Most climate discussions deal with the material conditions of climate: the amount of CO#, temperature, manufacturing machinery to produce CO, delivery systems, and so on. What is not dealt with much is the social organizing structures that actually make the key decisions. Imagine a network like a spiderweb laid on top of a map of the material resources. We imagine the web as flat, but what if we lift some of it into the third dimension? In the actual distribution of people in the organization. Very few have contact with the outside world, yet their actions and inactions are decisively important for what actually happens in society and on the globe. Most of those agents of the actions have no contact with the outside but are only responsible for what happens inside. the other parts inside the network. It requires a three-dimensional map to illustrate this. In reality, few employees in the corporation have direct access to the outside. but their actions and the motives for those actions are critical for society. In conference after conference, the discussion avoids the social, probably because it would lead to discussions of capitalism rewards and careers. So we are struck with thinking about what to do with climate change without discussions of the political, social, and ideational systems that make the real difference.
In the discussions of climate, talk about the social structure is rare. An example of a good useful approach comes from Marvin Harris who divides the world into three parts - the technical infrastructure of buildings, energy, and information - the infrastructure. On top of the infrastructure is the social structure - all the human relations and their rules and habits. On top of that, t the cultural level of ideas, arts, ideologies, and belief systems. To use this would be helpful but few refer to it (Nate Hagens makes constant references but has not developed it much yet). Other writers such as Lewis Mumford and Sheldon Woin are generally ignored.
The result is a rather pathetic discussion of the physical factors misunderstood, things thing like "clean energy” and “Net zero “which are triumphs paid for rhetoric that are frozen in the clutches of the rarely discussed social system.
Love you and love your work Douglass! You are one of the very few that is on the ball in understanding what we need to address to get to a real future. NH, too, is gathering useful ideas, is moving forward in his thinking, but not as incisively as you.
Yes, all the things you mention here are essential in understanding the meta-solution.
Unless we get all of these physical, technological, organisational, infrastructural, relational/social, economic, political, spiritual, ideological and perceptual structures/systems realigned with a goal of a sustainable Humanity then nothing can happen. We are — our system is — log-jammed and ineffective until we can get this clear direction and all of these aspects working together instead of against each other in a muddled ball of spaghetti.