Melbourne is a diverse capital city. We rejoice in this and accept it, which allows the harmony of the governments and councils and society to do their job properly and well. In years to come, I can imagine Australia being a leading country in the many areas, but not the top dog, which today we would associate that term with America and China. Australia has a huge landmass, like Russia, however much of that land is uninhabitable or discouraging to live in, e.g. the centre of Australia is a big desert. Nevertheless, technology will allow us humans to live in these spaces over time, and thereby: allowing Australia’s population to grow further, develop new land which supports thousands of jobs and reduce urban problems like traffic, property prices and pollution.
Let’s face it: if there weren’t 7 billion people on Earth to feed, climate change would not be a problem. As scientist estimate, at the current rate Earth could be destroyed by overheating, oversized natural disasters or severe atmosphere changes in about 100 years. Or less. We as a population have hit the top bit in the S curve, years ago. Our population has passed the value K on the second diagram already — the solution is to bring the population down.
https://www.britannica.com/science/population-ecology/Logistic-population-growth — the graph
Not by mass murder, no, but possibly by controlled reproduction plans/family plans being put into action — each family having 1 child each. (Refer to Ender’s Game by O.Card, or Inferno by D.Brown)
So in the future, past society will probably condemn the way we live today, with such inequality and exploitation. In the future with climate change looming over us, exploitation is pointless; until the crisis is over. (see Ender’s Game bean series again — threat gone, then unity is dispelled) Why? Because in the end, you’ll be dead anyway from the threat, no matter how much money or exploitation you’ve done.
After recognising these views, why doesn’t the whole world just agree to work together to stop climate change? The answer is human nature. Notable examples include greed, procrastination and pride, which all make it impossible for humans to solve climate change now. Greed: no-one wants to miss out on the financial opportunity that comes with climate change, because after its over they’ll have an advantage. Procrastination, because everyone wants to make sure that they are in best shape before serious change begins and also because they don’t really care about climate change, and pride because people want to be better than some others because of their pride.
I think these behaviours and attitudes will be frowned upon in the future even more than they are now, because this is the reason why climate change has been taken this far. The most likely outcome of the (u)(dys)topian future will be something like the Giver, family units, given society roles and indoctrinating children at a young age. (I mean, today we do that too, but its much more loose today) And I think that we should already be working towards this, because it probably will be necessary.