As you should know from my writing, sustainability is an evolutionary oxymoron and an evolutionary false positive of life-threatening proportion. By virtue of nature’s irreversible entropy, the decline of available energy on our planet, sustainability does not exist.
The awareness of that truth leading some “leaders” to soften the absolutism of sustained growth by calling their efforts “more sustainable.” As if to suggest a toning down of absolutism delivers a more accurate proxy to nature’s relativity.
When that too does not compute, they refer to their sustainability efforts as cyclical based on renewal. As if the difference between sustainability and renewal is a mere linguistic tug of war.
The confounding of consequence and cause leading in the words of Nietzsche to grave depravity of reason bears witness to the widespread misunderstanding of renewal and sustainability.
By the asymmetry of nature’s entropy, simply put, you can only go from renewal to temporal proxies of sustainability, you cannot go from sustainability to renewal. Sustainability is an unattainable evolutionary goal.
Any type of absolutism, with the promise of growth for the sake of growth, is by nature’s first principles incompatible with the way life, and the availability of resources and energy on our planet evolve.
Nature’s first-principles of renewal are fundamentally different from the suppositions inferred by sustainability. They lead to diametrically opposite vectors of human expansion, and in the case of sustainability into a manmade dead-end street.
Sustainability as a goal is an outdated and disproven pre-Columbus flat-earth presumption, incompatible with the round world we live in. We must begin to abide by nature’s first-principles that dictate how human renewal can evolve in tune with nature’s dynamic equilibrium of change.
The flat-earthers who indiscriminately mix and toss around sustainability and renewability ought to be removed from the heavy responsibility of deciding on humanity’s evolutionary expansion.