I don’t understand how you envision our species coexisting in equilibrium with our planet. Are you suggesting that we give up our resource hungry high technology and live closer to what the Amish are trying to do?
The future you’re talking about won’t be in your own hands. Technocapital will make those decisions about how to exploit the planet for you, and population stability, quality of life, and economic, measured use of resources (ie literally “conservative”) will all be secondary, tertiary, or even more distant goals. There will not be a great flash of light where turning the planet into a gray brick will yield a positive singularity. When we’ve used the world up, it’s gone, but you and I will be left alive for a litle while to writhe like flayed worms in hell. Maybe another species can guzzle up our bones in several million years to make a computer do unnecessary math calculations with the hopes of achieving infinite growth?
I don’t understand how you envision our species coexisting in equilibrium with our planet.
Because I don’t want to discuss this. This is a vile path. It’s like a debate on the fact that jews disproportionately control more capital than other ethnicities or not.
Fair enough, what if I wanted to ask you outside of that context? I have very few thoughts and opinions about this subject and would appreciate any reasonable views.
At our current level of industrial capabilities we could provide a standard of living for all humans at around the level of an eastern European country. That sounds bad if you live in America, but it sounds like an impossibility if you live in the 3rd world. The truth is capitalism creates these disparities and prevents the study of more equitable technologies.
You should look up solarpunk for ideas of how we can live in a symbiotic way without giving up technological advancements or reducing our quality of life. Mostly it’s stuff like sustainable farming, renewable energy, and not being wasteful with materials.
I don’t understand how you envision our species coexisting in equilibrium with our planet. Are you suggesting that we give up our resource hungry high technology and live closer to what the Amish are trying to do?
The future you’re talking about won’t be in your own hands. Technocapital will make those decisions about how to exploit the planet for you, and population stability, quality of life, and economic, measured use of resources (ie literally “conservative”) will all be secondary, tertiary, or even more distant goals. There will not be a great flash of light where turning the planet into a gray brick will yield a positive singularity. When we’ve used the world up, it’s gone, but you and I will be left alive for a litle while to writhe like flayed worms in hell. Maybe another species can guzzle up our bones in several million years to make a computer do unnecessary math calculations with the hopes of achieving infinite growth?
Because I don’t want to discuss this. This is a vile path. It’s like a debate on the fact that jews disproportionately control more capital than other ethnicities or not.
You don’t want to discuss your ideal vision of humanity? That’s odd.
Not in a context of eco fascism
Fair enough, what if I wanted to ask you outside of that context? I have very few thoughts and opinions about this subject and would appreciate any reasonable views.
At our current level of industrial capabilities we could provide a standard of living for all humans at around the level of an eastern European country. That sounds bad if you live in America, but it sounds like an impossibility if you live in the 3rd world. The truth is capitalism creates these disparities and prevents the study of more equitable technologies.
You should look up solarpunk for ideas of how we can live in a symbiotic way without giving up technological advancements or reducing our quality of life. Mostly it’s stuff like sustainable farming, renewable energy, and not being wasteful with materials.