I'll listen with interest and a twinge of academic jealousy. I must admit that I suffered an "oh no" when I first learnt of Kemp's book a while back, as I've been labouring with something very similar for a long time. Fortunately, on investigation, I think our focus is sufficiently different for me not to be too despondent. But still a little green-eyed envy may colour my listening experience.
There was a lot of really interesting research that Luke referenced and the predominance of more egalitarian societies was an eye-opener. There is much in what he talks about that resonates with Anarchism which favours non-hierarchical forms of governance in which citizen assembly-type decision making is key.
I would second his suggestion for Audrey Tang who I saw interviewed on Nate Hagens channel a while back (https://youtu.be/aXgne-9F7uU?si=Uexr9V0KVitfB8Ch). I got a little lost in the tech bit but what he and those he works with with have achieved is immense.
While I shared some of your optimism about our ability to ride out a collapse - and it was definitely good to hear that collapse historically has been beneficial for the majority - I do wonder whether the different ratio of resources to population that we now face might make the slide into collapse a rather more cutthroat affair. I'd be happy to hear arguments to the contrary!
Luke was a great guest and I appreciated his grasp of his subject.
‘Most’ ‘economic thinking’ is ‘short run’ and ‘redundant’?
‘It’ ignores the ‘supply side’?
‘Growth’ {and ‘civilisation’} depends upon ‘cheap’ F.F. – those so called ‘halcyon days’ are ‘over’. ?
“The crisis now unfolding, however, is entirely different to the 1970s in one crucial respect… The 1970s crisis was largely artificial. When all is said and done, the oil shock was nothing more than the emerging OPEC cartel asserting its newfound leverage following the peak of continental US oil production. There was no shortage of oil any more than the three-day-week had been caused by coal shortages. What they did, perhaps, give us a glimpse of was what might happen in the event that our economies depleted our fossil fuel reserves before we had found a more versatile and energy-dense alternative. . . .
And this is why the crisis we are beginning to experience will make the 1970s look like a golden age of peace and tranquility. . . . The sad reality though, is that our leaders – at least within the western empire – have bought into a vision of the future which cannot work without some new and yet-to-be-discovered high-density energy source (which rules out all of the so-called green technologies whose main purpose is to concentrate relatively weak and diffuse energy sources). . . . Even as we struggle to reimagine the 1970s in an attempt to understand the current situation, the only people on Earth today who can even begin to imagine the economic and social horrors that await western populations are the survivors of the 1980s famine in Ethiopia, the hyperinflation in 1990s Zimbabwe, or, ironically, the Russians who survived the collapse of the Soviet Union.” ?
Just watched/listened to this twice in a row to try to absorb more of it (while building a Lego set to keep my hands busy 😅). I find the sheer density of valuable information in your conversations to be overwhelming at times, but in the best possible way. There was so much good stuff here but what struck me the most was the idea that we largely view historical collapses through the eyes of those who stood to lose the most at the time, and thus project current outcomes for ourselves to be far bleaker than they may actually turn out to be.
Again, thank you so much for the amazing work you do, Rachel.
The AFL CIO protest has a slight slant towards worker's rights, while the MayDay protest leans more into civilian rights. Each speaks out against the Trump Regime.
Both have marches and rallies, while the AFL CIO is also hosting picnics and parades. They each share some of the same local events. Why not attend both?
🌿🌻🌿🌻🌿🌻🌿🌻🌿🌻🌿🌻🌿🌻
🍃Dissent in Bloom
🍃"I want you to remember something: The line doesn’t end with LAND OF THE FREE but with HOME OF THE BRAVE."
Writing about collapse is an odd business. When I started researching and obsessing about collapse a decade-and-a-half ago, there were only about half a dozen people writing about it (Diamond, Tainter, Greer, Bardi, Orlov, Kunstler and some adjacent figures; almost entirely white, male elders), now though the field of collapsology is much more diversified and much busier (dozens of books, authors, substacks and an expansive collapse reddit). I wonder why? (haha)
It’s also odd because one writes about a situation that is worsening quicker than one can reasonably keep track; any disaster or horrible statistic is soon out of date and overtaken by another grim fact. Moreover, if one is writing in good faith, one needs to ask, for whom is one writing? Reflecting on the downward slopes of collapse scenarios reminds one that there is little by way of a future audience for what one is writing about. Being right, if even approximately so, means one’s time might have been better spent than writing an academic book about collapse. Little or no value in a “I told you so” or proof of theory if there is no one to hear. Odd.
However, while we are still here to listen and think about such matters, a great interview (“damn”; my aforementioned envy creeping in) and a useful contrast with the earlier much drier collapse piece. Not much to say. I agree broadly with all of Luke’s points – and it’s consoling to see that people are increasingly converging on these systems-based diagnosis of past and future collapse(s).
My only trivial bones of contention:-
I think for various reasons this time collapse it is different. You picked Luke up on this and he obviously recognises this himself too (e.g. (a) there is nowhere to go post-collapse when it is global (we are now massively expansive as a civilization), b) during past collapses the 99% were more competent and able to feed themselves, whereas today we tend to lack such basic skills and competencies (i.e. we are thoroughly domesticated and dependent on the system), c) there is the resource issue, which you highlighted, which could be developed to include: d) the massive ecological overshoot, environmental degradation, extirpation of species etc. that is co-extensive with our particular collapse.
Basically, I’m more pessimistic than Luke (possibly an artefact of age). I consider us to be facing a dozen or more progress and anthropocene traps (rather than just one or two), each of which is wired to cause us to collapse or self-terminate and which must be safely defused. So, a dozen or more traps to get past in order to escape collapse or self-destruction. That feels like a pretty big miracle or series of miracles to me. I liked it where Luke noted “The book is maybe pretty pessimistic about the future, but much more optimistic about people.” I would say that my own work in progress is pretty pessimistic about the future, and pretty pessimistic about humanity too. So, the difference probably rests there.
I’d also affirm that collapse is best thought of as a process – or a series of interconnected processes - rather than an event. So, I’d agree that doomsday predictions are misplaced. However, there may be various tipping-points, although probably only discernible with any confidence in the rear-view mirror. I’d personally suspect/predict that collapse is already well underway, and some tipping-points may have been crossed (collapse is ‘already here, but not evenly distributed’ to use William Gibson once more).
Enough said. Another great interview. Many thanks.
We know this. The root problem is that many do not and automatically reject this kind of thinking because it’s not important or true from their point of view. If and only we can get through to enough of them, otherwise this is spitting into the wind.
“Complexity Theory argues that any species that is dependent on any non-renewable resource must grow or it will collapse, because as a resource depletes the quality of its reserves declines, which requires increasing complexity and energy for extraction to maintain the flow of supply, and increasing complexity requires a growing population, because each brain can manage a finite level of complexity, which requires a growing supply of resources to support the growing population, and because recycling non-renewable minerals without losses is impossible, and since the energy that supply chains depend on is mostly non-renewable, a point is eventually reached where the complexity of supply chains must break down, and the species returns to a state that is not dependent on non-renewable resources, which for humans is a hunter-gatherer lifestyle. “?
“So the thesis of this book stands or falls with the correctness of the decline rate that Brown gives us. Therefore I have calculated with several different parameters as regards the decline rate, and all point in the same direction. The difference between them is a few years at most. Therefore I assume that my thesis is solid, which is that the end of global net oil exports in 2030-2032 (Brown’s scenario) is a best-case scenario.
Collapse can, I think, begin in earnest already in 2026, only because of too little diesel exports. Observe that oil exports vanish successively, more and more, not all at once.” ? ?
I'll listen with interest and a twinge of academic jealousy. I must admit that I suffered an "oh no" when I first learnt of Kemp's book a while back, as I've been labouring with something very similar for a long time. Fortunately, on investigation, I think our focus is sufficiently different for me not to be too despondent. But still a little green-eyed envy may colour my listening experience.
Thank you! I just ordered the book. Listening in now 🙏🏻
There was a lot of really interesting research that Luke referenced and the predominance of more egalitarian societies was an eye-opener. There is much in what he talks about that resonates with Anarchism which favours non-hierarchical forms of governance in which citizen assembly-type decision making is key.
I would second his suggestion for Audrey Tang who I saw interviewed on Nate Hagens channel a while back (https://youtu.be/aXgne-9F7uU?si=Uexr9V0KVitfB8Ch). I got a little lost in the tech bit but what he and those he works with with have achieved is immense.
While I shared some of your optimism about our ability to ride out a collapse - and it was definitely good to hear that collapse historically has been beneficial for the majority - I do wonder whether the different ratio of resources to population that we now face might make the slide into collapse a rather more cutthroat affair. I'd be happy to hear arguments to the contrary!
Luke was a great guest and I appreciated his grasp of his subject.
I second the suggestion for an Audrey Tang conversation.
No ‘BAU’?
‘Most’ ‘economic thinking’ is ‘short run’ and ‘redundant’?
‘It’ ignores the ‘supply side’?
‘Growth’ {and ‘civilisation’} depends upon ‘cheap’ F.F. – those so called ‘halcyon days’ are ‘over’. ?
“The crisis now unfolding, however, is entirely different to the 1970s in one crucial respect… The 1970s crisis was largely artificial. When all is said and done, the oil shock was nothing more than the emerging OPEC cartel asserting its newfound leverage following the peak of continental US oil production. There was no shortage of oil any more than the three-day-week had been caused by coal shortages. What they did, perhaps, give us a glimpse of was what might happen in the event that our economies depleted our fossil fuel reserves before we had found a more versatile and energy-dense alternative. . . .
And this is why the crisis we are beginning to experience will make the 1970s look like a golden age of peace and tranquility. . . . The sad reality though, is that our leaders – at least within the western empire – have bought into a vision of the future which cannot work without some new and yet-to-be-discovered high-density energy source (which rules out all of the so-called green technologies whose main purpose is to concentrate relatively weak and diffuse energy sources). . . . Even as we struggle to reimagine the 1970s in an attempt to understand the current situation, the only people on Earth today who can even begin to imagine the economic and social horrors that await western populations are the survivors of the 1980s famine in Ethiopia, the hyperinflation in 1990s Zimbabwe, or, ironically, the Russians who survived the collapse of the Soviet Union.” ?
Bigger than you can imagine
https://consciousnessofsheep.co.uk/2022/07/01/bigger-than-you-can-imagine/
https://www.facebook.com/cosheep
Just watched/listened to this twice in a row to try to absorb more of it (while building a Lego set to keep my hands busy 😅). I find the sheer density of valuable information in your conversations to be overwhelming at times, but in the best possible way. There was so much good stuff here but what struck me the most was the idea that we largely view historical collapses through the eyes of those who stood to lose the most at the time, and thus project current outcomes for ourselves to be far bleaker than they may actually turn out to be.
Again, thank you so much for the amazing work you do, Rachel.
🏚️🏠🏚️🏡🏚️🏚️🏬🏚️🏡🏚️🏚️🏠🏚️🏠🏠🏠🏚️
TWO NATIONAL PROTESTS IN 3 DAYS
🏡🏚️🏠🏚️🏡🏠🏚️🏠🏡🏚️🏚️🏡🏠🏚️🏡🏘️🏚️
🏚️🏚️🌵 Monday September 1st 2025 🌲🏠🏚️
🏘️🏠🏚️🏠🏚️🏡🏚️🏘️🏠🏠🏡🏘️🏚️🏚️🏠🏚️🏚️
Workers over Billionaires
organized by MayDay/50501
https://maydaystrong.org/
⚙️⚙️🔨🔧⚒️🔧🔨⚙️⚙️🔨🔧⚒️🔧🔨⚙️⚙️
Workers Labor Day 2025
organized by AFL CIO
https://workerslaborday.org/
JOIN THE DEMOCRACY TRAIN.
🚂🇨🇦🇬🇧🇫🇷🇯🇵🇦🇺🇩🇪🇺🇦🇸🇳🇳🇱🇰🇷🇵🇱🏴🇻🇦
The AFL CIO protest has a slight slant towards worker's rights, while the MayDay protest leans more into civilian rights. Each speaks out against the Trump Regime.
Both have marches and rallies, while the AFL CIO is also hosting picnics and parades. They each share some of the same local events. Why not attend both?
🌿🌻🌿🌻🌿🌻🌿🌻🌿🌻🌿🌻🌿🌻
🍃Dissent in Bloom
🍃"I want you to remember something: The line doesn’t end with LAND OF THE FREE but with HOME OF THE BRAVE."
🍃
🍃"So, now I must ask you — are you brave?"
🍃
🍃Sixteen Days Into Trump’s Occupation of D.C.
https://open.substack.com/pub/dissentinbloom/p/sixteen-days-into-trumps-occupation
🌿🌻🌿🌻🌿🌻🌿🌻🌿🌻🌿🌻🌿🌻
Elbows UP! 🏒
🍁🍁🍁🍁🍁🍁🍁🍁🍁🍁🍁🍁🍁🍁
Barry McGuire - Eve Of Destruction
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qfZVu0alU0I
🍁🍁🍁🍁🍁🍁🍁🍁🍁🍁🍁🍁🍁🍁
Keep protests peaceful.
Don't kill anyone.
Here are resistance related guides from around the world:
🇺🇸 Fundamentals of physical surveillance: a guide for uniformed and plainclothes personnel
https://archive.org/details/fundamentalsofph0000silj
The RCMP has its own publications including:
🇨🇦 GCPSG-022 (2025) - Threat and Risk Assessment Guide
GCPSG-010 (2022) - Operational Physical Security Guide
🇨🇦 GCPSG-019 (2023) - Protection, Detection, Response, and Recovery Guide
https://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/physec-secmat/pubs/index-eng.htm
The non-profit Electronic Frontier Foundation also has excellent guides on:
🇺🇸 Street Level Surveillance
https://sls.eff.org
🇺🇸 Surveillance Self-Defense
https://ssd.eff.org/
🇪🇺 🇸🇪⚠️ Resistance Operating Concept
https://jsou.edu/Press/PublicationDashboard/25
🇺🇦 🇺🇲 Radio Free Ukraine Resistance Manual
https://radiofreeukraine.com/3d-flip-book/resistance-manual/
⚠️ Assessing Revolutionary And Insurgent Strategies (ARIS) Studies
Small Wars Journal
Assessing Revolutionary and Insurgent Strategies (ARIS) Project
https://smallwarsjournal.com/2012/08/05/assessing-revolutionary-and-insurgent-strategies-aris-project/
Author's website:
On Resistance, Revolutions, and Insurgencies
https://zimmerer.typepad.com/resistance/
Free PDF download of the book from the original author:
Casebook on Insurgency and Revolutionary Warfare, Volume II 1962 - 2009
http://zimmerer.typepad.com/Documents/ARIS%20Casebook%20Vol%202%202012%20s.pdf
⚠️ Civilian-Based Defense: A Post-Military Weapons System
https://www.nonviolent-conflict.org/resource/civilian-based-defense-a-post-military-weapons-system/
🏁 Simple Sabotage Field Manual by United States Office of Strategic Services
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/26184?ref=404media.co
⚠️ Library of Congress
Revelations from the Russian archives: documents in English translation
https://www.loc.gov/item/96024752
🏁 Robert Reich/Resistance School
Communicating Across Difference
https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLaT8gjnOmQl3dguy0_E0vVCL5ZYEyCTzu
🏁 Bernie Sanders:
https://m.youtube.com/@BernieSanders
🏁 CPJ Committee to Protect Journalists:
Safety Kit
https://cpj.org/safety-kit/
🏁 Activist Handbook:
https://activisthandbook.org/introduction
(⚠️ These are USA sponsored websites. Some publications may have been removed by the Trump regime)
Writing about collapse is an odd business. When I started researching and obsessing about collapse a decade-and-a-half ago, there were only about half a dozen people writing about it (Diamond, Tainter, Greer, Bardi, Orlov, Kunstler and some adjacent figures; almost entirely white, male elders), now though the field of collapsology is much more diversified and much busier (dozens of books, authors, substacks and an expansive collapse reddit). I wonder why? (haha)
It’s also odd because one writes about a situation that is worsening quicker than one can reasonably keep track; any disaster or horrible statistic is soon out of date and overtaken by another grim fact. Moreover, if one is writing in good faith, one needs to ask, for whom is one writing? Reflecting on the downward slopes of collapse scenarios reminds one that there is little by way of a future audience for what one is writing about. Being right, if even approximately so, means one’s time might have been better spent than writing an academic book about collapse. Little or no value in a “I told you so” or proof of theory if there is no one to hear. Odd.
However, while we are still here to listen and think about such matters, a great interview (“damn”; my aforementioned envy creeping in) and a useful contrast with the earlier much drier collapse piece. Not much to say. I agree broadly with all of Luke’s points – and it’s consoling to see that people are increasingly converging on these systems-based diagnosis of past and future collapse(s).
My only trivial bones of contention:-
I think for various reasons this time collapse it is different. You picked Luke up on this and he obviously recognises this himself too (e.g. (a) there is nowhere to go post-collapse when it is global (we are now massively expansive as a civilization), b) during past collapses the 99% were more competent and able to feed themselves, whereas today we tend to lack such basic skills and competencies (i.e. we are thoroughly domesticated and dependent on the system), c) there is the resource issue, which you highlighted, which could be developed to include: d) the massive ecological overshoot, environmental degradation, extirpation of species etc. that is co-extensive with our particular collapse.
Basically, I’m more pessimistic than Luke (possibly an artefact of age). I consider us to be facing a dozen or more progress and anthropocene traps (rather than just one or two), each of which is wired to cause us to collapse or self-terminate and which must be safely defused. So, a dozen or more traps to get past in order to escape collapse or self-destruction. That feels like a pretty big miracle or series of miracles to me. I liked it where Luke noted “The book is maybe pretty pessimistic about the future, but much more optimistic about people.” I would say that my own work in progress is pretty pessimistic about the future, and pretty pessimistic about humanity too. So, the difference probably rests there.
I’d also affirm that collapse is best thought of as a process – or a series of interconnected processes - rather than an event. So, I’d agree that doomsday predictions are misplaced. However, there may be various tipping-points, although probably only discernible with any confidence in the rear-view mirror. I’d personally suspect/predict that collapse is already well underway, and some tipping-points may have been crossed (collapse is ‘already here, but not evenly distributed’ to use William Gibson once more).
Enough said. Another great interview. Many thanks.
We know this. The root problem is that many do not and automatically reject this kind of thinking because it’s not important or true from their point of view. If and only we can get through to enough of them, otherwise this is spitting into the wind.
“Complexity Theory argues that any species that is dependent on any non-renewable resource must grow or it will collapse, because as a resource depletes the quality of its reserves declines, which requires increasing complexity and energy for extraction to maintain the flow of supply, and increasing complexity requires a growing population, because each brain can manage a finite level of complexity, which requires a growing supply of resources to support the growing population, and because recycling non-renewable minerals without losses is impossible, and since the energy that supply chains depend on is mostly non-renewable, a point is eventually reached where the complexity of supply chains must break down, and the species returns to a state that is not dependent on non-renewable resources, which for humans is a hunter-gatherer lifestyle. “?
https://un-denial.com/2025/07/12/by-hideaway-eroei/
“So the thesis of this book stands or falls with the correctness of the decline rate that Brown gives us. Therefore I have calculated with several different parameters as regards the decline rate, and all point in the same direction. The difference between them is a few years at most. Therefore I assume that my thesis is solid, which is that the end of global net oil exports in 2030-2032 (Brown’s scenario) is a best-case scenario.
Collapse can, I think, begin in earnest already in 2026, only because of too little diesel exports. Observe that oil exports vanish successively, more and more, not all at once.” ? ?
https://un-denial.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/lars-larsen-the-end-of-global-net-oil-exports-13th-edition-2024.pdf
https://un-denial.com/2024/07/29/book-review-the-end-of-global-net-oil-exports-by-lars-larsen-2024/