Planetary Phase of Civilization

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
Was reading up on this. I find all this stuff pretty fascinating, but there seems to be a natural hostility to the idea of global interdependence and I'm not sure why.

Planetary Phase of Civilization

The Planetary Phase of Civilization is a concept defined by the Global Scenario Group (GSG), an environmental organization that specializes in scenario analysis and forecasting. Proponents of the Planetary Phase of Civilization state that it refers to a current historical transition from a world of capitalist states and consumerist societies to a world of increased global connectivity with new global institutions (like the United Nations and the World Trade Organization), new information technologies, environmental change in the biosphere, economic globalization, and shifts in culture and consciousness. Although the concept is hotly debated in some circles, most reputable scientists give little credence to the theory and assert that current global economic interconnectedness is a function of advanced technology rather than the emergence of anything new in cultural or sociological terms.

In a historical perspective, the Planetary Phase of Civilization is viewed by its proponents as the third significant transition in civilization. Though history is complex and difficult to distinguish, they argue that changes from the Stone Age to Early civilization and then to the Modern Era are the first two macro-shifts in human society and culture. These transitions can be differentiated based on social organization, economy, and communications. The Stone Age consisted of the least complex versions – tribes and villages, hunting and gathering, and spoken language as the only means of communication. The shift into Early Civilization brought more structured city-states and kingdoms, settled agriculture, and writing. Society became more complex in the Modern Era with nation-states, industrial systems and printing, which enhanced communication and further increased the complexity of society. Proponents argue that unlike prior transitions, the Planetary Phase marks a new geologic era, the Anthropocene, in which human activity fundamentally alters ecosystems and the climate.

In Great Transition: The Promise and Lure of the Times Ahead, the GSG argues that historical transitions appear to be accelerating as each successive period lasts for a shorter amount of time than the previous one. It speculates that the current Planetary Phase will last for about 100 years, during which there will be a clear progression in science and technology toward a more complex and environmentally interdependent society. The GSG uses this assumption to create scenarios which lead to varying futures ranging from Breakdown to Policy Reform to Eco-Communalism. The GSG contends that the most desirable scenario is a "Great Transition" to an environmentally and socially sustainable global civilization. This scenario, however, depends on the emergence of a global citizens movement as a potential actor to contest the power of transnational corporations and state governments.

The concept of the planetary phase of civilization has become popular in the academic field of environmental science. In "Building a Global Culture of Peace"[2] Steven C. Rockefeller states that "...we have entered a planetary phase in the development of civilization - what the historians call an era of global history." In his article entitled "Paths to Planetary Civilization,"[3] Ervin László describes this planetary civilization as one in which "The consensually created and globally coordinated ecosocial market system begins to function" and "The natural resources required for health and vitality become available to all the peoples and countries of the human community."
This kind of scenario analysis helps analysts think in an organized fashion about future alternatives, key decision points, and possible obstacles to global development. It then becomes possible to determine how to avoid the less-favorable directions and encourage changes to nurture a more beneficial one.

Planetary Phase of Civilization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
I think world federation and world citizenship are inevitable. We can either go to it the easy way or the hard way kicking and screaming, but either way it will come.

However, I still believe that even that society would be more capitalistic than socialistic. It might have some socialistic elements such as free universal compulsory education and the like, but still more capitalistic than socialistic.
 

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
536
113
Regina, SK
Was reading up on this. I find all this stuff pretty fascinating, but there seems to be a natural hostility to the idea of global interdependence and I'm not sure why.
Narrow mindedness, short term thinking, failing to see the big picture, something like that I think is the explanation. Most of the objections to it that I've seen appear to be rooted in fear of loss of sovereignty by individual nation states. Considering all the death and destruction and waste that's been generated by nation states warring with each other since they first appeared, I find it hard to believe that loss of national sovereignty would be a bad thing. As long as everybody loses it equally at the same time.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
Total national sovereignty is no longer possible. I could see a decentralized federal structure, but the age of the nation-state is long outdated in the modern age.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
Considering all the death and destruction and waste that's been generated by nation states warring with each other since they first appeared, I find it hard to believe that loss of national sovereignty would be a bad thing.

Yes, belligerent nationalism seems stupid to me.

Monkeys fighting monkeys over pieces of the ground.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
A perfect example of the problem is with Caanda's sovereignty claims in the North. We could simply define those boundaries via already established international laws, or we could wate billions on militarization even though other countries with much larger populations could easily outspend us on that front, not to mention that a strong military without any international legal standing will do nothing to legitimize any illegitimate claims anyway. Going through the proper international process would be far more cost effective and effective generally since it would be recognized by all other nations as a legitimate claim.
 

Cliffy

Standing Member
Nov 19, 2008
44,850
192
63
Nakusp, BC
A global state is inevitable, but it will take a quantum leap in human consciousness for it to work. As we have seen, corruption on all levels of governance is universal. On a universal level, the corruption would be catastrophic. The New World Order as envisioned by Bush senior and the Rockefellers would be a totalitarian nightmare.
 

The Old Medic

Council Member
May 16, 2010
1,330
2
38
The World
Ah yes, and someday, all of the swords will be beaten into plowshares.

In the meantime, I WILL keep my firearms.

If you study monkeys, they fight all the time. So do all apes, as well as virtually every animal on this planet.

And NEVER forget, we are just another form of animal!
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
Ah yes, and someday, all of the swords will be beaten into plowshares.

In the meantime, I WILL keep my firearms.

If you study monkeys, they fight all the time. So do all apes, as well as virtually every animal on this planet.

And NEVER forget, we are just another form of animal!

I haven't seen anyone sniffing other people's butts in public, pissing in public and squating in public recently. So I guess there are differences between humans and others.
 

Cliffy

Standing Member
Nov 19, 2008
44,850
192
63
Nakusp, BC
I haven't seen anyone sniffing other people's butts in public, pissing in public and squating in public recently. So I guess there are differences between humans and others.
The only difference is that we have laws against those activities and those laws are only in place because we can't accept that we are animals. That would indicate that our gods are also animals if we were created in their image. The only real difference between man and the rest of the animal kingdom is that we have egos that like to puff themselves up to hide their insecurities.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
The only difference is that we have laws against those activities and those laws are only in place because we can't accept that we are animals. That would indicate that our gods are also animals if we were created in their image. The only real difference between man and the rest of the animal kingdom is that we have egos that like to puff themselves up to hide their insecurities.

Law or no law, butt-sniffing just ain't my thing.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
Was reading up on this. I find all this stuff pretty fascinating, but there seems to be a natural hostility to the idea of global interdependence and I'm not sure why.


Global interdependence is not an idea it was made reality with ocean going ships. If you don't understand the natural hostility to Rome or to the city of London you should continue reading.

The only difference is that we have laws against those activities and those laws are only in place because we can't accept that we are animals. That would indicate that our gods are also animals if we were created in their image. The only real difference between man and the rest of the animal kingdom is that we have egos that like to puff themselves up to hide their insecurities.

The only difference between man and animal is the quality of knowledge afforded by long contemplation.
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,337
113
Vancouver Island
Who would rule Imperial Earth?

Me. I don't trust anyone else.

At some point a world government is inevitable. The greatest opposition seems to come from the left primarily because they think that they might not get something for nothing. I thought that the EU was a good first step but there was too much difference in value of their economies for it too work yet. It is a good working model and we can learn a lot from it wether the EU survives or not.