Of course I don't expect it either. I present it as the viewpoint of Nature (as opposed to the traditional viewpoint of humanity's egoistic 'Manifest Destiny').
In natural evolution, a species survives when it 'fits' the system of contribution vs. consumption (generally with a net contribution factor)). Humanity created civilization to isolate us from the risks and responsibilities of our natural environment. Humanity severed natural links, but most of the environmentalist views still fail to acknowledge how to re-establish our responsiblities to future humanity's planet. Instead, there's always a compromise between extractive civilization and less extractive civilization.
"The opposite of consumption is not frugality; it is generosity." -Raj Patel
In other words, "What are people for?"
Competitive consumption seems to be the common interpretation. Advancing technology extrapolates out to having robots consuming agricultural products in order to build more robots in the image of human colonization. People become redundant after a certain point.