Moloch can be used to describe any interplay between actors that operates according to a set of incentives that will eventually ensure the suffering of all the actors within the system. The global model of growth economics tragically favours Moloch incentives that result in the destruction of Earth’s biosystem. We are all persisting with growth economics, and this is accelerating the destruction of life on Earth. The incentives that drive growth economics urge those involved to increase all three drivers of ecosystems collapse. The three drivers of eco-degradation were identified in the 1970s through the I=PAT equation; they were identified as: population size, affluence, and technology.
Artificial Intelligence is not designed to block the economic incentives in our culture, Therefore, when we combine AI, and any other technology with the incentives to grow our economy, this accelerates the ecosystems collapse. This connection is explained clearly by Daniel Schmachtenberger in this interview with Liv Boeree about Moloch and AI.
Escaping the Moloch Trap
The only way out of the Moloch trap is for the actors involved to realise that incentives of the competition will eventually cause them all to suffer. For actors to survive a Moloch scenario they all need to collaborate and agree to work towards a wiser set of incentives. In the case of humanity’s predicament with regards to escaping from the trap of growth economics, these new incentives will need to repair the ecological damage that we have already inflicted. The data on ecological overshoot gives some indication of the level of ecological debt that we have already accumulated.
A Helpful Global Aspiration
The data on ecological footprint informs us that humanity is consuming about 1.75 Earths. The book ‘Half Earth’ by the biologist E. O. Wilson suggests that the carrying capacity for humans is exceeded at about 0.5 Earths. Therefore we need to shrink the global economy by about 70% to get back within carrying capacity: 100*(1.75–0.5)/1.75
In April 2021 the UN Charter for Ecological Justice was proposed as an incentive to steer humanity in a wiser direction. It states an aspiration to peacefully shrink our population and equitably reduce our average footprint per capita until we return within the carrying-capacity of Earth. A five minute animation was released in 2023 to summarise this concept, and it appeared in one of the papers that was accepted by the UN Framework Committee on Climate Change during the 2023 Global Stocktake for the Paris Climate Agreement. As at July 2026 the petition is under the new name ‘A Global Aspiration for Eco-equity’.
The aspiration for eco-quity runs contrary to the global cultural bias in favour of pronatalism and the entrenched addiction to financial wealth and technology that dominates the developed world. As I write this, in April 2024, the developed countries are all still deeply entrenched in coercive consumerism. This trap is perpetuated by education, judiciary, mainstream media, arts, sports, and social media. Furthermore, under-developed countries are compelled through neo-colonialism to indulge these excesses with their commerce, and are encouraged to adopt the same unwise behaviour demonstrated in the developed countries. As yet, there are no politicians seeking to lead us out of the Moloch trap of growth economics; but there are many helpful leaders and commentators emerging from within other walks of life. The interview mentioned earlier between Liv Boeree and Daniel Schmachtenberger is an example of two people who are helping others to understand our predicament in a profound manner.
In addition to the addictions that arise from coercive consumerism, there is also an addiction to militarisation and modern technological warfare. This constitutes the most ecologically damaging form of self-harm that humanity has chosen to invest in. This investment is carried out under the false assumption that military aggression can improve security for those that are buying the weaponry. Global ecological security has never been seriously considered throughout human history. Whenever climate changes and environmental conditions make an area unsuitable for human habitation, populations have either died out or migrated to a different part of the world.
It is only in the last hundred years that we have been exceeding the carrying capacity of Earth; and it is only in the last 5–6 years that the effect of breaching climate and ecological tipping points is becoming very visible to the lay person. The number of displaced people, and people attempting to migrate has been steadily rising for years.
Influencers who can Steer us onto a better Path
Although there is no sign of helpful leadership emerging in the political world, there are many helpful voices now appearing in the alternative media and within the intellectual world. These voices are reasoning, and enquiring, and looking forensically at the many issues that are now emerging.
For example, the Novara Media channel has some very impressive journalists. They frequently help their listeners to understand what is wrong with the very biased reports that are available. In this example, Michael Walker reveals the evidence of Venessa Feltz’ bias in favour of Israel with forensic precision.
Ash Sarker, another excellent communicator, recorded a fascinating interview with an Israeli pro-Palestinian called Eyal Weizmann. Eyal specialises in Forensic Architecture, which has been used to expose state crimes against civilians, nature, and humanity. Eyal has written several books shedding light on the injustice that is perpetrated by Israel; in one instance the title alone speaks volumes: ‘The Hollow Land’. What fascinated me most listening to him is the way that the forensic work that they do requires multi-disciplinary collaboration to weave together hundreds of different perspectives to gain a broader understanding of events in our recent past. This is the way that I imagine a collective understanding can grow, this could enable us to break free of the Moloch incentives that underpin our society.
Israel is an example of a Malthusian meltdown. Both Israelis and Palestinians have very large families on average. Israel is very reliant on fossil fuels; ‘greening’ the desert and militarisation both come with a high ecological cost. Israel exceeds the biocapacity within her borders by a factor of seventeen. In Israel we have two ethnic groups who are trying to out-birth each other whilst they are already exceeding the available natural resources. Tragedy was always inevitable, but in an apartheid state only the dominant population has the necessary control of resources needed to implement the objective of genocide. The desire to commit genocide has been expressed by both sides. That indicates the emotional immaturity of humanity as a whole. We still have not learned the lessons of World War II.
Israel is providing an insight into the type of wars that arise from the incentives that underpin economic growth. Some are already eyeing the Gaza strip in terms of real-estate potential.
There are many other examples of wise voices emerging: Robert MacNeill Christie, Yes magazine, Abby Martin, Chris Hedges, Democracy Now, Resilience.org, Double Down News, Owen Jones, Naomi Klein, and many others. There is a raft of economists addressing different aspects of our Moloch economic model: Yanis Varoufakis author of ‘Techno Feudalism’, Gary Stevenson author of ‘The Trading Game’, Grace Blakeley author of ‘Vulture Capitalism’, Kate Raworth author of ‘Doughnut Economics’, and Jason Hickel author of ‘Less is More’ are examples of notable voices.
Despite many groups labelling themselves ‘Degrowth’, none have the moral courage to admit the urgent need to shrink the global economy by 70% to return within the carrying capacity of Earth. Ted Trainer is uniquely helpful with his Medium article entitled ‘A Friendly Critique of the Degrowth Movement‘.
What will it take for humanity to embrace an aspiration like the Charter for Ecological Justice? What will it take to accept that we need to shrink the global economy by 70%? It requires a level of emotional maturity that we have yet to achieve. Where all the actors recognise that this is a silly self-destructive game that we are playing.
Emotional Evolution
Bringing a child into a world dominated by Moloch incentives is not fair on the child. We need to facilitate a global birth strike until we can prove our ability to escape the Moloch trap. Does this mean there will be no-one to look after us in our old age? There is no old age in an extinction event. Everything we are doing is making the future prospects worse for everyone. We need to start behaving like adults, we have been trashing our environment for decades. We need to be willing to protect our unborn from these dangers.
Giving up the pleasure of parenthood will be the hardest step. However, since our children are nothing more than cannon-fodder as things stand, that will make the sacrifice easier. A voluntary global birth strike will protect many unborn from brief lives of suffering. Globally embracing free access to family planning services, will put the folly of our coercive consumerism and militarisation into perspective. This will foster the mindset needed for global disarmament. From that point we can collaborate peacefully to deliver basic subsistence rations and shelter to 8 billion people, whilst winding down the non-essential and harmful eco-costly pursuits that are currently wasting most of our efforts and natural resources.
What is the Incentive?
The incentive for the actions described above, is the desire to extricate ourselves from the Moloch trap of growth economics. This arises from the understanding that we are in the trap. As explained at the start, the only way out, is if all the actors collaborate and agree to change the agreed incentives, i.e. their common purpose.
We can choose wiser incentives. For example, a global agreement like the aspiration outlined in the UN Charter for Ecological Justice, would encourage us to use all our tools more wisely. Tools at our disposal are the collective mindset and the three IPAT drivers: our population, our affluence, and our technology.
An anti-Moloch collective mindset would use these three tools to limit and reduce our dependence on the IPAT drivers. Such a mindset aspires to shrink global GDP, and becomes the driver to eliminate desire for non-essential consumption and reduces our desire to procreate. It reduces our desire for affluence, and technology to a level that lies within the carrying capacity of Earth. The IPAT drivers are all tools, not solutions. They only become solutions when we choose to deploy them within the anti-Moloch mindset. Right now, bearing children is supplying cannon fodder for resource wars. This is not a wise strategy going forward. Therefore, voluntarily minimising child-birth to allow our ecosystems a chance to recover from the injuries that we have inflicted, will steer us into a wiser direction. With that level of emotional maturity, we can choose a future where coercive consumerism and weaponry are abandoned, together with many other follies of the past and present.
Growth economics is a mugs game, it is a negative sum game in which all of life on Earth suffers. The insights from I=PAT have warned us since the 1970s, that this economic model leads to ecocide and self extinction. We are witnessing this in the ever increasing wealth inequality, injustice, and suffering within human society.
>>> Barbara Williams is the author of the free book Saving Us From Ourselves
Please note that this article was originally published on Medium in May 2024.