House questions in a new political order

[CS]

@hristo
That clarifies things a lot. Thank you for explaining.

@cl
Good summation on strategy
What are you leaning towards - mobility or hunker down? Hunker down has the downside of setup cost - plus then mental cost of not wanting to lose whatever investment it is. I think I would not want to buy more than what I could just walk away from as total loss and mentally plan for that. With mobility it is harder to network with local folks.

I've been going towards mobility but my (argh!) decision to get a cat was not a good one for that. Push comes to shove, she can just come with and lump it, but that is stressful for all involved. It does make slow travel the better choice - and that is cheaper anyhow and will allow for some interconnections to form.

@alphavile
I don't know how much of a horror it would be. The will to live is strong.

@UK
New Zealand is hard to get in unless young and skilled. The minimum points are high (harder than Canada). Not sure how low the population density really is in relation to their resources. There is already a lot of pressure (from what friends have told me) from those who can afford million dollar houses (for not much house at all) versus those getting preventable diseases because the rental conditions are so bad for the low income. There is also China, as @IlliniDave mentioned.

@IlliniDave
China is an interesting factor. Would they be willing to align with Europe? The geography does not favor it, unless the widespread geography has something unique to offer in return.

I was wondering the big countries would team up short term to swallow the smaller ones, especially if those morsels were resource-rich, and there was still fuel for the military mount the operations. Eventually they'd squabble amongst themselves when even those additional resources were not enough.

Plus there is India and that region which is already flooding, has huge water shortages and nuclear weapons. A wonderful combination.
I know enough about all these regions to know 1. I don't know enough and 2. It could get so ugly.

[Dream of Freedom]

I thought I read it took a few hundred years for Rome to fall. They were only dealing with population and disease though and not the additional multipliers of fossil fuel and climate change. Actually, I think there were some temperature fluctuations that affected them too but the details are fuzzy.

The eastern roman empire survived until 1453. So quite a long decline. With something that size a few bits and pieces stick around.

[classical_Liberal]

What are you leaning towards - mobility or hunker down?

I've always been a mobile person. Though, I'm beginning to see the other side of the coin. Given that I serendipitously found a place that has proven to be very stable in this round of chaos (hence likely to be that way in future waves?), and actually chose it more because I like the lifestyle here, I'm starting to move towards the other side. Although I doubt I'll invest too much in "hunker down", I now see the benefit of limiting the "Be mobile" aspect to a more narrow spectrum. IOW, Find two or three places to grow some shallow roots. So that if the time comes, I have options to leave the primary more easily. Because I have some social and/or economic roots in another place.

[classical_Liberal]

The eastern roman empire survived until 1453. So quite a long decline. With something that size a few bits and pieces stick around.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xo0X77OBJUg

Sorry, I just like this song too much to pass up the opportunity.

[Seppia]

New Zeland is great, but then you’re stuck on an island far away from everything and everyone
If that’s what you like, cool.
Otherwise, one can pick the nordics
Low debt
Safe
North
Good safety net
Low population density
Lots of natural resources
Everybody speaks English

Alternative: italy
If you are FI: cheap, safe, beautiful, low tax (for those who don’t work), we don’t shoot people or riot that often.

[Dream of Freedom]

@ classical_Liberal
Ya she could get a house in Istanbul but not Constantinople. That's a bad place to ride out the collapse.

[Campitor]

The Indigenous people of America coped with scarcity with mobility - they traveled to where the resources were and the climate suitable for the season. What would this lifestyle look like today? It looks like the camper/van movement. You would need to live off the land and be skilled in hunting and survival. Any medical knowledge regarding surgery, making antiseptics/medicine, triage, etc, would be invaluable. Once the gas is gone, it's back to riding horses or good old foot travel as the indians used to do before the Spaniards reintroduced the horse into America.

If you're a particularly good sailor, you could go the Waterworld way and live off the ocean and head to dry land for supplies as needed. Bartering skills and goods would be king again.

[Hristo Botev]

If you're a particularly good sailor, you could go the Waterworld way and live off the ocean and head to dry land for supplies as needed. Bartering skills and goods would be king again.

https://quidnon.blogspot.com/

[Alphaville]

@alphavile
I don't know how much of a horror it would be. The will to live is strong.

there is also a will to die though. i’m thinking at some point it’s gotta kick in

[Jean]

@CS
We have 800 meter thick glacier, and are the rainiest area in europe after the norwegian coast. Danube(Inn), Rhein and Rhone have there main sources here. So Water is likely to be an isue later than in other places in europe. More annectotically, two summer earlier, i rode a train from sweden back to switzerland, and the contrast was impressive as soon as we passed basel. Everything was green, while in germany, denmark and sweden, everything was dry and yellow.

[JollyScot]

If it wasn't for my country shitting the bed just now I would recommend Scotland.

300 days of rain a year, so plenty of water. Less population density than most. South East of England skews UK numbers.

I liked Switzerland, in hindsight I should have stayed and saved for place in mountains.

However we are shitting the bed, so if you were to come your position would not be secure at this point of time. If the world does but a crisis then being an immigrant anywhere will become a lot more painful. In the era of big government bureaucracy they can dismantle you if its politically beneficial.

In the blame game immigrants are no1 on the list.

[IlliniDave]

@IlliniDave
China is an interesting factor. Would they be willing to align with Europe? The geography does not favor it, unless the widespread geography has something unique to offer in return.

I was wondering the big countries would team up short term to swallow the smaller ones, especially if those morsels were resource-rich, and there was still fuel for the military mount the operations. Eventually they'd squabble amongst themselves when even those additional resources were not enough.

Plus there is India and that region which is already flooding, has huge water shortages and nuclear weapons. A wonderful combination.
I know enough about all these regions to know 1. I don't know enough and 2. It could get so ugly.

China is interesting to think about but I don't think in your scenario it matters too much. China and Russia share a large border and have an uneasy relationship. If it could be done in a non-autocratic takeover scenario, it makes a lot of sense for the US to strengthen US-Russia relations. Both Obama and Trump had some openness too that, but both wound up having to hit them pretty hard with sanctions becuse Russia still has some growing up to do.

The difficulty when calamity is heaped on calamity is that you wind up with no options. If the earth between +/-50 degrees latitude or so is going turn into a desert, then all China means is another billion people looking to flee to the same places that the rest of us would want to flee. That's the rub with currently nice but relatively small places. How many people can they actually take in? At that point what do politics and health insurance mean? And if c19 is still a thing people in the US have very few options. Autocrats also tend to lock down their borders to keep people in.

I've looked at the some of the gloomier climate change prediction maps and should they prove correct there are basically two choices for humans. N. Canada and N. Russia. Besides those, there may be small isolated patches here and there where people might live, and some day Antarctica will evolve an ecosystem where people could live.

I don't think the bigger nations would team up if the world turned into a game of Risk, They would knock off smaller countries on their own. Nations bent on conquest don't really make good allies.

And we have a ~0.5% chance of getting hit by a meteor before the election even gets here.

You are absolutely correct that it could get very very ugly.

[Alphaville]

I'm not sure why the answer isn't just New Zealand. Low population density, English speaking, beautiful country, plenty of water, universal good quality healthcare, a long way from everywhere else...

i missed this earlier, and while new zealand has a great appeal today, i don’t think it would be any kind of safe haven during a period of global chaos.

in the absence of a usa presence in the pacific, australia and new zealand would quickly fall into china’s sphere. not sure what the uk would be able to do for them—likely not much. already both australia and new zealand’s largest trading partner is china, and china invests heavily in australian mines. china has interests across the pacific rim all the way to chile and peru where there’ slithium and copper and other minerals. maybe the south pacific would become their mare nostrum (dont know how to say that in chinese). hey, even to the other side of the continent, they’re investing in brazil as well, and then in africa...

orwell miscalculated the size and reach of eastasia...

[2Birds1Stone]

@CS, not really worried about invasion from the east. It's also the western most point in Europe.

Portugal has aquifer water, plenty of sun for solar, and extremely fertile soil. The sea and rivers provide a lot of food as well.

The temperatures along the coast are mild most of the year.

[UK-with-kids]

in the absence of a usa presence in the pacific, australia and new zealand would quickly fall into china’s sphere. not sure what the uk would be able to do for them—likely not much. already both australia and new zealand’s largest trading partner is china, and china invests heavily in australian mines. china has interests across the pacific rim all the way to chile and peru where there’ slithium and copper and other minerals. maybe the south pacific would become their mare nostrum (dont know how to say that in chinese). hey, even to the other side of the continent, they’re investing in brazil as well, and then in africa...

orwell miscalculated the size and reach of eastasia...

I've read this a few times now and I'm still struggling to understand what you mean. Why is it a problem if New Zealand falls into "China's sphere"? Is the expression code for something else?

[Hristo Botev]

orwell miscalculated the size and reach of eastasia...

We are at war with Eastasia. We have always been at war with Eastasia.

ETA: But seriously, I know I tend to see most everything through the lens of dystopian literature, but this entire thread is an exercise in Orwellian philosophy.

ETAx2: Having now done that personality thing, I think this is the part where I'm supposed to say that my seeing everything through the lens of dystopian literature is a side effect of me being INFP.

[Alphaville]

I've read this a few times now and I'm still struggling to understand what you mean. Why is it a problem if New Zealand falls into "China's sphere"? Is the expression code for something else?

economically no as long as it’s based on trade, they’re already there, but politically i think it would be a problem for new zealanders to follow the fate of, say, hong kong.

historically at least we can see central political systems exerting influence to protect economic interests in the colonies. e.g, the east india company’s long history in asia, or the united fruit company installing central dictators in central america (“banana republic”).

in the case of a destabilized global order i could see china mobilizing military might and installing favorable political regimes, i.e., politically colonizing australia and new zealand. why not?

i don’t see the decline and fall of american hegemony as a good thing. i’m not referring to national interests, but rather of the stabilizing global force of the usa and nato and the gradual advancement of democracy. i do cherish the notion of individual human rights, and i think so far this was our best hope for them, warts and all. europe has that promise too but but without sufficient power we don’t know where that’s going. (eta: eurasia?).

we’re sort of accustomed/adapted to this pax americana, in spite of the problems it presents, and i regard any period of future global political readjustment with great dread, particularly when faced with authoritarian powers filling the vacuum.

[Alphaville]

We are at war with Eastasia. We have always been at war with Eastasia.

ETA: But seriously, I know I tend to see most everything through the lens of dystopian literature, but this entire thread is an exercise in Orwellian philosophy.

ETAx2: Having now done that personality thing, I think this is the part where I'm supposed to say that my seeing everything through the lens of dystopian literature is a side effect of me being INFP.

yes. i think the original question could be summarized as: “in the case of dystopia, what territory is safe?”

i’m trying to argue that if we let things go to hell we won’t be safe anywhere. seriously, we’re globalized now, there is no last frontier to flee to, or irish monasteries to safeguard civilization. the earth is a spheroid or whatever, there are satellites all above us, and there’s no place to run. this is it. no exit.

[Hristo Botev]

i’m trying to argue that if we let things go to hell we won’t be safe anywhere. seriously, we’re globalized now, there is no last frontier to flee to, or irish monasteries to safeguard civilization. the earth is a spheroid or whatever, there are satellites all above us, and there’s no place to run. this is it. no exit.

Well, you're obviously wrong there: https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/je ... cna1006036. (Hristo signs himself with the sign of the "B," for Bezos.)* Now, where's my Soma?

*Apologies for switching from Orwell's dystopia to Huxley's.

[Alphaville]

Well, you're obviously wrong there: https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/je ... cna1006036. (Hristo signs himself with the sign of the "B," for Bezos.)* Now, where's my Soma?

*Apologies for switching from Orwell's dystopia to Huxley's.

hahahahah! both books were very formative in my adolescence. i can relate... also i’m near the actual malpaís, lol.

mars colonies are more of a pk dick thing but i’m sure bezos grew up under his influence.