DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Global Collapse
HTML https://globalcollapse.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 1352--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cultural Errat
By: RE Date: October 21, 2021, 11:06 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
That's a practical answer, but it is, yes, a cop out.
What you are faced with here is a kind of global Sophie's
Choice. You are drowning with 2 kids. You can only save 1, if
you try to save both, all 3 of you will drown. So you pick one
to save, and let the other one go. This is very good for you
and the saved one, very bad for the dead one.
Not a lot different for distributing out the coal or NG. If we
ship coal from here on the Last Great Frontier to China to keep
their lights on, we can't ship it to India to do the same for
them. We only can mine the coal so fast, and there are a
limited number of ships to load it onto. Fortunately of course
we don't need the coal, because we have plenty of NG we cannot
ship anywhere because we don't have a plant to liquify the NG
and no terminal to pump it onto ships. Both are unlikely to be
built anytime soon.
So, you can "do good" for somebody if you have a surplus, but
the good you do for them is bad for somebody else. Who do you
choose? Which child will you save?
Abigail Adams credo is simplistic, and does not address the
problem of how you can do good when there just is not enough
around to do good for everyone. Back in Biblical times, there
are stories of people who ate their children to avoid starvation
themselves. Is that good or bad? In a resource depleted
economy that is contracting, everybody's life comes at the
expense of someone else who dies. Is it good to sacrifice your
own life so someone else might live? If it is your own child, I
think many (though not all) people would do that. But how many
would give their own life to save a starving child in
Afghanistan?
Cutting your own energy footprint if you are in surplus is a
good thing, and you can more or less go to the Great Beyond with
a clear conscience that you tried to do...something. What you do
though will never be enough, short of course of joining the
Voluntary Extinction Movement, whose Motto is, "Save the
Pllanet. Kill Yourself." lol.
Would Abigail Adams have killed herself to do good?
RE
#Post#: 1353--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cultural Errat
By: K-Dog Date: October 22, 2021, 12:09 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=BuddyJ link=topic=73.msg1350#msg1350
date=1634852752]
[quote author=RE link=topic=73.msg1343#msg1343 date=1634783183]
[quote author=K-Dog link=topic=73.msg1341#msg1341
date=1634777445]
I agree with the **** -up electronic meat monkey brain riding
the back of a tiger comparison.
COVID denialism which Rebecca talks about in the first video
makes it crystal clear. People are walking around with
unlicensed brains.
[/quote]
I think you need to go back to why about ALL cultures, civilized
or not believe in a God or Gods.
RE
[/quote]
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terror_management_theory
Probably explains incessant doom mongering as well.
[/quote]
I have exchanged emails with Sheldon Solomon.
HTML https://www.youtube.com/user/ernestbecker/about
Our need to avoid death is built in. I am totally on board with
terror management theory. I was influential in getting an
interview for Sheldon.
Awareness of death engenders debilitating terror “managed” by
the development and maintenance of worldviews. Awareness of
death makes it difficult for the common person to understand
doom. They won't think about it and you can't make them.
#Post#: 1354--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cultural Errat
By: Phil Potts Date: October 22, 2021, 3:41 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=RE link=topic=73.msg1352#msg1352 date=1634875616]
That's a practical answer, but it is, yes, a cop out.
What you are faced with here is a kind of global Sophie's
Choice. You are drowning with 2 kids. You can only save 1, if
you try to save both, all 3 of you will drown. So you pick one
to save, and let the other one go. This is very good for you
and the saved one, very bad for the dead one.
Not a lot different for distributing out the coal or NG. If we
ship coal from here on the Last Great Frontier to China to keep
their lights on, we can't ship it to India to do the same for
them. We only can mine the coal so fast, and there are a
limited number of ships to load it onto. Fortunately of course
we don't need the coal, because we have plenty of NG we cannot
ship anywhere because we don't have a plant to liquify the NG
and no terminal to pump it onto ships. Both are unlikely to be
built anytime soon.
So, you can "do good" for somebody if you have a surplus, but
the good you do for them is bad for somebody else. Who do you
choose? Which child will you save?
Abigail Adams credo is simplistic, and does not address the
problem of how you can do good when there just is not enough
around to do good for everyone. Back in Biblical times, there
are stories of people who ate their children to avoid starvation
themselves. Is that good or bad? In a resource depleted
economy that is contracting, everybody's life comes at the
expense of someone else who dies. Is it good to sacrifice your
own life so someone else might live? If it is your own child, I
think many (though not all) people would do that. But how many
would give their own life to save a starving child in
Afghanistan?
Cutting your own energy footprint if you are in surplus is a
good thing, and you can more or less go to the Great Beyond with
a clear conscience that you tried to do...something. What you do
though will never be enough, short of course of joining the
Voluntary Extinction Movement, whose Motto is, "Save the
Pllanet. Kill Yourself." lol.
Would Abigail Adams have killed herself to do good?
RE
[/quote]
The choice has been made by the UN, G20, Paris agreement.
Carboneutral for middle age median, low fertility, gas guzzling,
thermostat setting, SUV driving without passengers, empty rooms
dwelling, mRNA injecting western world by 2030.
Teen or twenties median, emigrant exporting, cheap
manufacturing, lightly polluting per capita, traditional vaccine
taking, 'emerging economies' by 2060. This probably means
exporting fossil fuels and hoping windmills do the job
domestically. If bills get too high to pay, sit on the porch
shirtless in summer and wear a sheepskin onesie in winter. Not
inside out like this guy.
HTML https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/kremlin-says-putin-will-not-fly-glasgow-cop26-2021-10-20/
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 1357--------------------------------------------------
Hundreds of kids and their families are riding a bicycle bus to
school in Barcelona
By: RE Date: October 22, 2021, 6:32 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Here's a nice upbeat story to relieve your Doom Gloominess for
the day. :)
Hundreds of kids and their families are riding a bicycle bus to
school in Barcelona
HTML https://www.npr.org/2021/10/22/1047341052/barcelona-bicibus-kids-parents-bike-ride-to-school
Up here on the last great frontier, we can do bikes in the
summer, cross country skis in the winter! Also dogsled buses
for the preschoolers!
RE
#Post#: 1358--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cultural Errat
By: Digwe Must Date: October 22, 2021, 1:04 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=RE link=topic=73.msg1352#msg1352 date=1634875616]
That's a practical answer, but it is, yes, a cop out.
What you are faced with here is a kind of global Sophie's
Choice.
[b]I disagree, not surprisingly. My point is that we have much
more power over the individual choices we make. I can't impact
shipping Australian coal to China. I can't impact the growing
tensions in the region. The people who make these decisions
don't listen to me. Those who are committed to conflict on an
international scale don't listen to me - or you. They move
piles of wealth from one spot to another without any thought for
the poor and desperate, mine all the resources out from under
native people, prepare for war that will decimate the poor first
and have no thought or care for the future. We know how the
movie ends.
For me, I can help many more people by putting my efforts into
learning and teaching alternative ways for people to manage the
food, water, shelter and security challenges that they face.
This where I can do the most good, as I see it. We are in the
lower energy future that we've been saying is on the way.
However, as we descend I still expect those in power to burn
every BTU they can scrape up - so they stay in power as long as
possible. I can't do anything about that or who gets the coal.
"Cutting your own energy footprint if you are in surplus is a
good thing, and you can more or less go to the Great Beyond with
a clear conscience that you tried to do...something. What you do
though will never be enough..."
As you know well, this isn't about me or you. We're damn near
done. It's about what we leave behind for those who follow. I
work much harder at all this than I should. I'd rather go
fishin' once in a while. But, apparently I'm not done yet. It
sure isn't about upping my personal Good Guy score. I'm not
telling anyone else how they should deal with collapse or the
conundrum we find ourselves in. You "do good" as you see it.
That's not my call. As to the fact that what I do will never be
enough, sorry but that is no reason not to do it. I quote RE:
"Save as many as you can."
[/b]
So, you can "do good" for somebody if you have a surplus, but
the good you do for them is bad for somebody else. Abigail
Adams credo is simplistic, and does not address the problem of
how you can do good when there just is not enough around to do
good for everyone. Would Abigail Adams have killed herself to
do good?
Of course Abigail's quote is simplistic. Yankee wisdom, solid,
severe and sparse. As to her character, well she risked it all,
her own life and her family's for what she thought was a just
cause bigger than her. To try and be good and do good doesn't
mean you can help everyone or keep the ship from sinking.
RE there are many good folks who do what they can for others
even though they don't have a surplus at all. Those people
humble me every day.
As it happens, I know a few men who did risk their lives to save
injured and desperate kids in Afghanistan. They did it all the
time.
Sorry I still can't figure out the quote doo-dad.
#Post#: 1360--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cultural Errat
By: RE Date: October 22, 2021, 3:44 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The difference here is one of focus. You are focused on
individual actions; I am focused on social actions. Individuals
can be "good", just as they can be intelligent. Civilizations
are never good and they also operate at a low level of
intelligence. When you are swimming in a sea of shyt, you can't
do good. The waves of shyt roll over everyone, you included.
When I began the Diner, my motivation was to wake people up to
what was transpiring around them. I didn't have huge success
with the project, my websites never went viral of course. I
did have a few successes, I know of at least 4 people who made
significant life changes after reading the Diner. Did this do
any good though? Definitely not on the social level, and not
even on the individual level. Frankly, these days I don't think
Doomsteading offers much more chance of survival than living in
a big shitty. Maybe it buys you a few more years of survival,
but it's no permenent solution. I know of no Doomstead that is
self sufficient nor any that could defend itself when either the
Zombies or the Military shows up in force. I also don't
consider Farming to be a sustainable way of life anyhow.
Historically speaking, all Ag Civilizations have collapsed. The
only sustainable form of living is H-G, but you can't do that
nowadays. Not enough game, not enough fish, not enough unowned
land to wander around on to pick berries and dig up edible
roots.
So, what is good here? You can make the case it is good to let
nature take its course and letting the population dieoff. You
can make the case it is GOOD to keep burning FFs, because then
people will dieoff faster! lol. That would be the case made by
the Illuminati. Get rid of those Useless Eaters! You can also
make the case it would be good to Guillotine all the folks at
the top of the pyramid who got us into this mess. Work your way
down killing off rich people until you have left only poor and
generous people. :)
Far as soldiers who risked their lives to save Afghani children
goes, they were working in service for the MIC, which in
aggregate kills many more children than it saves. I don't
consider anyone who is a soldier in service to the MIC to be
good. They are the enablers of Evil, the enforcement arm of
Capitalism. In the words of General Smedley Butler:
HTML https://change-links.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/smedley-quote.jpg
RE
#Post#: 1361--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cultural Errat
By: Digwe Must Date: October 22, 2021, 5:51 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=RE link=topic=73.msg1360#msg1360 date=1634935460]
The difference here is one of focus. You are focused on
individual actions; I am focused on social actions. Individuals
can be "good", just as they can be intelligent. Civilizations
are never good and they also operate at a low level of
intelligence. When you are swimming in a sea of shyt, you can't
do good. The waves of shyt roll over everyone, you included.
When I began the Diner, my motivation was to wake people up to
what was transpiring around them. I didn't have huge success
with the project, my websites never went viral of course. I
did have a few successes, I know of at least 4 people who made
significant life changes after reading the Diner. Did this do
any good though? Definitely not on the social level, and not
even on the individual level. Frankly, these days I don't think
Doomsteading offers much more chance of survival than living in
a big shitty. Maybe it buys you a few more years of survival,
but it's no permenent solution. I know of no Doomstead that is
self sufficient nor any that could defend itself when either the
Zombies or the Military shows up in force. I also don't
consider Farming to be a sustainable way of life anyhow.
Historically speaking, all Ag Civilizations have collapsed. The
only sustainable form of living is H-G, but you can't do that
nowadays. Not enough game, not enough fish, not enough unowned
land to wander around on to pick berries and dig up edible
roots.
So, what is good here? You can make the case it is good to let
nature take its course and letting the population dieoff. You
can make the case it is GOOD to keep burning FFs, because then
people will dieoff faster! lol. That would be the case made by
the Illuminati. Get rid of those Useless Eaters! You can also
make the case it would be good to Guillotine all the folks at
the top of the pyramid who got us into this mess. Work your way
down killing off rich people until you have left only poor and
generous people. :)
Far as soldiers who risked their lives to save Afghani children
goes, they were working in service for the MIC, which in
aggregate kills many more children than it saves. I don't
consider anyone who is a soldier in service to the MIC to be
good. They are the enablers of Evil, the enforcement arm of
Capitalism. In the words of General Smedley Butler:
HTML https://change-links.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/smedley-quote.jpg
RE
[/quote]
Glad it's raining today and I can a few minutes to go back and
forth. Good discussion.
I am focused on individual actions. That's where I can do the
most good. I can opine on the Meryl Streep choice and offer my
take on the societal choices to be made but I will have no
effect. All the outrage and moral dilemma I feel will not alter
the outcome. For me, channeling that outrage and sadness into
positive action on the ground works best.
The members of the MIC you mention were about 19 years old when
sent to Afghanistan, convinced they were fighting for their
country, avenging 9/11 and keeping terrorists away from the US.
Indeed, they were tools of the MIC and killed many people.
They were the occupiers and on the wrong side. They did things
that 10 years later they simply would not do. In my opinion
they were duped. They pay for it every day. My point being
that when making individual decisions under extreme duress,
caught in a colossal geo-political blunder, they chose,
sometimes at great personal risk, to do good when they could -
of course in the context of the situation they found themselves
in. Perhaps you were a mature 18 year old who transcended your
upbringing and culture to have an enhanced ability for critical
thinking. Maybe you've never been sold a bill of goods or duped
by propaganda. Maybe you don't regret any major choices you
made at that age. We aren't all that fortunate.
I'm very familiar with Smedley Butler. Read books about him
years ago. He didn't start out enlightened on the subject of US
imperialism. It took him a few years - and he stayed with the
program for a while. He was a general for chrissakes.
I did what I could - again a very small contribution- to stop
the Vietnam war. I grew up with kids who went when drafted,
kids that enlisted because of patriotism and kids that went to
jail and Canada. I never blamed them. I blamed Johnson and
Nixon and the MIC. Still do. So many lives ruined and gone.
I agree that traditional ag is unsustainable. That's why we
don't do it. We have a Permaculture site. This involves a much
different design and use of land and soil, using biological
solutions to meet challenges whenever possible. We build soil,
we don't deplete it. We bury carbon. Permaculture is based on
ethics: care for the earth - care for people - fair share the
surplus - self regulation. This is followed by 12 principles
that I won't list because I don't sense any interest. It is a
much different approach to producing food (also shelter,
community, enterprise) with much different results. Holmgren
and Mollison (two Aussies) came up with the concept which has
been evolving for over 40 years. We've taught some young folks
who are spending their lives now doing this work. You may view
this as insignificant - I see it as essential. I see it as my
way of meeting my obligation to do good.
I completely agree that one family or small group has a very
poor chance of survival in a SHTF scenario. As I've said
before, you can't have all preps. And no, you can't be
completely self sufficient. You can't have every skill and
piece of equipment. You can't keep your eyes open 24/7.
Intentional communities generally don't work. A network of
neighbors with complimentary skills and resources is the best
solution I've run across. I think your statement about survival
odds in a city versus a rural environment depends on the
individual. I wouldn't last a day in a city in bad times.
There are many in the city who would starve out here while
surrounded by food they don't recognize as food. They can't
tell north from south without their phone. They can't read
maps, and many, many are too fat to make it in a situation that
requires physical work.
I expect things to get very bad. But I do not expect the US
military to show up here. We're tiny. They will be spread very
thin. In a 2nd Civil War or general revolt local militias and
paramilitary groups will be more of a factor. Zombies will be a
threat - but smaller and more isolated. Community defense can
deal with zombies.
Living on freeze dried, stolen rations in a concrete urban hovel
has no interest for me. Tapping into natural systems,
relearning patterns and methods for obtaining food, clothing and
shelter is, to my mind, the only chance many young people today
will have in the future. Not just to survive, but to have lives
with some potential for dignity and joy.
I'm sorry you don't think the Diner was much of a contribution.
I thought it was great when I could spend time there. My only
problem was the lack of specific strategies and methods people
employed. An accurate view of the big picture is essential.
Discussion of the issues and elements of the ongoing collapse is
essential - at least for me - to be able an put my own views in
perspective. But what are we doing about it?
There was a guy named Category 5 (as I recall) who posted
articles about his place in Nova Scotia. I thought his pieces
were very interesting, although he seemed pissed off all the
time. His approach to many issues were very different than mine.
In particular he despised his neighbors and the locals. But
there were many methods he took for certain work that I found
intriguing. I sent you a message once asking if you thought I
should submit a piece contrasting our approaches to certain
tasks and concerns. As it turned out, you were sick and on the
IR list and I didn't hear back. So, I sent the same message to
either Eddie or K-Dog ( can't remember which) and never got a
response. I took that as a clear sign of lack of interest.
We all do what we can, when we can, and do it as well as we can.
If you think the concept of "doing good" is simplistic and a
waste of time...well that's certainly an opinion shared by the
majority, if we believe actions speak louder than words. We can
agonize over the suffering of children and the helpless around
the world , but I don't think we can let the severity of the
situation paralyze us into inaction and impotent outrage.
Fodere Debemus
#Post#: 1363--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cultural Errat
By: Phil Potts Date: October 22, 2021, 7:33 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=K-Dog link=topic=73.msg1341#msg1341
date=1634777445]
This looks like a good place for these:
HTML https://youtu.be/jtTr8k6sh78
HTML https://youtu.be/t74YeWd2SOsby
I agree with the **** -up electronic meat monkey brain riding
the back of a tiger comparison.
COVID denialism which Rebecca talks about in the first video
makes it crystal clear. People are walking around with
unlicensed brains.
[/quote]
By 'covid denialism' I thought you meant denying covid exists.
That's not what she addressed though, it was 'vaccine hesitancy'
(refusing unless forced). She cites only 3 reasons.
Her first reason for refusing was it is not FDA approved. She
says this can not be a logical reason because Iver is not FDA
approved for treatment of covid either. This neglects the
reasons why both are not approved being entirely different.
There is no money to be made from iver. Approving it would stop
the money being made by pharmacos with vaccines. The pharmacos
fund and run the FDA, saving the taxpayer money but clearly
compromising it's integrity by interests.
An entirely different standard is being applied to studies of
iver as a treatment, it is not the low standard and skipping
phases of trials with control group done with the Vax. The
pharmacos themselves are not doing the studies on iver, they are
ignoring what studies have been done and why it is then approved
in those countries, while banned in our own.
mRNA as a Vax has never been approved because it's effects are
short lived and side effects over time with repeated doses are
disastrous in animal trials.
Second reason cited was side effects. She says 'study after
study shows they are ridiculously safe'. This is an article of
faith, death and other things are listed as side effects on the
label and the study is being done on you now. Who has asked you
about any side effects to gather the data? Look at what other
countries did halting the Vax when unnaceptable numbers showed
up with blood clots for a clue. Look at the resignations and
warnings from the CDC regarding vaxing children. Look at those
who produce or push it exempting themselves.
Third reason is it is new technology. It is old as a gene
therapy not as a successful vaccine and not for want of trying.
It could not be used now as a Vax if not for a pandemic being
declared an emergency. Declaring an emergency removes a lot of
human rights as well.
She mentioned J&J as older technology available. It is viral
vector, not deactivated virus. Many consider it the best of a
bad bunch, but it is not available everywhere. Even in the US it
has now been stopped because of blood clotting.
She thinks 'it's most likely we got our information on fox news
and Facebook', another baseless article of faith for those who
get their own info only from the msm. What they do is a risk v
reward calculus based on immediate side effects possible and
unknown long term side effects. The nurses do this based on what
they see themselves, The pilots and air crews refusing to get
vaxed probably do that based on things they see themself
including the grounding of all crews at fort hood. Many know or
know of people who had side effects from vax as well as people
who had covid. If not, there is no shortage of stories available
online. They count dverse reactions between recieving first dose
and two weeks after second dose who are not counted as
vaccinated. They don't think there is no connection between the
vaccine and the side effect because these things can happen to
people with a pre-existing condition. They think if it happened
to a healthy person with no history, it was the vaccine causing
it.
On being atheist, she really is not, as she is fully baptised in
the State substitute provided, recognising man's general need
for religion. When she gave reasons for being atheist, she said
various religions were wrong to her, not that she gave any
reasons for them being wrong, but that people followed them only
because of being brought up with them. That is not always the
case, many question the faith and come to their own
understanding, also many join religions of their own volition
from outside. More important is the rookie atheist error in not
distinguishing between a religion and a creator to explain
phenomena.
She could step up as the first person presenting the case for
Vax mandates to accept the challenge to actually debate the
topic, which has gone unanswered. She could start by giving a
reason for just 3 things. 1 why it is important for anyone to
take something which does not prevent infection or spreading the
disease, but only reduces severe symptoms and messaging now is
only 'it might'. 2. Why an alternative treatment that can do
that as well and completely safe is blocked. 3. Why people who
have had covid and recovered, having the best protection, are
also forced. The reason for not already considering any of this
is only religious fanaticism.
That took way too much time just to repeat things I've said
before. It would be easier protesting being told I'm walking
around with an unlicensed brain by just not participating.
#Post#: 1367--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cultural Errat
By: RE Date: October 22, 2021, 10:20 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Digwe Must link=topic=73.msg1361#msg1361
date=1634943111]
Glad it's raining today and I can a few minutes to go back and
forth. Good discussion.
I am focused on individual actions. That's where I can do the
most good. I can opine on the Meryl Streep choice and offer my
take on the societal choices to be made but I will have no
effect. All the outrage and moral dilemma I feel will not alter
the outcome. For me, channeling that outrage and sadness into
positive action on the ground works best.
The members of the MIC you mention were about 19 years old when
sent to Afghanistan, convinced they were fighting for their
country, avenging 9/11 and keeping terrorists away from the US.
Indeed, they were tools of the MIC and killed many people.
They were the occupiers and on the wrong side. They did things
that 10 years later they simply would not do. In my opinion
they were duped. They pay for it every day. My point being
that when making individual decisions under extreme duress,
caught in a colossal geo-political blunder, they chose,
sometimes at great personal risk, to do good when they could -
of course in the context of the situation they found themselves
in. Perhaps you were a mature 18 year old who transcended your
upbringing and culture to have an enhanced ability for critical
thinking. Maybe you've never been sold a bill of goods or duped
by propaganda. Maybe you don't regret any major choices you
made at that age. We aren't all that fortunate.
I'm very familiar with Smedley Butler. Read books about him
years ago. He didn't start out enlightened on the subject of US
imperialism. It took him a few years - and he stayed with the
program for a while. He was a general for chrissakes.
I did what I could - again a very small contribution- to stop
the Vietnam war. I grew up with kids who went when drafted,
kids that enlisted because of patriotism and kids that went to
jail and Canada. I never blamed them. I blamed Johnson and
Nixon and the MIC. Still do. So many lives ruined and gone.
I agree that traditional ag is unsustainable. That's why we
don't do it. We have a Permaculture site. This involves a much
different design and use of land and soil, using biological
solutions to meet challenges whenever possible. We build soil,
we don't deplete it. We bury carbon. Permaculture is based on
ethics: care for the earth - care for people - fair share the
surplus - self regulation. This is followed by 12 principles
that I won't list because I don't sense any interest. It is a
much different approach to producing food (also shelter,
community, enterprise) with much different results. Holmgren
and Mollison (two Aussies) came up with the concept which has
been evolving for over 40 years. We've taught some young folks
who are spending their lives now doing this work. You may view
this as insignificant - I see it as essential. I see it as my
way of meeting my obligation to do good.
I completely agree that one family or small group has a very
poor chance of survival in a SHTF scenario. As I've said
before, you can't have all preps. And no, you can't be
completely self sufficient. You can't have every skill and
piece of equipment. You can't keep your eyes open 24/7.
Intentional communities generally don't work. A network of
neighbors with complimentary skills and resources is the best
solution I've run across. I think your statement about survival
odds in a city versus a rural environment depends on the
individual. I wouldn't last a day in a city in bad times.
There are many in the city who would starve out here while
surrounded by food they don't recognize as food. They can't
tell north from south without their phone. They can't read
maps, and many, many are too fat to make it in a situation that
requires physical work.
I expect things to get very bad. But I do not expect the US
military to show up here. We're tiny. They will be spread very
thin. In a 2nd Civil War or general revolt local militias and
paramilitary groups will be more of a factor. Zombies will be a
threat - but smaller and more isolated. Community defense can
deal with zombies.
Living on freeze dried, stolen rations in a concrete urban hovel
has no interest for me. Tapping into natural systems,
relearning patterns and methods for obtaining food, clothing and
shelter is, to my mind, the only chance many young people today
will have in the future. Not just to survive, but to have lives
with some potential for dignity and joy.
I'm sorry you don't think the Diner was much of a contribution.
I thought it was great when I could spend time there. My only
problem was the lack of specific strategies and methods people
employed. An accurate view of the big picture is essential.
Discussion of the issues and elements of the ongoing collapse is
essential - at least for me - to be able an put my own views in
perspective. But what are we doing about it?
There was a guy named Category 5 (as I recall) who posted
articles about his place in Nova Scotia. I thought his pieces
were very interesting, although he seemed pissed off all the
time. His approach to many issues were very different than mine.
In particular he despised his neighbors and the locals. But
there were many methods he took for certain work that I found
intriguing. I sent you a message once asking if you thought I
should submit a piece contrasting our approaches to certain
tasks and concerns. As it turned out, you were sick and on the
IR list and I didn't hear back. So, I sent the same message to
either Eddie or K-Dog ( can't remember which) and never got a
response. I took that as a clear sign of lack of interest.
We all do what we can, when we can, and do it as well as we can.
If you think the concept of "doing good" is simplistic and a
waste of time...well that's certainly an opinion shared by the
majority, if we believe actions speak louder than words. We can
agonize over the suffering of children and the helpless around
the world , but I don't think we can let the severity of the
situation paralyze us into inaction and impotent outrage.
Fodere Debemus
[/quote]
We had a whole Forum on the Diner, the Doomsteading forum
dedicated to topics like permaculture. I chartered a 501c3
nonprofit corporation, the Sustaining Universal Needs (SUN)
Foundation to help educate and build sustainable living
communities. We had many members over the years who were
permaculture enthusiasts. Some even had their official
Permaculture Certificates. Eddie has one of those. I published
numerous blogs by others concerned with this topic, Toby
Hemenway for one. I talked several times with Irv Mills on
Video. We did a show on food preservation, including
cheesemaking, pickling and canning. Don't know why you never
got response to your PMs, but you could have posted on the forum
anytime. I often took detailed posts and threads from the
forum and turned them into blogs. I was always looking for new
authors and contributors.
My own area of expertiese is not in this field, it's in
mathematics and economics, along with biochemistry and
psychology. I don't write about permaculture because I'm not
familiar enough with it.
As to the potential for permaculture to save the population, I
don't know how many people it can feed on the earth, but I don't
think it is 7.8B. Many of the techniques come from antiquity,
but it was consistently out competed by more intensive methods
that grew the population faster. You need a big population to
have a big army, of course.
When it comes to being duped into the military at 19, no I was
not. I knew it was trash by the age of 15 for sure with
Vietnam, possibly earlier than that. I did almost get duped
though, because I applied to the Air Force Academy out of HS. I
wasn't accepted because I was too young graduating HS, I was 16.
You had to be at least 17. They invited me to reapply the next
year (I got a call from a General at the Pentagon personally
inviting me to do that). I didn't want to join the Air Force to
bomb people though, I did it because I wanted to be an
Astronaut. At the time, the only way to get that job was to
have experience as a military pilot. They didn't send 90 year
old actors into space in those years. lol.
Do I forgive 19 year olds for being stupid and voluntarily
signing up to kill people? No I do not, stupidity is no excuse
for making a piss poor moral choice. I do not Forgive and I do
not Forget. People need to be accountable for their mistakes. I
am accountable for all mine, fortunately they don't include
killing anybody else.
It would be nice if everyone was good and kind and generous, but
sadly most people are not. Most people are stupid, greedy and
selfish. The WORST people are smart, greedy and selfish. So it
goes.
RE
#Post#: 1368--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cultural Errat
By: Digwe Must Date: October 22, 2021, 11:34 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
That took way too much time just to repeat things I've said
before. It would be easier protesting being told I'm walking
around with an unlicensed brain by just not participating.
I'm not sure that "unlicensed brain" and "duckwit" are
compatible, but they make a nice couple on the dancefloor.
I hope you continue to participate, PP. The discussion really
benefits from your presence. I think the ad hominem attacks are
based on fear.
Abigail's old man had it right. "I will enlarge no more on the
evidence, but submit it to you, gentlemen—Facts are stubborn
things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the
dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts
and evidence..." John Adams, 1770.
HTML https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.0020138
Medical Journals Are an Extension of the Marketing Arm of
Pharmaceutical Companies
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page