4 ms·
As COVID-19 hits, people understand Taleb's idea about critical importance of multiple redundancies. These are clearly incompatible with minimalism. To be alive
by JackPoach 7y ago
As COVID-19 hits, people understand Taleb's idea about critical importance of multiple redundancies. These are clearly incompatible with minimalism. To be alive is more important than to be a minimalist in the end.
- ravenstine 7y agoI don't see how that's the case. If multiple redundancies are a necessity, then having them doesn't go against the minimalist lifestyle. Minimalism doesn't mean that you stick to only have one of everything, although it can mean that to an individual minimalist depending on their goals, perhaps such as traveling light. There's no definition of minimalism that says you should have an insufficient supply of anything.
- JackPoach 7y agoHere's a real life example. Suppose, you are a true minimalist and all you have is a backpack with 35 items. You used to make all your money blogging about travel. Your income is now ZERO. What do you do? Now, compare that to a different person who, let's say, has a garage. With lots an lots of tools that he or she can do to create something useful. Or a boat that he or she can live on, catch fish, etc. Now having those items is quite beneficial. Please understand that I am all for minimalism from the consumer point of view, but having lived in a lot of poor countries and can say that US-based minimalist driving force is DEBT. People simply can't afford to buy housing and they are crushed by student debts or debts of other kinds. So they adapt to a certain life style. Which is fine and dandy, but on the other hand instead of going after the root of the problem, you are totally avoiding it on a country-wide scale.