3 ms·

And strangely, there's a culture of folks resisting this, trying to get us all back into agriculture. Community gardens, organic food etc. A giant step backward

And strangely, there's a culture of folks resisting this, trying to get us all back into agriculture. Community gardens, organic food etc. A giant step backward for civilization, to be sure.

jimcavel888 4y ago
[flagged]
helen___keller 4y ago
Community gardening is a form of leisure and organic food is a luxury good, neither of which are a giant step backwards for civilization.
- JoeAltmaier 4y ago
  As such, no. I'm just sensitive to the organic-type (yes, here on HN) that pushes the crazy notion that only organic food should be permitted. Clearly, a giant step backward.
thevagrant 4y ago
I'm not sure people who want community gardens are resisting this. It's more about being able to grow for yourself, should one choose to do so. There is a certain benefit to gardening. It is calming, while still remaining active physically. It provides a low cost food source and some benefit arises from the appreciation you get when you grow and harvest your own food. Both productive growing and localised growing can exist together.
- JoeAltmaier 4y ago
  Oh I understand. My wife and I have 7 gardens. But it's a pipe dream that 'everybody should do it'.
jrussino 4y ago
I don't see it as "resisting" or trying to go "back". Maybe I'm out of touch, but back when I was in school it was starting to be accepted that both (a) industrialization, globalization, and technological progress have lead to dramatically improved quality of life in general, including the ability to feed many many more people much more efficiently, and (b) the way that we're doing this at the moment is literally unsustainable, in the sense that it just won't be possible to continue to do it this way in perpetuity. Some people take this seriously, and want to find ways to move forward (not "back") to find ways of thriving that aren't doomed to fail eventually... When you look at it that way I don't think it's "strange" at all.
- JoeAltmaier 4y ago
  Understood. But things have changed - population growth has leveled off. Efficiency of food has increased geometrically. A sustainable balance could very well be achieved with careful management. And without everybody growing organic tomatoes in their back yard.
diogenescynic 4y ago
It’s because for all the productivity gains, we are still working 40 hours or more a week. The gains go to the owners instead of allowing the laborers to work less. Medieval peasants has more leisure time than modern workers.
jokoon 4y ago
Because a big part of those gains has bad consequences on the environment. It's not about productivity, it's about keeping that productivity while reducing externalities.

And strangely, there's a culture of folks resisting this, trying to get us all back into agriculture. Community gardens, organic food etc. A giant step backward for civilization, to be sure.

jimcavel888 4y ago

[flagged]

helen___keller 4y ago

Community gardening is a form of leisure and organic food is a luxury good, neither of which are a giant step backwards for civilization.

JoeAltmaier 4y ago
As such, no. I'm just sensitive to the organic-type (yes, here on HN) that pushes the crazy notion that only organic food should be permitted. Clearly, a giant step backward.

thevagrant 4y ago

I'm not sure people who want community gardens are resisting this. It's more about being able to grow for yourself, should one choose to do so. There is a certain benefit to gardening. It is calming, while still remaining active physically. It provides a low cost food source and some benefit arises from the appreciation you get when you grow and harvest your own food. Both productive growing and localised growing can exist together.

JoeAltmaier 4y ago
Oh I understand. My wife and I have 7 gardens. But it's a pipe dream that 'everybody should do it'.

jrussino 4y ago

I don't see it as "resisting" or trying to go "back". Maybe I'm out of touch, but back when I was in school it was starting to be accepted that both (a) industrialization, globalization, and technological progress have lead to dramatically improved quality of life in general, including the ability to feed many many more people much more efficiently, and (b) the way that we're doing this at the moment is literally unsustainable, in the sense that it just won't be possible to continue to do it this way in perpetuity. Some people take this seriously, and want to find ways to move forward (not "back") to find ways of thriving that aren't doomed to fail eventually... When you look at it that way I don't think it's "strange" at all.

JoeAltmaier 4y ago
Understood. But things have changed - population growth has leveled off. Efficiency of food has increased geometrically. A sustainable balance could very well be achieved with careful management. And without everybody growing organic tomatoes in their back yard.

diogenescynic 4y ago

It’s because for all the productivity gains, we are still working 40 hours or more a week. The gains go to the owners instead of allowing the laborers to work less. Medieval peasants has more leisure time than modern workers.

jokoon 4y ago

Because a big part of those gains has bad consequences on the environment. It's not about productivity, it's about keeping that productivity while reducing externalities.