"Is it a system of centralised direction, intent on cutting off communities from abundant energy sources, and allocating resources via bloated bureaucracies at the say-so of detached technocrats?"
If you answer yes please submit your resume to WEF and network partners immediately!
It's interesting that, even as there have been undercurrents of Malthusianism present among elites for a long time, mainstream establishment progressivism at least used to pretend to be for improving the lives and material conditions of the common man. Regardless of its actual results or intent, that was at least the message broadcast to the masses as its purpose. Now it's turned to almost explicitly "Things will be worse for you than they used to be, and worse for your children (if you have them, which maybe you shouldn't because of climate change) than they were for you, but this is necessary in order to save the world (from the very humans we used to at least pretend to want to make things better for)." It's very weird.
The Left used to be far more Promethean than Malthusian in fact. Just ask Karl Marx himself. Of course, Marx was also apparently a "let it rip" kind of guy when it came to infectious disease, something the "Left" nowadays disavowed on that fateful day in March 2020.
Well-said. "Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell", as Edward Abbey famously said long ago, which eventually kills its host. And GDP is a flawed measure of success at best. That said, there are many flavors of "degrowth" out there, and the ones that require central planning by elite technocrats will NOT end well at all, if the plandemic response was any indication. We would thus get permanently stuck in a bad place and still destroy the Earth, albeit a little bit more slowly and much more painfully than business as usual.
Our rulers know that we are running out of the basis of our wealth, fossil fuels, with no feasible alternative available. Therefore, they need to cover the upcoming (or ongoing) decline in euphemisms to keep the population quiet.
"Is it a system of centralised direction, intent on cutting off communities from abundant energy sources, and allocating resources via bloated bureaucracies at the say-so of detached technocrats?"
If you answer yes please submit your resume to WEF and network partners immediately!
So true!
Free speech, thought and debate will lead to solutions and these will work best at local level.
When solutions are worked out at global level implementations create havoc at local level and at best won’t get to the best outcome.
It's interesting that, even as there have been undercurrents of Malthusianism present among elites for a long time, mainstream establishment progressivism at least used to pretend to be for improving the lives and material conditions of the common man. Regardless of its actual results or intent, that was at least the message broadcast to the masses as its purpose. Now it's turned to almost explicitly "Things will be worse for you than they used to be, and worse for your children (if you have them, which maybe you shouldn't because of climate change) than they were for you, but this is necessary in order to save the world (from the very humans we used to at least pretend to want to make things better for)." It's very weird.
The Left used to be far more Promethean than Malthusian in fact. Just ask Karl Marx himself. Of course, Marx was also apparently a "let it rip" kind of guy when it came to infectious disease, something the "Left" nowadays disavowed on that fateful day in March 2020.
Well-said. "Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell", as Edward Abbey famously said long ago, which eventually kills its host. And GDP is a flawed measure of success at best. That said, there are many flavors of "degrowth" out there, and the ones that require central planning by elite technocrats will NOT end well at all, if the plandemic response was any indication. We would thus get permanently stuck in a bad place and still destroy the Earth, albeit a little bit more slowly and much more painfully than business as usual.
What all the domineering
do-gooders
wholeheartedly agree on
is the degree of leverage
that administrative bureaucracies
ought to wield
on people’s freedoms
which
to borrow a terminus technicus
from a French intellectual
from another field
had better be
the maximal grip
Our rulers know that we are running out of the basis of our wealth, fossil fuels, with no feasible alternative available. Therefore, they need to cover the upcoming (or ongoing) decline in euphemisms to keep the population quiet.
We are not running out of oil. There is something called free energy that will set the world on track
Indeed, Nikola Tesla could tell you all about that if he were still alive.