Fascism

[shankara]

You’d think they would be happy more people would be able to buy their items and that in turns puts more money into their pockets.

Corporations are made up of working people ya know?

Actually it's not so much your lack of any basis for your views that bothers me so much as that you simply repeat time after time "the status quo is good and how it should be" in a variety of different words. It's obvious that you have little to contribute to this thread, you seem to even be unaware of the definition of "self-sufficiency", so maybe y'know go derail some other discussion, it gets kind of boring.

Like I said, in order to understand alter-Globalization you really should read some books. You never know, you might find that a process of sincere reflection based upon actual facts might cause you to change your views, if you are capable of such a thing.

 

[shankara]

I’m sure there’s a way to do it that doesn’t perpetuate this screwed up global system, I just don’t know how that would be. Maybe if imports/exports were limited to specialty products that can’t be made on your own soil? Idk. When I think self sufficiency I think make and produce everything I use and consume myself. Or barter with local people.

Maybe there could even be a system with some degree of international trade, just a kind of trade based on economic justice. Of course the ideal is that people produce what they need for themselves or for their local community, but still there are things which could be better manufactured in other places, like plants which grow better in some climates or whatever. I think there is no problem with trade and enterprise, it doesn't need the "benevolent" hand of the state controlling it as in Communism, the problem is the imbalance. If it was a case of small scale producers trading with other small scale producers there would be no possibility of the development of monopolies like the corporations which have enough power to control the market, there would equitable exchange for the proper use value of the goods.

@Aero

 

[justjess]

Maybe there could even be a system with some degree of international trade, just a kind of trade based on economic justice. Of course the ideal is that people produce what they need for themselves or for their local community, but still there are things which could be better manufactured in other places, like plants which grow better in some climates or whatever. I think there is no problem with trade and enterprise, it doesn't need the "benevolent" hand of the state controlling it as in Communism, the problem is the imbalance. If it was a case of small scale producers trading with other small scale producers there would be no possibility of the development of monopolies like the corporations which have enough power to control the market, there would equitable exchange for the proper use value of the goods.

@Aero

I looked into producing my own bananas in a greenhouse. (I have some absurd self sustainable life goals, don’t judge). I live in the northeast and it gets bitterly cold in the winter but I wanted to see if it was possible... the amount of money and energy it would take to keep a greenhouse hot enough to allow someone in the northeast to grow bananas is Atleast comparable to the amount of energy used transporting them from more compatible climates. To try to do it in a sustainable way would require a whole lot of effort, investment and answered prayers. The conclusion I came to was that maybe we just weren’t going to eat bananas anymore.

point: if there’s a way to facilitate sustainable trade while staying consistant with the spirit of self sustainability that would be fantastic, my imagination is just not that grand perhaps cuz I can’t think of one

 

[shankara]

I looked into producing my own bananas in a greenhouse. (I have some absurd self sustainable life goals, don’t judge). I live in the northeast and it gets bitterly cold in the winter but I wanted to see if it was possible... the amount of money and energy it would take to keep a greenhouse hot enough to allow someone in the northeast to grow bananas is Atleast comparable to the amount of energy used transporting them from more compatible climates. To try to do it in a sustainable way would require a whole lot of effort, investment and answered prayers. The conclusion I came to was that maybe we just weren’t going to eat bananas anymore.

point: if there’s a way to facilitate sustainable trade while staying consistant with the spirit of self sustainability that would be fantastic, my imagination is just not that grand perhaps cuz I can’t think of one

I guess there is a balance. All the fascist regimes have been somewhat nationalistic, kind of in the way that Trump is now. Personally I don't see the problem with international trade, yeah there's some greenhouse gas emissions but that's not the most significant thing maybe, it's more the kind of inequalities which are inherent in the system.

But maybe, like you said, we will have to learn to live without things like bananas. Or even go and travel the world by foot in search of bananas, if one is the intrepid type. Even if it's that way, I'd much rather live in a small agrarian community than in a city surrounded by smog and shop windows. All government kind of tends towards fascism, there is always the aggressive imposition of authority on the people, control by repression and violence, fascism is just the same system with the masks off. Look at how they are treating protestors in the USA, spraying them with tear gas so they get out of the way so Trump can go to church, or so I heard.

All this scapegoating of the Antifa doesn't seem right to me, they aren't authoritarian communists seeking to install some dictatorship. In my experience they are mostly pretty decent and sincere people who have an actual love of freedom, not the sham "American dream" kind. Maybe they go too far, but resisting fascism in itself is a laudable aim.

 

[justjess]

I guess there is a balance. All the fascist regimes have been somewhat nationalistic, kind of in the way that Trump is now. Personally I don't see the problem with international trade, yeah there's some greenhouse gas emissions but that's not the most significant thing maybe, it's more the kind of inequalities which are inherent in the system.

But maybe, like you said, we will have to learn to live without things like bananas. Or even go and travel the world by foot in search of bananas, if one is the intrepid type. Even if it's that way, I'd much rather live in a small agrarian community than in a city surrounded by smog and shop windows. All government kind of tends towards fascism, there is always the aggressive imposition of authority on the people, control by repression and violence, fascism is just the same system with the masks off. Look at how they are treating protestors in the USA, spraying them with tear gas so they get out of the way so Trump can go to church, or so I heard.

All this scapegoating of the Antifa doesn't seem right to me, they aren't authoritarian communists seeking to install some dictatorship. In my experience they are mostly pretty decent and sincere people who have an actual love of freedom, not the sham "American dream" kind. Maybe they go too far, but resisting fascism in itself is a laudable aim.

Ditto

 

[Hon33]

Few countries surely, have all the resources and all of the skills they need to be entirely self sufficient, not to mention climate, land etc.

 

[justjess]

Few countries surely, have all the resources and all of the skills they need to be entirely self sufficient, not to mention climate, land etc.

Depends on your definition of necessities. We managed for like thousands of years

 

[Aero]

When I think self-sufficient I'm also thinking about prosperity. Like what is a self-sufficiency without prosperity? Now apparently the Amish population has exploded recently. That may be because they all have 14 children, or maybe it's because they are, by definition prosperous. The Amish also exists under its own form of fascism.

What the Amish do good, they do really good. I'm talking about things like saving money and avoiding debt. In business, the Amish are considered a sure bet. The reason that is, is because of the authoritarianism type system they live under. The Amish don't have a lot of the freedoms that a great many enjoy. They can't owe the electric company 500 dollars because they don't have electricity.

In any case, the reason fascist systems work is because of force. The Amish just have a method of force that's really cheap, almost costless even. The United States for example has a method of force that's extremely costly, inflated even. Nevermind the fact that we only ever needed mass mobilization 1 time in our entire history. It's like we are still living in the 1940s and the Nazis are coming, or the red army.

 

[justjess]

When I think self-sufficient I'm also thinking about prosperity. Like what is a self-sufficiency without prosperity? Now apparently the Amish population has exploded recently. That may be because they all have 14 children, or maybe it's because they are, by definition prosperous. The Amish also exists under its own form of fascism.

What the Amish do good, they do really good. I'm talking about things like saving money and avoiding debt. In business, the Amish are considered a sure bet. The reason that is, is because of the authoritarianism type system they live under. The Amish don't have a lot of the freedoms that a great many enjoy. They can't owe the electric company 500 dollars because they don't have electricity.

In any case, the reason fascist systems work is because of force. The Amish just have a method of force that's really cheap, almost costless even. The United States for example has a method of force that's extremely costly, inflated even. Nevermind the fact that we only ever needed mass mobilization 1 time in our entire history. It's like we are still living in the 1940s and the Nazis are coming, or the red army.

Again I think it really depends on what your definition of prosperity is. Typically that’s tied to materialistic notions. I’m trying to move past that. It’s a trap. And imo it’s an illusion that prosperity needs to be materialistic in nature.

 

[Lisa]

You clearly understand economics better than people who actually have some knowledge of economics.

Thanks!

 

[Lisa]

Actually it's not so much your lack of any basis for your views that bothers me so much as that you simply repeat time after time "the status quo is good and how it should be" in a variety of different words. It's obvious that you have little to contribute to this thread, you seem to even be unaware of the definition of "self-sufficiency", so maybe y'know go derail some other discussion, it gets kind of boring.

Like I said, in order to understand alter-Globalization you really should read some books. You never know, you might find that a process of sincere reflection based upon actual facts might cause you to change your views, if you are capable of such a thing.

What was wrong in what I said?

 

[Aero]

Again I think it really depends on what your definition of prosperity is. Typically that’s tied to materialistic notions. I’m trying to move past that. It’s a trap. And imo it’s an illusion that prosperity needs to be materialistic in nature.

Typically people are thinking let's build skyscrapers because they are awesome.

I'm thinking more about the necessity and scalability aspect though. Skyscrapers may never be necessary, but sewers probably. Do you want us to completely turn back to nature? Prosperity and self-sufficiency is great, but I don't think it should mean someone can't be an astronaut or something.

 

[justjess]

Typically people are thinking let's build skyscrapers because they are awesome.

I'm thinking more about the necessity and scalability aspect though. Skyscrapers may never be necessary, but sewers probably. Do you want us to completely turn back to nature? Prosperity and self-sufficiency is great, but I don't think it should mean someone can't be an astronaut or something.

Tbh I never thought about this on a macro scale. There are septic systems you know and while exploring space is nice it probably isn’t necessary. I think our technology has advanced far enough to support self sufficiency or it is atleast almost there. I just see all these systems outside of that as power structures and when there’s a power structure there is always a winner and a loser. Maybe I’m just so fed up with the state of the world I’m romanticizing something that ultimately is just a different set of problems? Hard to be objective concerning yourself.

 

[Maes17]

I looked into producing my own bananas in a greenhouse. (I have some absurd self sustainable life goals, don’t judge). I live in the northeast and it gets bitterly cold in the winter but I wanted to see if it was possible... the amount of money and energy it would take to keep a greenhouse hot enough to allow someone in the northeast to grow bananas is Atleast comparable to the amount of energy used transporting them from more compatible climates. To try to do it in a sustainable way would require a whole lot of effort, investment and answered prayers. The conclusion I came to was that maybe we just weren’t going to eat bananas anymore.

point: if there’s a way to facilitate sustainable trade while staying consistant with the spirit of self sustainability that would be fantastic, my imagination is just not that grand perhaps cuz I can’t think of one

What’s wrong withe having self sustaining life goals? Bananas would be a good food source.

I have the same goals too.
More so after we had our son.
When you have a kid, out of state, miles away from immediate family. Having/developing those skills helps.

What some people see as conspiracy, bug out, hoarding psychos. Being self sustainable is an extremely valuable skill to have.

And yeah. If the situation ever arises. Having strong trades within the region helps

 

[Maes17]

Typically people are thinking let's build skyscrapers because they are awesome.

I'm thinking more about the necessity and scalability aspect though. Skyscrapers may never be necessary, but sewers probably. Do you want us to completely turn back to nature? Prosperity and self-sufficiency is great, but I don't think it should mean someone can't be an astronaut or something.

Focusing on necessities.
Hard thing is though to supply to a high populace of civilization. You’d have to artificially duplicate some materials. Even food.

Technology helps with that

 

[Lisa]

What some people see as conspiracy, bug out, hoarding psychos. Being self sustainable is an extremely valuable skill to have.

Do those people have land somewhere where they bug out to? If not what land will they bug out to? I never understand how they think they will just be able to get to that land. What if they come for you before you can bug out? Sure seems like a waste of time then, because you can’t plan for every eventuality.

 

[Maes17]

Do those people have land somewhere where they bug out to? If not what land will they bug out to? I never understand how they think they will just be able to get to that land. What if they come for you before you can bug out? Sure seems like a waste of time then, because you can’t plan for every eventuality.

Maybe they do. Maybe they don’t.
Being self sufficient is still a good skill to have

 

[Aero]

Tbh I never thought about this on a macro scale. There are septic systems you know and while exploring space is nice it probably isn’t necessary. I think our technology has advanced far enough to support self sufficiency or it is atleast almost there. I just see all these systems outside of that as power structures and when there’s a power structure there is always a winner and a loser. Maybe I’m just so fed up with the state of the world I’m romanticizing something that ultimately is just a different set of problems? Hard to be objective concerning yourself.

Septic systems and recycling can work great. And yeah maybe I'll buy that NASA is unnecessary.

Coincidentally, I romanticism about Utopia all the time. In my mind, Utopia doesn't have any fascism. The problems are all solved by some futuristic technology. Of course, I might have some misconceptions about power. Like I think if a power structure was kept small but laser-focused on 1 job real checks and balances should be possible.

 

[justjess]

Septic systems and recycling can work great. And yeah maybe I'll buy that NASA is unnecessary.

Coincidentally, I romanticism about Utopia all the time. In my mind, Utopia doesn't have any fascism. The problems are all solved by some futuristic technology. Of course, I might have some misconceptions about power. Like I think if a power structure was kept small but laser-focused on 1 job real checks and balances should be possible.

When this semester is over I’m reading Walden -2, different kind of utopia but I’m definately intrigued by the idea.

I think humans have a natural tendency to organize some sort of power structure. But a power structure that is communally decided should not be oppressive and if it becomes so then the community should be able to end it at the first hint of trouble.

 

[Aero]

When this semester is over I’m reading Walden -2, different kind of utopia but I’m definately intrigued by the idea.

I think humans have a natural tendency to organize some sort of power structure. But a power structure that is communally decided should not be oppressive and if it becomes so then the community should be able to end it at the first hint of trouble.

Lol, that book sounds like it would terrify the average fascist. I wish I had time to read whole books anymore, that's how I envision Utopia anyway. Just reading and having fun educational experiences. Like field trips to see how things work. Idk about going all-in on communal living though.

An A.I program can simulate as many scenarios as it takes to find the best form of government. I know, everyone freaks out when someone brings up A.I. and I'll probably get accused of following universal mechanism or some kind of determinism. I'm not being deterministic, I'm saying let's at least see what the machines say.