System in Crisis - Whole Environments Wasted

How our system works now:

Planned obsolescence: in industrial design is a policy of deliberately planning or designing a product with a limited useful life, so it will become obsolete or nonfunctional after a certain period. Planned obsolescence has potential benefits for a producer because to obtain continuing use of the product the consumer is under pressure to purchase again, whether from the same manufacturer (a replacement part or a newer model), or from a competitor which might also rely on planned obsolescence. (1)

How do we get off this roller coaster?
Scheme of sustainable development: at the confluence of three constituent parts.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/e4422895a849.png[/atsimg]

Focus on Sustainability. The capacity to endure. In ecology, the word describes how biological systems remain diverse and productive over time. Long-lived and healthy wetlands and forests are examples of sustainable biological systems. For humans, sustainability is the potential for long-term maintenance of well being, which has environmental, economic, and social dimensions.

We must recognize that we share this planet. We must acknowledge that our impact on the planet is not linear, it is part of the circle of life and we must understand that we have a responsibility to others (human and non-human, equally) and we must embrace and live within the rules handed to all those who live on Earth. Our actions are like ripples on water, moving further outward and having a wider effect on space, as it goes. We will thrive, or we will not, depending on our decisions going forward.

So true, it's not just capitalism that destroys ecosystems, China is doing far worse to itself than America has.
We should do a far better job of being stewards of our Earth, we certainly can't replace it and when we develop we need to think in those terms - what are we destroying? how can remediate the loss in resources and biodiversity?
Corporations need to be restrained and forest product substitutes need to be placed in the market.
Real rain forest products need to be harvested by the indigenous people and used collectively to fund their tribe.
Some of that money should go to government protection of that forest.
We need to strive for negative population growth - I'm not for Chinese style controls but hey, people need land and there's only so much of it.
Our monetary system needs a huge overhaul and redistribution of wealth, but again not Communist style.
We should all barter and buy local as much as possible,
Recycling is good but to never have used is even better.
Simplicity has it's own virtues that Western civilization seems slow to grasp.
Thanks for posting Lady

reply to post by LadySkadi


Of course entire environments are wasted.

While everyone was complaining about the BP PLC disaster with the Deepwater Horizon nonsense, the eco-system was long ago going to the crappy side of life, due to corporate, civil, and Government negligence, corruption, and malfeasance.

What am I talking about?

Quote from : Wikipedia : Great Pacific Garbage Patch

The Great Pacific Garbage Patch, also described as the Pacific Trash Vortex, is a gyre of marine litter in the central North Pacific Ocean located roughly between 135° to 155°W and 35°N to 42°N.

The patch extends over an indeterminate area, with estimates ranging very widely depending on the degree of plastic concentration used to define the affected area.

Although many media and advocacy reports have suggested the patch extends over an area larger than the continental U.S, recent research sponsored by the National Science Foundation suggests the affected area may be twice the size of Texas, while a recent study concluded that the patch might be even smaller.

This can be attributed to the fact that there is no specific standard for determining the boundary between the “normal” and “elevated” levels of pollutants and what constitutes being part of the patch.

The size is determined by a higher-than normal degree of concentration of pelagic debris in the water. Recent data collected from Pacific albatross populations suggest there may be two distinct zones of concentrated debris in the Pacific.

The Patch is characterized by exceptionally high concentrations of pelagic plastics, chemical sludge, and other debris that have been trapped by the currents of the North Pacific Gyre.

Despite its size and density, the patch is not visible from satellite photography since it primarily consists of suspended particulates in the upper water column.

Since plastics break down to ever smaller polymers, concentrations of submerged particles are not visible from space, nor do they appear as a continuous debris field.

Instead, the patch is defined as an area in which the mass of plastic debris in the upper water column is significantly higher than average.

American's are fickle people.

They only truly care about something if it makes the news.

Or if it affects them directly.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/3fbcf4478805.jpg[/atsimg]

Great thread, LadySkadi, but I wonder if this world will sustain us for much longer.

Charles Moore: Sailing the Great Pacific Garbage Patch


Not if the selfishness of mankind does not take a back seat to our desires to sustain life.

Originally posted by SpartanKingLeonidas

Not if the selfishness of mankind does not take a back seat to our desires to sustain life.

Well, true - but what is the catalyst? It does seem to be the case that the majority of humankind will only think far enough ahead to understand what impacts them in the moment and in the near future, but cannot fathom what will impact them in the generation, next. Our strength and weakness is the determination to bend the environment to our will, to our benefit - it's a double edge sword.

Fantastic special. A "what if" scenario that is not just a worst case scenario, but a real possibility. View as a playlist: Here

Part 1 of 9

It is the weathy capitalist nations that are doing far more for their and the worlds environments than Russia China India etc - generally in the third world people do not give a rats arse about the environment or wildlife -so long as they can make a buck out of it - it is only the wealthy and educated West that can afford the luxury of caring for it!

As for the Earth being in crisis - it is far more robust than people give it credit for, you are being played like a sucker by propagandists into adopting political stances.

Originally posted by JohhnyBGood

As for the Earth being in crisis - it is far more robust than people give it credit for, you are being played like a sucker by propagandists into adopting political stances.

You will have to do much better than that post, to prove this point.
Looking forward to something more...

An interesting proposal, is making making environmental destruction a criminal offense the way to go?

Lawyer Polly Higgins is spearheading a campaign to have 'ecocide' recognised by the UN as an international crime against peace. But how will this work in practice?

Ecocide has always been a moral crime, but British lawyer Polly Higgins sees it differently: 'until it is legally a crime it's not going to be thought of as wrong. Banks are willing to put our money - public money - into some of the most destructive practices on the planet because they see nothing wrong with it.'

Higgins is leading a new campaign to have ecocide recognised by the United Nations as an international crime against peace. She defines ecocide as 'the extensive destruction, damage to or loss of ecosystem(s) of a given territory, whether by human agency or by other causes, to such an extent that peaceful enjoyment by the inhabitants of that territory has been severely diminished.'

Ecocide: making environmental destruction a criminal offence

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/4c71b3ad6442.jpg[/atsimg]

reply to post by LadySkadi


yes i would agree, however you can gaurentee it would be a law that only applied to the little people, do you think big oil corporations etc would accept such a law and risk themselves being prosecuted.

in the ideal world it would be a good idea, but it would only be enforced on those who are not one of them.
sorry to think that way but it is how i see things work on a daily basis on many others subjects, so this would be no different.

Nature is perfect balance and harmony. Think of nature as a perfectly balanced scale.

This is what humans do to nature.

I got to the part in the video that said it was made by the TIDES Foundation and stopped.

If you don't think that group's agenda is just as large, nefarious and tyrannical as that of the corporate capitalist pigs they claim are the enemy of the environment you are deluded.

Do we have some dirty places, sure but redistribution of the wealth from the 1st the 3rd world so we can all be 2nd world nations equally is not the answer. Sucks to live in a country where food don’t grow but as a farmer here in the US you are not getting me to work so you can eat while you give me nothing in return - sucks huh?

Life is not fair; it is a competition plain and simple depending on your belief system it has been from the beginning (Cain and Able or perhaps); belief systems aside, competition has been ongoing since the first cave man killed another who hunted deer on "his" lands to modern times.

It is human nature to compete for resources - if you want to gather them for your own, family, tribe, state or nation you have to understand that others are going to have less.

Resources are indeed finite of course but mutable; today's surplus of one resource is tomorrow's shortage...

Today's shortage is tomorrow’s inspiration to find something else that will take its place.

If we were truly in dire straits as the Eco-Whackos suggest all manner of time and effort would be going into the development of alternatives; however, as it stands that is not happening because the "shortages" of resources are simply manufactured to exploit profitability.

You are being manipulated into a propaganda arm for the very corporations you so despise to make more profit off the perceived shortages.

This thread isn't about me and whether I'm being manipulated by corporations, though 2 posters have both ended their contributions by saying so. Golf66 gets the star for presenting another viewpoint though and it's appreciated. For the record, eco-whackos is a great term and I've used it to describe many an organization, with E.L.F. being at the top of the list and PETA not far behind.

The thread is meant to be a discussion about the balance between consumption and conservation and our need to work responsibly within the natural limits more importantly; understanding that we must not sacrifice tomorrow with the expense of today.

S & F

I was meaning to jump in earlier.
Great thread, well worth the read. Lot's of great info posted so far.

BUMP

Originally posted by LadySkadi
This thread isn't about me and whether I'm being manipulated by corporations, though 2 posters have both ended their contributions by saying so. Golf66 gets the star for presenting another viewpoint though and it's appreciated.

Lady -

I appologize for being a lazy writer; I more often than not use "you" when I should use "one" or in this case I reallty meant "you" in the sense of the collective group of people who deamonize corporations and want to restrict people's consumption and competition for rescources as IMO is the natural state of human affairs.

While, it was perhaps not entirely clear I did not mean you individually in this instance.

Sorry!

@Golf66: Semantics. 'meh.

***

So, just to be clear; there are no reasonable steps to finding acceptable middle ground between the Corp. capitalists and the Eco-whackos?

Probably not.

What about the the silent majority who must pay the price?

Originally posted by LadySkadiWhat about the the silent majority who must pay the price?

I am a proponent of sustainable agriculture – actually I am an organic farmer raising certified organic soy, alfalfa hay, soy, cow and goat dairy along with free range eggs.

I don’t really make much money off the whole thing but between my military retirement and the money we make off the milk mostly we break even, having a little to save for the future and live the quiet lifestyle we chose.

The key word there is chose because it is my choice to live that what and conduct my business that way; it is not the purview of the government or other individuals. I honestly could care less if children are starving in Africa as it is not my responsibility to feed them just like it is not for them to decide how we live.

The key to sustainable living is letting the world reach it’s natural equilibrium between the local population and the environment absent the intervention and machinations of governments or groups to “engineer” or “regulate” balance.

We make the issues worse IMO when it comes to resource competition by providing “aid” to struggling nations and people in the name of “good” or “humanity”. It does little good to send food aid to Haiti or other places that are in fact worse (Say, Sudan, Ethiopia and other places I have seen first-hand.) where the people have become dependent on it and have procreated way past the point of providing for themselves.

If we did not sustain their population with aid and let some die off like I do here on the farm with livestock when I don’t have enough fodder the problem would never have surfaced in the first place.

A struggling and hungry heard cannot in nature reproduce quickly. It may sound harsh and cruel and unfair but life is all of those things.

The key to the issue of resource scarcity is the opposite of intervention IMO it is the absence of it so people will have to suffer the consequences of their poor choices. Perhaps if people had to suffer watching their offspring die horribly they would no longer produce more than they can sustain.

We all know where babies come from and to create more than one can provide for with his/her own access to resources is the most selfish and inhumane act I can fathom. If one does not have enough resources to satisfy their own needs then they need to be, either smart enough, driven enough or violent enough (likely all three) to procure them or one will die – it’s fairly simple.

That applies to the individual, a family group, a village, a city, nation or the world itself. We (all of those groups) are not created equal and to force it through some arbitrary desire for the common good is actually a horrible force for evolution of the species.

Not all people (or groups of people) are as intelligent, physically gifted or unfortunately graced with a favorable geography at birth – to sustain artificially the weak, stupid and the lazy at the expense of the others is antithetical to nature and why we are in the current predicament.

Once we reach the tipping point the earth will cull the human population to the correct size – in the interim some will thrive some will wither and suffer…its simply nature.

Again, many think me cruel for this view; however, in the end it is nature in action and there is in my opinion nothing more perfect than nature and its own ability to manage and regulate its resources.

In the end I deal with what I can affect, which in my case is the 40 acres I live on and the newly accquired 100 that I will pay for in the fall after I sell my feeders to the market.

Is that more than I "need"? Most probably, but that is not for others to deside I am as Charile would say, at this current point in my life - WINING! However, that can change at any time...

reply to post by Golf66


Awesome post. Almost my exact views on this subject. For some, allowing nature to take it's course is only the "right thing to do" when it is beneficial. Conditions will always oscillate as it has forever on this planet. Oh well.