Can we talk about how psychology is a load of. . . rhetoric masquerading as science?
Ecocide: The Psychology of Environmental Destruction
- Thread starter Cliffy
- Start date
That is exactly what it's about. The thirst for fossil fuels can be traced right down to the individual whether we use it directly or buy products and services that employ them in their production. As long as the demand exists at the individual level then big business will step up to satisfy that demand. And until the individual has viable options to move away from fossil fuels and related products we are stuck in the loop. It's going to take a grassroots shift in the societal mindset effect change, a willingness to either pay more for those products or live without them.
Where is the gas going BTW
Sea grass will probably grow back and the condition of the rivers determine the salmon stocks, perhaps some work on the river the lets few entering the rivers actually make it to the egg laying areas. That is who own the salmon stocks rather than the ones sitting in the best place to catch them in a for profit deal. Put it to a vote by everyone over 18, to have just a few decide the fate of the majority is what brings on foreign invasions.
They could be shown an animation of what life would be like with a trouble free line going through or what life is like on the Rez once the North American money system tanks so even the rich are looking for tall building to jump from. I don't thing the delivery service to the Reservations is going to pick up. They would be the first one cut off any aid and a news blackout or false headlines would be all anybody would hear about it.
You can buy a lot of survival equipment to get through a disaster or have something to do when your broadband connection crackles to life.making your remote living at least equal to that of urban Canada. Just don't get sucked into believing the trucks will never stop bring in the basic living supplies.
Sea grass will probably grow back and the condition of the rivers determine the salmon stocks, perhaps some work on the river the lets few entering the rivers actually make it to the egg laying areas. That is who own the salmon stocks rather than the ones sitting in the best place to catch them in a for profit deal. Put it to a vote by everyone over 18, to have just a few decide the fate of the majority is what brings on foreign invasions.
They could be shown an animation of what life would be like with a trouble free line going through or what life is like on the Rez once the North American money system tanks so even the rich are looking for tall building to jump from. I don't thing the delivery service to the Reservations is going to pick up. They would be the first one cut off any aid and a news blackout or false headlines would be all anybody would hear about it.
You can buy a lot of survival equipment to get through a disaster or have something to do when your broadband connection crackles to life.making your remote living at least equal to that of urban Canada. Just don't get sucked into believing the trucks will never stop bring in the basic living supplies.
Last edited:
Sure, but having an alternate to oil/gas does not change the fact that humanity will still have an exploitative-style relationship with ole Ma Gaia.
The form of how the energy produced is irrelevant, directly or indirectly, it will still be a byproduct of a resource from Ma Gaia
True, but hopefully we can find a viable alternative that is more "cooperative" with nature and less at odds with the environment.
Doesn't change the fact that humanity can't survive without exploiting the environment... Isn't that what ecocide is about or is it solely limited to the oilsands?
It's not like "exploiting" is a bad word, there are methods of resource exploitation that are less damaging to the environment, like hydro electric power vs coal power. Fossil fuels are pretty far reaching in their effect on the planet, and we are basically ignoring that due to an unwillingness to seriously explore alternatives. Wind, solar, and wave power are all viable alternatives aside from the fact that they are more expensive than fossil fuels. Natural gas burns a little cleaner than traditional petro-chemical fuels but has a higher cost as it is harder to transport and store, hence the cost thing again.
Hydro electric is great is you have the needed geography and a body of water large enough to generate that power. Doesn't work so well in arid places or on the prairies though... We won't talk about having to flood thousands of hectares of river valley or the massive amounts of heavy metals and other toxins that build up there
As far as viable alternatives, if they were truly viable, we would have established their use and all the needed infrastructure would be in place already.
Fact is, at present, those techs are not viable, hence, the situation where they do not add in any real benefit into the equation.
As far as viable alternatives, if they were truly viable, we would have established their use and all the needed infrastructure would be in place already.
Fact is, at present, those techs are not viable, hence, the situation where they do not add in any real benefit into the equation.
by all means.
So again, attack the message and the facts. Not the messanger with snide cut downs.
Nothing brings down a topic like someone who can't seem to talk about the post and only talk about the poster.
The chiefs are already making more than this per annum and I'm sure it wasn't put to a secret vote for the rank and file.
Those that masquerade a repeated and tired agenda as something new should expect exactly the reaction they got.
What is even more laughable is the very hypocritical nature of the dichotomy between the dire message and the actual life they lead
... And yet, you have contributed nothing other than to repeat the same message you offered earlier.
Care to provide any opinion?... I penned a comprehensive overview of my thoughts - do you wish to add to the actual topic?
The tech is available, it's just more expensive than fossil fuel at present, and very few are willing to shoulder the extra cost even though the harm that fossil fuel use causes is becoming more evident.
Our environment laughs at our superficial vandalism, it wins every fight, every time, we just love to think we,re that powerful. Still we should be nice to the green stuff, when we aren,t eating it.
If you consider people demanding handouts instead of working for a living as a conscious shift. We are getting overrun with people that don't want any industry but expect all the benefits of modern society. Cause they are "entitled".
Ecocide is really economic suicide.
You mean bankers, right? Industry they hate, money they love. The laziest bunch of usless cutthroats anywhere anytime.
You mean bankers, right? Industry they hate, money they love. The laziest bunch of usless cutthroats anywhere anytime.
No I am talking about cliffy and his ilk. Also includes the idle rich that have made their money, move to resource dependent areas because it is cheap and then demand we stop working because it is interfering with the lifestyle they would now like to have for themselves. Joe and Jane lunchbucket are quite happy to have jobs that pay over $100000 A YEAR. And try to make a better world for their kids.
Better world for the kids! That,s what they said about WW2. How,d that work out? It's not forking better, it's faster but it ain,t better.
Way better now. Even you have a computer and a beer fridge. Not many of either in 1945.