[premium-gecko]

The Club of Rome is some odious stuff. It seems to be a group of academic doomsayers who like to play around with toy models in order to justify quasi-communism and other goals related to neo-Malthusian beliefs. They may be the primary progenitors of using toy models to cast the bones and make scary predictions about the future, especially with regard to climate alarmism. From The Limits to Growth:

"In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together. But in designating these dangers as the enemy, we fall into the trap, which we have already warned readers about, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself."

[AnimalMuppet]

As a human, I have a hard time finding common cause with people who consider humanity to be the enemy.

I mean, even if you say human nature is a problem, I might agree, depending on the specifics. But humanity itself? Well, if you think I'm your enemy, then maybe I'm your enemy.

[longwick]

That’s just semantics, it means the same thing.

[tanbog4]

I guess if you keep saying the same thing will happen repeatability eventually you'll look like you predicted something.

Even a broken (analogue) clock tells the right time twice a day.

[forz877]

The problem is people are expecting the asteroid impact, or the single point where "civilization is collapsed."

These aren't helpful and aren't realistic. Even historical societal collapses happen over periods of centuries, often.

It's foolish to simply dismiss threats because people make bad predictions. We can already see increases in rare weather events right now, and these have already had significant geopolitical consequences (e.g. Syria).

[XorNot]

Or it's an ongoing cautionary narrative that we shouldn't take our civilizational accomplishments forgranted, and that government and civic works are ultimately a long chain of development and stewardship which depended on those before to keep going.

[briefcomment]

If you thought the world could only survive with a much smaller population, and you had enough money to buy out all decision makers and media, what would you do? Sit around and wait for the world to end, or take matters into your own hands?