Knute does not paint a pretty picture with his list of 'existential threats':

But of serious interest should be the real existential dangers we face in the next few years:

- pandering politicians promising unsustainable "energy independence" gimmicks, and no real plan. This will be reinforced by an unwillingness of the public to accept the new harsh realities, ending with a total cynicism about collective social action;

- a faltering economy that cannot even capitalize the development of or transition to new forms of energy, and thus a steady economic downward spiral;

- resource wars on a global scale, and nuclear proliferation;

- the breakdown in the production and wide distribution of agricultural products - and massive starvation on an unprecedented scale;

- the discovery that humanity and democracy are a luxury of "cheap" oil, and the acceptance of a more brutal policy enforcing order going forward;

LeRoy: We have always had pandering politicians, so I don't have much to suggest about your first item above. Politicians almost always tell people what they want to hear, because that is what tends to get the most votes. They want to hear that "It's morning in America", or that, if we do have problems, they are all the fault of foreigners. How do we go about finding the mythical non-pandering politician? Or, to put the question differently: how bad will things have to get before the public is finally willing to listen to someone who is willing to tell them the unvarnished truth?

Your second existential threat is one that has been on my mind lately as well. To put it bluntly, we must not allow this to happen. You are perfectly correct that if we "cannot capitalize the transition to new forms of energy", then we face "a steady economic downward spiral"...and our civilization would ultimately collapse from the stresses and pressures. At some point, we need one of those non-pandering politicians to tell us that we need to stop such silliness as the waste of energy on display in all the NASCAR events, and, even more importantly, that Americans must give up their vast overseas 'empire', and reallocate those resources toward finding solutions to our energy crisis. The public does not appear to be at that point, yet---they are still in denial.

Your third threat is of "resource wars on a global scale", along with proliferation of nuclear weapons (and I would add other weapons of mass destruction). Here, too, we must avoid globalized resource wars, as I do not see how this could fail to be anything other than World War III. And, as Albert Einstein said, if there is ever a World War III, we will be fighting World War IV with sticks and stones. This, too, would lead, perhaps more abruptly, to a collapse of civilization. This is an issue which is crying out for more global cooperation. It will be a test of just how rational the human species has become during the course of our evolution.

Your fourth threat is of "massive starvation on an unprecedented scale", caused by breakdowns in the production and distribution of agricultural products. I in fact expect massive starvation in Africa in the coming decades, and in parts of Asia, and perhaps in parts of Latin America. I would like to think we could avoid it in Europe and most of North America. We have been seriously underinvesting in agricultural research for several decades now, and this too must end. There should be more research effort devoted to many local crops, to diversify our agricultural base, and make us less vulnerable to diseases of wheat, corn, and/or rice, the three major crops.

Your fifth existential threat is perhaps the most disturbing. You say: "humanity and democracy are a luxury of 'cheap' oil", and suggest there will be an "acceptance of a more brutal policy enforcing order". I for one hope that America does not become brutal in attempting to force its preferred policies on the world, but there is already some reason to suppose this might happen, with the evident American acceptance of torture as a policy of warfare. I say this because my reading of history tells me that only benevolent empires have any staying power, that malevolent or tyrannical empires are soon overthrown. One can only hope that the other suggestions I have made will help us to find a cost-effective energy technology before we lose those Enlightenment values that have sustained this republic.

I was a bit surprised that you left out the existential threat of rapid climate change, which I think is very real and will only magnify all your other existential threats.

A very thought-provoking post on your part, Knute.