Self Sufficiency - A Test Case

How will oil depletion affect the way we live? What will the economic impact be? How will agriculture change? Will we thrive or merely survive?

Moderator: Peak Moderation

JavaScriptDonkey
Posts: 1683
Joined: 02 Jun 2011, 00:12
Location: SE England

Post by JavaScriptDonkey »

stevecook172001 wrote:Marx may have been a hundred or so years out on his predictions of the collapse of capitalism. But, that prediction may yet be be proven correct.
Marx thought he knew all about the Capitalist system but his predictions have failed to materialise.
Worse, those economies run with a nod to Marx are broken and the people suffer. Capitalism on the other hand pays for the NHS. Not unbridled dystopian capitalism of an anarchist's fantasy but the real capital based economy that we actually live in run by normal people.

Marx looked at the world of the poor in the cities and assumed that they be better off labouring in the fields. Pretty typical view of someone who had never done a hard day's work in his life. Many of the factory workers choose to be there because the agricultural wages were so low. Capitalism gave them the choice whereas Marxism would have shackled their children to the plough forever.
Little John

Post by Little John »

JavaScriptDonkey wrote:
stevecook172001 wrote:Marx may have been a hundred or so years out on his predictions of the collapse of capitalism. But, that prediction may yet be be proven correct.
Marx thought he knew all about the Capitalist system but his predictions have failed to materialise.
Worse, those economies run with a nod to Marx are broken and the people suffer. Capitalism on the other hand pays for the NHS. Not unbridled dystopian capitalism of an anarchist's fantasy but the real capital based economy that we actually live in run by normal people.

Marx looked at the world of the poor in the cities and assumed that they be better off labouring in the fields. Pretty typical view of someone who had never done a hard day's work in his life. Many of the factory workers choose to be there because the agricultural wages were so low. Capitalism gave them the choice whereas Marxism would have shackled their children to the plough forever.
Would that be the same capitalism that has so efficiently hoovered up resources and left the majority of the world in poverty for much of the last century such that we now stand on the brink of global economic and social collapse? Being "shackled to the plough" might well have been harder than being engrossed by an ipad. The problem is that ipads and the lifestyles and population explosion that go with them are looking to be lasting a couple of centuries at best whereas the life of the plough and the populations it supported could have lasted indefinitely.

We've been living beyond our means and we'll be going back to the plough whether we like it or not. However, the journey back there is not going to be some re-run of a rural idyll circa 1750. We've f***ed up the land and air and sea too much for that.

Oh yes, capitalism and the industrial machine has really served us well.
User avatar
emordnilap
Posts: 14823
Joined: 05 Sep 2007, 16:36
Location: here

Post by emordnilap »

We've just passed the peak of a very short phase in human history. None of us know what the next phase will be like but low energy availability will be part of it, just like virtually every other phase.

Low energy availability will still deliver the NHS but not as we know it Jim. Think Cuba - little money, little energy, relatively healthy people, lots of doctors, nurses and gardeners, lots of preventative thinking in health, rather than the post-stable door policies of US-type high-powered 'health' services.
I experience pleasure and pains, and pursue goals in service of them, so I cannot reasonably deny the right of other sentient agents to do the same - Steven Pinker
Little John

Post by Little John »

emordnilap wrote:We've just passed the peak of a very short phase in human history. None of us know what the next phase will be like but low energy availability will be part of it, just like virtually every other phase.

Low energy availability will still deliver the NHS but not as we know it Jim. Think Cuba - little money, little energy, relatively healthy people, lots of doctors, nurses and gardeners, lots of preventative thinking in health, rather than the post-stable door policies of US-type high-powered 'health' services.
We only get that if we are prepared to fight for it. As the pie gets smaller, those at the top are not going to see their slice reduce in size in order to make up the shortfall on the rest of us unless they are forced to.
JavaScriptDonkey
Posts: 1683
Joined: 02 Jun 2011, 00:12
Location: SE England

Post by JavaScriptDonkey »

stevecook172001 wrote:Would that be the same capitalism that has so efficiently hoovered up resources and left the majority of the world in poverty for much of the last century such that we now stand on the brink of global economic and social collapse? Being "shackled to the plough" might well have been harder than being engrossed by an ipad. The problem is that ipads and the lifestyles and population explosion that go with them are looking to be lasting a couple of centuries at best whereas the life of the plough and the populations it supported could have lasted indefinitely.

We've been living beyond our means and we'll be going back to the plough whether we like it or not. However, the journey back there is not going to be some re-run of a rural idyll circa 1750. We've ****** up the land and air and sea too much for that.

Oh yes, capitalism and the industrial machine has really served us well.
I'm not arguing that modern industrial society is a picnic but you seem to be lumping all the blame on capitalism whereas in fact socialist societies have industrialised just as fast as capitalist ones.

We may end up back at the plough but it'll be a high carbon steel affair turning sod for genetically modified seed.
kenneal - lagger
Site Admin
Posts: 14287
Joined: 20 Sep 2006, 02:35
Location: Newbury, Berkshire
Contact:

Post by kenneal - lagger »

JavaScriptDonkey wrote:I'm not arguing that modern industrial society is a picnic but you seem to be lumping all the blame on capitalism whereas in fact socialist societies have industrialised just as fast as capitalist ones.
In fact industrialised socialist societies have been dirtier than capitalist ones. Just look at the USSSR and China. Then there's N Korea of course....
We may end up back at the plough but it'll be a high carbon steel affair turning sod for genetically modified seed.
High carbon steel is a possibility as even a basic blacksmith's forge could produce this but not in large quantities.

GM seed requires sophisticated industrial bases for their manufacture so is unlikely to be commonly found in a more simple, low tech future.
Action is the antidote to despair - Joan Baez
Little John

Post by Little John »

kenneal - lagger wrote:
JavaScriptDonkey wrote:I'm not arguing that modern industrial society is a picnic but you seem to be lumping all the blame on capitalism whereas in fact socialist societies have industrialised just as fast as capitalist ones.
In fact industrialised socialist societies have been dirtier than capitalist ones. Just look at the USSSR and China. Then there's N Korea of course....
We may end up back at the plough but it'll be a high carbon steel affair turning sod for genetically modified seed.
High carbon steel is a possibility as even a basic blacksmith's forge could produce this but not in large quantities.

GM seed requires sophisticated industrial bases for their manufacture so is unlikely to be commonly found in a more simple, low tech future.
I'm not suggesting that socialist industrial societies were paragons of virtue in terms of their industrial practices. Far from it. Indeed, the industrial technologies they used were extremely "inefficient" and, on occasion, environmentally polluting. However, it is precisely because they were "inefficient" in their production compared to capitalist societies that is the reason that capitalist societies have, in the end, done far more damage because they are so efficient at production and distribution. In any event, capitalist use of technologies has been no less polluting. It's just that the pollution, in recent decades, has often been off-shored to countries far, far away full of brown-skinned people and so we have tended not to notice its effects.

To take one example of how capitalism knackers the environment precisely because it is so "effective" at production; take a look at the soils of those countries in Europe that were, until recently, part of the Soviet block of socialist countries and then compare them to the soils of those countries that have been capitalist during the same time period. The fact is their soils are often far healthier. The reason is because they employed "inefficient" farming technologies.

Capitalism, in conjunction with fractional reserve banking, has proved to be the most effective system for the turning of raw materials into products the world has ever known. Consequently, it has taken the entire world to the brink of political, economic and environmental catastrophe in less than a couple of hundred years. Don't misunderstand me here; all civilisation-sized systems of organisation are, in the end, unsustainable. However, capitalism, aided and abetted by FRB, happens to be particularly unsustainable.
MrG
Posts: 613
Joined: 02 Sep 2009, 12:43
Location: Home :)

Post by MrG »

kenneal - lagger wrote: GM seed requires sophisticated industrial bases for their manufacture so is unlikely to be commonly found in a more simple, low tech future.
were you thinking something like this perhaps...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUNzJWEq ... T5HVG9P2PN

About half a million quid I believe. When I watched that the other day I was thinking... "I wonder how many of those we'll be seeing in our low tech, low energy future"
peaceful_life
Posts: 544
Joined: 21 Sep 2010, 16:20

Post by peaceful_life »

vtsnowedin wrote:
biffvernon wrote:
vtsnowedin wrote: Biff you just don't get
Story of my life!

Vt, I've just taken a stroll, with the help of Google Earth, around Chelsea, Vermont. What a nice looking place. Typical of many places in North America, the houses are spread about with wide areas of grass between them and between the roads and the houses. I would guess that there is enough spare land within all but the town centre for each household to grow much of their own food within their own property, having to buy in just grains and a little grass fed meat. Three quarters of the food could be grown by households quite easily without anybody moving more than wheelbarrow range from their kitchens.

If others would care to join the virtual stroll its round about here:
https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=Chelse ... 9,,0,-6.42
I kind of like the place myself but you should be aware that the town only has 1150 residents and is some 25,000 acres in area or about 24 acres per person. The soil is thin if well watered and drained and much of it is on such steep slopes and so rocky that the only viable crop is trees and maple syrup. The village is at 800 feet above sea level and the hill on my west boundry rises to 2020ft. my house is at 1700 feet and it was +6 F this AM with 4 inches of new snow. Winters are 160 days long and growing degree days are so low that field corn will not get sufficently ripe to harvest before frost except in the lowest bottoms in good years. With all that the farmers in town that are left ship tons of milke to Boston or the Cabot cheese plant daily.
Check out the work of Sepp Holzer, if you haven't already.
User avatar
biffvernon
Posts: 18538
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
Location: Lincolnshire
Contact:

Post by biffvernon »

Good bloke.

Here's a film about him: http://www.cultureunplugged.com/play/930/The-Agro-Rebel
peaceful_life
Posts: 544
Joined: 21 Sep 2010, 16:20

Post by peaceful_life »

biffvernon wrote:Good bloke.

Here's a film about him: http://www.cultureunplugged.com/play/930/The-Agro-Rebel
Aye, these people are out there and doing it on a grand scale.


http://www.bookdepository.co.uk/Sepp-Ho ... ription-20

Sepp Holzer farms steep mountainsides in Austria 1,500 meters above sea level. His farm is an intricate network of terraces, raised beds, ponds, waterways and tracks, well covered with productive fruit trees and other vegetation, with the farmhouse neatly nestling amongst them. This is in dramatic contrast to his neighbors' spruce monocultures.In this book, Holzer shares the skill and knowledge acquired over his lifetime. He covers every aspect of his farming methods, not just how to create a holistic system on the farm itself, but how to make a living from it. Holzer writes about everything from the overall concepts, down to the practical details.......
peaceful_life
Posts: 544
Joined: 21 Sep 2010, 16:20

Post by peaceful_life »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzBbHrHGwok

Writer and Biologist Colin Tudge talks about the importance of small-scale farms in our future food system.
peaceful_life
Posts: 544
Joined: 21 Sep 2010, 16:20

Post by peaceful_life »

JavaScriptDonkey wrote:
stevecook172001 wrote:Marx may have been a hundred or so years out on his predictions of the collapse of capitalism. But, that prediction may yet be be proven correct.
Marx thought he knew all about the Capitalist system but his predictions have failed to materialise.
Worse, those economies run with a nod to Marx are broken and the people suffer. Capitalism on the other hand pays for the NHS. Not unbridled dystopian capitalism of an anarchist's fantasy but the real capital based economy that we actually live in run by normal people.

Marx looked at the world of the poor in the cities and assumed that they be better off labouring in the fields. Pretty typical view of someone who had never done a hard day's work in his life. Many of the factory workers choose to be there because the agricultural wages were so low. Capitalism gave them the choice whereas Marxism would have shackled their children to the plough forever.
Working (with) the land doesn't have to be a hardship.

Agreement pays for the NHS, it's how that agreement is manipulated that's the issue, the concept is more communist that capitalist.

Not much "choice" between being enclosed...cleared....and putting food on the table, the wages weren't low...the markets were heavy.


ets
vtsnowedin
Posts: 6595
Joined: 07 Jan 2011, 22:14
Location: New England ,Chelsea Vermont

Post by vtsnowedin »

biffvernon wrote:Good bloke.

Here's a film about him: http://www.cultureunplugged.com/play/930/The-Agro-Rebel
I'd be interested in an accurate audit of his farm accounts. The film shows a lot of expensive machine work being done and it will take more then a few baskets of fruit each year to pay for that. It wouldn't be a big surprise if films and classes bring in more profit then the produce from the land does.
User avatar
biffvernon
Posts: 18538
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
Location: Lincolnshire
Contact:

Post by biffvernon »

A useful veg-patch accessory:

Image

Details at http://www.chriseckersley.co.uk/section662175.html
Post Reply