt to use that backfires. A launch accident is possible, perhaps more so for Russia, seeing as we overestimate their abilities all the time. In any case, all out nuclear war is only one outcome of many that include a nuclear weapon exploding. Are there other routes to disarmament? Perhaps a few, but I think the use of one is the more likely route sadly.

[@ronalddecker8498]

Sadly, to get all parties to the bargaining table, the threat must be credible and real. That might even include limited strikes. Even with full knowledge that limited strikes may escalate.

[@monkeyfist.348]

@ronalddecker8498 yup, for sure, the threat has to be real and imminent. There are other outcomes with a real and imminent threat that don't include the use of one. The longer we live with the threat, the more likely we are to do something about it.

[@LandscaperGarry]

What you have to say Nate I could swallow a whole lot easier if we had a century or two to implement, but we don't...seems we may only have a few decades. And, so far, despite our annual COP meetings, seem like very little is actually changing for the better. I'll be gone soon, so I won't have to explain to my grandkids why things look so bleek. Once we had to make a choice between sustainability and business as usual, the powerful weren't about to give up their (economic) power, so here we are...realizing the planet, all but raped to death, can't be expected to fix itself without some major changes in how we do things. Major changes for which there's way to little time left to implement. Glad to be an older person.

[@LogosFlow]

What is the single fundamental most important question? For me it's "Now what?" A question that never expires. So? Now what?

[@justcollapse5343]

Yes - #JustCollapse!

[@spring9603]

I agree with your point of view regarding the invitation of someone from the other side of the barricade. I honestly don't think will bring value. On the contrary, it will bring more intrigue and confusion and considering the current situation, more confusion is not desirable. On the other hand, I'd really love to see you on Lex Fridman because I know he's a die hard fan of Elon Musk and a Republican type of capitalist. I think you are a good person.

[@dbadagna]

Yes, many of those people are fundamentally disingenuous, so it wouldn't be productive to engage in a dialogue with them.

[@pookah9938]

Ken Meter has been providing examples of "What to do..." i.e., the question about land.

[@alandoane9168]

Population discussion: 5:53

[@anthonytroia1]

21:40 🎯

[@generic_youtube_comment]

Sorry, as i understand it power is a measurement of Energy consumption over time usually measured for a persons rate of consumption as kw/h's It does not have to specifically mean in the form of electricity. The average citizen in the U.S./ Canada consumes approx 250kw/h's in a day (wealth inequality aside), but that doesn't mean necessarily all electrical. You can measure the power output of a vehicle as that in kilowatts and i think that is what's used in the E.U. but that's derived from mainly burning hydrocarbons and very little to do with electricity.

[@buddyneher9359]

The shrinking Overton window... I hope you are right that a substack can continue uncensored if KZbin channel can't.

[@dalebirononpoetry]

Nate, of course I was nudged to full attention when you answered one of your questions in this most juicy and for me, helpful way...! "I realize now that it's important to have a diverse conversation about the head, the heart, and the hands. The head is the intellectual framing of the biophysical constraints we face. The heart is the change in consciousness, the change in value, the change in definition of we the recognition that this is not who we have to be as a species, the recognition of what we're doing to the planet the recognition of the colonial impulse and the hierarchical." Head. Heart. Hands. When we line these three up, (even sort of) we really do become paradoxically joyful, sad, and badass, all at the same time. When poet, Mary Oliver said the lines below, she was looking grief, sadness, and joy right in the old kisser... "Tell me about despair, yours, and I will tell you mine. Meanwhile the world goes on. Meanwhile the sun and the clear pebbles of the rain are moving across the landscapes..." -Mary Oliver PS: You know Nate, if you ever want to talk poetry, ecology, and the power of fierce language... drop a line.

[@pascalxus]

Here's my question: Why is 30% decrease in gdp ( as you predicted for 2050) a disaster on the scale of "neighbors helping neighbors"? what am I missing?

[@yvonnereed167]

If you get credible people of good faith and ask important questions to respectfully find places where you diverge without being confrontational. I have often wondered where Tony Seba is seeing things differently to those who don’t believe the transition to renewables is so easy.

[@emilymiller1792]

"Being better communicators *to* the general public". That is part of the problem, like people are to be talked *to* and told how to think and where to go and what to do. Perhaps *with* would be better to find out better what people's concerns are, where bridges could be built.

[@benbullard2298]

Good, competent, governance would be a really great direction to move in. Mind that what I am talking about has nothing to do with conservative vs. liberal. It has to do primarily with competence and seeing the world that actually exists clearly. I doubt the US will take the lead in this. American's just are not ready for democracy. Clearly.

[@danielfaben5838]

Generally, folks prefer not to live in horror and terror. Some might like to have others experience intense negativity so that they can feel the waves of emotion come off of them. As the simplification creates its own waves, there will be no avoidance of personal impacts as they wash around and through us. Denial is an option at present as the media presentations of edited sensationalized entertainment preclude serious contextualization. Let a major world city go down the tubes then we may have a genuine impact. For the urbanized population (and human impact) to drop in a meaningful manner, a whole shitload of cities (all of them?) need to disappear. That will be some horror story. Likely there will be no documentarian/educator such as yourself to do a podcast at that point. Cowering in a dark hole will be the final moments for many of us and eventually nearly all humans. Reality lived and died up close and personal is not a product edited and sold. How else can it be?

[@johngillespie8855]

Can you edify us on the perihelion and apehelion , the earths orbit around the sun, and it's relation to global heating of history and present affect?

[@chriscopeman8820]

What does TGS stand for?

[@Namari12]

The Great Simplification, the name of Nate's podcast

[@aerobique]

try to get peter joseph on

[@katiegreene3960]

At 24 min .. I have also found that most podcasts seem to be only the intellectual and credentialed types and I consume a inappropriate amount of pods and I'm a bit tired of it and just want an average joe on a pod for once... tucker c actually just did this by having a neighbor on and it was enjoyable

[@thegreatsimplification]

Ive thought about this - invited my cousin who is high school football coach/guidance counselor. Centrist. Great guy - but he's ascared. Ill pursue this though - thanks for the push

[@katiegreene3960]

@thegreatsimplification yeah I'd be nervous too.

[@boblove3167]

The .7 correlation between gdp and power sounds like Geoffrey West's .75 correlation between size and metabolism indicating economies if scale?

[@boblove3167]

Head, heart and hands is the right approach for us. Reason/logic, intuition/values, action/economy. McGilchrist would affirm this trifocal approach. TGS tries so hard to maintain this balance. Well done!

[@SeegerInstitute]

Nate, hosting episodes about new forms of governance is a great idea. Been giving a lot of thought to that. I think the trick is not shooting for the moon, but understanding that we’re in a really bad place right now both on the individual level and on the governance level. We obviously need to move beyond nationalism and anything that has to do with us versus them regardless of who them is. This is not going to be easy. This is where climate change Becomes the solution. It’s really not the problem. Climate change can be the other which has been embodied in another group of people in the past, allowing us to all understand we’re in this game together on this canoe going to sink together if we don’t get our act together. my belief and it’s not a popular one is at the concentration of wealth in private hands could be the key to getting going in the right direction. Several times in the past at the end of civilizations, extra state, federated trading partnerships in the form of the Hansen league where the Republic of Venice have emerged to take up the slack as civilizations fell. Perhaps a neo feudal model no matter how palatable it is at this point might be the way to at least train future leaders and to get going in the right direction at least for the next few years. If wealthy people instead of building, bunkers, built lifeboats, and used the opportunity to get young people and bring them in to train them in the skills necessary to facilitate or transition from a high energy past to a low energy local future based on local growing food, local manufacturing and local energy production all with an emphasis on carbon sequestration and increasing local biodiversity getting past the differentiation between indigenous and invasive, and just acknowledging that the future is something we kept predict perhaps we can lay the groundwork for a new civilization, especially if we use Technology to create an open source, expanding educational system online, which enables people to use their local resources to begin to localize. It’s a matter of thinking globally and acting locally. I believe billionaires who will have nothing to do with the money once the earth burns up, could be persuaded to invest an infantile and significant amount of their money to create a series of interconnected incubators to train leaders of the future young people who want to do the work along the lines of the peace core, or the civilian conservation core to begin to do the work and help local communities transition to a very very different future. It’s certainly not the answer, but it might be one step in the right direction which makes use of the existingpopulation because that’s not part of the solution remains part of the problem. Keep up the good work spend some time with your chickens invite some young young people to help plant potatoes and don’t worry about the weeds. They’re your friends.

[@emilymiller1792]

I disagree. This is exactly what the WEF wants. Corporate elites in charge, herding their human capital as products towards the elites' ends. How about we stick with our constitutional republic and educate our kids such that they can and will shoulder leadership and responsibility with wisdom; this is a necessity in a self-governing society--for people to be self-governing as individuals and in their communities.