/lit/ - Literature

>>13108066
unadulterrated autism: the book

>>13108066
leftists seem to complain a lot about the ecology, but are far too hogtied by political correctness in order to propose any actual solutions to the real problems of overpopulation and polution how to actually solve the ecological crisis:

ending financial speculation

ending political correctness and cultural marxism, expelling the screching victim classes from society

cutting all foreign aid immediately

repopulating the countryside with urban excess population (pol pot for white people)

establishing a totalitarian fascist regime in europe and north america.

engage in wars of culling and conquest against the overpopulated third world

>>13108184
t. Absolute retard

>>13108184
>leftist
>political dichotomy
Stfu brainwashed filth. You know what the actual solution is? Cutting the power out. None of your ideological fantasies.

>>13108184

dumbest post i've ever seen

>engage in wars of culling and conquest against the overpopulated third world

if we wanted to kill the most egregious polluters, we'd start with ourselves. you first, faggot.

>>13108262
Based and paleopilled

>>13108184
I always wondered why people don't return to the country side as high-salary distance work and worldwide shipping are now commercially available.

>>13108302

>why don't people live out in the country and just have every single thing shipped directly to their isolated door, surely that's an efficient use of fuel

>>13108302
No one wants to be surrounded by redneck inbred retards

>>13108310
but if this takes please on a larger scale, micro communities could be build, that can slowly rejuvenate the cultural live of country regions.
>>13108308
Well, can't argue with this point. I guess current trends on ecological transportation could one day work in my favor, but that's not an argument. Still, if there are more things delivered at once, as in my first argument, it could lessen prices a bit, but I still have to agree that it's not very efficient either way. Didn't think that trough.

>>13108184
>Political correctness and cultural marxism are the REAL polluters
This has to be bait

>>13108184
nigger

The truth is to seek out a new form of ecology that is sustainable and symbiotic with contemporary technology in society. The problem most solutions have are trying to preserve that which is no longer capable of being sustained without massive artificial restrictions. Instead, we should seek out how to mold the what all else is alive to a world with pollution shitholes like The US or China, and try to be more health conscious moving forward

>>13108448
Or just nuke mutts

>>13108066
Humanity is not capable of making the changes necessary to prevent ecological collapse, we simple don't have the necessary selflessness, cooperation, and altruism on a large scale. We're a blight on the planet and we won't stop until we bleed it to death.
The only future for humanity is to escape to other planets before this one becomes our grave, but that begs the question: should we? We would of course go on to do the same thing elsewhere, no end in sight, unless we drastically change every aspect of our identities. I see that as unrealistic, so my answer is no - we deserve to die here. We MUST die here before the infection that is ourselves spreads any farther.

>>13108492
But we don't need any of those things. All we need is a tiny tiny minority of revolutionaries committed to disrupting some small but significant aspect of the system to cause systematic collapse. Post-collapse, there are many reasons why it can't be rebuilt.

Don't be so anti-human and pessimistic. I find your lack of faith disturbing...

>>13108066

Capitalism destroying "Nature" as per Leftist phantasmagoria would do it a favor since the former is only a lame imitation of the latter. "Nature" is a laissez-faire nightmare where one calamity mitigates another to no end, ever writhing in sardonic providence. I think Leftist hysteria is mainly a recoiling from the intuition that living, that is to say bestial, "Nature" is superfluous to non-living, that is to say grossly Phenomenal, "Nature". Not that the former emerged from the latter, but that it is actually Ontologically superimposed thereon. That "Nature" is not necessary for the light you see, the air you breathe, the water you drink, the ground you tread. That the nightmare is superfluous to the dream.

>And that mystery knoweth why the wild beasts have arisen and why they will be destroyed.

>>13108592

>i don't get out much: the post

>>13108302
at least in the UK, a lot of the countryside is bought by rich yuppies and boomers
the poor went to the cities for work, and then the rich went out of the cities to the country

>>13108184
>tfw this post is so right, no one could actually prove it wrong and just seethed

>>13108592
>never read a book in my life

>>13108554
A temporary fix. I would help any movement like this out of principal, but in the end, humanity can't reform itself into being sustainable.
Ruthless, opportunistic, power-hungry expansionists will find ways to rise to the top in any large-scale human system and manipulate the well-intentioned but lazy and/or retarded masses into the same march we're in now. It has always happened, the past century just cemented and perfected it, and made elite control inescapable.
Systematic collapse is morally just and I support it, but one day we will put ourselves down if not by accident then by necessity.

>>13108661
Humans lived for hundreds of thousand of years without causing systematic existential catastrophe for the biosphere. The crucial focus should be on the MEANS (i.e. the technology) which allows humans (or any self-propagating system) to disrupt the natural biosphere as it exists--the product of millions of years of complex evolution.

There is no point in lamenting the problems with HUMANS. It is just a small subset of humans who are advancing the MEANS. Once the means have been disrupted in such a way that they cannot be re-established, humans will go on living like they have for thousands of years without threatening existential collapse. That's the best we can hope for, and that's what we should want. "Ruthless, opportunistic, power-hungry" ...humans are all those things! Just like ants in the wild or penguins! Every self-propagating system ruthlessly competes for power. And that is the way it SHOULD be. Humans NEED power and the pursuit of power for a fulfilling life.

Stop focusing on human behavior and focus on the MEANS.

Everyone here STFU and study actual ecology please.

And read Coming Home to the Pleistocene, Paul Shepard.

everyone ITT is gay but me

>>13108609
>>13108651

Not only would climate hysterics find banishing the slaughter from the house inconceivable, but they would rather die than see it manifest.

>>13108184
Ow the edge

>>13108627
>tfw this post is so bad nobody bothers engaging it for longer than 10 seconds
Ftfy

>>13108184
You do know that suburbs are essentially repopulating the countryside with excess urban population, right? Like, my suburb city used to be a farming town less than a hundred years ago, until a fuck-ton of people started wanting to get out of the city. It was rural countryside, and a few neighboring towns are still rural countryside. Suburbs, meanwhile, produce a lot more pollution than crowded cities do. Both per-capita (per person) and overall when we compare all of the suburbs surrounding most cities to the cities themselves. They use more water to maintain private and public lawn spaces, more food per-person, and more fossil-fuels per person. A better solution to the problem of urban pollution (especially in the western half of the US) would be a renewed focus on public transport, figuring out how to improve an area without making it too pricey for poor people to afford to live in a one-room apartment there, and public works that focus on cleaning the air and clean energy. Now, the focus on public transport would require some sort of new funding drive or tax, most likely, and would have to operate at a net loss for some years before the system becomes self-sustaining on fares and passes. Especially since new buses and trains would have to be bought, or at least more efficient new engines for said buses. The same can be said for economic revitalization, especially if you aren't trying to push out the urban poor in the process. However, it is possible through rent-control for businesses and private homes, public infrastructure investment, and a focus on public health. Again, any and all programs would have to operate at a net loss for some years before seeing any actual results. Finally, public works for green energy and pollution clean-up. This is achievable, but would require a multi-pronged approach. First of all, more "green" power plants and generators would need to be constructed. Solar panels and wind turbines (preferably vertical axis turbines) on top of large buildings, tide power on coastal cities, large-scale solar and wind power plants in areas where weather is conducive to their operation. Then, one needs to also step up on advertising campaigns aimed at urban populations to individually use less power, waste less food (which uses fuel and electricity to make), and to make use of public transit systems that were set up earlier.

We would not be facing a climate change catastrophe today if the Axis had won.

>>13109880
I think what you've written is a place where the supposed "right" and "left" can unite on environmental issues.

I would add a focus on horizontal density vs vertical density as well. Most modern buildings are a fucking travesty in both architectural and system design (let us build a large glass tower with no air-side zone control to track sun load over the course of a day, very cool).

>>13110094
>A state depending on constant expansion would be much more ecologically conservative
What possible fucking reason would you have to think this other than "lol Hitler was a vegetarian"

>>13108184
>real problems of overpopulation
this is a meme and its the least stupid thing you wrote, what a fucking retard

>>13110240
Germans, Italians, and Japanese would never breed to the rabbit extent that all third-world peoples do. Naturally stable.

>>13110240
>>13110284
Further and of bigger consequence - Capitalism came out as the victor in WWII. And ideology of "constant expansion". Through capitalism, stability is failure as there is no monetary growth. Only expansion is acceptable. The only way these global corporations can expand is to push massive third world immigration. More cheap little underpaid worker drones. More more more. That's who won WWII.

Is the book OP posted any good, regardless if you believe in it? Banter in this thread aside, I do like some of the techno-skepticism that I see Heidegger and the like

>buy a book by Pentti Linkola
>wonder why did I decide to support the printing of this ultimately unnecessary book and the death of woodlands through it

>>13110132
the right mostly has no intentions (or real plan of a ction in any case) to stop capitalist markets; any objections it raises about the environment are naive and moot until they adress these.

>>13108592

> I read every book in existence and randomly vomited the resultant vocabulary back onto my keyboard

>>13110797
The right is the only voice speaking out against globalization. Globalization is the fanatical end that all corporations seek. Endless immigration, endless manpower and faceless worker bees who labor for pennies. You want to have a worker's union in your place of business? What a joke! Bossman will scrounge up the nearest somalis, pakis, and guatemalans he can find to toil at half your pay. After all, there is an endless supply of them and they keep multiplying. Doesn't sit well with you? You are now a racist according to the left. They spit on the concept of citizenship and nation - the only checks with the power to rival multinational corporations.

>>13110284
italians are third world people, maybe the northern ones less so but still