You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #24: Figures ... going backwards into the future ... [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
Nihil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-16-08 04:48 AM
Response to Reply #9
24. Figures ... going backwards into the future ...
:P

On a serious point ...
> Civilization with its consumption of resources is not going to
> go away because you don't like it.

It doesn't matter what I like or don't like. Civilisation with its
constantly increasing consumption of resources is going to
go away and, in the process, a lot of people, animals, plants, marine
life and minerals are going to go away too. It is the timescale and
thus the severity of the transition that concerns me.


> I see many people wanting to live in an "advanced civilization" and
> few who prefer to live in a mud hut and grow yams.

As above, it simply doesn't matter what "many people" want: they are not
in the position to get it.

Constantly increasing numbers of people consuming increasing quantities
of resources (for their "advanced civilisation" dreams) results in fewer
resources left and more pollution in the process. This, in turn, results
in fewer people (through conflict, resource shortage and environmental
poisoning).


> Better to make the best use of those resources than to sit around
> and bitch about the downsides.

I agree with this bit but strongly disagree that the proposals above
are in fact making "the best use of those resources". They are making
the quickest, shoot-from-the-hip, commercially-advantageous and short-term
politically-expedient use of those resources. This results in a one-off
consumption of said resources, a deterioration of the environmental
situation and an acceleration of the intensity of the problem (which will,
in turn, generate a whole new set of brain-dead "quick fix" schemes in the
hope of finding some touchstone to allow the stupid game to continue).

*THAT* is the base of my objection, not some desire to grow yams ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC