1. Nathan Bernacki

    Nathan Bernacki New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2016
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    1

    Can climate change destroy governments like the US, UK, China, etc?

    Discussion in 'Setting Development' started by Nathan Bernacki, Feb 10, 2023.

    This is admittedly a minor aspect of the background of my story, but it's a somewhat important minor aspect.

    The idea is that the world is in chaos from a unprecedented increase in global temperatures. There are water wars in Africa and the rules-based international order has broken down with Europe in chaos due to droughts in Germany, Poland, etc.

    While I know that some countries could cease to exist like the Pacific Islands, could climate change theoretically be severe enough to break down civil order in countries like the United States, UK, China, etc? I know China is predicted to have a water shortage in the near future, but are food and water shortages, increased flooding and social unrest caused from climate change enough to bring down seemingly countries as strong as the United States, UK and China?
     
  2. Mogador

    Mogador Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2021
    Messages:
    490
    Likes Received:
    538
    Well yes. Civil wars have started for less. But are you asking for ideas on how that might conceivably happen or a poll on if its likely to? The UK, USA and China all very different so likely to have social breakdown for very different reasons. For example China could conceivably have serious civil strife if the economy stagnates for a decade or more, whereas the UK wouldn't (used to it!)
     
  3. big soft moose

    big soft moose An Admoostrator Admin Staff Supporter Contributor Community Volunteer

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2016
    Messages:
    22,569
    Likes Received:
    25,885
    Location:
    East devon/somerset border
    Hat on : Preemptive note I know its a contentious subject but we won't be discussing the issues around whether climate change exists and the political stuff in this thread - save that stuff for the debate room. Anyone who can't stick to helping our friend with his setting will get a thread ban

    Hat off: Damn that thing chafes my antlers. ... could questions don't really apply to fiction, because anything can happen at the will of of the author... the question really is is it at least plausible that it might. I'd say yes... resource shortages whether food, oil, or water can lead to considerable strife and trouble between haves and have not's whether on a societal or international relations level
     
  4. Louanne Learning

    Louanne Learning Happy Wonderer Contributor Contest Winner 2023 Contest Winner 2022

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2022
    Messages:
    5,669
    Likes Received:
    3,662
    Location:
    Canada
    One aspect that might work to destabilize governments is massive forced migration and population displacement in the wake of extreme weather events causing severe droughts and famine. Climate change refugees fleeing environmental disruption put pressure on resources elsewhere and this might lead to confrontation.

    Also, sea-level rises result in environmental refugees. Below is an example happening now, copied from https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/environmental-refugee

    For instance, about half the population of Bangladesh lives less than five meters (16.5 feet) above sea level. In 1995, Bangladesh’s Bhola Island was half-submerged by rising sea levels, leaving 500,000 people homeless. Scientists predict Bangladesh will lose 17 percent of its land by 2050 due to flooding caused by climate change. The loss of land could lead to as many as 20 million climate refugees from Bangladesh.

     
  5. Earp

    Earp Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2016
    Messages:
    4,507
    Likes Received:
    8,247
    Location:
    Just right of center.
    I don't think so, no, not in the US anyway. I do think that the water 'shortages' (and wars) won't materialize. Seventy percent of the Earth's surface is covered in water, some of it miles deep. The fact that some of it isn't where people want to live, or in the form we need it, are scientific and engineering problems, and we're good at solving those.
     
  6. Seven Crowns

    Seven Crowns Moderator Staff Supporter Contributor Contest Winner 2022

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2017
    Messages:
    1,998
    Likes Received:
    3,692
    Yeah, it would have to be a war for water. Unless you're talking about "The Big Freeze" fears, but I guess those are gone. Now it would be the fear of too much heat + no water.

    I've always wondered why even today we can't build wind-powered desalinization plants on the coast. I mean, like Earp said, the water is just sitting there. Maybe that's what the government would be trying to do during the hypothetical war, trying to build water purification stations.
     
  7. Not the Territory

    Not the Territory Contributor Contributor Contest Winner 2023

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2019
    Messages:
    1,242
    Likes Received:
    1,675
    I think you'd see a lot of the smaller, fragile countries crack first. That's sort of what's happened economically in the past few years. Larger countries generally have more diversified trade weight to throw around.

    Life will get very shitty for most people in the big US, UK etc... in the worst case scenario, but they won't collapse.

    That said I agree with Moose that it's fiction, so it can happen however you want it to, really. Massive empires have collapsed in the past. It's never something that's entirely impossible.
     
  8. Bruce Johnson

    Bruce Johnson Contributor Contributor Contest Winner 2023

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2021
    Messages:
    1,340
    Likes Received:
    959
    TL;DR: You can do whatever you want as long as it makes sense internally.

    Are you asking if these countries would cease to exist or if the governments would collapse completely? There are many scenarios possible, and any of them are fair game if the worldbuilding supports it in a logical way.

    I don't think the main governments would cease to exist. I think it's more likely the specific countries would end up with divided states and in the case of the U.S., some government or quasi-government would exist for some nation comprising of the eastern seaboard area. There'd probably be one in California with a lot of conflict with water resources in that area which are already showing early signs of trouble. Maybe one in the gulf states, etc.

    Several wildcards are if an when nuclear weapons are used. If a country that has nuclear weapons has their back to the wall, what will they do?

    Another thing is that in developed countries like the U.S., so much of the population is either unemployed , retired, or working in non-critical service industries. That is sort of one of the things that defines first world countries as technology allows so few to have to work in agriculture or as essential workers. But what happens when such a large percentage of the population stops receiving entitlements (which they've earned through years of taxes) or aren't able to trade their well developed skills manipulating spreadsheets or writing stories for online forums or blogs?

    I guess you have to start with what the situation is for the essential resources, food, water, energy, and then determine what the situation is in each specific country and region. The movie 'Southland Tales' shows the result of a nuclear attack on Amarillo, TX, which didn't affect the rest of the U.S., but resulted in landslide victories for the Republican Party, closed borders, reduced trade and a surge in biofuels. Oh, and a police state. Don't bother watching all of it, trust me, you won't get that 2 1/2 hours back, but I thought it did a good job of what would happen after such an attack. I did like the end sequence though ('This is the way the world ends'). The inciting incident, if you would call it that, wasn't climate change per se, but I think the results are similar to what severe climate change might cause.

    Or would it be more like the first 'Mad Max' where there was still some civil order in individual city-states, but barely enough to keep things going?

    Depending on how bad the climate change is and resource depletion, I'd think there would still be some government and order centered around areas with well preserved resources and infrastructure, and in the less fortunate areas you'd have a lot of Negans from the Walking Dead.
     
    Last edited: Feb 10, 2023
  9. w. bogart

    w. bogart Contributor Contributor Blogerator

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2022
    Messages:
    2,127
    Likes Received:
    1,398
    Location:
    US
    Moose I saw they warning, but to answer this I need to dip into politics a bit. Hopefully I can walk that line.

    With the larger more powerful nations, I think the real determining factor is they way they respond to the issue. I think the most likely result would be short sighted policies, that worked to the advantage of particular politicians, or groups of politicians. The kind of policies they could point to and say we are doing something, while making the problems worse. Those events could spark resistance and unrest in the population, which could lead to widespread unrest, and a breakdown of society.

    Depending on how dramatic the breakdown of social order, you could see warlords spring up. Look at Afghanistan after the Soviets left.

    What actions could the government take to restore order, that only makes the problem worse. Solutions that spark race riots, or pit different groups against each other due to a heavy handed application of a questionable solution.

    Water shortages have been mentioned in the thread already, and considered more science and engineering questions. Which is a valid point, but add in bad policies, and you could find workable solutions that are prevented by policy. Say for example, desalination plants, but energy policies prevent enough energy from being produced.

    Collapsing society is easy, keeping it running is hard.
     
    Xoic and Homer Potvin like this.
  10. montecarlo

    montecarlo Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2020
    Messages:
    922
    Likes Received:
    835
    Location:
    America's Heartland
    I’m with the group consensus here that societal collapse isn’t hard to imagine, or at least to suspend disbelief to enjoy the story.
     
    Some Guy likes this.
  11. big soft moose

    big soft moose An Admoostrator Admin Staff Supporter Contributor Community Volunteer

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2016
    Messages:
    22,569
    Likes Received:
    25,885
    Location:
    East devon/somerset border
    You're alright i meant we're not doing the climate activist vs climate denier blue man bad red man bad shit
     
    Catrin Lewis likes this.
  12. J.T. Woody

    J.T. Woody Book Witch Contributor

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2018
    Messages:
    4,130
    Likes Received:
    8,667
    I kind of disagree with this.
    If temperatures increase, so would flooding. The coastline of the US would be the first to go. Louisiana is already below sea level and is prone to terrible floods. The Chesapeake Bay area would get washed out as well. Our big cities are also on the coast, too (Washington DC floods when it rains too hard...).
    Massive amounts of people will flee inland. More will be stranded (as with Katrina). More will die.
    The people who flee inland will contribute to food and water shortages. They will essentially be refugees.
    I dont know much about the Great Lakes, since im a transplant here, but arent the beaches eroding? Would that contribute to water levels rising?(general inquiry because idk).
    There is/was already a "water war" (Flint, MI).
    I'd expect it to get a whole lot worse on the event of catastrophic climate shifts.
    I would expect the government to prioritize certain communities over others, providing resources and solutions to them first. This would add to contentions and begin conflicts that could escalate.
    Yes we are "good" at solving science problems, but no so good at solving people problems. We arent so good at applying solutions either....:superthink:
     
    Louanne Learning likes this.
  13. Homer Potvin

    Homer Potvin A tombstone hand and a graveyard mind Staff Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2017
    Messages:
    12,141
    Likes Received:
    19,771
    Location:
    Rhode Island
    If we're referring to rising sea levels, the East Coast would be fucked. NYC is just sitting there surrounded by water. Flood the subway tunnels, and that's game over.
     
  14. Earp

    Earp Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2016
    Messages:
    4,507
    Likes Received:
    8,247
    Location:
    Just right of center.
    I'm sure I disagree with this. The water problem in Flint was caused by a bunch of yokels in city government who decided to save money by routing river water through lead pipes. Nothing to do with climate change. The problem is still ongoing because of another bunch of yokels who still won't accept the fact that the water is safe now.

    Not the Debate Room, but you can't really discuss the dangers of climate change without noting that those who shout the loudest about our impending doom if we (we, not them) don't change our evil ways are still bombing around the planet in private jets and still own (and are still buying) oceanfront property. We're being punked by these people.
     
    J.T. Woody likes this.
  15. J.T. Woody

    J.T. Woody Book Witch Contributor

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2018
    Messages:
    4,130
    Likes Received:
    8,667
    I will start by saying i agee with this and am not debating against this fact.

    But my point was we alread have conflicts over water. If the were to he a climate crisis and resources become scarce... Government "yokels" will be looking to cut costs to stretch out resources, creating not the best conditions.
    As i said at the end of my last post, we are not that great when it comes to people or when it comes to applying potential solutions.
    Id imagine it would get even worse in a large scale crisis.
    -Oprah voice- YOU GET LEAD, AND YOU GET LEAD! EVERYBODY GETS LEAD!
     
  16. big soft moose

    big soft moose An Admoostrator Admin Staff Supporter Contributor Community Volunteer

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2016
    Messages:
    22,569
    Likes Received:
    25,885
    Location:
    East devon/somerset border
    There’s also the Tri-state water dispute between Georgia, Alabama and Florida about lake Lanier and water flow in the chattahoochee ( I’m on a phone so I can’t link it but Google will find it)

    the Supreme Court also have one still to judge between Texas , New Mexico, and colorado about who is using too much from a certain aquifer

    at the minute these are being settled in the courts but it’s not beyond the realms of fictional possibility that they could turn violent

    ( there’s also an episode of Dallas back along where a ranch upstream cuts off the Ewings water supply with a dam when negotiations fail Bobby goes all Rambo and assaults the property and blows up the dam… obviously Dallas is horrific melodrama but it does show it being thought about as a valid fictional route)
     
    Last edited: Feb 12, 2023
  17. Bruce Johnson

    Bruce Johnson Contributor Contributor Contest Winner 2023

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2021
    Messages:
    1,340
    Likes Received:
    959
    There's also a similar case between Mississippi and Tennessee regarding an aquifer that mostly resides under Mississippi land. But Tennessee can access it too, and Memphis, TN the largest city in the Mid-South area, is using a lot of this water.

    Apparently there is a doctrine of 'equitable apportionment ' and that's Mississippi's only legal angle but to do so they have to show how they are being hurt by this (North Mississippi is not as densely populated as Southwestern Tennessee so I don't see this working). But the difficult thing is, with finite resources like aquifers and reservoirs you may not be able to show or see danger until conditions get so bad that it's running low and not replenishing fast enough (either naturally or through man-made intervention).

    There's also the movie and novel 'The Milagro Beanfield War' but I don't know how much of the story is based on facts versus dramatization.
     
    Some Guy likes this.
  18. Xoic

    Xoic Prognosticator of Arcana Ridiculosum Contributor Blogerator

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2019
    Messages:
    12,460
    Likes Received:
    13,504
    Location:
    Way, way out there
    Oh man, no way could I ever remember the name of this move. It's from Iran I think, I must have seen it when I had a membership to Mubi (whatever it was called before they came up with that horrible name—The Auteurs I think?). It was about people living along a river. Everything was very primitive, when somebody dammed up part of the river it was done with hand-cut wood gates on primitive hinges, but I don't know what time period it was set in. The story was about how people upstream would divert away too much water for their own use and leave just a trickle going downstrem for their neighbors. Somewhere down the line was a clan/family that were really mean and nasty, and they got really pissed off and went upstream on a killing spree. Obviously a metaphor for the struggle over limited resources, and very well done.
     
    Last edited: Feb 12, 2023
  19. Earp

    Earp Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2016
    Messages:
    4,507
    Likes Received:
    8,247
    Location:
    Just right of center.
    I can easily see something like that happen if the Californians come for our Great Lakes.
     
  20. B.E. Nugent

    B.E. Nugent Contributor Contributor Contest Winner 2023

    Joined:
    May 23, 2020
    Messages:
    1,262
    Likes Received:
    2,192
    The answer, from my point of view, is a resolute No.

    The things you've listed, such as civil order, national/international law, trade agreements, even the notion of statehood, are all human constructs, abstractions, if you will, that are designed, if one holds to a benign point of view, to help us make sense of the chaos. A tsunami or earthquake or asteroid strike or alien attack might topple the building where parliament sits (on its arse?) but there's always a fence nearby where it can sit instead. I think you might need a slight shift in focus that might answer your question. From your original post, it doesn't sound like you're particularly looking to get overly scientific with climate change just name-checked as the instigation. If your question is whether water shortages, crop failures, coastal erosion, flooding, etc are sufficient to bring about changes in social behaviour where bad actors seize opportunity to establish a New Order fueled by greed, hate, selfishness and, maybe, survival instinct, then yeah, absolutely. Could happen in a squabble over who took the last donut, if you ask me.
     
  21. Mogador

    Mogador Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2021
    Messages:
    490
    Likes Received:
    538
    MI5 was supposed to have advised the UK government (at some time) that the country was only every seven* missed meals away from total anarchy.

    * (Or something like that.)
     
    B.E. Nugent likes this.
  22. Iain Aschendale

    Iain Aschendale Lying, dog-faced pony Marine Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2015
    Messages:
    18,851
    Likes Received:
    35,471
    Location:
    Face down in the dirt
    Currently Reading::
    Telemachus Sneezed
    Look at The Water Knife by Paolo Bacigalupi. It posits not a total breakdown (spoilers) of the US but states being allowed to restrict immigration from other states. Like Texans can't move to California without permission from the CA state government. It's heavily into the idea of water rights, which (very short version) means if I set up a town in California at the mouth of a river in....1800? and start using the water for irrigation, people who later settle upriver have to allow the water I'm accustomed to getting to flow downstream. They could be dying of thirst and not be allowed to take a drop out of the river without my say-so (and nodding to Moose, this could as easily be Louisiana, Maine, or Liverpool. Anyplace at the mouth of a river, not picking on the west coast of the US). So when towns upstream take more than their "fair" share of river water, mercenaries are hired to blow up their dams etc, with a court order authorizing them to do so.

    Good book, and I think it touches on your topic.
     
    Mogador likes this.
  23. KiraAnn

    KiraAnn Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2019
    Messages:
    482
    Likes Received:
    336
    Location:
    Texas
    It's believable for the US to fall apart as millions facing rising sea levels flee towards the middle of the continent. San Diego, Los Angeles, the Bay area, Portland, Seattle - all gone. Where will those people go? And that's not considering everything along the Gulf coast or the East Coast. Certain other geological formations would have adverse reactions as well. If the rise is enough, the San Joaquin valley could become an inner sea; the lower Colorado River could turn out the same way. Then, you could also have that swampy mess from Houston to New Orleans reaching up the Sabine river, and as for Florida, forget it. All the acrimony now in US politics would be amplified a hundred fold.
     
  24. Louanne Learning

    Louanne Learning Happy Wonderer Contributor Contest Winner 2023 Contest Winner 2022

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2022
    Messages:
    5,669
    Likes Received:
    3,662
    Location:
    Canada
    So I googled "how to destroy a government" and came upon this article. It seems a little tongue in cheek, but might be helpful.

    How to Destroy the Government in Three Easy Steps

    Step One: Divide the people and blame individuals. This blinds them to what is really going on.
    Step Two: Cut taxes. Weaken programs. Make government services inadequate. Set the stage to make life dire.
    Step Three: Exploit disaster. Get people in a panic. Rash decisions result.
     
    B.E. Nugent likes this.
  25. Kalisto

    Kalisto Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2015
    Messages:
    975
    Likes Received:
    995
    It's hard to say at this time what climate change will and will not do. The science is just not there. But it is also not implausible for it to be to a point where people will go to war in an environment they fail to adapt to.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice