Short post but hopefully not a shitpost.
Went to a thing recently. There was a good ‘sweeping overview’ history of the twentieth century around Keynesianism/neoliberalism (though it undersold the importance of ICT and containerisation for my taste).
Halfway through I scrawled to a colleague “Five quid says he says nothing/has nothing to say about ‘what is to be done?’. ” I later added ‘hundred’ and then ‘thousand’ between the five and the quid.
Safe bets.
Yes, Paris is dead/worthless. Apparently small nations might be able to do something by appealing to local ‘patriotism’ and ‘honour’ (in German, that’s Ehre) around carbon emissions reductions.
(They haven’t, and, um, free-rider, but never mind).
My actual question would be – How can you give a forty five minute lecture about the future – and specifically ‘the breakdown of systems’ – without mentioning environmental degradation and pressures even once? Why is that a good and productive thing to sit through.
Answers on a postcard to the usual place
marchudson.net 
‘Why is that a good and productive thing to sit through.’
This is some kinda’ trick question, right? 😉