Started By
Message
locked post

If you're too young to remember the Unibomber...

Posted on 10/28/14 at 2:29 pm
Posted by Zach
Gizmonic Institute
Member since May 2005
112499 posts
Posted on 10/28/14 at 2:29 pm
I've posted several times on Global Warming threads that one of the major branches of the true GW believers is 'De-Developers'. Too help define them I always say "think Ted Kascinsky".

These are not scientists concerned about grants. These are not Marxists. These are people who are profoundly convinced that man should live in a primitive state like the rest of creation. Or, not live at all.

Well, here is a modern example of a De-Developer:

We must end civilization to stop Global Warming
Posted by SlowFlowPro
Simple Solutions to Complex Probs
Member since Jan 2004
422599 posts
Posted on 10/28/14 at 2:32 pm to
i forget the anarchist term these people get, but yeah...they are also typically the people who turn protests into riots in the NW
Posted by wickowick
Head of Island
Member since Dec 2006
45814 posts
Posted on 10/28/14 at 2:33 pm to


Posted by DosManos
Member since Oct 2013
3552 posts
Posted on 10/28/14 at 2:34 pm to
Neo-Luddites?
Posted by Zach
Gizmonic Institute
Member since May 2005
112499 posts
Posted on 10/28/14 at 2:34 pm to
quote:

i forget the anarchist term these people get, but yeah...they are also typically the people who turn protests into riots in the NW


One term was 'Eco-Warriors.'
Posted by DosManos
Member since Oct 2013
3552 posts
Posted on 10/28/14 at 2:35 pm to
Btw, Kaczinsky hates liberals. Read his Manifesto. It's interesting.
Posted by Bunk Moreland
Member since Dec 2010
53432 posts
Posted on 10/28/14 at 2:36 pm to
I am not on board with the climate change dorks, but I am definitely in the Malthusian camp on peak oil/finite fossil energy source stuff and think the infinite growth paradigm is going to die within 50 years. So, IMO, talking about this is mature, but you tend to get labeled some nazi depopulation agenda guy when you do.
Posted by Zach
Gizmonic Institute
Member since May 2005
112499 posts
Posted on 10/28/14 at 2:36 pm to
quote:

Neo-Luddites?

Have you read Toffler's '3rd Wave'?
Posted by bamarep
Member since Nov 2013
51807 posts
Posted on 10/28/14 at 2:36 pm to
quote:

A former professor at the University of Arizona


no damn wonder the youth of this generation is so fricked up.
Posted by gatorrocks
Lake Mary, FL
Member since Oct 2007
13969 posts
Posted on 10/28/14 at 2:36 pm to
To be fair, Al Gore just wants more of your money.

That's always been his end game. He couldn't give a shite about the environment.
Posted by Zach
Gizmonic Institute
Member since May 2005
112499 posts
Posted on 10/28/14 at 2:37 pm to
quote:

Read his Manifesto. It's interesting.


I tried but his writing style is not what we would call 'concise.'
Posted by DosManos
Member since Oct 2013
3552 posts
Posted on 10/28/14 at 2:38 pm to
quote:

Have you read Toffler's '3rd Wave'?



No, sir.
Posted by Zach
Gizmonic Institute
Member since May 2005
112499 posts
Posted on 10/28/14 at 2:41 pm to
quote:

I am not on board with the climate change dorks, but I am definitely in the Malthusian camp on peak oil/finite fossil energy source stuff and think the infinite growth paradigm is going to die within 50 years. So, IMO, talking about this is mature, but you tend to get labeled some nazi depopulation agenda guy when you do.


I've argued Malthusian issues since the 70s. I've never encountered a Nazi jibe. Nazis wanted to kill people. Malthus simply wanted nature to take it's course. IE, disease, drought, floods, etc have always killed people. When we intervene to send food to people who live in a region where food cannot grow we upset the balance of the region's sustainability and its population.
Posted by Teddy Ruxpin
Member since Oct 2006
39584 posts
Posted on 10/28/14 at 2:44 pm to
quote:

but I am definitely in the Malthusian camp on peak oil/finite fossil energy source stuff and think the infinite growth paradigm is going to die within 50 years.


Do you even fusion bro?
Posted by son of arlo
State of Innocence
Member since Sep 2013
4577 posts
Posted on 10/28/14 at 2:48 pm to
quote:

These are people who are profoundly convinced that man should live in a primitive state like the rest of creation.


I think there is merit with the idea all men should stay in contact with the basics of their survival, but it's problematic to bridge the gap between that world and metropolitan America. Some might think they could work on Wall St, and then go home to slaughter a goat in their apartment, but that practice has become increasingly difficult.

The obvious answer is for Mother Gaia to eradicate the human infestation so that she can return to her proper temperature.
Posted by Zach
Gizmonic Institute
Member since May 2005
112499 posts
Posted on 10/28/14 at 2:48 pm to
quote:

Have you read Toffler's '3rd Wave'? No, sir.


Short story. Civilization does not advance at a consistent curve. It takes JUMPS or waves.

1st wave... primitive man who hunts and gathers discovers agriculture. This creates towns since they aren't constantly moving.

2nd wave... industrialization. Divisions of labor increase efficiency and allow social mobility between the classes. Consumerism becomes important.

3rd wave ... Technology. Innovation and information become prominent.

Toffler says that when each wave hits there are people who reject the new and want to retain the old.

So, in the late 19th century when the movement from agriculture to industrialization begins you have grandma saying "I don't need no new fangled machine to get around. My old mule Betsy did just fine."

Today, we have older people who are rejecting technology. They don't have computers and don't want them.

Well, there is a very much smaller segment that not only resists moving from the last wave to the next. They want to go all the way back to primitive (hunter gatherer).

There are also some who merely want to go all the way back to agrarian. Think hippies.
Posted by son of arlo
State of Innocence
Member since Sep 2013
4577 posts
Posted on 10/28/14 at 2:59 pm to
quote:

Well, there is a very much smaller segment that not only resists moving from the last wave to the next. They want to go all the way back to primitive (hunter gatherer).


There is something kinda romantic about the notion of a guy who works the fields to grow food, or hunts the wilderness and puts meat on the table. That idea resonates with any cisgendered male who has natural testicles.
Posted by dante
Kingwood, TX
Member since Mar 2006
10669 posts
Posted on 10/28/14 at 3:04 pm to
Here is another version for you Zach

A History Lesson
Humans originally existed as members of small bands of nomadic hunters/gatherers. They lived on deer in the mountains during the summer and would go to the coast and live on fish and lobster in the winter.

The two most important events in all of history were the invention of beer and the invention of the wheel. The wheel was invented to get man to the beer. These were the foundation of modern civilization and together were the catalyst for the splitting of humanity into two distinct subgroups:

1. Liberals; and
2. Conservatives.

Once beer was discovered, it required grain and that was the beginning of agriculture. Neither the glass bottle nor aluminum can were invented yet, so while our early humans were sitting around waiting for them to be invented, they just stayed close to the brewery. That's how villages were formed.

Some men spent their days tracking and killing animals to B-B-Q at night while they were drinking beer. This was the beginning of what is known as the Conservative movement.

Other men who were weaker and less skilled at hunting learned to live off the conservatives by showing up for the nightly B-B-Q's and doing the sewing, fetching, and hair dressing. This was the beginning of the Liberal movement.

Some of these liberal men eventually evolved into women. The rest became known as girliemen.

Some noteworthy liberal achievements include the domestication of cats, the invention of group therapy, group hugs, and the concept of Democratic voting to decide how to divide the meat and beer that conservatives provided.

Over the years conservatives came to be symbolized by the largest, most powerful land animal on earth, the elephant. Liberals are symbolized by the jackass.

Modern liberals like imported beer (with lime added), but most prefer white wine or imported bottled water. They eat raw fish but like their beef well done. Sushi, tofu, and French food are standard liberal fare.

Another interesting evolutionary side note: most of their women have higher testosterone levels than their men. Most social workers, personal injury attorneys, journalists, dreamers in Hollywood and group therapists are liberals. Liberals invented the designated hitter rule because it wasn't fair to make the pitcher also bat.

Conservatives drink domestic beer. They eat red meat and still provide for their women. Conservatives are big-game hunters, rodeo cowboys, lumberjacks, construction workers, firemen, medical doctors, police officers, corporate executives, athletes, Marines, and generally anyone who works productively. Conservatives who own companies hire other conservatives who want to work for a living.

Liberals produce little or nothing. They like to govern the producers and decide what to do with the production. Liberals believe Europeans are more enlightened than Americans. That is why most of the liberals remained in Europe when conservatives were coming to America. They crept in after the Wild West was tamed and created a business of trying to get more for nothing.

Here ends today's lesson in world history: It should be noted that a Liberal may have a momentary urge to angrily respond to the above before forwarding it. A Conservative will simply laugh and be so convinced of the absolute truth of this history that it will be forwarded immediately to other true believers and to more liberals just to piss them off.
Posted by kingbob
Sorrento, LA
Member since Nov 2010
67115 posts
Posted on 10/28/14 at 3:07 pm to
quote:

When we intervene to send food to people who live in a region where food cannot grow we upset the balance of the region's sustainability and its population.


On the flip side, stabilization of those region's economies, political systems, and populations would allow for mechanization and technological improvements in their food production capabilities, eventually allowing such a region to feed itself many times over.

Remember, the Great Plains were once called the Great American desert because no food could be grown in the hard soil. Now, it's the breadbasket of the world thanks to technology. The same could very well happen in sub-saharan Africa, India, and Bangladesh.
There may someday come a time when innovation no longer finds a way to increase productivity, sustainability, and efficiency to keep up with population growth, but that time is not now, nor is that time even close at hand.
Posted by Zach
Gizmonic Institute
Member since May 2005
112499 posts
Posted on 10/28/14 at 3:33 pm to
Excellent points. But another item to remember about the Great Plains is that the Indians didn't cultivate the soil. So, today, America has waaay more topsoil than more ancient nations that tilled it for 1,000s of years.

I recall horrific predictions in the 70s about food supplies running out. Some scientists were convinced that we would have to grow plants in the oceans...ie, we must eat sea weed because we won't have enough crops growing on land.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 2Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram