[Doly]

The big problem I find with a plan that requires some form of dictatorship is: What if the dictator was wrong? Especially if the plan involves a lot of unhappiness for a lot of people.

I think rationing in the UK during the World Wars was a good example of how to deal with harsh times without being harsher on people than strictly necessary.

[snowhope]

Macsporan, thanks for that optimistic outlook!

I have to say that must rank amongst the most pessimistic summaries I have read of where we are going to as a civilisation. I count myself as a survivalist. Some people I have spoken to about the hardships of the future have said they may as well die - having read your post, for the first time that thought crossed my own mind....

Surely you don't really in your heart think it will get that bad? Has our civilisation not advanced to a level where we aren't all prepared to fight to the death over everything. Surely we can use our heads to come up with collective support and help for one another and not just try to kill each other whilst competing for enough resources to eek out an acceptable way of living.

[Graeme]

I made this suggestion earlier in the SUGGESTION BOX and called it "Solutions to Peak Oil" but moderators were not interested in starting another roundtable discussion. Solutions to peak oil is the same as "reaching for sustainability"? As I see it, the solutions are scattered in the other discussions but could be brought together and elaborated upon by contributors.

Solutions require political will (Geopolitics), planning (Planning for the future), economic assessment by experts in this area (Economics), and of course alternative energy strategies (Energy Technology). I think the first one is the main stumbling block, so contributors need to think of strategies to change the thinking of our politicians. There are signs that this is beginning to happen with Roscoe Bartlett in US Congress and now the G8 Summit. And I think there is also time for the necessary changes to take place. The future does not have to be as bleak as some paint it here. It really depends on the collective will of all of us. If all of us want a disaster and act in that way like Hitler did, then that is what will happen. But I really think that most of us with a healthy attitude want a better future for ourselves and our children. Now please help with your positive suggestions. . .

[Macsporan]

Snowhope,

I don’t pretend to have all the answers, obviously. I'm sorry if this is pessimistic to you. To me if anything can be preserved that may flower and bear fruit in days to come than this is grounds for optimism. Most other people seem to be saying that either everyone will die like dogs or that everyone will mutate into hobbits. I see the second as being wildly unrealistic and the first as the only alternative to some form of collectivist eco-tyranny.

I would imagine that the eco-tyranny would last only so long as was necessary to create a new civilisation and then revert to something more democratic, rather like Cromwellian England giving way to the Restoration.

I think we will need a very strong authoritarian government to engineer change. In part this is because of the unpromising nature of most of the disgracefully spoiled and deluded people of modern industrial civilisation, especially it seems those of the USA and Australia, who really do believe that their barren and destructive way of life can be made to continue forever by means of a little wishful thinking.

I wish I could share you optimism regarding "advanced civilisation" but what we are talking about is the destruction of one. In such a situation all bets are off. If people cannot treat each other with decency and compassion when their stomachs are full they are certainly not going to do so when they are empty. The collapse of government and social order generally leads not to The Shire but to the Dark Ages. Just look at the looting that went on after the fall of Saddam in Iraq.

As sustainable civilisation can only be created by a functioning government. We need to make sure that it survives and we control it so that we can do the creating. If we don't than you can bet your life that some cornpone fascist promising to bring back the good old days by killing the Arabs, Jews, Blacks, Liberals, environmentalists, feminists, gays, "insert name of favoured scapegoat here", will certainly do so and we will have all of the tyranny with none of the hope.

Survivalism and small-scale attempts to create a sustainable society while useful, run the risk of degenerating into feudal barbarism.

I am not trying to be contrary, nor am I a troll. I take no pleasure in any of this. I doubt I would survive very long in the future I predict, but such to me seems to be the way of things. I submit my views to you wise and far-sighted folk of the PO forums in the hope that I may be proved wrong.

[Madpaddy]

Snowhope wrote:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')urely you don't really in your heart think it will get that bad? Has our civilisation not advanced to a level where we aren't all prepared to fight to the death over everything. Surely we can use our heads to come up with collective support and help for one another and not just try to kill each other whilst competing for enough resources to eek out an acceptable way of living.

[Macsporan]

Graeme,

Here is a positive suggestion or two:

1. As many people as possible move to the country and create self-sufficient communities. This would be good because these people would
2. In effect conduct "research" into how to make such communities operate. This research would involve philosophy and social relationships not just technology.
3. Inspire others to do likewise and give hope to the hopeless.
4. Set themselves up in a favoured position for the great downfall: much better to be a lord than a peasant!
5. Create a mass-base for a nation wide political movement to encourage, and if need be, impose, a similar society on the whole country and create a sustainable mass-civilisation, based on renewable energy with a living standard at about the level of the 1850's that will last for millennia.

[nocar]

Johndenver said:
[QUOTE] "The personal automobile is at the root of many of our sustainability problems, and should be a key focus. It's an extremely tricky, deep problem, however. Kind of like navigating an intellectual minefield through human psychology, urban planning, economics, sociology, industrial history, corporate imperatives etc. etc. "



I agree completely that the personal automobile is a root problem. And we have to realize that we would not be facing peak oil at all (well certainly not until a century from now) if it was not for automobiles. Trucks use a lot of oil too, but if there had not been congestion from personal automobiles, and if automobile drivers therefore had not been pushing for wider and faster roads, truck transport would not have grown very much. No one would care if just truckers were stuck in traffic - (like who cares if goods transport on railroads gets delayed?), and long distance transport of fresh food would not have grown so much. Local production means smaller farms, another good thing post peak oil.

Without private automobiles we would not have long car commutes and urban sprawl. City centers in small towns would still be viable. Children could still play on the streets. Bicyclists would ride much more safely.

And without private automobiles we (=humanity) would have used only a fraction of the oil we have used today.

So, the first step is to discourage private automobile transport. Cars should be blamed and car-owners shamed instead of respected. People who are dependent on private car transport should be pitied and programs to wean them from their awful addiction should be introduced.

We have come a long way with tobacco smokers. Perhaps the car addiction can be overcome - but first we have to put a finger on it.

nocar

[Wildwell]

In order to get off some of the addiction problems, such as cars, there would need to be a complete re-think on urban planning, design, business and general lifestyle. Since the 1950s the model has been house, car, long journeys to get basic needs and to go to work.

What is needed is an imaginative plan to built townships around sustainability: Locally grown produce, crafts, community spirit, local business and a new urban planning regime that actually precludes cars. Maybe even an entire township based on walking, sports, cycling and light rail along with renewable energy generation. Some imagination is needed, the old models need a big re-think. Certainly we have been set up for car dependency and heavy energy use, that needs to change.

The garden city model is a good place to start.

http://www.library.cornell.edu/Reps/DOCS/howard.htm

[Macsporan]

IMHO cars will have to go. All long distance haulage will in future by done by train; all short distance haulage by horse and cart just as in the 1850's.

Commuting within the few and shrunken cities will be done by electric-driven light rail or by bicycle.

International trade will take place in sailing ships.

Fortunately there'll be plenty of iron and steel. All the SUV's could be melted down to make railway lines and hulls for ships.

Twentieth Century rubbish dumps will be mined for raw materials.

Most of the work around the place will be done by picks, shovels,wheelbarrows and cart-horses.

Houses will have electricity for lighting only. Solar hot water will be de rigeur.

Hemp will come back into its own for clothing, ropes, plastic, oil, paper, packaging fibreboard and many, many other uses.

Industry will be much reduced and concerned with maintaining the system as it is: recycling, steel, rail and rolling-stock, carts, barrels, hemp processing, tools, clothing and textiles, footwear, timber, building materials, shipping, windmills, solar panels and probably not much else.

Materially it will be a very constricted existance but there will be plenty of fresh air and clean water. Nature will make a spectacular comeback. As is to be expected in a society that uses perhaps a quarter of the present energy, life will be slow and largely stress-free.

There will be plenty of time to write resentful, censorous treatises, plays, poems and novels on the wanton extravagance, madness and lust of the 20th century.

Intellectual, artistic and spiritual life may reach new heights. There may even by room for a modest scientific and technological effort although it will revolve around simple machines and recycling, especially of plastics.

Society will be largely static and community-oriented. Individualism and egotism will be frowned upon.

[oowolf]

The future? Look no further than present day North Korea. Totalitarian dystopia; no cars-city streets now look empty and fantastically overbuilt, office building uninhabitable due to no utilities, city people forced into the country to plant food (Better learn some subsistance farming techniques now; maybe you'll get to be a "straw boss" and not just a grunt.), general death-camp milieu with pervasive snitching and hypocrisy....and THIS is the best-case scenario.
Worst is sudden anarchy with rapid dieoff by mayhem and starvation, or nuclear war, or both.

[bart]

To get your stereotypes about N. Korea re-arranged, see: Beyond Korean Barbecue by John Feffer, AlterNet.$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'N')orth Korea has 1) boasted of having nuclear weapons; 2) threatened to turn its neighbors into a "sea of fire"; 3) traded in illegal drugs and counterfeit currency; or 4) been enjoying a gourmet revival.

If you snorted at the last choice, think again.

Recent visitors to the "hermit kingdom" report that good food is no longer limited to government functions or the occasional hotel eatery. A new raft of restaurants -- from Korean barbecue to fast-food hamburgers -- cater to foreigners and locals alike.

"Everybody is now interested in making money, and restaurants are one way of doing so," says Kathi Zellweger of the Catholic aid organization, Caritas. "On my last trip I was told that in Pyongyang alone there are now over 350 new restaurants and I did note far more restaurant signs on buildings and also some 'beer drinking bars' packed with men in evenings."

While North Korea's thriving restaurant scene might seem like minor news -- a feature perhaps for the Wall Street Journal's offbeat middle column -- this new trend is in fact a key economic and social indicator of change. The U.S. media provides a steady diet of unappetizing images -- the shadowy nuclear complex, the military parades, the dour aging leadership. This is what "evil" is supposed to look like. But as the burgeoning restaurant trade suggests, the North Korean reality has departed significantly from the fixed menu we've come to expect.

[holmes]

I agree alot with that bart. The big problem is the occuring population boom from post ww2 immigrants and illegals. The problem will not be solved. A civil war, disease and starvation- population crash is the only way out now. Unfortunately. I just wish more folks would realize this.
http://www.numbersusa.com/overpopulatio ... uture.html

[Ludi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('bart', 'O')ur fate depends on our actions. Are we up to the responsibility?

[holmes]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('bart', 'O')ur fate depends on our actions. Are we up to the responsibility?

[Sys1]

If i were optimistic, i would see the future as something betwen hi tech stuffs (satellites, computers, internet...) and sailing boats, zeppelins, stream trains, victorian style cities.
Growth would be forbidden, mankind stabilized at 500 millions. Freedom would be preserved, but not democracy (by that, i just mean no more voting. I love paradoxes).

[johnmarkos]

It seems to me that we're getting off topic here. There are plenty of places to discuss doom vs. anti-doom. Please, let's stick to the main purpose of the thread, which is to collect knowledge about sustainability.

Thanks,
John

[cube]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('johnmarkos', 'T')his thread is an outgrowth of my reading and review of Limits to Growth: The 30-Year Update, by Donella Meadows, Jorgen Randers, and Dennis Meadows, ....

[Macsporan]

I think you underestimate how courageous and resourceful people can be when they're backed into a corner.

I think that offered the choice between the Dark Ages and Solar Byzantium people will definitely take the latter.

The first generation who remember the good old days will be baulky and resentful but their children, for whom this is all they've ever known, will be happy enough.

For the residue who simply won't go along there's always labour camps.

If this seems monstrous then just remember, the US already has the highest rate of incarceration on earth and their convict labour is exploited by the capitalists: and this, for the most part for petty drug offences and crimes against property.

[cube]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Macsporan', 'I') think you underestimate how courageous and resourceful people can be when they're backed into a corner.

......

[holmes]

im telling you thermal mass biotechture and indoor/outdoor greenhouses with agrarian spatial topography surrounded earthship villages. There are eco-villages on the right track. Suburbs need to be converted now as much as possible and sadly monstrous cities are in a bad way. That is why i am adament about getting culture change. The cities and suburbs will be the greatest threat to my and others eco villages soon enough. I wouldnt be on this stinking internet if the case was different.