I don't find the opposing argument convincing at all. If you look at the US for example, all direct energy usage for crops and livestock production (~800 Tbtu)

I don't find the opposing argument convincing at all. If you look at the US for example, all direct energy usage for crops and livestock production (~800 Tbtu) plus energy used for fertilizer production (~350 Tbtu) adds up to about 1% of all energy consumption [1]. This includes all the energy used to farm crops for biofuels and for export. This does not suggest some sort of looming agricultural energy crisis. The basic formula of mechanized agriculture has been in place for at least 100 years, and what is generally still happening is steadily increasing yields, decreasing energy consumption, and more knowledge and concern for soil quality and sustainability. The argument that we all need to leave cities behind and "return to the land" is squarely in the horseshoe zone of radical politics. These days I associate contempt for modernity, industrial agriculture and cities more with far-right ideologues than the far-left ones he is targeting here, but to me they are on both sides borne out of a similar unrealistic, apocalyptic, and utopian mindset; and especially the desire (conscious or not) that such a destructive transformation would address their personal struggles or political grievances. [1] https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=18431 https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=18431, https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/us-energy-facts/ https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/us-energy-facts/