John2045’s Posts

• Poverty and sustainability 8

  Posted 3 years, 8 months agoBasing information on the Earth Council website, the world has 2.1 hectares of biologically productive area per capita at a population level of 6 billion people. That population is currently using the resources of 2.8 hectares per capita, meaning that humans are consuming more than can be replenished. In the U.S., we consume the equivalent of 10.3 hectares per capita.

  In order for the world to be sustainable, in theory anyway, humans would have to reduce consumption of resources by over 33% from current levels. For comparison, we would have to maintain a lifestyle similar to the average person… Read More

• Poverty in a civilized world 11

  Posted 3 years, 9 months agoPoverty is a by-product of civilization. We cannot eradicate it by spending more, organizing more, analyzing more, developing more technology, or curbing consumption. We can only make limited, short-term improvements. This does not mean we should not make the effort to address specific concerns. What else would the action-minded have to do? We do need to be realistic that we are treating a symptom of a human condition. A true solution would require a radical change in our nature. When was the last time there was a truly lasting shift in the way of being human?

All Posts

John2045’s Recent Comments

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Enviro friendly kayaks

  Another option is buying used equipment. That would allow choosing the best material without the anxiety hangover.

  Though kayaking is human powered, how about the transportation to Alaska? Are there other impacts such as disruption of habitat that should be thrown into the mix?

  Maybe the most environmentally friendly activity would be watching Nature on a used b&w TV.On Umbra on kayak materials posted 3 years, 1 month ago 2 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Us versus Them

  What doesn't work for me is looking at another group, class, corporation, or institution and making assumptions that they are different than we are or that they are the root of the problem or if they would only change.  The first step is to look at ourselves and determine how we are going to live. If we cannot change ourselves how can we expect to change others. Institutions and corporations are made up of individuals.  We try to make a living and succeed at the role we have. We are all faced with the same choices.  We don't always make the same or the right choice.

  It is the worst case of powerlessness to look at them and say they need to change or look to some organization or government to make things right.

  Our institutions, corporations, governments, families, and ourselves are all part of and result of a shared human condition.  THERE IS NO THEM THERE.

  The only chance of making a difference is changing one person at a time beginning with ourselves.

  The difficulty there is, who is standing outside the realm of ignorance to know what is right?On Poverty and sustainability posted 3 years, 8 months ago 8 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Institutions are people too

  That is a good question about the contribution of organizaitons on consumption. I would say that companies are consuming resources in order to supply the end user. That is why they are in business.  It comes down to us as individuals to take responsibility for how we spend our money.  If companies did not have customers they would stop consuming resources.  As the world's most voracious consumers it falls on us.

  It is the people running the companies and making individual decisions that are responsible, too. If we choose not to make the necessary decisions, they will be made for us.On Poverty and sustainability posted 3 years, 8 months ago 8 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  To Clarify

  The disturbing aspect of social movements is that the original message becomes corrupted as the movement becomes popular or even mainstream. If you look at the original message of Jesus, Ghandi, MLK Jr., et al. and then at their legacy there is a major disconnect. I find it ironic that the US recognizes Martin Luther King Day when his objective was to overthrow the estabished order that sanctioned injustice and continues to. Nor do I think his intention was to create the opportunity for the disenfranchized to participate in the middle class American dream. What better way is there to kill the dream than to make it the establishment's own.

  What I understand as the heart of the message is not to allow equal access to the debased power structure of the time but to create something different. It seems that human nature takes over and the goal of the followers becomes personal or group power, comfort, and possession. So in the end it becomes more of the same. I question the effectiveness of a movement beyond the individual.

  My remark that activism is a rich, white person's luxury refers to those who are in the "haves" camp, myself included, who out of guilt or sympathy or good intentions want to bring the disenfranchized in.  I think it is we who should go to them. (Recognizing that making the distinction between us and them being part of the problem in the first place.)

   On Poverty in a civilized world posted 3 years, 8 months ago 11 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  A few more words

  Because I think poverty is a by-product of civilization does not mean that I condone either poverty or civilization.

  What are the options?

  Raise the standard of living for all impoverished people? The earth cannot sustain the 6.5 billion people as it is.  In 20 years, 9.6 billion. Even if we try to live a green eco-friendly life it will not be sustainable.

  Revert to a hunter-gatherer existence for all of us?

  Eliminate warfare that feeds on and creates poverty?

  Start a cultural revolution that will transform society? Should we use Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Marxism, Indian independence movement,or American civil rights movement as examples of successful revolutions?

  There are precious few options for fixing things.

  That does not mean that we should be complacent with the status quo. On the contrary,  the approach is much more difficult than fixing other peoples' problems.

  Use Ghandi as an example. He did not preach at people about what they ought to do.  He changed his life and asked people to follow him. To protest the British control and taxation of salt, he gathered his own salt.  To protest the importation of British cloth made from Indian raw materials, he spun his own cloth.  

  So, if we complain about the economic system, pollution, poverty then we have to be willing to live outside of the systems that maintain it.  But, how many of us are willing to give up the car, the petro-chemicals, the TV, the lattes, the jobs?  I don't know if I am.  Until then things may be different but they will never change.  That is why environmentalism and social activism is a rich, white person's luxury.

  We are chasing our tails.On Poverty in a civilized world posted 3 years, 9 months ago 11 Responses