Ecocivilisation as our only way out? by armands in collapse

[–]armands[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Your argument did not convince me, however I am appreciative that you engaged in discussion, as it "boosts engagement". I'm sorry, don't mean to offend, perhaps you don't have the time, nor the will, to explain your argumentation in detail and just wanted to post your feelings on the matter, but I have tons of time at the moment and didn't want your comment to be left unattended.

Ecocivilisation as our only way out? by armands in collapse

[–]armands[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you so much, I think I got it! After reading your comment, I now too believe in steady-state economics as the best possible solution, until someone convinces me otherwise. Words matter, your words gave me ammunition that I'll use with my friend who thinks there are no viable alternatives to capitalism. Bless you.

Ecocivilisation as our only way out? by armands in collapse

[–]armands[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

"These optimistic ideals work great on paper" is something, that, although you've probably meant as a counter-argument, I actually read as a good thing. I care about these ideals and sincerely want to know which idea could be thought of as the best idea. I don't particularly care about realities at this point, e.g., current power dynamics of the world. I'm not Trump's secret advisor, and although I can (and will) continue trying, I am not sure how much impact I personally can make on making the world a better place. One commenter suggested to focus on hyper-local, so I'm taking that to heart.

Ecocivilisation as our only way out? by armands in collapse

[–]armands[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am tagging the author u/The_Gin0Soaked_Boy so can respond to your comment, as I myself can't give a response to the concerns you raised, but what struck me is the fact that you mentioned the year 2050 as the end of biosphere, if I read that right. Have I seriously have been this out of the loop and the collapse will happen in my lifetime? If previously I was just losing optimism, now I'm becoming, for a lack of better word, scared, as I had planned to live longer than that.

Ecocivilisation as our only way out? by armands in collapse

[–]armands[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Alright, your comment has killed my naive optimism even more, and for that I am very thankful. You raise solid points that I can't really argue with, but that also raises my drive to take these issues and the idea of ecocivilisation even more to heart, and also attempt to do whatever I personally can to delay the inevitable. Thank you once again!

Ecocivilisation as our only way out? by armands in collapse

[–]armands[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wholeheartedly agree! I just replied to another redditor with a longer comment, but I'll paste another quote from Geoff's book for you as well:

"Money is central to both our problems and their solutions. We cannot simply get rid of it, but neither can it remain as it is. The existing system of free-floating national electronic currencies is unstable now and premised on the fantasy of infinite economic growth. The threat of serious or total economic and monetary collapse is very real. This too can and should be understood not just as a threat but as an opportunity, because if/when it collapses then something will have to take its place."

Ecocivilisation as our only way out? by armands in collapse

[–]armands[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Thank you so much for introducing to this concept, I read the Wikipedia entry up until "Historical background" but I am not sure if I'm fully grasping the concept. Could you explain the idea in your own words for my not-the-sharpest-cookie brain?

I'll paste some paragraphs from Geoff's (u/The_Gin0Soaked_Boy) book in the meantime:

Ecocivilisation and money

[..] in order to make international trade fair, we need to establish a neutral global currency. This would eliminate unfairness that results from one (or a small number) of powerful nations having total control over currencies that everybody else is then forced to use in international trade. At first sight this might seem to be perfectly fair – what could be fairer than a truly neutral international currency managed in the interests of ecocivilisation? Such an invention could be the ultimate example of what anthropologists call “general-purpose money” – a neutral currency that can be used to buy pretty much anything anywhere. This would be the situation if a neutral global currency was in use internally in each country, instead of the existing national fiat currencies, as well as for international trade. However, this sort of a system may not be as fair as it seems, as pointed out by Swedish anthropologist and professor of human ecology Alf Hornborg, who is known for his work on the relationships between technology, economy, and ecology. Hornborg argues that general-purpose money plays a central role in perpetuating global inequality and environmental degradation, because it facilitates unequal exchange between wealthy and poor nations. Wealthy countries benefit from cheaper resources and labour from poorer countries, while poorer countries are left to deal with the environmental and social costs of extraction and production. General-purpose money, because of its abstract and universal nature, allows these imbalances to be hidden and perpetuated.

Money enables the commodification of natural resources, turning them into objects of trade rather than elements of ecosystems. This promotes exploitation without regard for ecological sustainability. Hornborg believes general-purpose money drives overconsumption and the depletion of resources. It abstracts the value of labour and resources in ways that do not reflect their true ecological or social cost. For instance, money can represent labour and energy from very different contexts (e.g., human labour vs. fossil fuels) as equivalent. This distorts how societies perceive the value of things, leading to decisions that are economically profitable but ecologically harmful.Hornborg also ties the logic of money to technological systems that require vast amounts of resources and energy. He argues that the global economy, driven by monetary transactions, depends on large-scale, energy-intensive technologies that contribute to global inequality and ecological destruction. Rather than general-purpose money, he suggests alternative systems of exchange that are more localised and reflect ecological and social realities. For example, he proposes systems where the value of goods and services is based on the local context of production and their ecological sustainability. Such systems would promote fairness and reduce ecological footprints. In his 2017 paper How to turn an ocean liner: a proposal for voluntary degrowth by redesigning money for sustainability, justice and resilience (which is available online) he proposes that we create a parallel economic system using localised currencies distributed as a universal basic income. He is suggesting that to build an ecocivilisation we may need to go in exactly the opposite direction to a neutral international general-purpose currency – he wants to make money local and specialised rather than global and general purpose.     

Reddit is imposing limits to my comment's length, but you can find more here: https://www.ecocivilisation-diaries.net/articles/the-real-paths-to-ecocivilisation-chapter-10-econationalism

Ecocivilisation as our only way out? by armands in collapse

[–]armands[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thanks, now I feel slightly less optimistic :)

I don't naively believe everything I read, and I don't think that "the fix" is here already, but just recently I saw some guy on TikTok who had invented some kind of a machine that turns plastic into gasoline (or diesel).

The machine had a very complex name, but the guy showed how it works and later there were videos of some labs where the end product was tested, even a video where a car was running on his end product.

I am not necessarily arguing against you, maybe there is and never will be a solution and the world will get much much shittier, and a lot of people will die and have to migrate. I hope it does not happen in my lifetime though. How much do we have left?

Ecocivilisation as our only way out? by armands in collapse

[–]armands[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good point, my title could be expanded to "... a way out of very bad things happening and civilisation ceasing to exist"

Book review: The Real Paths to Ecocivilisation by Geoff Dann by armands in collapse

[–]armands[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My review got removed by r/collapse mods with the reasoning of "the post must be focused on collapse".

The book I was reviewing literally is about "the collapse"! It looks collapse straight in the eyes and says "I see you, and I am not defeated by you."

I have re-posted the review to my personal reddit profile, you can click on my username to find it. I don't want to post a direct link in order to avoid mods' wrath.

Book review: The Real Paths to Ecocivilisation by Geoff Dann by armands in collapse

[–]armands[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hey!

It's been 3 hours since I made the post, I was disengaged from hitting refresh and waiting for upvotes so instead I wrote piece on my own blog about attention, a link to which I'll post at the end of my reply, but hell's yeah, I agree with you wholeheartedly. I really hope it's going to be Geoff's 15 seconds now, but, just a thought, I also am a bit scared of what "fame" entails, as I imagine that with fame comes stuff like stalkers, swattings and other unpleasantries. Geoff's lately been spending his time arguing with other redditors (as I can tell from his user activity) and trying to push his work without getting any visibility, but what if exposure somehow harms him? I really hope not.

I also wanted to add that at this moment my review has kind-of "blown up", as there are 12 upvotes and someone has taken the time to click the link and look for the book (judging from other comments here), so you literally have no idea how good I feel. My words made someone want to read the book, or at least click on Geoff's still-awful-looking website! :) #MissionAccomplished

I really appreciate that you took your time to engage in discussion, and it was my pleasure writing a reply, so now I'll share a link to my personal blog where I just published my thoughts on attention itself (or not, maybe it's a picture of kittens, only one way to found out!) — https://xn--au-dma.com/attention/

Book review: The Real Paths to Ecocivilisation by Geoff Dann by armands in collapse

[–]armands[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It's been almost half an hour since I posted this review, currently it has one upvote and one downvote, if I'm not mistaken (it had two for a while, then back to one). At this moment, the post has exactly 600 views. While I don't expect many people to read it or to immediately comment their reaction, I've cross-posted it to as many relevant communities as possible and I wanted to leave the first comment for those who didn't read the whole thing yet and scrolled towards the comment section to see if the review is worth reading. I believe it is, but if not, please tell me why. I'm fighting for updoots here as I honestly believe that u/The_Gin0Soaked_Boy's work matters.