The PRINCIPLE of HEALTHY & MEANINGFUL LIVING
- This topic has 216 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
alanjjohnstone wrote:Robbo, I'll concede to Tim and Vin that i do have a tendency to over-simplify future problems for socialism as black and white rather than the 50 shades of grey that a complex world economy throws up. But overall, i have to accept that we need changes and some may well not be palatable for everybody. If it retards recruitmant to the socialist mission as Gnome suggests, so be it – but the Party has never pussy-footed around its unpopular conclusions.The necessities of life will be distributed through free access. How future generations inside socialism determine what is basic needs and what are luxuries, i leave to them, although we can all speculate about it today. They will also evolve their own and widely diverse methods of "rationing" "scarce" goods and we can take educated guesses at these. But i still insist that we will make decisions on a social level that will mean a restriction on individual choices.Global warming doesn't magically disappear over-night because we end capitalism and socialism arrives. It has to be tackled by human action just as it was created by human action.
Absolutely. But I think the point needs to be made that we can have our cake – or more cake – and eat it. We can raise production but also be more eco-friendly. In the sphere of agricultural production that means seriously modifying the way we go about producing food. Large scale, capital intensive, industrialised monoculture farming is NOT the way to go. It is less productive and more environmentally destructive. We need to think smart and to think small . We need to diversify and to be more labour intensive and one thing for sure is that in a socialist society there will be masses of people released from the enourmous amount of of socially useless work undertaken today that is only necessary to keep capitalism functioning. These people will want to find meaningful creative work. As Marx, I think, said work itself will become a prime need in socialism. Advances in robotics are creating the very real prospect of eliminating all back breaking unpleasant toil. But at the same, this should open up the possibility for human beings to become more creatively involved in other areas of production. Food production is a prime candidate for this. .Lets get more people directly involved in producing their own food. Here's my utopian dream: Lets transform our big cities (in which about a half of the world's population now live) . Lets bulldoze the ugly squalor that scars so much of our cities and turn these areas into city farms. Lets recycle our shit and use the stuff productively rather than dump it into the sea or wherever. Lets bring the countryside right into the heart of the city (the original idea behind the Garden Cities movement). Lets use more in the way of small scale appropriate technology like rotavators and drip irrigation to lighten our workload but also to reduce our ecological footprint. All the evidence suggests that this is the way to increase output and become more sustainable but it is the economics of capitalism that gets in the way and prevents it from happening. We dont even need to radically alter our diet – for example by becoming more vegetarian – for all this to happen. In fact there is a lot to be said for free range and better quality meat production, which, for example, exploits ecological niches such as mountainous terrains which are very difficult to convert into arable land. Where I live in Southern Spain I am surrounded by mountains. I had a little place up in the mountain which I have just recently had to sell unfortunately and my nearest neighbour, Pepe is the local cabra hombre or goat man. He has a herd of 1000 goats which produce milk and meat. He splits the herd into 3 lots and he and his two sons, on an almost daily basis, wander around the countryside grazing the grass – the goats I mean , not Pepe (although he has been behaving rather strangely of late). The environmental benefits of this are enormous. Not only does this stimulate biomass growth but it also reduce the risk of devastating wildfires in the late summer. So there is a role for animal husbandry in a socialist society too but as with arable farming it needs to be substantively modified . That means, amongst other things, no more of those horrible factory farns or using hormones for the sake of making a profit
Quote:Lets bulldoze the ugly squalor that scars so much of our cities and turn these areas into city farms. Lets recycle our shit and use the stuff productively rather than dump it into the sea or wherever. Lets bring the countryside right into the heart of the city (the original idea behind the Garden Cities movement).https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allotment_(gardening)I know from anecdotal evidence that there are many who would like a plot but the council waiting list is ten-fold longer than the housing list and the trend now is to sell allotments to property developers. The number of plots in England has fallen from a peak of 1.4 million in 1949 to around 150,000 today. In 1996 there were four people waiting for every 100 plots, but that has risen to 57 today.Our council house had a back garden and we grew tatties, rhubarb, carrots, all easy growing for a lazy dad. And whatever happened to the gooseberry?Oh, and just to add irritation salt to the wound on lifestyles, i have decided to do a future SS article on the probable demise of the pet in socialism…Maybe for a working title call it "Animal lovers against nature" lovers".
alanjjohnstone wrote:Oh, and just to add irritation salt to the wound on lifestyles, i have decided to do a future SS article on the probable demise of the pet in socialism…Maybe for a working title call it "Animal lovers against nature" lovers".oooo youre on dodgy ground there, Alan. Me and my missus are inseparable from our pet dog and our pet chickens, each having been given suitably spanish names and with whom we gossip on a daily basis. They also recycle food waste and produce eggs. So, very ecological."Workers of the World Unite – you have only your pets to lose" Hmmm. Doesnt sound right to me….
[ Would like to add the following text to my comment dated 04 April 2017: ' It seems clear as day that if you're to make a choice between pragmatism ( or something like the principle … ' ] There's NO good reason to believe the born poor and underprivileged, the silly millions, that don't feel ashamed of the fact that they were born poor and underprivileged to be exploited by the born rich and the born super-rich and lead a hard and humble existence as beasts of burden are used to doing throughout their life or the fact that the fact that they were born poor and underprivileged and thus are born victims of what I view as the GREATEST and gravest social INJUSTICE is NOT attributable to any faults or failings of theirs and find NOTHING wrong with squandering their hard-earned money on silly stuff like drugs, drinks or matrimony, the stuff that gives them NOTHING meaningful, and so they've got NOTHING meaningful to lose for breaking with their habits of relishing such stuff, are dispensable for, or can make great big contribution to, the world communist movement. Nor do I think there exists any good reason to believe that those vulgar millions are resistant to enlightenment and reform or lacking in the calibre or willpower they need to conquer the seduction of and get rid of the addiction to drugs, drinks, matrimony, etc. The PRINCIPLE of healthy and meaningful living has NO room for PESSIMISM. There's no good reason to believe that humanity or human civilisation has reached a stage of stagnation, in terms of quality, and is NOT capable of making any further progress in this direction. The history of civilisation gives the lie to all PESSIMISM. The fact that the Dark Ages was followed by the Enlightenment or the fact that pacifism has triumphed over imperialism proves pessimists wrong. The perpetual change reflects the law of Nature, and in keeping with this law, civilisation, society, social order, social institutions, social environment, etc have undergone constant change, and with this, humanity, human cultures, costumes, and fashions, humanity's outlook, values, principles. way of life, and standard of living have changed as well, and almost in each case, the change has been a change for the better. I think it's up to true communists and a true communist party to undertake to enlighten and reform the benighted, silly, and vulgar millions and thus make them turn enlightened, sensible, and refined. I believe it's the changed humanity, the sensible, enlightened, and refined humanity, of tomorrow who will NOT be devoid of shame and will feel ashamed that they were born poor and underprivileged to be exploited and to lead an existence that befits the beasts of burden, who'll be aware of the fact that they're NOT to blame for the fact that they were born poor and underprivileged and thus born victims of the GREATEST and gravest social INJUSTICE and the fact that addiction to stuff like drugs, drinks or matrimony is silly and unbecoming of the civilised humanity. It's those enlightened, sensible, and refined millions of tomorrow who, I believe, will organise the communist revolution to rid themselves, and thus humanity, of the EVILS of exploitation, deprivation, inequality, and injustice. I's silly to expect the silly, benighted, and vulgar millions to take part in so great an act as the communist revolution. You can expect them to engage and indulge in all sorts of silly and vulgar acts, such as stealing, robbery, bribery, smuggling, trafficking in drugs and dames, addiction to drugs, drinks or the luxury of matrimony or sheer travesties in the name of matrimony, etc, etc, but NOT so great an act as switching over to the communist mode of production from the capitalist mode of production. I wish British socialists would soon awake to this brute and naked TRUTH.
Ornithologists will be delighted when the domestic cat disappears from the garden and the genocide of birds ceases.So will communities rejoice when the quarries for cat-litter are filled in and land-scaped. Ttwo million tons of clay are mined mostly by strip mining in the United States every year, requiring massive amounts of soil and rock to be moved in order to access the mineral seam underneath.Veterinary resources for "small-animals" diverted from livestock farms and food processing monitoring.Many cities and towns have better animal health facilities than clinics for people. Pet food is directly and indirectly in competition to ourselves for protein and not just the rejected bits unfit for human consumption.Perhaps the only way Tim's pork pie is going to be sustainable is when pigs are fed what dogs get fed now.And if we can eat a pig, then we can have, as many poverty-stricken people do, dog and cat for dinner. After all, the pet guinea pig is a meal in South America. And Europeans relish horse flesh.I mentioned we got chicken only at Xmas when i was young. We had "poor-man's chicken" – rabbit – a lot more until myxomatosis (And why not solve the pigeon problem and replace chicken with them?) The psychological bond with pets is broken when we become a more social and communal species, no longer requiring a dog as our best friend and a substitute for real family, neighbours and friends and that old lonely cat-lady is enjoying being around people once more. If only my two dogs and kitten-expecting cat could read this.
You forget that cats weren't originally pets. They performed a useful role in homes and in farms of keeping mice and rats (which eat food supplies) down. I can't see why this couldn't be so in socialism, especially on your small-scale farms.
I think working animals will remain but they are not pets by definition. Hopefully, horse and greyhound racing also disappears as well as other cruel animal-centred "sports".Also what about the pedigree commercialisation and the inbreeding of breed faults.Guide dogs for the blind but if we can have driverless cars, the same technology can give the blind "sight" – think Geordi La Forge of Star TrekWere cats the most efficient pest control or are feral cats a pest themselves. I'd put money on a ratter terrier than a cat on a small farm, even the cutesy Yorkie.Again to recall my youth, milk, coal and brewery dray horse-drawn wagons were a common sight even on the cobbled hilly streets of Edinburgh. Perhaps when the roads are cleared of private vehicles, there will be a return. Who knows but i think more likely will be the technologically more advanced drone-delivery. But socialism will always be a work in progress and the real question is when do we begin the task of adapting…prior to the establishment or only after political power is acquired.I think Robbo and i contemplate a period on the threshold of socialism where issues are going to be seriously debated on what and how changes will be implemented by the concerned and relevant scientific, professional and trade bodies to minimise that inevitable "transitional" period and make it as short as possible. After all, for decision making people need options and the case for them presented for their appraisal…democratic control.
A lot of people depend on their animal companions. we have always had them. The source of many modern diseases influenza etc. but we still cling onto them. I feed the wild birds when weather is bad and in summer they nick my berries, but I am encroaching on their habitat so its eachy peachy..
The working balance will be struck when we don't have commodites.It is pretty bad just now with specialise breeding and puppy farms etc churning out physical misfits to suit created fashionable demands..
The point though is that pets afford pet owners a very real sense of joy and pleasure and we shouldnt adopt a too hardnosed attitude on this. For some folk their pet (s) is the only real emotional bond they have with a sentient creature. There is a local guy around here who seems to have mental problems and is withdrawn more or less completely into his own world, speaking to himself and avoiding human contact as much as possible except to beg for a bit of cash. He is very attached to, and gentle with his two dog companions and I imagine that his world would collapse without them. Losing a pet is traumatic as I know but it is indication of what an important role pets play in our lives Yes cats kill birds often wantonly and there is in my local pueblo a campaign to get cats spayed becuase the problem is that they breed like …well…cats. Litters of 'em! And they raid the public bins where they scavenge for wasted food (talking about food). This is a problem of unwanted or dumped animals, however. People dont bother to spay their animals becuase it costs money so their animals produce litters which can't be sold but also can't be kept because of costs again – so they are dumped. And when they are dumped they will do what they can to survive – including killing birds. Its the same with dogs. Some dogs have gone feral and there are packs of them high up in the mountains around here where they hunt for rabbits and possibly even wildboar. There is a dog warden that comes round in the pueblo every now and then with a pole and a noose to round up all (apparent) strays to take to a compound eventually to be put down. Its quite distressing to watch. Its a difficult question to resolve – pets – but you cant really force people by edict not to keep them in a socialist society. I think its one of those questions that will resolve themselves rather like water finding its own level
ALB wrote:You forget that cats weren't originally pets. They performed a useful role in homes and in farms of keeping mice and rats (which eat food supplies) down. I can't see why this couldn't be so in socialism, especially on your small-scale farms.If anyone is interested in the history of changing attitudes towards nature – both fauna and flora – I cannot recommend this book too highly:"Man and the Natural World: Changing Attitudes in England 1500-1800" by Keith Thomas published in 1983 Its is a classic in its field. You can read a snippet of the book here: http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/eac/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Keith-Thomas.pdf You might want to look it up in researching for your article , Alan
And don't forget the contribution dogs make to law and order…i lost count of how many times i read of a corpse being discovered by someone walking his or her dog
Matt wrote:A lot of people depend on their animal companions. we have always had them.Quite so. Me and pussy are inseparable…
Another report that is related.https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/apr/06/farms-could-slash-pesticide-use-without-losses-research-reveals
Quote:Study shows almost all farms could significantly cut chemical use while producing as much food, in a major challenge to the billion-dollar pesticide industry… the scientists found that 94% of farms would lose no production if they cut pesticides and two-fifths of these would actually produce more…“But the research does not mean pesticides are useless or inefficient,”. The farmers using low levels of chemicals employ other methods to control pests, such as rotating crops, mechanical weeding, using resistant varieties and carefully managing sowing dates and fertiliser use. “It’s a big change, but not a revolution,” he said.“If you want real reduction in pesticide use, give the farmers the information about how to replace them,” said Munier-Jolain. “This is absolutely not the case at the moment. A large proportion of advice is provided by organisations that are both selling the pesticides and collecting the crops. I am not sure the main concern of these organisations is to reduce the amount of pesticide used.”This gives strong credence to Robbo's statements that Big Ag manipulates scientific opinion to favour their own profit interests.
Quote:Prof Dave Goulson, at the University of Sussex, UK, said: “While we have a system where farmers are advised by agronomists, most of whom work on commission for agrochemical companies, then inevitably pesticides will be massively overused.”The new research showed that the type of farms most sensitive to cuts in pesticide use are potato and sugar beet farms, because they use high levels of pesticides and are highly profitable. But it showed that most arable farms could cut pesticides by over 40% without losses.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.