Green Anarchy

[ProsperousPrimate]

Is the only sustainable lifestyle a hunter-gatherer life? Is John Zerzan right?

Is living in the present and continuing to just consume everything the only viable option?

Is the only ultimate goal of existence to survive?

Is our current life taking us down the road to destruction and extinction faster than following a true hunter-gatherer lifestyle would lead us to extinction?

Will we be able to keep developing and developing to fix our problems or is the key to understanding the universe always going to be one step further?

Will our future dependants suffer from the endlessness of our greed?

 

[bushwacker bob]

1) No.
2) probably due to inherant stupidity of our species
3)Yes
4)Yes
5)No
6)definately
You forgot to ask whether mother nature will bite us on the bum and cause human extinction to reclaim the planet.

 

[Aaron]

Whilst we're on the subject, who do you think would win in a war between Star Wars and Star Trek? Tricky one.

 

[British Red]

Also, why is there only one "Monopolies Commission"?

 

[durulz]

What if I go into a General Store but want to buy something specific?

 

[sapper1]

I know where the seafront is,I know where the seaside is.But where is the seaback?

 

[Chris the Cat]

Whats another word for Thesaurus?

 

[Matt.S]

Why does 'lisp' have an 's'?

 

[ProsperousPrimate]

Thanks Bushwacker Bob,

Everyone else, I appreciate your replies and I understand that you are all simply stating it's a question that cannot be answered somewhat like: "How long is a piece of string". Yet I was hoping for a somewhat more intelligent descussion as to you opinions on the ideaology of Green Anarchy. I was hoping you'd try a little harder, and put a little more thought into it than that... and then put your witty little remarks.

I personally feel that neither path is the road to a solution, inevitably we are going to face problems in both walks of life. In a hunter Gatherer situation we could face climate changes, epidemics, disasters that we simple may not have the technology to avoid! It may be the case that we would not use up all the resources so fast but if something were to happen it could just be that it is out of our power to stop our extinction. The way we are going however could lead us down a path where we are the resultant force in our decline, on the other hand we are actively putting in the efforts to secure our existance and make it a good one and who knows we could just constantly wing it through existence by finding solutions to the most pressing problems at the time.

 

[gregorach]

Yet I was hoping for a somewhat more intelligent descussion as to you opinions on the ideaology of Green Anarchy.

Oh, go on then.... I think it's an oxymoron. In the absence of regulation, people will do whatever they want. Mostly, what they currently seem to want to do is to burn lots of hydrocarbons in pursuit of social status. Therefore, you can't have "Green Anarchy". Shame really, but there you go...

The problem with any grand utopian vision for the future is that people invariably won't do what you think they should. Even if you could somehow force everybody back into the palaeolithic, some smartypants would only go and invent agriculture again. And I dread to think what you'd need to do to force everyone back into the palaeolithic in the first place - Pol Pot's Year Zero would be a church picnic by comparison.

 

[durulz]

Everyone else, I appreciate your replies and I understand that you are all simply stating it's a question that cannot be answered somewhat like: "How long is a piece of string".

Er, no, I'll think you'll find we were all taking the mick because your original post was so hypothetical as to be meaningless and no one could really be bothered taking it serious..

 

[Waldganger]

"How long is a piece of string"

twice as long as from the middle to one end

 

[ProsperousPrimate]

Er, no, I'll think you'll find we were all taking the mick because your original post was so hypothetical as to be meaningless and no one could really be bothered taking it serious..

My point exactly, you have little intent in hypothesising because it's beyond your scope of existance and because you are happy just tagging along with everybody never questioning the deeper questions in life, the hypothetical questions, in a way that defines intelligence. You cannot be bothered, instead you prove your timid existence by insulting those who dare to question.

You don't have answers to the questions and that instills fear within you. You practice bushcraft because you have an interest in nature, or perhaps you exhibit a survivalistic mindset, on the other hand if someone were to question any deeper questions in life you 'duck and cover' under your metaphorical ammunition of slur.

It is these particular questions that give rise to progress. Someone somewhere questioned our resources and fears their future depletion and so raised the question for all to ponder over with determination and grit to find a solution. The result has been a huge movement in greener technology. Hypothetical questions path the way for realistic solutions; Insults, demotivational responses, only hinder our progress.

Thank you, Gregorach. A nice educated response.

 

[Chris the Cat]

A bit of context would be nice PP!
The way your first group of questions were set lead to bushwacker bobs answers
( all of which I agree with )
Who is Mr Zerzan.
What is a 'True' hunter/gatherer?
My best
Chris.

 

[ProsperousPrimate]

Hi,

In terms of the future of securing our survival for the longest. I just reached a point where I began to question everything we are aiming for and whether we all just a little greedy. Everything now seems to be taking us away from nature and we are constantly looking to substitute everything with lazyness as opposed to perhaps looking towards securing a healthy future.

At first a move to the wild to me, although bizarre, seemed the best answer to alot of the world problems. However now I see differently and think that it's better to have tried, like we are doing now, than to not have bothered at all.

So I was just hoping for opinions on the topic, I apologise for how I came across in later messages but I was just a little disheartened that people didn't seem willing to discuss the topic. I choose to post it here because as bushcraft practicers I felt you would have a little more appreciation for the natural world and would like to discuss it. I could have posted it on a philosophy site I guess but I felt perhaps here would provide the best, and most inspired responses.

Mr Zerzan is the lead philosopher of the movement and a true hunter-gatherer I suppose is defined by the environment in which they are based? Zerzan believes that technology now is focused more on distancing us instead of bringing up together, and life is more focused on efficiency rather than playfulness. We are able to choose who we wish to talk to through the internet and mobile phones and can, if we wish, ignore our neighbours completely and we also typically work long 9-5 hours with emphasis on profit rather than enjoyment; we work to live and don't live to work.

Many Thanks.

 

[British Red]

I long for a world where 9-5 is considered long working hours!

As for a hunter gatherer lifestyle - have you ever considered the population density that such a lifestyle would support? And if so, what would you propose to do with the majority of the current planetary population?

Red

 

[bushwacker bob]

As for a hunter gatherer lifestyle - have you ever considered the population density that such a lifestyle would support? And if so, what would you propose to do with the majority of the current planetary population?

Red

See Q7 on my reply

 

[Tengu]

Its not possible, they are not organised enough.

 

[British Red]

See Q7 on my reply

Good point mate. I wonder though, is the plan for people to die of starvation or some more managed transition?

Also does one expect that we expect to revert to the normalcy of simple life styles...those attractive features of >50% infant mortality, death from infection, such diseases as small pox proving fatal due lack of immunisation, exposing malformed children...... just wondered?

Red

 

[bushwacker bob]

Good point mate. I wonder though, is the plan for people to die of starvation or some more managed transition?

Also does one expect that we expect to revert to the normalcy of simple life styles...those attractive features of >50% infant mortality, death from infection, such diseases as small pox proving fatal due lack of immunisation, exposing malformed children...... just wondered?

Red

Sounds like a plan.