jensen's father beat him and his siblings and his mother. as an adult, civilization and "nature" have taken on the dual roles of father and mother in his mind. he's highly intelligent, and his intelligent mind has followed that association unceasingly. i think that's what leads him to seriously ridiculous conclusions, like the epilogue of 'culture of make-believe' in which he describes native americans as having been, essentially, hippie communists instead of violent and superstitious.
Its very easy to bash civilization on youtube, selling books online, learning from the internet and books - Jensen is just a hypocrite. Go bash civilization using smoke signs in the middle of the jungle.
This is not a good definition. It's way too subjective. When does a population center become large? And what is the distance that constitutes "importation". And again, one could consider earth one land base, in which, nothing is being imported to.
@SecularAnimist Excellent remarks. Jensen's "thoughts" may impress ignorant and infantile people but ultimately don't make any sense. It's flabbergasting how so many people can be so alienated as to fall for that junk. Just add "primitivism" and "deep green" to the diseases of civilization.
They not an inherent problems with being civilized; they are the anathema of civilization. The question is, can humankind get to resolving those traits while 'progressing' civilization to the utmost sustainable and compassionate level?
@ODvids As long as there is the requirement for the importation of food there is no possible way that a civilization can be sustained. And don't sit there and tell me America built its civilization to protect the native inhabitance of North America. Also as far as your social network what happens when you don't pay rent? A man with a gun comes and tells you to live on the street. Some social network a social network based on violence. cont.
@ODvids and also I highly doubt, even if it was possible for solar energy, that it wouldn't be charged and stolen and fought over just like our water is today from corporations that need it to import massive amounts of food to to our cities.
Civilizations were built to satisfy the participants' needs to protect, survive and to create comfort and progress that was not possible on their own. They were a social network aimed at sustainable survival stimulated by symbiotic contributions to progressive means of doing that. Add greed and selfishness, and there becomes the problem.
I think he makes a lot of assumptions and holds them as truths. I don't agree that the importation of goods necessarily leads to war. Greed and selfishness do. Oil doesn't have to be the end of civilization; solar can replace it and make ALL energy requirements available to ALL tribes.
I think he makes a lot of assumptions and holds them as truths. I don't agree that the importation of goods necessarily leads to war. Greed and selfishness do. Oil doesn't have to be the end of civilization; solar can replace it and make ALL energy requirements available to ALL tribes.
This is nonsense. Stone age people who didn't live in cities could still live non-sustainable lives, and certainly still had wars. In a modern industrailized society it is consumption, not density, that is non-sustainable. And people who don't live in cities in North America (like New York) consume at least as much as those who do.
i believe in the 'slow food' movement... i have, as well, spent a total of only 13 euros on my bicycle in the last 3 years for my personal transport needs. we don't need to own or drive a car, or buy into the oil market for example to move ourselves to work and back. think of the savings, think globally, act locally. don't reproduce.. don't desire so much. share what you have with the poor... be kind.. what so difficult about these simple things.. forget population growth man..its a lie.
indigenous peoples usually have a very friendly relationship to the world that helps them to minimize the damage they do to nature. the idea of consuming the world as something human beings do to live is a prejudice of the world of consumer capitalism. of course, it makes sense to believe in that view or else the whole meaning of a consumer society will collapse. i pray for that collapse every day. we do not need 'desire'. the Buddhists say desire is the source of all suffering.
no, not true. this is also a myth. the idea that the world is going bad because of its tribalism(s). tribes around the world, especially indigenous ones, whether you are talking African, Australian aboriginies, Amazonian Indios, New Zealand Maori, etc..
they have all a great respect for nature and have had cultural ceremonies and praxes that celebrate and work to establish harmony with the natural habitats. anthropomorphic means they only see the world through their own tribal eyes, not true.
cont'd: Also, i wonder if civilizations are really all that great... maybe we would be better off without them. The indigenous Amazonian peoples struggling against oil companies polluting their rivers would probably prefer it if so called civilization would just keep out of their rainforests. What do civilized people do anyway? They drive, they go to war so that they can drive some more, and in the end, they watch television.... well, maybe we are destroying the world so we can watch Homer..
cont'd: ...but this is also silly. i mean the recent BP oil spill had nothing to do with an increase in population. The Fukushima nuclear power plant disasters had little or nothing to do with an increase in population. Rather, these disasters were caused by greedy and irresponsible rogue corporations. Sure the need for clean green energy exists and we could get it for all of our growing world population if the bad guys, the polluters, stepped aside.
but crashedsky, going back to your food=increase in population formula. i really don't know where you got this one. doesn't make sense. in the State of Kerala in India, they have a strong family planning policy so reproduction is kept to a minimum, but it is one of the richest states, meaning most productive, in agriculture etc. so there is at least one example where increase in food does not mean more population. also you connect the increase in global population with increase in pollution,
cont'd: we should emulate those people and have free baths, as well as free notebooks and pens for students. the problem today is: my own university management, for example, awards itself with parties in which female students wear bikinis and high heels to serve their faculty wine. when the vice chancellor was asked by a feminist professor why he arranged this, he responded, 'we have to reward ourselves somehow!' the cultural degeneration, and i agree with DJ on this, has begun at the top.
Hi crashed sky, thanks for your comments. I think Gandhi's words will work well here..
when asked what he thought of British civilization, he paused for a while and then said 'it would be a good idea'.. that is to say, we aren't quite there yet.. if we want to be as civilized as the Hindus or the Buddhists or the Muslims were in their best years, we have to work much harder. The Muslims originated the university, for example, and they even had hot baths and flowing water for the students!
cont'd: ...starvation. But the real reason for these things is not the carrying capacity of the land. The fact is: we now have both the technology and an overabundance of supplies of grain (silos and silos full) to feed the entire world several times over. But we possess an amazingly 'Western civilized' trait: namely, an unwillingness to share the bounty that we possess (a extreme poverty of the human spirit). The question then seems to be: how do we change from being mean-spirited to kind?
@kaikido You have a very well reasoned response - however, I wonder what you think about this. Remember the fact that increase in food = increase in population. Whether are not we are reaching 'carrying capacity' - you can't deny that the increase of population is destroying our natural environments and biodiversity. Such things, once they are gone, will forever be gone, and, according to most scientists, would lead the the downfall of our civilizations, western or not?
lets be very precise. I tend to think DJ confuses the processes of capitalistic industrialization with civilization. I dont. As such food is being grown, clothing is being made, metals are being shaped, houses are being made by local materials at a civilizational level NOW beneath the level of global capital he is talking about. The idea of the 'population explosion' overshooting the land's carrying capacity is also a myth. This emerged as an explanation for lingering poverty and large-scale.
@kaikido ps: This is just ONE of the negatives of an ever increasing population. Most, besides many tribal societies (not all), are very anthropocentric when it comes to the world. We, the west, the east, wherever, despite what is told to the populations, believe that HUMANS deserve the world and will do anything to conquer it. We, like capitalist consumers who can't get enough of their supplies, consume the world. An increase of population just serves that purpose faster.
also FeralK, I would add that the whole idea of social evolution that DJ uses at the core of his argument is flawed. Although it may look like it is the mainstream view in the West that it is the dominant force on the planet, this is not how other civilizations view it. Neither do those other civilizations view the world through the prism of evolution or the metaphor of 'struggle'. The idea that modernity is singular, constructed from a monolithic narrative stemming from the West is wrong.
hi FeralK, I realize DJ isnt just talking about food. This is especially where he has to be careful. His argument is undercut 2 ways. 1) In saying 'we' are a 'civilization' (Western? dominant?), he then makes it impossible for those who made that civilization possible to change without being uncivilized in the process 2) there are other civilizations, that do not and did not follow the Western model that nonetheless became civilized i.e. they did not grow by being violent dominator-exploiters
DJ never mentioned here the word 'massification' (globlization is massificaton of global connections). Civilzation vs a mass of people. A democratic society depends on mass of voters. The fast growing mass of young people in Tunis, Egypt, Lybia etc. want to have a vote and make revolution. Go with the flow of grow? There is a lot of dynamic in world politcs now. The highest point of U.S.A. power is in endgame now. World is chancing by the force of global masses: identities with same interests.
yes, nice points, Derrick. I wonder if you aren't exaggerating the 'urbanization' theory of the city though. The early Italian cities or 'city states' were semi-agricultural fortified towns. To this day, many cities in Egypt among other places in the Middle East retain part of this old structure and there are miniature market gardens everywhere within cities. Almost every corner shop will have a small garden nearby growing the veges it needs to feed its clients. Your analysis a bit Western?
@kingofaikido They're still not sustainable. They may be more sustainable than cities in the west, but they are still not going to last. DJ isn't just talking about food when he mentions resources; it includes EVERYTHING. From the metals that need to be mined, to the clothing on people's backs, to the housing structures; everything is still imported. Also, in any civilization, populations aren't kept in check, eventually overshooting the land's carrying capacity. It's just not sustainable.
@Gondring The only way you would be correct is if we humans can not only halt total ecological catastrophe due to pollution, but if we can stop a "natural" extinction level event with our technology Asteroids etc.
Many natives should be looked at the generations they allowed to live on the same land without destroying the land base. These people must be added to their per capita use of natural resources.The west -count- on infinite future innovation, because we are leaving negative wealth.
"Denuded the landscape of that resource"...hehehe...pre-Civilization societies do the same thing. Recall how the New England American Indians used up all the resources in an area and moved on. When the first whites showed up from across the sea, they assumed it was because they had destroyed all of the woods in the Old World. HIs analysis is rather shallow and one-dimensional in this clip. Has he gotten more realistic since this?
Its called commerce. When farmers can produce more food then they need themself it enables us to create cities. Noone is self sufficient, that what makes the system seem sane. It seems allmost impossible to become self sufficient.
@typeclash it does seem impossible under the current circumstances we are in. Mostly because it's true. But with the innovations and technologies we have now and if we change our wasteful, obsolete practices to sustainable ones and everything that goes along with it, like being truly educated, then it would seem less impossible and more practical. Easier said then done, I know.
the following quote kind of fits in with what's been posted here in the comments: "The economy is a subsystem of a larger finite system, the biosphere; hence, permanent growth is impossible" - Manfred Max-Neef
@tbridge71 yeah, that's interesting because the Nazis definitely had a longing for the way of life of their ancient Nordic neighbors. Someone like Jensen might be looking at from the perspective of the Native Americans vs European empires. I too believe a more sustainable way of life would be possible. We've had cities for so long, which did pollute as well, just not the kind of pollution that stays around for 1000s of year like nuke waste does.
@PtAltmVansanTarr -- Funny how people attack "the greedy," while simultaneously lauding the Plains Indians who hoarded huge swaths of land to support only a few people. If modern people did that, they'd be called names for not sharing their wealth or putting it to more efficient use.
The Atlantic Coastal Indians generated more non-recycled/re-used solid waste than modern Americans, on a per-capita basis! But most people are ignorant of such things.
Sadly due to criminal greed it is not cost effective to save ourselves. I worked building master planned communities before greed destroying this industry and while watching these houses spring up literally by the dozens over night I realized that this is all wrong. I have dreams about self sustaining, off the grid mini farm communities dedicated to a healthy sustainable future for both man and animal. When I mentioned my dream to others within the industry they love it but fail to see a profit.
Was there any society, hunter-gatherer or otherwise, that didn't require some kind of trade for something it needed-- salt, oolichan oil, pelts, etc? This implies the necessity of relations between groups. Those relations can get ugly, violent, but not always. Interrelationships based on need lead to diversity, cultural exchange, love, children, etc. What is Jensen advocating for here? Isolate permaculture farms? We need each other. And that's messy. Human life is messy. Beware of utopia.
@tbridge71 Trading some salt with a neighbouring tribe is a far cry from strip mining half a continent for some shale oil so we can make millions of iPods and chinese plastic trinkets that we throw away two years later. I'm not a primitivist like Jensen but I do agree that infinite growth on a finite planet is unsustainable and that we have to change how we do things or our children and grandchildren will either die or live in what can only be described as hell.
@johan404 agreed. we're the choir here. if you feel as you say you do, I hope you work locally/globally to oppose corporate rape. (I work on salmon conservation). my point was simply that the argument-- perhaps primitivist-- that "civilization" is inherently unsustainable and violent because it hinges on trade (and if I want something you have then i will want to kill you) seems facile. and unhelpful. and may lead to the trap of utopian fascism seen under Mao, Lenin, and the Bush admin.
@tbridge71 Yes it's a very dystopian view of reality. I do believe we can have a sustainable society if the economy is based on the efficient use and conservation of resources instead of mindless consumerism. But to have that we have to change our values as well as the debt-based monetary system that encourages infinite growth.
@johan404 whether or not civilization is unsustainable, would like to know more about the way our economic system is inherently unsustainable. Monbiot was writing about that in a post recently (or not so recently) and I'm ignorant. could use an economics primer... one in graphic novel format would be ideal! ; ) any suggestions?
@tbridge71 It's pretty straightforward. The economy has to maintain infinite growth or else the entire system collapses. I mean, just look at what happens when there isn't any economic growth: recession, depression, starvation, death. Usually economic growth means more products and services are being traded. Products and services require natural resources and energy. Thus the need for more resources increases infinitely. Unfortunately we live on a finite planet. That's why it's unsustainable.
@johan404 willing to discuss over email? I have remedial questions. eg: why does an economy need to grow, isn't the need for it to grow based on population increase? why can't there be a stable-state economy?
@tbridge71 Sorry I don't have the time for that right now. But check out Zeitgeist Addendum, you can find it here on YouTube for free, just search "zeitgeist addendum". Without the quotes obviously. The movie explains the whole thing very well, better than I can.
This is only logical. You can't keep expanding infinitely on a finite planet. Unfortunately, this simple concept is hard for many people to grasp, because this culture is all we know. Sometimes we have to be reminded that this isn't the only way to live. We have to start opening our minds.
What if you were to consider us a global community? We don't import resources from outside of our planet. I propose this only as a thought experiment, but were we to live in a world with global free migration, it would never be considered "...'their' oil... under 'their' land". As transport and communications grows, the sense of isolation and nationalism is diminishing. Be optimistic about the future, nobody can really predict what's around the next corner.
@handinhand2020 It doesn't matter if nationalism dies or whatever, as long as we operate under the infinite growth paradigm we will run out of some critical resources, be it oil or topsoil, and that will be the end of it. Being optimistic essentially means denying what is, denying reality, and if you don't accept what is, then you can't really change it. I think it would be preferable to be an optimistic realist.
Hey Derrick could you show me the peer reviewed journal articles you cited when righting your books? Oh wait that's right, you didn't cite any, ever.
This guy's "research" would be laughed out a high school turn paper. He offers no data to back up his claims. He has nothing but pseudophilosophical ramblings to offer.
I just hope that any of you that believe this guy don't choke on the the leader, because you've already swallowed hook, line, and sinker.
@12345combination He doesn't often make data-centric "claims". They are done on occasion, and there's citations here and there, but he's more logic-driven.
@12345combination They aren't really science books? I mean what kind of justifications are you looking for? It's not like he cited no sources at all, iirc Endgame II had like 600 endnotes (granted plenty were extraneous commentary).
And the rest of his endnotes were crappy opinion pieces, other books without any citations of peer reviewed material of their own, and newspapers. None of which scholarly sources.
five stars for stating the bleeding obvious! How boring is this guy -and he really thinks he's enlightening us!? preaching to the converted me thinks...
yes, our way of life is destructive, yet jensen is another critic who offers very little in way of practical ideas on how to change these things, and many impractical ones (blowing up dams anyone?). his books are long-winded and could be condensed into 100 pages, thus saving trees, water, transportation costs, etc.
@earinsound the books are well written, inspiring and readable. you want a plan...quit fuckin playing THEIR GAME and teach others to do the same. quit feeding the sources of dominion...have some courage and change everything in your life...aren't you bored to tears, scared to death? ...the forces of this dominion are incredibly popwerful but only if you feed them....we change our driection and teach others or ..nature changes it for us.. done deal. have some goddamn fun too. stay in touch
well-written books, but...longwinded and also highly repetitious. what is jensen doing but presenting the same facts over and over again? my beef is that he, along w/ many other "anarchist" authors, present the problem most of us have known for decades, get into details, yet offers NOTHING other than blowing up dams as advice. no, i don't need a plan. i have one (or three!). and i'll have fun along the way. thanks!
What I don't get about this is where does this place all the "uncivilized" nomadic/semi-nomadic cultures in history that move from one area to an other, exhausting the resources and driving out, exterminating, or enslaving the people there. Where does this put historical tribal empires like the Iroquois, the Zulu, the Huns? Their situation was completely 'uncivilized', was it any less unsustainable? It certainly was no more enlightened.
I listed a few examples off the top of my head, but the list goes on.
It's just that I don't think there's anything especially peaceful, harmonious, or for that matter "sustainable" about "non-civilized" peoples' way of life.
For instance, the slash-and-burn agriculture the Iroquois depended on, left unchecked, would probably turn New England into a rocky plain.
@bathetcnow i respectfully disagree, you can do what you want but i will continue to listen to Him who loved me in spite ogf me, who bore my sins upon Himself, died on a cross in my place and rose from the grave with a free gift pf pardon and eternal life spent with The One who walked the shores of Galilea 2000 some years ago, who's law is not meant to restrict but to protect against what we see today and through secular and pagan history...He commands to love as He is Love
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
When I was a young girl, I tried to listen, But got distracted by the human race; Always knew I was part of a system, And never wanted to just take up space; Then came an answer I always wanted; Through the noise, I stumbled upon it A sea of faith is what I needed. Can't believe it took so long to see it. Maybe if I find it, I'll keep it Maybe if I say it, I'll mean it Praise Allah, God is One! Find me in that 'permanent state'.
if we all lived in tents, or teepees, it would be a normal thing to us. we'd never question it. we'd learn to use our environment around us. to survive. i submit that it would be a far better life, without corporations enslaving us...everyone would be way happier.
This man has his shit together. I have sold my car, stopped buying paper towels and disposables, and plastics. A very small step i know, but we have to do something about this. Civilization will destroy itself and hopefully alot of us get out of there and stop feeding these businesses that are pulling us all down.
Think we should just wait for it to destroy itself? Why not help it along a little? The longer we wait, the harder the fall. Need to start to get some resilient alternatives out there as well to protect us against its death throes.
@SwartasSkelthus absolutely! it is imperative to quit feeding them and to quit playing their game.You must know who they are too. IN order to survive, flourish and heal to.. go into a regenerative descent. the average person needs to know steps on how to ...give people things to do and so they can empower themselves while they take it away from very powerful sources ..the only way. all of thsi must come with reverence and re-alignment with natures laws...not mans. maybe a lil music...comedy.
@enderwigginsx I thought that to...and occassionally still (lose hope) feel it , but I was told by indian elders here on MInnesota reservation...you must try and you'd be surprised how fast a wave of change can travel. Iwas in a meeting bringing biodiesel to the res and just broke down thinking about the numbers and the control of US and...angry and ....the dude grabbed me and laid some wisdom on me. change the topic of conversation NOW
Actually the original idea was that you lend them money and they pay you interest for the use of your money.
That's become twisted now, and it's treated more like a outright service to you, that you should pay for, completely forgetting that all the banks lending and investing power comes from *your* money.
Yes, they are a Simulacra; they make the most money, yet without actually producing anything of value, whereas mexicans get paid the least to feed the bankers; so they can do nothing
More storms, more droughts, more violent weather, more cold spells ,more heat related deaths,melting of the ice caps, pollution everywhere, plastic everywhere, toxic waste dumps, dioxin in every female on earth's breast milk, whole forest clear cut, new diseases, AIDS, SARS, Bird Flu, Now Pig Flu.
They did warn about eating too much fish, but lately they don't have too worry much about it since most all the big fishing is over, done
Ever wonder why suddenly the Grocery store sells Tilapia?
With all the poisons that industrialized civilization pumps into this world, it won't be too much longer until zero population growth naturally, is a daily reality.
But everyone is at workkkk.... and everyone seems to be happily growing golf-course grass. Propaganda is a real problem in the US. I might be attacking this problem the wrong way.
What makes you think that I have a home to go to ?
We are all going to experience some very real and life changing problems in the very near future.Global climate change is not just something for scientist to worry about and government officials to deal with. It is already affecting us and it is only a matter of time before our home is changed into something we no longer recognize as Earth
Humanists like Sojaofdapepo often cannot see overpopulation as a problem. John Lennon thought overpopulation was a sham. Don't they see that a population collapse due to overpopulation is the end result of this denial?
Sure it can. it is sustainable through maintenence of constant trade. Whence trade is inequal then violence occurs. True if cties, are ever expanding then they are not sustainable but that doesn't have to be the case if the population is enlightened enough to stop expansion beyond its lands carrying capacity.
Cities are expanding. "If the population is enlightened,... " is a thought that just exists in your mind. These thoughts are just your denial of reality. "Constant" trade today requires fossil fuel. Are you also in denial of global warming? What happens when we run out of fossil fuel? How can trade be constant? It is not sustainable! Are you also in denial of overpopulation? People who cannot think straight are going to cause a die-off of humanity. Think "reason" not "enlightenment".
The clovis peoples, and those native tribes after the clovis peoples all which descended from the Chaco Valley in North America, did in fact rely upon a "collective city". Various sects of native Americans built storages for the depositing of food. Deposits left by the Shawnee could be consumed by another tribe. They truly mastered the art of living within the local habitat, while subsidizing other tribes needs.
He nails it: "A city ["civilization"] is any collection of people living in numbers large enough to *require* the importation of resources. This means that (1) your way of life can never be sustainable and (2) your way of life must be based on violence. To survive, you *need* to get resources under some other peoples' land."
Life on our planet has worked out a way to exist entirely on the flow of the 1 / 2-billion fraction of the energy radiated by our star, the Sun, to deep our space that is intercepted by our planet. We call the 'mechanism' that has evolved to do this the 'ecosystem'.
The ecosystem is a 'mechanism' that all living things are evolved parts of, until one kind of living creature, human beings, came to think they could 'do better'.
But they invented their own 'criteria' of 'better'..........
Civilized humans have used 'fossil fuels' to increase the size of their population by more than ten times. The most recent half of that population increase (1963 to 1999, to 6-billion) occurred AFTER it was known (in 1958) that petroleum, at least, was definitely 'finite'.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Jensen makes a lot of problematic assumptions here. Disclaimer: I'm an enviromentalist, antifascist, antispeciesist.
1. Cities CAN be self-sufficient, through technology (disclaimer: technology isn't the solution and it is not always good and could well kill us all).
2. Oil is a bad example. It is not the oil that's needed, it's the profit of Big Oil. Oil could be replaced with geothermia, HPVs, EV1, solar power, wind, lower state of living (highly recommended to the fat US asses!).
Cities can not - I am in the public works business (they are my customers) please believe me on this one
Alternative energy accounts for less than 5% of our current energy use - there is nothing that can replace oil, and we have created a system that requires oil for our very survival - which is completely absurd.
You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about. This reminds me of the ridiculous propaganda of the nuclear mafia in the 70s. It's just absurd to get caught with nonsense like this in 2008. In Europe everything the energy monopolies said would be impossible is already reality. Hmmm.
Politicians won't do it because they are corrupted, but there is absolutely no question about the technical feasibility.
WHAT is not about "finding a new cool alternative way to exploit"?
What about geothermia, lower state of living or HPVs is exploitation? Zero-emission houses exploit whom exactly?
What has "new cool" to do with everything? Is that a last resort for the conceptual analphabet to imply superficiality to have a pretext to be superficial himself?
The kind of people Jensen attracts makes me shiver. Anti-intellectuals at their best. One-dimensional. Unscientific. Disingenuous. Pol Pot style.
Insults are never productive. and your zero mission geothermia etc etc are just another way to help feed this death machine. Our way of life (civilization) is unsustainable and will never and can never be sustainable, what your saying is just a new way which wont work .
Geothermal plants still pollutes with arsenic, antimony, mercury, corrosive fluids, gh gasses, ect.. It's sucking hot water out of the earth and spitting back cold water. These things have effects. Not to mention all the resources it costs just to build and maintain the plants themselves. The plants in Iceland are always losing power too. This is why 75% of thier electricity still comes from Hydro plants.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Funny how you don't even understand the topic, yet already know what works and what does not.
Geothermia today has almost nothing to do with Iceland's hot springs and the like, as this method is clearly geographically limited. Instead it is a closed loop in solid earth which reaches down hundreds of meters into the ground and self-exchanges fluid in a closed system with the warmth of deeper layers of the earth's crust. Zero emission is a reality, it's the politics and economics that fail.
Ok, you're talking about Geothermal heating for homes then.
Understand that the machines that circulate the fluid (which is toxic) runs on gas/electric (which cause emissions). Then take into consideration the resources (more nature destroyed), and machines (which run on fossel fuels) that have to be used to build+maintain the systems. Spend your $ (which was made by exploiting and/or polluting nature in some way) on it if you must.
To exchange warmth you need pipes and a medium (for which pure water or CO2 is sufficient). Where do you got that fairy tales about toxins from?
To move the medium, you need convection, which is driven by the correlation of density and temperature. Where do you get that fairy tales about pumps from?
If you are going to judge a technology by its least relevant or least sustainable or least applicable versions, you are beyond hope.
I like how hard you dig for things to argue with, and act the rest of my statement is irrelevent. This has turned into an issue with your pride I see. Tis the reason you feel the need to insult people.
It's pointless to have a discussion with someone like you. Go lie to yourself and tell me I'm wrong about that too if it makes you feel better. It's you problem.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Wow, you really are an imbecile. Like what part of my advice? Abstract ranting again, heh? Out of ideas again, heh? Incapable of debate, huh? And what exactly is the reason why YOU don't take it? Why are you constantly evading? Why do you try to psychologize when you're proven wrong? Why do you build up a strawman fallacy by judging a technology by its least sustainable & decentralized & applicable version? You do that with everything? Have fun thinking about Jensen's positions doing the same.
Just stop crying already. You've been crying like a little BITCH for 4 days now!
If you don't like Derrick Jensen then don't watch him. Do you need a tampon for your bleeding pussy or somthing? I mean how much longer are you going to be on the rag!?
I'm not calling people names. I'm describing low intellect.
If some idiot grunts nonsense like "your zero mission geothermia ... just another way to help feed this death machine" it's just as logical as "wet water is dry".
It's meaningless, incoherent, superficial drivel from a Jensen fanboy mob. As they don't even want to understand their dogma/ be skeptical/ debate the gaping holes of their ideology they'll drop it as a worn out trend, a temporary phase of their biography in the next moment.
You say you're not calling names, but you just called someone an idiot again.. Are you an idiot?
Just shut up dude. You aint shit. Stop acting like you smart, because you're not. You're a faggot with low self esteem because you're ugly. Got get you Geothermal shit, and shut the fuck up already.
Yeah, jack off off some more, jerk, I guess you will masturbate evil civilisation into the ground once your neuron-sperm ratio reaches an equilibrium. Till then, don't expect me to waste my time with someone who can't offer any content.
I agree. And I am torn between helping to transform this city to accept life on better terms: feed the plants and animals who it can(without importing anything) and feed its waste to those for whom it's food or go somewhere which I like, if I can even afford to do so. My options are better than when I lived in NYC but I wouldn't say that my options are actually good. I am deeply troubled, by awareness. I wish I knew what is of the most good. Thank you for shaking my broken heart, Derrick.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Jensen is missing the fact the biosphere is not a closed system; it is always being flooded by energy from the Sun. Feudalism, the type of society that was prevalent before the 1700s, doesn't need oil or natural gas and is pretty damn sustainable. Even if industrial civilization goes away that doesn't mean we'll have to live in a "gay" hunter-gatherer utopia. zzz33333 would get a nasty surprise when the local warrior aristocracy comes to fuck-up his little "tribe."
The 6,7 Billion humans needing energy exponentionally or the rich of the rich elite and some slaves protected by force until sustainability in 2 Generations to come?
The "We" here is fucksatanism and myself. Look, hunting/gathering or permaculture may sound fun to some people but it is really just toil and manual labor which is fine for most people. But there will also be a select few, the warrior nobility who will not degrade themselves to this level and force others to work for them. Its better to be part of their class or to die trying.
Of course, I'm half-joking here. But this is definitely a blind spot in primitivist thinking: why would a post-industrial-collapse society necessarily be egalitarian?
Most people in this world live with almost no energy consumption at all. How much energy can be used by someone who lives from less than a d0llar a day? That is what the masses on this planet are doing.
The filthy rich, the affluent chauvinists are the one who burn it all up with suburbia, SUVs, idiotic agroindustry, military, spectacles, air conditioning, fancy trips, useless meetings, empty buildings, meaningless office lands, golf courses, globalisation, luxury, decadence,...
interestingly, the American eugenics movement in the early 20th century was celebrated by German nationalists as well. who decides who lives, dies and "breeds?" and can we talk about re-sculpting civilization without falling into our deeply-engrained eugenic heritage?
Excellent points about the consumption of finite resources. And, I must agree with your premise on how CIVILization is fundamentally all about aggression, especially, but not limited to western philoshy based systems. Where I have to disagree is in your supposition that civilization is doomed. It is only if the bottom of the mental pool keeps ruling the roost. Are you surprised that likable dimwits make poor choices? Or amoral swine do no better? I vote for eugenics, no brains, no breed.
I think a world without boundaries with freedom where everyone is equal and one. Society build on wealth, knowledge & wisdom. We can already use alternative energy sources like Hydrogen(HHO)and Electro-Magnetism. Alternative education, health care.
thanks Adam - this is one of Jensen's boldest call-outs of the spirituality crowd who think that just working on themselves is going to change the world.
yeah i was just having this conversation with a spiritual friend the other day, who doesn't want to put 'negative energy' into addressing the harm that is being done
it all makes me think of that picture in 'as the world burns' where the guy is sitting on a stump meditating while they cut down the forest around him
There is no proof or data that could show whether a meditating person stops the West from destroying the world. However, there are signs that the world is a little more complex than we thought. If you study e.g. the scientific experiments of western physiologists on indian yogis you will find that the data is scientific, yet not understandable by modern concepts. I'd rather have an open mind regarding this question, though I believe that what you describe is more of a bad excuse and cowardice.
jensen's father beat him and his siblings and his mother. as an adult, civilization and "nature" have taken on the dual roles of father and mother in his mind. he's highly intelligent, and his intelligent mind has followed that association unceasingly. i think that's what leads him to seriously ridiculous conclusions, like the epilogue of 'culture of make-believe' in which he describes native americans as having been, essentially, hippie communists instead of violent and superstitious.
pretzelzetzel 5 months ago
Its very easy to bash civilization on youtube, selling books online, learning from the internet and books - Jensen is just a hypocrite. Go bash civilization using smoke signs in the middle of the jungle.
linghun 5 months ago
@linghun that doesn't make any sense. how would he get his message out?
pretzelzetzel 5 months ago in playlist derrick jensen
Oh God, what a breath of fresh air this is amid a toxic wasteland of brainless zombies.
MrIsaiah722 7 months ago 7
Hes talking bollocks ... we use LESS land mass to produce more and more food these days ...its called progress folks ...
GTWHITEFEVER 7 months ago
Detroit is the resounding example of how a city dies. I think Jensen's ideas are spot-on, these large upscale communities are unsustainable.
technologic21 7 months ago 2
This is not a good definition. It's way too subjective. When does a population center become large? And what is the distance that constitutes "importation". And again, one could consider earth one land base, in which, nothing is being imported to.
SecularAnimist 8 months ago
@SecularAnimist Excellent remarks. Jensen's "thoughts" may impress ignorant and infantile people but ultimately don't make any sense. It's flabbergasting how so many people can be so alienated as to fall for that junk. Just add "primitivism" and "deep green" to the diseases of civilization.
linghun 5 months ago
They not an inherent problems with being civilized; they are the anathema of civilization. The question is, can humankind get to resolving those traits while 'progressing' civilization to the utmost sustainable and compassionate level?
ODvids 9 months ago
@ODvids As long as there is the requirement for the importation of food there is no possible way that a civilization can be sustained. And don't sit there and tell me America built its civilization to protect the native inhabitance of North America. Also as far as your social network what happens when you don't pay rent? A man with a gun comes and tells you to live on the street. Some social network a social network based on violence. cont.
RyanTh3Lion 8 months ago
@ODvids and also I highly doubt, even if it was possible for solar energy, that it wouldn't be charged and stolen and fought over just like our water is today from corporations that need it to import massive amounts of food to to our cities.
RyanTh3Lion 8 months ago
Civilizations were built to satisfy the participants' needs to protect, survive and to create comfort and progress that was not possible on their own. They were a social network aimed at sustainable survival stimulated by symbiotic contributions to progressive means of doing that. Add greed and selfishness, and there becomes the problem.
ODvids 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I think he makes a lot of assumptions and holds them as truths. I don't agree that the importation of goods necessarily leads to war. Greed and selfishness do. Oil doesn't have to be the end of civilization; solar can replace it and make ALL energy requirements available to ALL tribes.
ODvids 9 months ago
I think he makes a lot of assumptions and holds them as truths. I don't agree that the importation of goods necessarily leads to war. Greed and selfishness do. Oil doesn't have to be the end of civilization; solar can replace it and make ALL energy requirements available to ALL tribes.
ODvids 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This is nonsense. Stone age people who didn't live in cities could still live non-sustainable lives, and certainly still had wars. In a modern industrailized society it is consumption, not density, that is non-sustainable. And people who don't live in cities in North America (like New York) consume at least as much as those who do.
cookerg 9 months ago
Comment removed
cookerg 9 months ago
Comment removed
cookerg 9 months ago
Comment removed
cookerg 9 months ago
i believe in the 'slow food' movement... i have, as well, spent a total of only 13 euros on my bicycle in the last 3 years for my personal transport needs. we don't need to own or drive a car, or buy into the oil market for example to move ourselves to work and back. think of the savings, think globally, act locally. don't reproduce.. don't desire so much. share what you have with the poor... be kind.. what so difficult about these simple things.. forget population growth man..its a lie.
kingofaikido 9 months ago
indigenous peoples usually have a very friendly relationship to the world that helps them to minimize the damage they do to nature. the idea of consuming the world as something human beings do to live is a prejudice of the world of consumer capitalism. of course, it makes sense to believe in that view or else the whole meaning of a consumer society will collapse. i pray for that collapse every day. we do not need 'desire'. the Buddhists say desire is the source of all suffering.
kingofaikido 9 months ago
no, not true. this is also a myth. the idea that the world is going bad because of its tribalism(s). tribes around the world, especially indigenous ones, whether you are talking African, Australian aboriginies, Amazonian Indios, New Zealand Maori, etc..
they have all a great respect for nature and have had cultural ceremonies and praxes that celebrate and work to establish harmony with the natural habitats. anthropomorphic means they only see the world through their own tribal eyes, not true.
kingofaikido 9 months ago
cont'd: Also, i wonder if civilizations are really all that great... maybe we would be better off without them. The indigenous Amazonian peoples struggling against oil companies polluting their rivers would probably prefer it if so called civilization would just keep out of their rainforests. What do civilized people do anyway? They drive, they go to war so that they can drive some more, and in the end, they watch television.... well, maybe we are destroying the world so we can watch Homer..
kingofaikido 9 months ago
cont'd: ...but this is also silly. i mean the recent BP oil spill had nothing to do with an increase in population. The Fukushima nuclear power plant disasters had little or nothing to do with an increase in population. Rather, these disasters were caused by greedy and irresponsible rogue corporations. Sure the need for clean green energy exists and we could get it for all of our growing world population if the bad guys, the polluters, stepped aside.
kingofaikido 9 months ago
but crashedsky, going back to your food=increase in population formula. i really don't know where you got this one. doesn't make sense. in the State of Kerala in India, they have a strong family planning policy so reproduction is kept to a minimum, but it is one of the richest states, meaning most productive, in agriculture etc. so there is at least one example where increase in food does not mean more population. also you connect the increase in global population with increase in pollution,
kingofaikido 9 months ago
cont'd: we should emulate those people and have free baths, as well as free notebooks and pens for students. the problem today is: my own university management, for example, awards itself with parties in which female students wear bikinis and high heels to serve their faculty wine. when the vice chancellor was asked by a feminist professor why he arranged this, he responded, 'we have to reward ourselves somehow!' the cultural degeneration, and i agree with DJ on this, has begun at the top.
kingofaikido 9 months ago
Hi crashed sky, thanks for your comments. I think Gandhi's words will work well here..
when asked what he thought of British civilization, he paused for a while and then said 'it would be a good idea'.. that is to say, we aren't quite there yet.. if we want to be as civilized as the Hindus or the Buddhists or the Muslims were in their best years, we have to work much harder. The Muslims originated the university, for example, and they even had hot baths and flowing water for the students!
kingofaikido 9 months ago
cont'd: ...starvation. But the real reason for these things is not the carrying capacity of the land. The fact is: we now have both the technology and an overabundance of supplies of grain (silos and silos full) to feed the entire world several times over. But we possess an amazingly 'Western civilized' trait: namely, an unwillingness to share the bounty that we possess (a extreme poverty of the human spirit). The question then seems to be: how do we change from being mean-spirited to kind?
kingofaikido 9 months ago
@kaikido You have a very well reasoned response - however, I wonder what you think about this. Remember the fact that increase in food = increase in population. Whether are not we are reaching 'carrying capacity' - you can't deny that the increase of population is destroying our natural environments and biodiversity. Such things, once they are gone, will forever be gone, and, according to most scientists, would lead the the downfall of our civilizations, western or not?
crashedsky 9 months ago
lets be very precise. I tend to think DJ confuses the processes of capitalistic industrialization with civilization. I dont. As such food is being grown, clothing is being made, metals are being shaped, houses are being made by local materials at a civilizational level NOW beneath the level of global capital he is talking about. The idea of the 'population explosion' overshooting the land's carrying capacity is also a myth. This emerged as an explanation for lingering poverty and large-scale.
kingofaikido 9 months ago
@kaikido ps: This is just ONE of the negatives of an ever increasing population. Most, besides many tribal societies (not all), are very anthropocentric when it comes to the world. We, the west, the east, wherever, despite what is told to the populations, believe that HUMANS deserve the world and will do anything to conquer it. We, like capitalist consumers who can't get enough of their supplies, consume the world. An increase of population just serves that purpose faster.
crashedsky 9 months ago
also FeralK, I would add that the whole idea of social evolution that DJ uses at the core of his argument is flawed. Although it may look like it is the mainstream view in the West that it is the dominant force on the planet, this is not how other civilizations view it. Neither do those other civilizations view the world through the prism of evolution or the metaphor of 'struggle'. The idea that modernity is singular, constructed from a monolithic narrative stemming from the West is wrong.
kingofaikido 9 months ago
hi FeralK, I realize DJ isnt just talking about food. This is especially where he has to be careful. His argument is undercut 2 ways. 1) In saying 'we' are a 'civilization' (Western? dominant?), he then makes it impossible for those who made that civilization possible to change without being uncivilized in the process 2) there are other civilizations, that do not and did not follow the Western model that nonetheless became civilized i.e. they did not grow by being violent dominator-exploiters
kingofaikido 9 months ago
DJ never mentioned here the word 'massification' (globlization is massificaton of global connections). Civilzation vs a mass of people. A democratic society depends on mass of voters. The fast growing mass of young people in Tunis, Egypt, Lybia etc. want to have a vote and make revolution. Go with the flow of grow? There is a lot of dynamic in world politcs now. The highest point of U.S.A. power is in endgame now. World is chancing by the force of global masses: identities with same interests.
Contextcatcher 10 months ago
yes, nice points, Derrick. I wonder if you aren't exaggerating the 'urbanization' theory of the city though. The early Italian cities or 'city states' were semi-agricultural fortified towns. To this day, many cities in Egypt among other places in the Middle East retain part of this old structure and there are miniature market gardens everywhere within cities. Almost every corner shop will have a small garden nearby growing the veges it needs to feed its clients. Your analysis a bit Western?
kingofaikido 10 months ago
@kingofaikido They're still not sustainable. They may be more sustainable than cities in the west, but they are still not going to last. DJ isn't just talking about food when he mentions resources; it includes EVERYTHING. From the metals that need to be mined, to the clothing on people's backs, to the housing structures; everything is still imported. Also, in any civilization, populations aren't kept in check, eventually overshooting the land's carrying capacity. It's just not sustainable.
FeralKimchi 9 months ago
Ah Derrick Jensen, forever young, the world is flawed so we need destroy it, how romantic.
brokennarcissist 11 months ago
@Gondring The only way you would be correct is if we humans can not only halt total ecological catastrophe due to pollution, but if we can stop a "natural" extinction level event with our technology Asteroids etc.
Many natives should be looked at the generations they allowed to live on the same land without destroying the land base. These people must be added to their per capita use of natural resources.The west -count- on infinite future innovation, because we are leaving negative wealth.
PtAltmVansanTarr 1 year ago
"Denuded the landscape of that resource"...hehehe...pre-Civilization societies do the same thing. Recall how the New England American Indians used up all the resources in an area and moved on. When the first whites showed up from across the sea, they assumed it was because they had destroyed all of the woods in the Old World. HIs analysis is rather shallow and one-dimensional in this clip. Has he gotten more realistic since this?
Gondring 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Its called commerce. When farmers can produce more food then they need themself it enables us to create cities. Noone is self sufficient, that what makes the system seem sane. It seems allmost impossible to become self sufficient.
typeclash 1 year ago
Comment removed
typeclash 1 year ago
@typeclash it does seem impossible under the current circumstances we are in. Mostly because it's true. But with the innovations and technologies we have now and if we change our wasteful, obsolete practices to sustainable ones and everything that goes along with it, like being truly educated, then it would seem less impossible and more practical. Easier said then done, I know.
moety2 1 year ago
the following quote kind of fits in with what's been posted here in the comments: "The economy is a subsystem of a larger finite system, the biosphere; hence, permanent growth is impossible" - Manfred Max-Neef
xTheRevisionistx 1 year ago
@tbridge71 yeah, that's interesting because the Nazis definitely had a longing for the way of life of their ancient Nordic neighbors. Someone like Jensen might be looking at from the perspective of the Native Americans vs European empires. I too believe a more sustainable way of life would be possible. We've had cities for so long, which did pollute as well, just not the kind of pollution that stays around for 1000s of year like nuke waste does.
PtAltmVansanTarr 1 year ago
@PtAltmVansanTarr -- Funny how people attack "the greedy," while simultaneously lauding the Plains Indians who hoarded huge swaths of land to support only a few people. If modern people did that, they'd be called names for not sharing their wealth or putting it to more efficient use.
The Atlantic Coastal Indians generated more non-recycled/re-used solid waste than modern Americans, on a per-capita basis! But most people are ignorant of such things.
Gondring 1 year ago
Sadly due to criminal greed it is not cost effective to save ourselves. I worked building master planned communities before greed destroying this industry and while watching these houses spring up literally by the dozens over night I realized that this is all wrong. I have dreams about self sustaining, off the grid mini farm communities dedicated to a healthy sustainable future for both man and animal. When I mentioned my dream to others within the industry they love it but fail to see a profit.
ZZzzbbssmmm 1 year ago
Was there any society, hunter-gatherer or otherwise, that didn't require some kind of trade for something it needed-- salt, oolichan oil, pelts, etc? This implies the necessity of relations between groups. Those relations can get ugly, violent, but not always. Interrelationships based on need lead to diversity, cultural exchange, love, children, etc. What is Jensen advocating for here? Isolate permaculture farms? We need each other. And that's messy. Human life is messy. Beware of utopia.
tbridge71 1 year ago
@tbridge71 Trading some salt with a neighbouring tribe is a far cry from strip mining half a continent for some shale oil so we can make millions of iPods and chinese plastic trinkets that we throw away two years later. I'm not a primitivist like Jensen but I do agree that infinite growth on a finite planet is unsustainable and that we have to change how we do things or our children and grandchildren will either die or live in what can only be described as hell.
johan404 1 year ago
@johan404 agreed. we're the choir here. if you feel as you say you do, I hope you work locally/globally to oppose corporate rape. (I work on salmon conservation). my point was simply that the argument-- perhaps primitivist-- that "civilization" is inherently unsustainable and violent because it hinges on trade (and if I want something you have then i will want to kill you) seems facile. and unhelpful. and may lead to the trap of utopian fascism seen under Mao, Lenin, and the Bush admin.
tbridge71 1 year ago
@tbridge71 Yes it's a very dystopian view of reality. I do believe we can have a sustainable society if the economy is based on the efficient use and conservation of resources instead of mindless consumerism. But to have that we have to change our values as well as the debt-based monetary system that encourages infinite growth.
johan404 1 year ago
@johan404 whether or not civilization is unsustainable, would like to know more about the way our economic system is inherently unsustainable. Monbiot was writing about that in a post recently (or not so recently) and I'm ignorant. could use an economics primer... one in graphic novel format would be ideal! ; ) any suggestions?
tbridge71 1 year ago
@tbridge71 It's pretty straightforward. The economy has to maintain infinite growth or else the entire system collapses. I mean, just look at what happens when there isn't any economic growth: recession, depression, starvation, death. Usually economic growth means more products and services are being traded. Products and services require natural resources and energy. Thus the need for more resources increases infinitely. Unfortunately we live on a finite planet. That's why it's unsustainable.
johan404 1 year ago
@johan404 willing to discuss over email? I have remedial questions. eg: why does an economy need to grow, isn't the need for it to grow based on population increase? why can't there be a stable-state economy?
tbridge71 1 year ago
@tbridge71 Sorry I don't have the time for that right now. But check out Zeitgeist Addendum, you can find it here on YouTube for free, just search "zeitgeist addendum". Without the quotes obviously. The movie explains the whole thing very well, better than I can.
johan404 1 year ago
This is only logical. You can't keep expanding infinitely on a finite planet. Unfortunately, this simple concept is hard for many people to grasp, because this culture is all we know. Sometimes we have to be reminded that this isn't the only way to live. We have to start opening our minds.
xs0heavenly 1 year ago
@lol97d Bitches don't know about my fast breeder reactors.
12345combination 1 year ago
civilization, by definition = overpopulation
Barklord 1 year ago
What if you were to consider us a global community? We don't import resources from outside of our planet. I propose this only as a thought experiment, but were we to live in a world with global free migration, it would never be considered "...'their' oil... under 'their' land". As transport and communications grows, the sense of isolation and nationalism is diminishing. Be optimistic about the future, nobody can really predict what's around the next corner.
handinhand2020 1 year ago
@handinhand2020 It doesn't matter if nationalism dies or whatever, as long as we operate under the infinite growth paradigm we will run out of some critical resources, be it oil or topsoil, and that will be the end of it. Being optimistic essentially means denying what is, denying reality, and if you don't accept what is, then you can't really change it. I think it would be preferable to be an optimistic realist.
johan404 1 year ago
Very true. Without some type of comprehensive eugenics the base of the species could be in danger...
It all begins with our numbers, our population. Our numbers are killing our species, and variably, the planet we live on.
A quote from Ghost In The Shell comes to mind...
"Overspecialize and we breed in weakness, it's slow death."
technologic21 1 year ago
Comment removed
technologic21 1 year ago
Hey Derrick could you show me the peer reviewed journal articles you cited when righting your books? Oh wait that's right, you didn't cite any, ever.
This guy's "research" would be laughed out a high school turn paper. He offers no data to back up his claims. He has nothing but pseudophilosophical ramblings to offer.
I just hope that any of you that believe this guy don't choke on the the leader, because you've already swallowed hook, line, and sinker.
12345combination 1 year ago
@12345combination He doesn't often make data-centric "claims". They are done on occasion, and there's citations here and there, but he's more logic-driven.
intdoublecharbool 1 year ago
@12345combination They aren't really science books? I mean what kind of justifications are you looking for? It's not like he cited no sources at all, iirc Endgame II had like 600 endnotes (granted plenty were extraneous commentary).
regurgitatedlie 1 year ago
@regurgitatedlie
And the rest of his endnotes were crappy opinion pieces, other books without any citations of peer reviewed material of their own, and newspapers. None of which scholarly sources.
12345combination 1 year ago
five stars for stating the bleeding obvious! How boring is this guy -and he really thinks he's enlightening us!? preaching to the converted me thinks...
kuriouskitti 1 year ago
Yo what's the song at the end?
ojr777 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Discovered in the 21stC: The Underlying Law of Nature.
The underlying law of nature may be the world's most useful, profitable and encouraging knowledge.
The top 3 General Characteristics of The underlying law of nature are:
#1. The Way of All Things
#2. The Basis of All Laws and Principles
#3. The Basis of All Health, Growth, Efficacy and Efficiency
Google it – as a start.
The empirical process for identifying the underlying law of nature was discovered in 2008.
Soon we may all do so.
TedDGPoulos 1 year ago
yes, our way of life is destructive, yet jensen is another critic who offers very little in way of practical ideas on how to change these things, and many impractical ones (blowing up dams anyone?). his books are long-winded and could be condensed into 100 pages, thus saving trees, water, transportation costs, etc.
earinsound 1 year ago
@earinsound the books are well written, inspiring and readable. you want a plan...quit fuckin playing THEIR GAME and teach others to do the same. quit feeding the sources of dominion...have some courage and change everything in your life...aren't you bored to tears, scared to death? ...the forces of this dominion are incredibly popwerful but only if you feed them....we change our driection and teach others or ..nature changes it for us.. done deal. have some goddamn fun too. stay in touch
bathetcnow 1 year ago
@bathetcnow
well-written books, but...longwinded and also highly repetitious. what is jensen doing but presenting the same facts over and over again? my beef is that he, along w/ many other "anarchist" authors, present the problem most of us have known for decades, get into details, yet offers NOTHING other than blowing up dams as advice. no, i don't need a plan. i have one (or three!). and i'll have fun along the way. thanks!
earinsound 1 year ago
What I don't get about this is where does this place all the "uncivilized" nomadic/semi-nomadic cultures in history that move from one area to an other, exhausting the resources and driving out, exterminating, or enslaving the people there. Where does this put historical tribal empires like the Iroquois, the Zulu, the Huns? Their situation was completely 'uncivilized', was it any less unsustainable? It certainly was no more enlightened.
ymirfrostgiant 1 year ago
@ymirfrostgiant What semi-nomadic cultures are you talking about?
Exterminating and enslaving people?
Where did you get that information???
Feomathar007 1 year ago
@Feomathar007
I listed a few examples off the top of my head, but the list goes on.
It's just that I don't think there's anything especially peaceful, harmonious, or for that matter "sustainable" about "non-civilized" peoples' way of life.
For instance, the slash-and-burn agriculture the Iroquois depended on, left unchecked, would probably turn New England into a rocky plain.
ymirfrostgiant 1 year ago
@ymirfrostgiant There is a great difference between our culture that now counts 6 billion people and other cultures.
We have a way of mind that no other culture has had before, visit my channel...
Feomathar007 1 year ago
What a stupid and idiotic religion! STOP DRINKING THE KOOL AID FOLKS! stop listening to this garbage!
Serge1965 1 year ago
@Serge1965 the only thing anyone should listen to is ...Nature and not man made dominion based lies...boring, destructive repetitive man made lies.
bathetcnow 1 year ago
@bathetcnow i respectfully disagree, you can do what you want but i will continue to listen to Him who loved me in spite ogf me, who bore my sins upon Himself, died on a cross in my place and rose from the grave with a free gift pf pardon and eternal life spent with The One who walked the shores of Galilea 2000 some years ago, who's law is not meant to restrict but to protect against what we see today and through secular and pagan history...He commands to love as He is Love
Serge1965 1 year ago
You should eat your own poop, Derrick. That would be sustainable.
cheesehead54494 1 year ago
If this man and all the commentors had no computer, this would not even be an issue. Good luck without your phones and computers...
sulamithwulfing 1 year ago
this guys a lune without trade the world pop would be much lower
MikDonsen 1 year ago
this is precisely the point. they are trying to break us. just gonna take everyone to see that the paper in their wallet is the enemy.
stett99 1 year ago
Even the great scientist Dr Stephen Hawkings said..." EVERY CIVILIZATION EVENTUALLY DESTROYS ITSELF!"
MrEddievanhalo 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
arozinsk 2 years ago
if we all lived in tents, or teepees, it would be a normal thing to us. we'd never question it. we'd learn to use our environment around us. to survive. i submit that it would be a far better life, without corporations enslaving us...everyone would be way happier.
StarGazerCafe 2 years ago 3
Does anyone know what the song is at the end?
ddrumsman549 2 years ago
This man has his shit together. I have sold my car, stopped buying paper towels and disposables, and plastics. A very small step i know, but we have to do something about this. Civilization will destroy itself and hopefully alot of us get out of there and stop feeding these businesses that are pulling us all down.
SwartasSkelthus 2 years ago 32
@SwartasSkelthus
Think we should just wait for it to destroy itself? Why not help it along a little? The longer we wait, the harder the fall. Need to start to get some resilient alternatives out there as well to protect us against its death throes.
loewenclass 2 years ago
Why not help it along a LOT?
Allpovvertoslaves 1 year ago
@SwartasSkelthus absolutely! it is imperative to quit feeding them and to quit playing their game.You must know who they are too. IN order to survive, flourish and heal to.. go into a regenerative descent. the average person needs to know steps on how to ...give people things to do and so they can empower themselves while they take it away from very powerful sources ..the only way. all of thsi must come with reverence and re-alignment with natures laws...not mans. maybe a lil music...comedy.
bathetcnow 1 year ago
@SwartasSkelthus Good for you. Now start composting your shit. The Humanure Handbook by Joseph Jenkins.
caveatemp 9 months ago
god we are fucked.
enderwigginsx 2 years ago 15
@enderwigginsx I thought that to...and occassionally still (lose hope) feel it , but I was told by indian elders here on MInnesota reservation...you must try and you'd be surprised how fast a wave of change can travel. Iwas in a meeting bringing biodiesel to the res and just broke down thinking about the numbers and the control of US and...angry and ....the dude grabbed me and laid some wisdom on me. change the topic of conversation NOW
bathetcnow 1 year ago
"What true value are banks anyway?
They just take your $ to watch your $."
Actually the original idea was that you lend them money and they pay you interest for the use of your money.
That's become twisted now, and it's treated more like a outright service to you, that you should pay for, completely forgetting that all the banks lending and investing power comes from *your* money.
withindarkness 2 years ago
Yes, they are a Simulacra; they make the most money, yet without actually producing anything of value, whereas mexicans get paid the least to feed the bankers; so they can do nothing
CammieSpectrum 2 years ago
a civilization, if you can keep it
entropyfu 2 years ago
More storms, more droughts, more violent weather, more cold spells ,more heat related deaths,melting of the ice caps, pollution everywhere, plastic everywhere, toxic waste dumps, dioxin in every female on earth's breast milk, whole forest clear cut, new diseases, AIDS, SARS, Bird Flu, Now Pig Flu.
They did warn about eating too much fish, but lately they don't have too worry much about it since most all the big fishing is over, done
Ever wonder why suddenly the Grocery store sells Tilapia?
notsure2013 2 years ago 4
With all the poisons that industrialized civilization pumps into this world, it won't be too much longer until zero population growth naturally, is a daily reality.
notsure2013 2 years ago
What are you going to do about it?? Run on the banks and collapse them. Stop paying your mortgage. Get everyone to at least start there!
BankRampage 2 years ago
What true value are banks anyway?
They just take your $ to watch your $. Learning to grow food for your family & neighbors is a real place to start.
notsure2013 2 years ago
But everyone is at workkkk.... and everyone seems to be happily growing golf-course grass. Propaganda is a real problem in the US. I might be attacking this problem the wrong way.
BankRampage 2 years ago
Alot of people are going to relocate, soon.
Phoenix AZ population: 4,281,899
Las Vegas NV population:1,836,333
Los Angeles Ca population 12.9 million
When there is no more drinking water because the Colorado River has dried up
All these people will have to migrate
and where will they go?
notsure2013 2 years ago
TO YOUR HOUSE
Sojaofdapepo 2 years ago
What makes you think that I have a home to go to ?
We are all going to experience some very real and life changing problems in the very near future.Global climate change is not just something for scientist to worry about and government officials to deal with. It is already affecting us and it is only a matter of time before our home is changed into something we no longer recognize as Earth
Making jokes doesn't change the truth
We are all in trouble !
notsure2013 2 years ago
I love the way this person thinks.
He is brilliant.
notsure2013 2 years ago 3
Now, face the facts. How do you solve overpopulaton?
Sciuser10 2 years ago
Comment removed
steven10107 2 years ago
I favor a two child policy, and zero migration world wide.
Sciuser10 2 years ago
overpopulation...= sham
Sojaofdapepo 2 years ago
Ok. What is your solution to the human perdicament?
Sciuser10 2 years ago
Almost 7 billion people on this tiny planet & you think overpopulation is a sham.
Let me guess... You went to school during George Bush's "No Child Left Behind" policy or
did you go to school at the "Pat Robertson institute"?
notsure2013 2 years ago 6
Humanists like Sojaofdapepo often cannot see overpopulation as a problem. John Lennon thought overpopulation was a sham. Don't they see that a population collapse due to overpopulation is the end result of this denial?
Sciuser10 2 years ago 2
agreed !
isforbliss 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Are you fucking retarded?
ButterySexBiscuit 2 years ago
Comment removed
Sojaofdapepo 2 years ago
Sure it can. it is sustainable through maintenence of constant trade. Whence trade is inequal then violence occurs. True if cties, are ever expanding then they are not sustainable but that doesn't have to be the case if the population is enlightened enough to stop expansion beyond its lands carrying capacity.
juanpablotocino 2 years ago
Cities are expanding. "If the population is enlightened,... " is a thought that just exists in your mind. These thoughts are just your denial of reality. "Constant" trade today requires fossil fuel. Are you also in denial of global warming? What happens when we run out of fossil fuel? How can trade be constant? It is not sustainable! Are you also in denial of overpopulation? People who cannot think straight are going to cause a die-off of humanity. Think "reason" not "enlightenment".
Sciuser10 2 years ago
The clovis peoples, and those native tribes after the clovis peoples all which descended from the Chaco Valley in North America, did in fact rely upon a "collective city". Various sects of native Americans built storages for the depositing of food. Deposits left by the Shawnee could be consumed by another tribe. They truly mastered the art of living within the local habitat, while subsidizing other tribes needs.
Dabodizafa 3 years ago
Why don't they teach things like this in grade school? No matter where i go in USA what is taught at every school is the same.
Out of all the knowledge , & from all the history, we are all taught the same things and only those things . As if that is all there is.
Sad...
But, you already knew that.
notsure2013 2 years ago
He nails it: "A city ["civilization"] is any collection of people living in numbers large enough to *require* the importation of resources. This means that (1) your way of life can never be sustainable and (2) your way of life must be based on violence. To survive, you *need* to get resources under some other peoples' land."
aronheintz 3 years ago 6
Life on our planet has worked out a way to exist entirely on the flow of the 1 / 2-billion fraction of the energy radiated by our star, the Sun, to deep our space that is intercepted by our planet. We call the 'mechanism' that has evolved to do this the 'ecosystem'.
The ecosystem is a 'mechanism' that all living things are evolved parts of, until one kind of living creature, human beings, came to think they could 'do better'.
But they invented their own 'criteria' of 'better'..........
rspiesr 3 years ago
Work this out for yourself:
1. World petroleum use is stated to be 80-million barrels per day.
2. The ecosystem started to 'produce' fossil fuels, including petroleum, about 350-million years ago in the Carboniferous Era.
Doing the arithmetic with large numbers we find thet the average rate of 'production' of petroleum by the ecosystem is about 11-barells per day.
Civilization is 'using' petroleum nearly 1-million times more rapidly that its average rate of ecological 'production'.
rspiesr 3 years ago
Civilized humans have used 'fossil fuels' to increase the size of their population by more than ten times. The most recent half of that population increase (1963 to 1999, to 6-billion) occurred AFTER it was known (in 1958) that petroleum, at least, was definitely 'finite'.
See the papers of M King Hubbert.
rspiesr 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Jensen makes a lot of problematic assumptions here. Disclaimer: I'm an enviromentalist, antifascist, antispeciesist.
1. Cities CAN be self-sufficient, through technology (disclaimer: technology isn't the solution and it is not always good and could well kill us all).
2. Oil is a bad example. It is not the oil that's needed, it's the profit of Big Oil. Oil could be replaced with geothermia, HPVs, EV1, solar power, wind, lower state of living (highly recommended to the fat US asses!).
trakkaton 3 years ago
Cities can not - I am in the public works business (they are my customers) please believe me on this one
Alternative energy accounts for less than 5% of our current energy use - there is nothing that can replace oil, and we have created a system that requires oil for our very survival - which is completely absurd.
Revbone450 3 years ago
You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about. This reminds me of the ridiculous propaganda of the nuclear mafia in the 70s. It's just absurd to get caught with nonsense like this in 2008. In Europe everything the energy monopolies said would be impossible is already reality. Hmmm.
Politicians won't do it because they are corrupted, but there is absolutely no question about the technical feasibility.
trakkaton 3 years ago
Its not about finding a "new cool alternative way to exploit "
SmokeOut315 3 years ago 2
WHAT is not about "finding a new cool alternative way to exploit"?
What about geothermia, lower state of living or HPVs is exploitation? Zero-emission houses exploit whom exactly?
What has "new cool" to do with everything? Is that a last resort for the conceptual analphabet to imply superficiality to have a pretext to be superficial himself?
The kind of people Jensen attracts makes me shiver. Anti-intellectuals at their best. One-dimensional. Unscientific. Disingenuous. Pol Pot style.
trakkaton 3 years ago
Insults are never productive. and your zero mission geothermia etc etc are just another way to help feed this death machine. Our way of life (civilization) is unsustainable and will never and can never be sustainable, what your saying is just a new way which wont work .
SmokeOut315 3 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You are an imbecile.
trakkaton 3 years ago
All those "solutions" come with problems.
Geothermal plants still pollutes with arsenic, antimony, mercury, corrosive fluids, gh gasses, ect.. It's sucking hot water out of the earth and spitting back cold water. These things have effects. Not to mention all the resources it costs just to build and maintain the plants themselves. The plants in Iceland are always losing power too. This is why 75% of thier electricity still comes from Hydro plants.
And stop calling people names. >8^(
eight38s 3 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Funny how you don't even understand the topic, yet already know what works and what does not.
Geothermia today has almost nothing to do with Iceland's hot springs and the like, as this method is clearly geographically limited. Instead it is a closed loop in solid earth which reaches down hundreds of meters into the ground and self-exchanges fluid in a closed system with the warmth of deeper layers of the earth's crust. Zero emission is a reality, it's the politics and economics that fail.
trakkaton 3 years ago
Ok, you're talking about Geothermal heating for homes then.
Understand that the machines that circulate the fluid (which is toxic) runs on gas/electric (which cause emissions). Then take into consideration the resources (more nature destroyed), and machines (which run on fossel fuels) that have to be used to build+maintain the systems. Spend your $ (which was made by exploiting and/or polluting nature in some way) on it if you must.
But again, stop call people names. >8^(
eight38s 3 years ago 5
You don't know what you are talking about.
Some basic physics:
To exchange warmth you need pipes and a medium (for which pure water or CO2 is sufficient). Where do you got that fairy tales about toxins from?
To move the medium, you need convection, which is driven by the correlation of density and temperature. Where do you get that fairy tales about pumps from?
If you are going to judge a technology by its least relevant or least sustainable or least applicable versions, you are beyond hope.
trakkaton 3 years ago
I like how hard you dig for things to argue with, and act the rest of my statement is irrelevent. This has turned into an issue with your pride I see. Tis the reason you feel the need to insult people.
It's pointless to have a discussion with someone like you. Go lie to yourself and tell me I'm wrong about that too if it makes you feel better. It's you problem.
eight38s 3 years ago
If you're wrong concerning the facts, it doesn't help to evade.
If you're wrong concerning the facts, it doesn't help to psychologize those who disagree with you because they have the better arguments.
If you're wrong concerning the facts, it doesn't help to try a strawman fallacy.
If you're wrong concerning the facts, it doesn't help if you abstractly declare that somehow something was overlooked.
trakkaton 3 years ago
You should take your advice.
Good bye
eight38s 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
trakkaton 3 years ago
You didn't prove shit wrong, you retard! Go bother someone else. Buy a dog or something! Get off my dick already! GOD!
IT'S YOU I DON'T LIKE, NOT THE TOPIC, NOT THE FACTS, IT'S YOOOOOOOOU!
eight38s 3 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Wow, you're dumb like bread.
You claim I proved nothing?
Well what about me constantly repeating that you started with a strawman fallacy, explaining exactly how.
Are you dumb?
You can't read?
Used to surround yourself with people who ignore every one of your logical missteps and lies?
Well, then I must be quite annoying constantly pointing out how badly you fail.
trakkaton 3 years ago
Are you still mad I proved you wrong? Get over it retard.
eight38s 3 years ago 2
Just stop crying already. You've been crying like a little BITCH for 4 days now!
If you don't like Derrick Jensen then don't watch him. Do you need a tampon for your bleeding pussy or somthing? I mean how much longer are you going to be on the rag!?
JurkoffJay 3 years ago
I'm not calling people names. I'm describing low intellect.
If some idiot grunts nonsense like "your zero mission geothermia ... just another way to help feed this death machine" it's just as logical as "wet water is dry".
It's meaningless, incoherent, superficial drivel from a Jensen fanboy mob. As they don't even want to understand their dogma/ be skeptical/ debate the gaping holes of their ideology they'll drop it as a worn out trend, a temporary phase of their biography in the next moment.
trakkaton 3 years ago
You say you're not calling names, but you just called someone an idiot again.. Are you an idiot?
Just shut up dude. You aint shit. Stop acting like you smart, because you're not. You're a faggot with low self esteem because you're ugly. Got get you Geothermal shit, and shut the fuck up already.
JurkoffJay 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
No, I'm calling an idiot an idiot, idiot. That's not calling names.
It's not an offense, it's an accurate description.
Don't take it personally, a lot of people are stupid, especially in the US, so you are not alone.
trakkaton 3 years ago
Pfft! And there's your true colors.
You're a loser dude. Get a life.
JurkoffJay 3 years ago 2
trakkaton
You are a rude bitch! Can't you have a intelligent conversation without being an asshole? PLAY NICE OR SHUT THE FUCK UP!
JurkoffJay 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I can't have an intelligent conversation with idiots. How would that be possible.
trakkaton 3 years ago
I think you're the only idiot here yo. Stop getting mad at everyone else for not understanding shit.
It's not there fault you're a moron!
JurkoffJay 3 years ago
Stop egging him on too.
eight38s 3 years ago
Yeah, jack off off some more, jerk, I guess you will masturbate evil civilisation into the ground once your neuron-sperm ratio reaches an equilibrium. Till then, don't expect me to waste my time with someone who can't offer any content.
trakkaton 3 years ago
Got nothing to say? Have you learned something yet?
I happy for you. Now spread the word.
JurkoffJay 3 years ago
I agree. And I am torn between helping to transform this city to accept life on better terms: feed the plants and animals who it can(without importing anything) and feed its waste to those for whom it's food or go somewhere which I like, if I can even afford to do so. My options are better than when I lived in NYC but I wouldn't say that my options are actually good. I am deeply troubled, by awareness. I wish I knew what is of the most good. Thank you for shaking my broken heart, Derrick.
lilysotoo 3 years ago 3
This anti-civie stuff is so fucking gay, I wish it weren't true.
fucksatanism 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Jensen is missing the fact the biosphere is not a closed system; it is always being flooded by energy from the Sun. Feudalism, the type of society that was prevalent before the 1700s, doesn't need oil or natural gas and is pretty damn sustainable. Even if industrial civilization goes away that doesn't mean we'll have to live in a "gay" hunter-gatherer utopia. zzz33333 would get a nasty surprise when the local warrior aristocracy comes to fuck-up his little "tribe."
lntertubes 3 years ago
who in your book of definitions is "we"?
The 6,7 Billion humans needing energy exponentionally or the rich of the rich elite and some slaves protected by force until sustainability in 2 Generations to come?
LastReplaySC 3 years ago
The "We" here is fucksatanism and myself. Look, hunting/gathering or permaculture may sound fun to some people but it is really just toil and manual labor which is fine for most people. But there will also be a select few, the warrior nobility who will not degrade themselves to this level and force others to work for them. Its better to be part of their class or to die trying.
lntertubes 3 years ago
Of course, I'm half-joking here. But this is definitely a blind spot in primitivist thinking: why would a post-industrial-collapse society necessarily be egalitarian?
lntertubes 3 years ago
no bees = game over no matter what you come up with
LastReplaySC 3 years ago
Most people in this world live with almost no energy consumption at all. How much energy can be used by someone who lives from less than a d0llar a day? That is what the masses on this planet are doing.
The filthy rich, the affluent chauvinists are the one who burn it all up with suburbia, SUVs, idiotic agroindustry, military, spectacles, air conditioning, fancy trips, useless meetings, empty buildings, meaningless office lands, golf courses, globalisation, luxury, decadence,...
trakkaton 3 years ago
interestingly, the American eugenics movement in the early 20th century was celebrated by German nationalists as well. who decides who lives, dies and "breeds?" and can we talk about re-sculpting civilization without falling into our deeply-engrained eugenic heritage?
endofempire79 3 years ago
Excellent points about the consumption of finite resources. And, I must agree with your premise on how CIVILization is fundamentally all about aggression, especially, but not limited to western philoshy based systems. Where I have to disagree is in your supposition that civilization is doomed. It is only if the bottom of the mental pool keeps ruling the roost. Are you surprised that likable dimwits make poor choices? Or amoral swine do no better? I vote for eugenics, no brains, no breed.
Plutonwolf 3 years ago 3
The world is falling apart of ignorance, status, profit, corruption, mind control & disinformation.
ase010 3 years ago
I think a world without boundaries with freedom where everyone is equal and one. Society build on wealth, knowledge & wisdom. We can already use alternative energy sources like Hydrogen(HHO)and Electro-Magnetism. Alternative education, health care.
ase010 3 years ago
As always, Derrick Jensen's philosophy on sustainability is brilliant!
Christinecedar 3 years ago 2
thanks Adam - this is one of Jensen's boldest call-outs of the spirituality crowd who think that just working on themselves is going to change the world.
endofempire79 3 years ago
yeah i was just having this conversation with a spiritual friend the other day, who doesn't want to put 'negative energy' into addressing the harm that is being done
it all makes me think of that picture in 'as the world burns' where the guy is sitting on a stump meditating while they cut down the forest around him
thanks for posting
pennilesscripple 3 years ago
There is no proof or data that could show whether a meditating person stops the West from destroying the world. However, there are signs that the world is a little more complex than we thought. If you study e.g. the scientific experiments of western physiologists on indian yogis you will find that the data is scientific, yet not understandable by modern concepts. I'd rather have an open mind regarding this question, though I believe that what you describe is more of a bad excuse and cowardice.
trakkaton 3 years ago
Keep them coming. Thank you.
AdamHintz 3 years ago