People never really believe the world changes. Intellectually they may know the world is different from the way it was 1000 years ago, 100 years ago, even ten years ago but despite that people always believe tomorrow will be the same as today, and the next day much the same as today and so on. They may be of the impression ten years will be different, but when ten years has passed it will have been as a bunch of tomorrow’s and the world will have changed gradually without the person really being aware it is changing, since they are still waiting for that one single day they wake up to an obviously different world.
There is a similar error of thinking in Climate Change; people believe, deep down, that the world’s climate change. They view the Earth as a static model. The truth is that the planet is constantly changing, swinging between ice ages and warm periods depending on various factors.
The question never asked is should the Earth stay the way it is or should it be constantly changing? Only once that question has been asked and the effects of non man made variables controlled for can we even ask the question how much, if any,* affect has man had on the climate?
Good luck modelling something so complex!
Caught up in the whole climate change debate is of course the assumption that the way the planet is now is the way it ought to stay forever. A second assumption is that humanity has the right to determine what the climate ought to be.
This inability to understand that the world is constantly in flux, that the current way the world is may only be temporary, is found even more heavily in economics.
Climate modelling and economic modelling are very similar, both attempting to draw causation from the data of a complex system.
The idea of equilibrium features heavily in economics. Briefly, a closed system tends toward equilibrium. An open system, such as economics, tends toward equilibrium both on its macro scale and its many minor scales (supply and demand), yet it is constantly upset by external factors which prevent equilibrium from being reached and forcing the system to readjust itself and aim to tend towards equilibrium again.
This interference in the tendency toward equilibrium (and the inability of the economic system to actually reach it) lead to instability in the marketplace. Instability is uncertainty. Uncertainty is insecurity.
Promising to remove that insecurity is how Communism always promotes itself. Without that insecurity, that instability, the world would be static, unchanging. We would continue in that mold until outside factors interfered (such as resources shortages, alien invasion etc).**
Is the global climate in equilibrium?*** If not, then outside forces affect it. Is the solar system in equilibrium? The galaxy? The universe? If nothing can be outside the universe, then what upsets its equilibrium?
Maybe the universe has been tending toward equilibrium since it began?
If so will that be the end of universe? To achieve an unchanging state, an equilibrium ad infinitum? A heat less amount of rocks going in the same fixed orbits forever?
The death of the universe sounds like the dream state of Communism/Socialism/Statism. An unchanging society, everybody going through the same motions forever. Human society without cycles.
Civilisation, after all, has cycles. An empire lasts approximately ten generations between its rise and fall. By historic measures the Western empire (of which the US is the head) is due to collapse. Many acknowledge its decline, but do they really believe it?
Intellectually they may be able to read the signs but do they still believe tomorrow will be the same as today? Ten years the same as today? What of fifty years? More importantly, do they live their lives with this in mind?
For those of you still skeptical that the world changes without you noticing, ask a German in the 1920s if they would believe that in less than twenty years they would be at war with half the world?
Ask an American in the 1920s if they’d be homeless and starving in less than ten years?
Ask a Russian in the 1880s if in less than forty years they would live through political collapse, war, famine and end up under the yoke of the greatest totalitarian dictatorship the world has ever known?
Ask an American in the 1990s if in less than 10 years their government would be detaining people indefinitely, and in less than twenty they’d be assassinating American citizens?
10 years from now, what will you wish someone could have asked you?
* Chaos theory, butterflies and all that lead to supposition that everything on Earth affects the planet’s climate in a constant feedback.
** Actually, we would be changing, but very slowly. Human nature being what it is greed, a new religion, apathy or some other uncontrolled factor would serve to slowly change the world over many generations.
*** Is Mars?