Nuclear war and climate change are not plausibly X-risks. Nuclear war is a civ-risk, climate change is just a single-digit % of global GDP. This list is also missing Global Mexico (dysgenics+immigration+intermixing) as a civ risk.
Global Mexico: Within and between population dysgenics + immigration + race-mixing destroys the whites/East Asians responsible for ~all of modern civ. Within-population dysgenics are ~1 IQ point/generation. Maybe flattening in the last few years, but this has yet to be confirmed.
Between-population dysgenics are worse; the Middle East and especially Africa have much higher fertility than the rest of the world. Wouldn't be such a problem, except immigration and interbreeding are both happening at scale (left: births, 2020. right: Nature Index, 2015).
East Asia has less immigration than white countries, but similar dysgenics and even lower baseline fertility, plus has contributed far less to modern civilization and may not be capable of continuing science and innovation alone if the white world goes under.
(Plus, as a white Western American, while East Asia retaining modern civilization while we turn into Latin America is better than everyone going Mexican, it still doesn't exactly fill me with joy).
Reducing Europe and the Anglosphere to the level of, say, Argentina (on track within two generations of continuing immigration + dysgenics + interbreeding), would kill science very nearly dead.
Obviously, biotech or AI singularity may render this [and everything else] moot soon, but it's the default trajectory if nothing big changes. It should be taken more seriously than nuclear war (would require a massive fuckup somewhere) or climate change (lol) as a civ-risk.
The initial paragraph is from Zvi Mowshowitz' newsletter. lesswrong.com/posts/CjrbJmtS…
Share this Scrolly Tale with your friends.
A Scrolly Tale is a new way to read Twitter threads with a more visually immersive experience.
Discover more beautiful Scrolly Tales like this.