Random thought of the day 6

Comments View as Flat

1. 

   stu7jokes Posted 10:53 am
   23 Aug 2006

   eh?We're in uncharted territory
   So what's new?

   Permalink

2. 

   LegumeSam Posted 1:35 pm
   23 Aug 2006

   symptoms and systemsMuch of the discussion at Gristmill is about the crisis symptoms of a global society that was adapted for survival yesterday but is heedlessly building a disastrous tomorrow.
   Global warming, for instance: most discussions of global warming start from the presumption that, if "carbon emissions" cause global warming, then what we have to do is cut "carbon emissions."  A very few get to the point where they realize that global civilization "emits carbon" because fossil fuels are cheap, and because global civilization has expanded to a scale to where it consumes 85 million barrels of oil every day.  Among those, an even fewer lot bothers to suggest that a wholesale reorganization of global civilization, away from global market competition and toward local cooperation and democratic community, could cut "carbon emissions" more effectively than anything else.
   So what you have is a learning curve, from surface realities toward an understanding of whole systems.  Let me be the first to suggest, here, that "population" is another symptom, and that we need to go from symptoms to systems in examining "population" as well.
   Talking about living human beings as if they were "population" is, to say the least, a mark of distrust.  The reasoning goes that is too much "population," therefore some people are "extra" -- but nobody is really "extra."  All people are an asset; each of us has our own unique creativity, intelligence, chutzpah; we can plant seeds, organize ecosystems, and transform out-of-control economies into sites of ecological production.  The problem, of course, is that we are not doing that.
   If the problem is that people are having too many babies, we need to start by looking at the patriarchal families that produce these babies.  How is it that women's control over their own bodies becomes an object of the penises of alpha males?  How does upbringing become an object of unpaid, female labor?  Once again, with systems based on exploitation it is best to organize the workers (in this case, women), to take control of the systems of production (in this case, "overpopulation").  Recommended reading: Maria Mies' Patriarchy and Accumulation on a World Scale.
   
   http://ecosocialism.blogspot.com/

   Permalink

3. 

   Jason D Scorse Posted 3:14 pm
   23 Aug 2006

   I'm all for humility....And also believe that there are plenty of resources to accomodate 9 billion people while at the same time protecting the environment.
   J.S.
   
   Assistant Professor
   
   Monterey Institute of International Studies
   
   http://policy.miis.edu/faculty/faculty.html?id=171

   Permalink

4. 

   caniscandida Posted 4:27 pm
   23 Aug 2006

   "population," etc.David, what a fascinating shot in the dark!  And rather uncharacteristic, inasmuch as neither a practical lesson nor a moral instruction seems to be in the offing.
   Legume Sam, my leader in most everything, is right to warn us against the use of "population," as a possible symptom of an attitude that may turn out to be in fact inhumane.  And I would add "homo sapiens."  I appreciate your disciplined effort to use morally neutral language.  And I regret your predictable impatience with yet another in the class of "interminable debates," on "population" or whatever.  Really, though, keep your powder dry, there is no need to make this a quarrel.
   By all means, let us continue to use such neutral, scientific terms as "population" and Homo sapiens.  Let us remember always, however, in a most humanist way, that these refer to real human beings, just like us: the relatively few whom we have met; the countless many whom we have not met and never will; all living, breathing, capable of suffering, fearing death.
   This line of thought of yours is excellent: "The past is no longer prologue. Maybe capitalism can keep up? Maybe some reversion to localized communalism? Maybe some combination?"  By now it should be quite clear, I neither like nor do economics.  I leave that to you and LSam, Biodiv and Bart, Patrick and SMLowry and Sunflower and the others.
   For what it is worth, I cling to history, and to evolution.  I do not believe that complete reformation, or revolution, is ever possible.  Where we are now in late August of 2006 CE, we have a deeply rooted tradition of capitalism, associated in many places with some of our most noble Enlightenment values.
   Elsewhere, we find equally deeply rooted resentment against the capitalist Class Triumphant, leaving everyone else hopelessly in their dust.  With that resentment, in the West, are associated certain central biblical values, humility, simplicity, compassion and so forth, as well as a nostalgia for what you refer to as "localized communalism."
   As if that were not enough, we are in the midst of this global warming crisis, which may in fact kill us all, or most of us, before it is through.
   And then, of course, these lovely distractions: Non-Western cultures acting out on how disrespected they have been by the US and the rest of the West.  First in line, the Sunni Muslims.  Next, the Shiites.  Next, the North Koreans.  Next, ...
   Intelligent, sensitive, thoughtful, learned people must always stand up and speak out for what is truly valuable.  But how such talent emerges, and how such talent is recognized, depends on how we evolve.  We cannot control that.
   There is no way to secure the lives of the 9 x 10 to-the-ninth human beings.  The US, whether or not our government has meant well, has got plenty of lessons in how forcing its point-of-view prompts a worse, more violent reaction.  It is time now to sit back, learn to love peace, settle into a Taoist mode, and prepare for lots and lots of casualties.  The medical professions are going to continue to be a growth industry for a very long time.
   At the same time, regarding the global warming crisis, it is time for the US government to take an utterly Taoist approach -- seeing how it has discredited itself in every area, and the very association of any suggestion with the US is the kiss of death -- , and just sit back, and let NGOs handle things.  And of course, the US gov. checks will be there, waiting to be written, quietly.

   Permalink

5. 

   caniscandida Posted 5:23 pm
   23 Aug 2006

   patriarchs and penisesLegume Sam wrote, "If the problem is that people are having too many babies, we need to start by looking at the patriarchal families that produce these babies.  How is it that women's control over their own bodies becomes an object of the penises of alpha males?  How does upbringing become an object of unpaid, female labor?"
   This is an extraordinarily important observation.  Surely there is no other social issue in the world, so important as women's rights.
   And while LSam asks us to consider the penises of alpha males, we should also consider, neither so long nor so hard, the more modest penises of beta and gamma and delta males, who fantasize that they are alpha males.  Such poor excuses for males are perhaps even more responsible within the Muslim world for "honor killings," and for the persecution of women seen outside the home in the company of an unrelated man, or without a head-covering, and in general for maintaining the status of women as infantilized toys.
   This is evil.  Let us all do what we can to win all women their rights, and move beyond this stage of human evolution.

   Permalink

6. 

   amazingdrx Posted 10:44 pm
   23 Aug 2006

   Yep CanisReproductive rights for women would stop over population.  And the rest of their rights would help with everything else.  It all seems so simple.
   
   http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog

   Permalink