Maybe this has been done already and its suppressed by capitalists. But, people should really think outside the box for solutions to all of our societies problems and come up with a sustainable way of living with nature. I'm thinking stuff like sustainable agriculture, waste, recycling, energy consumption, urban planning, and how these could all fit together to work. I guess its "utopianism", but is there a way for humans to co-exist on Earth without slowly killing it? Do we need to look to the ways indigenous people live? Or is there something in between here and there that could work?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xFAi8mR_VE for laughs.

  • ocho [they/them]
    ·
    4 years ago

    We were doing it before, it's not like we can't do it again. We don't even have to "return to Monke" or anything drastic to that extend, not that I wouldn't mind less tech and a more overt reliance on community instead of how depersonalized life is now. We just need to be more sensible in our production and distribution, but of course, that and capitalism are diametrically opposed.

    Still, if we ever manage to rid ourselves of that cancer, it'll be like night and day how future life and sustainability will differ from now.

    • zangorn [none/use name]
      hexagon
      ·
      4 years ago

      Sometimes I have these big thoughts about how far back we have to go to be sustainable, and it seems like every step we have taken beyond anarcho-primitivism is unsustainable. For example, if we had recycling facilities for all or most of our trash, or even just packaging, we would be much closer than we are now. Even requiring manufacturing to recycle their own products at the end of their lifecycles, would be amazing. Reaching net zero for energy AND water would be amazing. We definitely need more trees to help hold water in the ground when it rains, bring it up from underground into the air, and store carbon. But when you add these up, do we get to sustainability? What about children who naturally want to rebel and not conform with the norms of this sustainable society? What about when a company runs an advertisement that promotes fast cars that will catch the attention of all the cool, rebellious young adults, even though it burns gas and emits black clouds?

      Solar panels are good, but what about the initial investment to get them? The resource extraction and energy needed for production and installation is steep for most of the world. I guess I'm rambling. But the conclusion I always come to is that A LOT of people are going to have to come to terms with living with a lot fewer luxuries. And it reminds me of Jimmy Carter who said if people can't afford the spiked energy prices to have heat in their homes, they should wear sweaters to stay warm. And people voted him out. I fear the only way we can get the masses to become sustainable is after luxuries are gone and are not an option any more. But in the meantime, it would be smart to develop a sustainable alternative. A city or town design that has locally sourced food, water and energy. It needs an economic plan that doesn't get drained by people spending on products from the outside beyond what comes in. Land management needs to be sustainable, and transportation should be possible with walking and biking for a lot more trips than now.

      • ocho [they/them]
        ·
        4 years ago

        A lot of people's wastefulness is a byproduct of many things, mainly how disconnected producing and consuming is along with how naive people are to the conditions people have to go through to make everything around us. No one thinks of the migrant workers harvesting corn in California to make Doritos or the indigenous people of Bolivia mining the essential minerals to make the things we're typing on now because American hegemony and mass culture doesn't like to acknowledge that. It's a shame because it's definitely possible to have better/more ethical tech or random consumer goods in a way that doesn't rely on the military intervention and genocide of other people. They're not there because they want to, we're forcing them to meet the needs of profit by selling us useless shit that we're told to buy by the constant hemorrhage of ads and social pressure. All of this violence on the planet and others, consumerism, lack of solidarity with our people, it directly ties to the profit system and it's constant need for more. Our economic position of settler-colonial imperialism reifies our culture of disregard and waste, leading to the justified feeling that we just can't do it. We can't escape it because we're in the belly of the beast.

        That's why it's important to remember that fact and they're a lot of people around the world who, if given the chance, will work and fight for a more sustainable lifestyle. Anyone who doesn't will just have to get with the program, because if we ever do get to a point of global development, planning and democracy where we can discuss this topic for real, everyone who's been a victim of our violence will say no, and there's more of them than us. Luxuries simply won't be an option at that point, unless it's by some master craft-people creating what will essentially be their art.

  • NeoAnabaptist [any]
    ·
    4 years ago

    There's definitely a lot of rethinking to do, and I encourage people to try to remain radically creative. Spend time with comrades actually dreaming out what a better world looks like, coming up with future fantasy headlines, designing cities, whatever. It helps to reorient yourself and remind yourself why you care about all this.

    We need more permaculture type shit too.

  • emizeko [they/them]
    ·
    edit-2
    4 years ago

    As I bit into the nectarine it had a crisp juiciness that was very pleasurable— until I realized it wasn't a nectarine, but A HUMAN HEAD!

    • SimAnt [any]
      ·
      4 years ago

      special "fuck you" to Andy Dick for contributing to his death