Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
PG wrote: The problem with most (political) revolutions is that they end up devouring those who start them. The chaos caused by the deliberate break-down of old rules is used by the opportunistic (and ruthless) to seize control of the movement and install their own power structure. Elimination of those with principles and morals usually quickly follows. These are the true predators. Not necessarily true. Remember, America is the fruit of one.... Well, maybe that's the wrong example. But how are you going to jump start the dinosaur into action? Who's going to stop the onslaught on the environment? As for the person who needs 260 HP to have fun, that's not a predator, that's a sheep with vision problems. The cure for that is in the works. With the price of a barrel of oil spiking towards $100 per barrel (not there yet, but soon), a lot of consumption-oriented expenditures become discretionary. I share a waterway with many boats and it brings a smile to my face when I think of how much someone is spending to propel themselves from point A to point B with no purpose other than to "have fun". Of course, there is always the idiot boater who is drunk and can't figure out where they are going or what they are prone to hit, but the same idiots are also driving their trucks and endangering other peoples' lives on land as well. Even in the kayaking world, we have the whole spectrum of those who are perfectly happy in a stubby plastic rec boat, and those who disdain anything that isn't kelvar/graphic fiber with a 30 lb. net weight. The latter group is just as consumeristic as the ones who drive SUV's or big boats. The same situation with cyclists - there are those who are happy with a single-speed upright and those who drill out their magnesium/titanium derailers. You can put a consumer mind into the most environmentally-friendly transport system, and they will still be consumers. Heh, but that's humanity for you. :-) The kibbutz solve that consumeristic drive the simple way: SHARING. In our case, it could be 5 kayaks for 150 people say. I'm I getting too political? Please see... Going back to the coops, here are some good reasons why many people would join them if given the choice... "Most people are living on Kibbutz Arava for two reasons: 1.) to be able to work for themselves [no politician, no bureaucrat, no boss, in other words, no lion], and 2.) to be able to raise their children in a safe and comfortable environment [in other words, no jungle]. In a world whose cities are increasingly becoming more polarized and violent, these basic wants/needs are synonymous with life on a kibbutz. Internally, Kibbutz Arava functions rather communally and ecologically. There is a central dining room and commons area. Food that is eaten in the dining room arrives as bulk, wholesale crates, thus eliminating retail wastes such as packaging and plastic wrappers. The kibbutz is a pedestrian community. People are able to walk and ride their bikes to any kibbutz activity. In fact, there are only five leisure cars available for the 130 adult members. On kibbutz, people don't throw much away. When things break, they are fixed either by the garage, carpentry shop, or laundry. Things are not easily thrown away, as items are scarce. There are public commodities, such as a coffee and tea lounge, a pool, an entertainment area, a computer and fax room, a music studio, and a horse stable. By offering these amenities, the kibbutz eliminates the need for everyone to have their own TV, computer, etc [no consumerism, which feeds the lion]." kibbutz... http://www.objectsspace.com/encyclop...ex.php/Kibbutz Behind Consumption and Consumerism... http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRel...onsumption.asp |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
While I think I understand your admiration of the kibbutz culture, it takes
a stongly ideological person to participate and make it work. I knew one person who had been part of the kibbutz, and while one data point doesn't constitute proof of anything, he gave me the feeling that he would be a good communist if he was so inclined, as his ideological fervor was almost religious in intensity. By contrast, the majority of people I come across in the North American context seem very unwilling to share, and although most pride themselves on being "good people", there is very little enthusiasm for restricting their own freedom (to do, to consume, to enjoy the fruits of their labor) in support of the common good. Part of my work involves getting into peoples' heads to understand how and why they make various decisions (purchase of goods, selection of a service provider, deciding how to earn their living), and I am continually amazed at the mental gymnastics many make to justify their attitudes and positions (this applies to all positions on the political/economic spectrum). Over the years, I've come to the conclusion that if an incentive system doesn't offer immediate gratification, it has little chance of success. Yes, there are always exceptions to the rule, and I've met many fine, principled and aware individuals who do the right thing, but they are unfortunately in the minority. It's not to say that the rest are "bad" people, but they are not convinced that the reduction or denial of their desires will bring about a better overall situation. So to answer your question, until it is in the immediate interest of most people to stop fouling the environment, taking the necessary steps (choices) to do it won't happen. Why should anyone give up their fun and enjoyment, when the whole mass culture is reinforcing the notion that "consumption" is good, and even necessary. Those who don't buy into this concept are abnormal, by definition. I'm OK with being different - it gives me the freedom to see things from a different reference frame. I noticed that you were admiring the system in Norway. I spend some time in Sweden and the culture there is tangibly different from North America. There is much more focus on "family" and "community", and by extension the environment. On the other hand, Sweden has been a relatively homogeneous society until recently, and the influx of immigrants with very different social values has created strains. A similar view is also apparently occuring in Holland, with people less willing to put up with the non-assimilation of immigrant populations. Ultimately, as a believer in democracy, we need to elect the right leaders, who can then start steering the ship of culture in a different direction. There is yet other aspect to consider. We talk as members of the western culture, but the majority of the world's population do not belong to this group. The effect of China, India, Russia, the countries of Africa and South America will have a tremendous impact on the well-being of the environment. It is true that the majority of energy consumption is by "western" nations, but the others are trying very hard to catch up, and even if we all stop doing bad stuff in North America, it may not be enough to save the planet. Again, it appears that technology will have to be the saviour, in providing cheap, non-polluting power to all. No, it doesn't exist yet, but when the pain becomes acute enough, necessity will provide incentive to invent. And if we fail, ... guess we weren't as smart as we thought we were. In that case, the world will have another example of an over-specialized species that couldn't cope with a changing environment. I better get out and enjoy the waters with my family. And while we're at it, pick up some garbage. "donquijote1954" wrote in message oups.com... PG wrote: The problem with most (political) revolutions is that they end up devouring those who start them. The chaos caused by the deliberate break-down of old rules is used by the opportunistic (and ruthless) to seize control of the movement and install their own power structure. Elimination of those with principles and morals usually quickly follows. These are the true predators. Not necessarily true. Remember, America is the fruit of one.... Well, maybe that's the wrong example. But how are you going to jump start the dinosaur into action? Who's going to stop the onslaught on the environment? As for the person who needs 260 HP to have fun, that's not a predator, that's a sheep with vision problems. The cure for that is in the works. With the price of a barrel of oil spiking towards $100 per barrel (not there yet, but soon), a lot of consumption-oriented expenditures become discretionary. I share a waterway with many boats and it brings a smile to my face when I think of how much someone is spending to propel themselves from point A to point B with no purpose other than to "have fun". Of course, there is always the idiot boater who is drunk and can't figure out where they are going or what they are prone to hit, but the same idiots are also driving their trucks and endangering other peoples' lives on land as well. Even in the kayaking world, we have the whole spectrum of those who are perfectly happy in a stubby plastic rec boat, and those who disdain anything that isn't kelvar/graphic fiber with a 30 lb. net weight. The latter group is just as consumeristic as the ones who drive SUV's or big boats. The same situation with cyclists - there are those who are happy with a single-speed upright and those who drill out their magnesium/titanium derailers. You can put a consumer mind into the most environmentally-friendly transport system, and they will still be consumers. Heh, but that's humanity for you. :-) The kibbutz solve that consumeristic drive the simple way: SHARING. In our case, it could be 5 kayaks for 150 people say. I'm I getting too political? Please see... Going back to the coops, here are some good reasons why many people would join them if given the choice... "Most people are living on Kibbutz Arava for two reasons: 1.) to be able to work for themselves [no politician, no bureaucrat, no boss, in other words, no lion], and 2.) to be able to raise their children in a safe and comfortable environment [in other words, no jungle]. In a world whose cities are increasingly becoming more polarized and violent, these basic wants/needs are synonymous with life on a kibbutz. Internally, Kibbutz Arava functions rather communally and ecologically. There is a central dining room and commons area. Food that is eaten in the dining room arrives as bulk, wholesale crates, thus eliminating retail wastes such as packaging and plastic wrappers. The kibbutz is a pedestrian community. People are able to walk and ride their bikes to any kibbutz activity. In fact, there are only five leisure cars available for the 130 adult members. On kibbutz, people don't throw much away. When things break, they are fixed either by the garage, carpentry shop, or laundry. Things are not easily thrown away, as items are scarce. There are public commodities, such as a coffee and tea lounge, a pool, an entertainment area, a computer and fax room, a music studio, and a horse stable. By offering these amenities, the kibbutz eliminates the need for everyone to have their own TV, computer, etc [no consumerism, which feeds the lion]." kibbutz... http://www.objectsspace.com/encyclop...ex.php/Kibbutz Behind Consumption and Consumerism... http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRel...onsumption.asp |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
PG wrote: While I think I understand your admiration of the kibbutz culture, it takes a stongly ideological person to participate and make it work. I knew one person who had been part of the kibbutz, and while one data point doesn't constitute proof of anything, he gave me the feeling that he would be a good communist if he was so inclined, as his ideological fervor was almost religious in intensity. By contrast, the majority of people I come across in the North American context seem very unwilling to share, and although most pride themselves on being "good people", there is very little enthusiasm for restricting their own freedom (to do, to consume, to enjoy the fruits of their labor) in support of the common good. Part of my work involves getting into peoples' heads to understand how and why they make various decisions (purchase of goods, selection of a service provider, deciding how to earn their living), and I am continually amazed at the mental gymnastics many make to justify their attitudes and positions (this applies to all positions on the political/economic spectrum). Over the years, I've come to the conclusion that if an incentive system doesn't offer immediate gratification, it has little chance of success. Yes, there are always exceptions to the rule, and I've met many fine, principled and aware individuals who do the right thing, but they are unfortunately in the minority. It's not to say that the rest are "bad" people, but they are not convinced that the reduction or denial of their desires will bring about a better overall situation. So to answer your question, until it is in the immediate interest of most people to stop fouling the environment, taking the necessary steps (choices) to do it won't happen. Why should anyone give up their fun and enjoyment, when the whole mass culture is reinforcing the notion that "consumption" is good, and even necessary. Those who don't buy into this concept are abnormal, by definition. I'm OK with being different - it gives me the freedom to see things from a different reference frame. I noticed that you were admiring the system in Norway. I spend some time in Sweden and the culture there is tangibly different from North America. There is much more focus on "family" and "community", and by extension the environment. On the other hand, Sweden has been a relatively homogeneous society until recently, and the influx of immigrants with very different social values has created strains. A similar view is also apparently occuring in Holland, with people less willing to put up with the non-assimilation of immigrant populations. Ultimately, as a believer in democracy, we need to elect the right leaders, who can then start steering the ship of culture in a different direction. There is yet other aspect to consider. We talk as members of the western culture, but the majority of the world's population do not belong to this group. The effect of China, India, Russia, the countries of Africa and South America will have a tremendous impact on the well-being of the environment. It is true that the majority of energy consumption is by "western" nations, but the others are trying very hard to catch up, and even if we all stop doing bad stuff in North America, it may not be enough to save the planet. Again, it appears that technology will have to be the saviour, in providing cheap, non-polluting power to all. No, it doesn't exist yet, but when the pain becomes acute enough, necessity will provide incentive to invent. And if we fail, ... guess we weren't as smart as we thought we were. In that case, the world will have another example of an over-specialized species that couldn't cope with a changing environment. I better get out and enjoy the waters with my family. And while we're at it, pick up some garbage. Good idea about the garbage, but more like likely than not it'll be TOO LITTLE TOO LATE. The HUNGRY SHARK forces people to become predators of their own--small ones, big ones--until they devour each other. I bet you SARDINES want to remain sardines if they had a chance of survival by cooperating. Both the forces COMPETITION AND COOPERATION ARE PRESENT IN NATURE (yes, even predators cooperate) but cooperation is conspicuously absent in a jungle called capitalism. Well, the results are also conspicuous... Kalifornia Kritter wrote: Hey, the House of Mouse has done pretty well for central Florida. You have paved roads and a lot of infrastructure built up in what was once a mosquito-infested swamp. I remember what it looked like 40 years ago. Wall to wall bugs... When I returned to Kalifornia from Florida, I had a palmetto bug hitchhiker hiding under the seat of my Jaguar. I kept killing palmetto bugs and thought I'd got the last one, but there was always one more... Just like your posts, Donkey. Always one more. If you answer, for Dulcinea's sake, let that post be the last one! Dear Gawd, please make Donkey stop!!!! Yeah, all your polluting California stupid sprawl (read "Fast Food Nation")brought to Florida is 5 hurricanes in a year. Florida had a nice train to Key West and it went the way the of the trolleys in LA. Watch "Roger Rabbit" if you don't believe me. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Are there Conservative Kayakers? | General | |||
Are there Conservative Kayakers? | General | |||
OT Conservative pigs! What do you think NOW? | General |