NationStates Jolt Archive

I was wondering if anyone out in the ether of NSG had ever heard of the concept of Social Ecology. If you have, then I'd like to hear your opinion on it. If you haven't, you can get a fairly brief but passable synopsis at the Social Ecology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_ecology) page on Wiki.

It's probably right, if the Wiki page is anything to go by. I'm in no position to say much else.

*Shrug*

It's probably right, if the Wiki page is anything to go by. I'm in no position to say much else.

*Shrug*

Well, thanks anyway.

Ignores the social and environmental impact that the Soviet bloc states had.

Further, it doesn't seem to take note of the fact that the natural world is intrinsically competitive because of the extreme limitations on resources, which serve as a check on most species.

The problem is wealth. Many millions of people can afford holiday by airplane every year, 2 cars, 20 pairs of shoes, new clothes for every new fashion even though the "old" clothes where still not worn out, a new cellphone every 6th month, new TVs in several rooms just because the old and still working ones where not flat enough and so on. Thats whats straining the environment.

Producing that wealth for so many millions would have been just as straining under any other system. So don't blame capitalism unless you think wealth is only possible under that system.

So don't blame capitalism unless you think wealth is only possible under that system.Not simply wealth, but wealth in the context of a culture of atomized individuals and false abundance. Capitalism is an economic system that is based on the massive accumulation of wealth by a small class. This wealth is generated by the labor of the rest of society. Capitalism is the system that has created this crisis. It is perhaps not the only system that could have created it. This is quite irrelevant to the discussion. Our goal must then be to replace capitalism with a sane system.

Not simply wealth, but wealth in the context of a culture of atomized individuals and false abundance. Capitalism is the system that has created this crisis. It is perhaps not the only system that could have created it. This is quite irrelevant to the discussion. Our goal must then be to replace capitalism with a sane system.

No, it shouldn't.

Our goal should be to fulfill the needs and desires of existing human beings.

I was wondering if anyone out in the ether of NSG had ever heard of the concept of Social Ecology. If you have, then I'd like to hear your opinion on it. If you haven't, you can get a fairly brief but passable synopsis at the Social Ecology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_ecology) page on Wiki.

Any chance of a non-wiki ref? I refuse to use Wiki since they purged the n00b (http://www.thenoobcomic.com/)

No, it shouldn't.

Our goal should be to fulfill the needs and desires of existing human beings.
Ecocide is a sure fire way to thwart this goal:rolleyes:
Not to mention the fact that the capitalist project has been in the process of impoverishing the mass of humanity for well nigh 500 years.

Ignores the social and environmental impact that the Soviet bloc states had.

explain how

No, it shouldn't.

Our goal should be to fulfill the needs and desires of existing human beings.

Uh-huh...

...capitalism is based around constant growth. Economies MUST grow larger every year.

It doesn't take a genius to see that such a system is unsustainable in the long-term.

Not to mention the fact that the capitalist project has been in the process of impoverishing the mass of humanity for well nigh 500 years.

People have gained more in the past 500 years than they have in the entire history of our species. Literally, we have seen advances and improvements in our lives that people could not have dreamed of at any time before capitalist economic policies developed in the 18th century. Our performance as a species has been unprecedented thanks to the efficiency of the market system.

Capitalism drives technology and productivity, and technology and productivity help address environmental problems. It's one of the reasons why we the US grow at 3-4% per year with continued declines in environmental impact.

It doesn't take a genius to see that such a system is unsustainable in the long-term.


That's only true if the system grows extensively rather than intensively; as economies develop and technology advances, the productivity of the economy increases and you can get more growth with fewer inputs of labor and capitol. You need fewer additional resources to produce the same amount of growth.

And it also doesn't take in to account conservation or substitution, both of which can greatly impact the need for additional resources.

That's only true if the system grows extensively rather than intensively; as economies develop and technology advances, the productivity of the economy increases and you can get more growth with fewer inputs of labor and capitol. You need fewer additional resources to produce the same amount of growth.

And it also doesn't take in to account conservation or substitution, both of which can greatly impact the need for additional resources.

All very good points...but that still doesn't change the fact that we have a limited supply of resources. It doesn't matter how efficient we get, with a finite resource base, constant economic growth assures eventual depletion of those resources.

Of course, it's not entirely an economic issue...population growth has just as much to do with the problem.

The only solution I see is to get off this rock and start colonizing other planets...not exactly something we're going to be doing in the forseeable future.

explain how

"Social ecologists believe that the current ecological crisis is the product of capitalism."

That not only ignores the environmental impact of the USSR, which was horrendous, but contaminates what is supposed to be the scientific field of ecology with subjective judgements.

"Social ecologists believe that the current ecological crisis is the product of capitalism."

That not only ignores the environmental impact of the USSR, which was horrendous, but contaminates what is supposed to be the scientific field of ecology with subjective judgements.

As an anarchist, Murray Bookchin considered the Soviet Bloc to be a state capitalist perversion of socialism. Instead of making another useless condemnation of the Soviet Union, Bookchin instead focused his efforts on the system dominant in 90% of the world then and all of it now.