[Ferretlover]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', ' ')... But humans haven't "always" formed cities and governments; this kind of society is the minority among human cultures, probably only about 10,000 years old or so. That's what I mean by "civilization." We can devise different ways to live, because people have done so in the past.
That's a goal quite a lot of people have, actually, to find a different way to live.

[Ferretlover]

I don't mind if you don't mind! lol

[Ludi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ferretlover', 'I') can not immediately see why it would be ludicrous for you, or anyone else, to devise a goal for humanity.

[Ludi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ferretlover', 'I')MHO, whenever there are more than one, Maybe two, people together, there is always some form of hierarchy established-for defense, who eats first, etc.

[Ferretlover]

"I think I already explained why I think it would ludicrous for me to devise a goal for humanity. It's just not something I feel qualified to do and sort of doesn't fit in with my view of my place in the world.
Is it important to you that I devise a goal for humanity? Or is it unimportant?
I guess I'm not sure if this is something we should continue to try to discuss, or not...."

I have re-read this entire thread, and do not see where you explain why it would be ludicrous for you to devise a goal.
Why are you not qualified? If it is because you have apparently assumed that you would be part of the 'die-off," that would be silly. We are ALL going to die sooner or later. That would not invalidate your chance/choice to come to some sort of decision.
Why doesn't it fit in with your view of your place in the world?
Is it important to me that you devise a goal? Not necessarily.
Is it important to me that you understand that I consider your opinion (and ideas) just as 'important' as anyone else's? Yes.
Further discussion? Maybe, maybe not. Are we just wearing each other out trying to define semantics? Are we developing some rational perimeters for defining goals?
Or, do we just need to absorb what we've discussed so far, and pick up the discussion again later?

There is Always a hierarchy. Even in chaos.

And, I think I am reading civilization as 'culture.' I don't think that civilization is the only way to live. I will bet that there are many people who don't want to interact with civilization-but, I doubt there are many who can live without the benefits provided by civilization/society. There have been times when I thought I would like to live alone-with extremely limited interaction with others. There are so many stupid (unable to think) people, and ignorant people (recognize that their thinking processes are lacking or flawed, AND are too lazy to upgrade).. But, I digress.......
I have often thought that the world of 'Star Trek' societies might be nice to live in-where most people worked together towards a goal of seeking knowledge.
Maybe just a society where the primary goal is NOT acquisition only. ... sigh...

[JPL]

It is in the nature of humans to think great thoughts, and then go and fuck up on the details (grin).

Many of our greatest thinkers have become such only by understanding their faults. Withdrawal from the world does not mean you have failed to cast your dice on the table (grin).

JP

[BigTex]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JPL', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('BigTex', '
')Communist systems have the elite who decide what's a want and what's a need.

[JPL]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('BigTex', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JPL', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('BigTex', '
')Communist systems have the elite who decide what's a want and what's a need.

[BigTex]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JPL', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('BigTex', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JPL', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('BigTex', '
')Communist systems have the elite who decide what's a want and what's a need.

[JPL]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('BigTex', '
')Is going back several hundred years to a group that presumably long ago abandoned its communalism and existed before Marx even came up with his worker/capitalist struggle supposed to be an example of how Communism works or an example of how it doesn't work?

Al Haig was once talking about how the post-Soviet Union Moscow was bustling with capitalism. He said "you can go to certain hotels in Moscow and it almost feels like you are in Beverly Hills, except there aren't any Communists."

I'm all for the idea of sharing with the less fortunate and the government representing a safety net in some situations. The only things that Communist nations seem really good at, though, are repressing dissent within their borders and operating elaborate spying operations because it is easier to steal a capitalist economy's technology than build their own.

See "The Sword and the Shield" for an eye-opening look at how the Soviet Union found it more cost effective to steal military technology from the West than to develop it themselves. The bizarre irony of this was that U.S. defense contractors were essentially competing with the last generation of their own technology for much of the Cold War. The defense industry would moan: "The Russians' hardware is no more than one generation behind ours. We have to spend more to expand that gap." They didn't realize that the Russians would ALWAYS be, at most, one generation behind the U.S. because it took about one generation of weapons technology to steal it, reverse engineer it and get it into production.

[BigTex]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JPL', 'O')K just to clarify:

Firstly, I am not a communist.

Second, the Russians have never been communist - that dream died (arguably) when Trotsky had an ice-pick stuck in his head for daring to suggest that they should be.

Likewise the Chinese, North Koreans etc., etc., are no more communist states than I am a fairy godmother.

Communism is a pure ideal, difficult to make work in practice, but the problem is perhaps with either human nature or timing, rather than the idea itself (grin).

The Diggers, the Levellers & the Luddites have been influential on left-wing thought around the world for centuries - they continue to be so.

I think these sorts of ideas are worth revisiting for a post-peak world, because I think one thing IS abundently clear from the general 'peak-oil-depletion-global-warming' discussion. Namely that Marx was right about ONE detail at least:

Capitalism - the idea of infinite growth and eventual prosperity for all levels of the pile - is really just about exploitation. Grabbing what you can from the pile before the other guys get there.

Well, guess what? The pile just ran out. Oops... ...So maybe we should read those left-wing manuals again - if only to remind ourselves what happens after Capitalism blows up...

JP

[bshirt]

Good posts everywhere...nice!

My blind guess is that no government can resist complete corruption very long. As many previous have stated on this thread (indirectly), civilization is grossly overrated.

It's an open question if modern civilization is a better deal for humanity than the age old hunter/gatherer society, huh? But even if so, there's just way, way to many people for that, right? I wish I was smart enough to know the answer.

[Alcassin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('BigTex', '
')Is going back several hundred years to a group that presumably long ago abandoned its communalism and existed before Marx even came up with his worker/capitalist struggle supposed to be an example of how Communism works or an example of how it doesn't work?

[Dan_Browne]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', '
')This is a core issue on this site, but people kind of dance around it. I'd like to see it addressed.

[mos6507]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Dan_Browne', '
')So New York City and California are basically screwed but there are some decent liveable places to live that will make it through.
You might be flat broke but probably not dead.

[Zardoz]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', 'Y')ou are assuming that population remains fixed. Do you really think people will lay down and die? There [s]could[/s] will without question be mass migrations to "sustainable" areas, rendering them unsustainable through sheer numbers.

[threadbear]

[/quote]I have often thought that the world of 'Star Trek' societies might be nice to live in-where most people worked together towards a goal of seeking knowledge.
Maybe just a society where the primary goal is NOT acquisition only. ... sigh...[/quote]

Ferret, That's what we're moving towards, and it's a bumpy process. People will eventually come to the conclusion that buying stuff can't make up for the rich experience of learning, and forming cooperative bonds with others.

As far as hierarchies go, I think that people have trouble with the concept. They think in terms of bureaucratic hierarchies set up by corporate and political bodies. When these systems break down or just erode, those with natural authority are sought out. Those with dynamic personalities, the visionaries, those who empower with wise words, lead people out of the wilderness. Hey...like YOU.

[Ferretlover]

Should I practice my royal, rotating wrist wave??

Actually, I would probably be a "second fiddle" to about a dozen people here at PO, including YOU!