We are the current great mass extinction event

(Careful! This statistic is not useful in predicting if the total number of any species has increased or decreased. The data could say all species had populations that massively grew, and it would still report a decline. See Our world in data for a toy example, and discussion of what the base-data are for LPI.)

Yeah, but it isn't enough to know something is wrong, you should consider why people aren't rioting (more), and whether it is too reductive to assume it is a select few individuals and not a system that empowers them (even if they have disproportionate power over that system).

Most people are working dude, and many of them have to work out of responsibility for dependents. Ending this system also doesn't just mean taking the billionaires' yachts away, it means ending cheap electronics or coffee for the Global North, it means that clothes and time become more materially expensive for the benefactors in the metropole, which includes you. You and the people around you are effected by climate change and ecological destruction, but your immediate material interests are more aligned with maintaining this system than it is ending it, and you guys behave as such whether you realize it or not.

People riot in colonized spaces all the time, but if they aren't stopped by the colonial puppet states who occupy them, they're stopped by the imperialist militaries that you pay into whether through taxes, your state's federal investment portfolios, or the wealth that is directly extracted from your labour into the hands of capitalists. There is a reason that people in the metropole only started giving a shit after it effected them, it's hard to risk your own security for something that you can only rationally understand is real, and if we're being honest, the way of life in the metropole makes many of these people too exhausted or petulant to put much effort into that.

It would be incredible if all we needed was some white guys in the metropole to kill a few naughty bois to end all of this, but there's a reason that this hasn't happened even if it would work. Liberals in the metropole have a hard time knowing what to do about any of this because they don't want to recognize how they materially benefit from this violence, or grapple with the commitment to risk their security once they do.

edit: well, there we go, lol.

Ok; I've thought through several examples. The geometric mean is heavily biased to show a decrease IMO. A species could have it's total population grow substantially, but if most of that growth is to already large/successful subsets, then it'll almost certainly show as a negative (geometric) average change, even with ~noise on the other populations. I think you should only see a positive metric here if most species measured are invasive; growing extremely fast in places not prepared for them. (and being careful not to measure the things getting killed by the new invaders)

I remember reading a study that stated the Amazon is very close to a tipping point where it will cease to be a tropical jungle, becoming a giant savanna instead. Almost all other biomes from the entire South America will collapse when this happen.

I don't think starvation due to ecosystem collapse is widely expected anytime soon. That would be the headline otherwise, right? In particular, we pretty much control the whole grain + maize + soy + rice production process afaict?

Fuck (but with less inexplicable downvotes)

capitalism and colonialism are both human.

It's all human. Even if capitalism and colonialism were off the table, every person alive consumes so much food a day, and every square foot devoted to their life is unavailable for wildlife.

The people in charge benefit the most from capitalism, so it wont happen

Broader than capitalism; it's growth driven no? A planned economy that wanted a steady increase in energy/quality of life/resource extraction would also do most of this.