tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post1932574594987349185..comments2024-02-20T13:32:06.704-05:00Comments on Resource Insights: Why you can't argue with a "modern"Kurt Cobbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05330759091950742285noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-54833116460720945392020-11-27T14:16:01.700-05:002020-11-27T14:16:01.700-05:00Great piece!!! Reminds me of this quote from John ...Great piece!!! Reminds me of this quote from John Gray's book, Straw Dogs:<br /><br />“Today, for the mass of humanity, science and technology embody 'miracle, mystery, and authority'. Science promises that the most ancient human fantasies will at last be realized. Sickness and ageing will be abolished; scarcity and poverty will be no more; the species will become immortal. Like Christianity in the past, the modern cult of science lives on the hope of miracles. But to think that science can transform the human lot is to believe in magic. Time retorts to the illusions of humanism with the reality: frail, deranged, undelivered humanity. Even as it enables poverty to be diminished and sickness to be alleviated, science will be used to refine tyranny and perfect the art of war.”Pariah Sojournerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00731561526759517134noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-89526619269621318452019-10-09T08:39:32.352-04:002019-10-09T08:39:32.352-04:00Human measurement of success is tragically flawed....Human measurement of success is tragically flawed. By all measure, humans are a tragic failure. We have severed all meaningful relationship to the universe we emerged from. Almost every human is a tiny clone of the human species empire; a tiny tyrant stomping, spraying, slaughtering, bombing, poisoning, eradicating, branding, caging, incarcerating, cleansing, modifying...Modern culture is a Death Cult.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13764368897090965072noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-56157364189813704212016-06-09T17:08:28.692-04:002016-06-09T17:08:28.692-04:00You wrote the parameters for 1-4, and as such, you...You wrote the parameters for 1-4, and as such, you can then go on to write entire books on the subject.<br />The actions being taken and the beliefs people hold are not necessarily related. The present System of systems is the result of chaotic, unpredictable forces, no matter how many times we look back at history, we don't consider the things that didn't happen as part of the entire historical influence.<br />There are many so-called "moderns" who do 'get it', but collectively, we are lizard brains living in a controlled environment that is a juggernaut beyond our individual influence. Our philosophers have failed catastrophically, and haven't had the grace to say so. This includes science, religion, politics and anyone writing about humanity's place for the last 100 years or so.<br />We have had the data and the intelligence to understand our connection to nature, our origins and what to do as living animals at least that long. Unfortunately, we have accepted egotistical aggressiveness and hero worship as more important than cooperation and contemplative thought. Our lizard responses were much more profitable during the creation of the Consumer Empire, and the world outside Madison Avenue has spent the time creating excuses for the Empire. (see Joe Bageant's "A Feral Dog Howls in Harvard Yard").<br />You write and you want to make the world change. That's noble. Unfortunately, it isn't conspicuously impressive, and it doesn't sell advertising or automobiles.<br />I'm with Derrick Jensen on this: people have to lose all Hope before they understand the direct path to action that must be taken. Until then, our exponentially consuming train ride must continue.<br />By using the term "modern", you sound like yet another fanatic, pining for the "good ole Godly days" that never existed for humans (unless you are one of the rich exploiting the rest or a terrorist). Our entire perception of the human being's existence must reverse direction (the few should be contributing to the many who are contributing to the environment).<br />Husbandry has always been the purview of the poor who have no other choice or vocation. That doesn't mean all of the other levels and vocations can't be supportive instead of extractive. On top of all that, our modern technology allows us another luxury: relieving ourselves of most of the dangerous and stupid labors of the past. The problem is that we don't know when to stop. Just 1% of the world's population is feeding the rest, so what the hell is everyone else doing that is so damned important? <br />I am also not anti-religion. I'm anti-god. God is only supposed to be the marketing department that gets everyone together for the town meeting. Going to church to worship God is like going to the SuperBowl to watch the half-time show. <br />Nobody wants to discuss that. Atheists hate the idea because it means they don't have a reason (or a target) to hate religions. Religionists hate the idea because they no longer have a "secret" to sell (or trade for your soul). Meanwhile, the community work isn't getting done, and 1/7th of our working days are wasted that are supposed to be spent cooperating and improving the world, not selfishly trying to convince and convert.<br />Nature Creek Farmhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11628016586734984351noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-81624553001860340482016-05-07T17:44:15.129-04:002016-05-07T17:44:15.129-04:00As a friend of, and seemingly necessarily an advoc...As a friend of, and seemingly necessarily an advocate for, Clooney the very smart apartment squirrel from across the alley who visits my apartment complex and stashes in-shell pecans for delayed consumption, I find that Kurt's piece, and his four pinpointed myths, resonate with my own societal-critique sentiments. Of course, so do all of Kurt's pieces, almost. Anyway, I find myself increasingly alienated from seeming modernists who exhibit the four characteristics he describes and who too often tend to be urban (read "city") anthropocentric types with anthropocentric hubris. Bill Murray has said, "It’s hard to win an argument with a smart person, but it’s damn near impossible to win an argument with a stupid person." I'm not sure which category, if not both, non-green or minimalist-green modernists of that genre fall into. But, on item 1, yes, we are embedded in planetary nature, not to mention the extra-planetary cosmos. An associated common vocabulary failing consequently occurs when there is reference to "THE environment" as if it's over there, we're instead over here, and we should be nice to it IF AND ONLY IF we can, which is to say IF AND ONLY IF doing so doesn't interfere with our big-appetite human activities over here. Better and more accurate vocabulary is "OUR" rather than "THE" environment, referring to a wellspring from which we draw sustenance, and other biota draw sustenance, and thus is highly deserving of a conservationist impulse, ethic, and game plan. As regards human sustenance, to describe our earthly situation in Seinfeldian terms, everything in Jerry's refrigerator and everything in Peterman's catalog derives from resources extracted from the biogeophysical world, although in many cases we help out. Natural resources, raw materials...this is basic fourth grade Geography 101. And the same goes for other biota who extract sustenance from the biogeophysical world, and in many cases help out, except with the disadvantage that the HANPP Kurt has identified and acronymed is overrunning a good portion of what should have remained their share. Somehow there seems to be a tacit pair of conflicting beliefs that it was imperious and sinful of European newbies to snatch a huge chunk of North America away from indigenous tribes, but that it's not really imperious or sinful of human beings via HANPP to snatch a huge chunk of the planet away from the other biota. I have big doubts that the second imperiousness will be considered okay with generations and historians five hundred years from now. The scale of that imperiousness, as elaborated in Kurt's discussion of myth 2, has gotten way WAY out of hand.Chris Kuykendallnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-13475848812857173502016-05-03T04:44:09.053-04:002016-05-03T04:44:09.053-04:00I heard such positions and speeches against "...I heard such positions and speeches against "the moderns" many times but still don't get the argument (or the rethoric figure). I think I never met a person who believes in 1.-4. Who exactly is the text talking about? What is the value of using this general label in a pejorative manner for a group of people? Why not be more specific and show which particular behaviors, policies, infrastructures, technologies, persons, etc risk well-being, life, the planet? And propose and work on specific changes? "Moderns" are against change and action? An entire branch of environmentalists has been fighting for "ecological modernization" for decades and is partly successful. And not all major environmental indices are getting worse. Look at the recovering ozone layer over Antarctica. Or recently due to massive deployment of renewable energies global CO2 emissions already stopped growing in spite of exponentially growing global GDP. I'm not saying this is enough but it's already clear that fossil fuels lost the race and it demonstrates that change in the right direction is possible.Roman Brinzaniknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-63040160816599551692016-05-02T19:48:21.204-04:002016-05-02T19:48:21.204-04:00Who are the persuadable from whom we need to learn...Who are the persuadable from whom we need to learn the weaknesses of the modern outlook? The persuadable are open to understanding the world in new ways because something in their experience has shown them that mere belief is not enough to assure that things will turn out all right. It takes action.<br />The majority of young 20 to 40 year olds I speak with have compartmentalized the converging issues and are going about their lives. Tomorrow, is very narrowly defined by the mind set/myth/zeitgeist.<br />Looking at Watzlawick, Weakland and Fisch - Change: Principles of Problem Formation and Problem Resolution - I think the future is saddled with "More of the Same" or, When the Solution(s) Becomes the Problem(s).John Weber https://www.blogger.com/profile/18104568019314685460noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-84301433199993619952016-05-02T00:37:14.324-04:002016-05-02T00:37:14.324-04:00OK - I'm an athiest - how can you not be, cons...OK - I'm an athiest - how can you not be, considering the incredible extent of the known universe - we are but micro mites (probably below the angstrom resolution of anything we have) - but so many of us feel that we are the 'centre of the universe' - we are not .. for whatever reason we have landed on a 'Goldilocks' situation - and we can't envisage how lucky we are (oh well - there are other possible planetary systems out there that might have life!" - sure - and when you understand the complexities that resulted in our appearance (and their extreme unlikleness) .. then you might appreciate the immense improbability that something like us might have evolved else where, is pretty massive (let alone their ability to being able to send messages! - now what was the speed of light again...).<br /><br />It's a GOOD Article - however - talking to a colleague (in environmental management) - community environmental groups (in Aus) are collapsing ..why .. the internet is providing too much distraction.;. funny eh = what is supposed to be enabling us.<br /><br />Do read "Religion for Athiests" - we as a species/culture need ceremony - it seems part of our evolved psyche. http://alaindebotton.com/religion/<br /><br />THINK ABOUT IT<br /><br />HughHughhttp://www.austrop.org.aunoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-90227066809337926312016-05-01T12:55:12.630-04:002016-05-01T12:55:12.630-04:00I am anti-religion. Religion, of whatever stripe, ...I am anti-religion. Religion, of whatever stripe, is bad and destructive. If not physically, then morally, if not morally, then psychologically, because it leads to an abdication of responsibility for past, present and future actions. It is a self replicating, virulent meme that humanity would be better off without. harryflashmanhigsonnoreply@blogger.com