Why we need degrowth
Posted by BaseballSeveral1107@reddit | collapse | View on Reddit | 117 comments
Posted by BaseballSeveral1107@reddit | collapse | View on Reddit | 117 comments
Hilda-Ashe@reddit
We don't "need degrowth." Degrowth is something that will be forced upon is, and the only thing we can do is to ensure that this degrowth process doesn't result in horrors that make WW2 looks like My Little Pony.
Taqueria_Style@reddit
I mean My Little Pony is pretty horrific as it stands...
a_dance_with_fire@reddit
Why not My Little Pony Apocalypse Edition?
Taqueria_Style@reddit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cH-yA8U2XgI
Taqueria_Style@reddit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2wWUNQ80s8
PedaniusDioscorides@reddit
Degrowth is essentially collapse isn't it? But more of a controlled manner so that, like you said, doesn't result in a horrific turn of events as it likely will be.
I have a difficult time seeing anyone that is ignorant to the reality of this system and approaching collapse to be on board for anything less. Less vacations? Less clothing? Less hoarding? Less entertainment? Less energy use? Less driving? Less consuming in general? Hell no (would be my guess at their response)
Probably one of the biggest problems is the majority don't see their lifestyles as negative and taking it away is certainly a challenge.
-Winter-Sol-@reddit
Collapse now and avoid the rush.
PedaniusDioscorides@reddit
Mentioned this to my wife yesterday, not sure she took me seriously but God dammit I am.
squailtaint@reddit
This is the truth.
BaseballSeveral1107@reddit (OP)
Many politicians, media, experts and activists talk about green growth. They talk about making capitalism green.
But they forget the fact that capitalism requires infinite growth on a finite planet.
That capitalism requires exploitation, environmental destruction, and some cheap nature to exploit for free.
We cannot wind turbine, solar panel and EV our way out of the climate and environmental and social crises.
Specter313@reddit
We need to learn from those who are already content and happy in poverty if we wish to transition with the least amount of suffering. People will suffer greatly when the daily pleasures they are accustomed to will be quickly and permanently taken from them. It is something we have to prepare for regardless.
Lord_Vesuvius2020@reddit
This is the reason that current government climate policies will not work. They assume that bans and mandates on the middle and working classes to get them to buy EV’s, ditch gas heat, etc will allow us all to glide smoothly from the fossil fuel economy to a green decarbonized economy while growth based on capitalism just keeps chugging along.
Specter313@reddit
We need to learn from those who are already content and happy in poverty if we wish to transition with the least amount of suffering. People will suffer greatly when the daily pleasures they are accustomed to will be quickly and permanently taken from them.
ro_hu@reddit
I believe in this, however I'm an architect. I am unsure how the separation between paying my rent and decoupling the nonstop need for growth from my profession works.
Background-Head-5541@reddit
I see a lot of interesting statements there but no plan to make it happen
dumnezero@reddit
It's important to get people on the same page first.
3wteasz@reddit
I don't think so, or would specify "... the decision makers...".
dumnezero@reddit
Yes, the decision makers.
The People - becoming the decision makers.
I'm not a fan of authoritarianism.
Ah, I see, you want Business As Usual. Well, good luck with all the fascism.
3wteasz@reddit
Why do you insult me with this mindless accusation? And why do you assume that of all things? Makes no sense whatsoever. I agree with the other person, there are no plans and given the current status, it seems more likely you support fascism if you don't act, don't come up with plans or at least suggestions. What do you do? Smartassing on reddit?!
And yes, we need action that works today, the small steps common action that emerged from nature conservation was not able to stop what we have now, despite our better knowledge since the fucking 60ies! Read "losing earth", if you are not involved yourself.
dumnezero@reddit
Bud, you're working with pure optimism:
The common term for that is techno-optimism. In practice, it is a type of conservatism. That's why Elon Musk and Donald Trump are friends, or at least colleagues.
I'm not advocating for small steps. We actually have mass social media and a huge chunk of the global population lives in urban centers. Communications can go very fast. I'm saying that if you're waiting for a hero, you're at the level of help as the people using "thoughts and prayers" unironically.
You don't understand what you're claiming to want to change, so you will most likely fail.
3wteasz@reddit
I can counter with yet another book, "brave new world". If you think the modern media landscape will magically come up with a solution that tranforms everything in months, you may be quite naive. So far it has proven not only as the giver of dopamine to hook everybody, but also to commodify (and pervert) every single idea. Just look at what the guys over at "OptimistsUnite" do...
What process would you suggest rids us of the daily needs, that keep us spinning in this vast machine, all of a sudden? I mean, by saying that the space of solutions is restricted to something within our modern communication, you should know how exactly that works, or at least have a rough idea? I am eyeing "non-movements" as a possible solution, but the Arab spring had a clear enemy against which to organize in that way worked. What else could there be? Other than more small steps?
I did btw nowhere say we need another product or technology... I'm not a techno-optimist. I know that technology can only be part of a solution under so restricted circumstance where the technology is merely a catalyst, and the solution is in the adjoined (change in) behavior of people. I want to turn people into agents of change without them making a decision, just based on a shifting incentive structure... How to foster that and on which topic (it needs to be something that has sustainable effects), not sure yet...
dumnezero@reddit
I didn't say "modern media", I said communications. Like you, doing this, now, and me reading it.
I was online for the Arab Spring and watched with great investment. I saw the problems too, before it was obvious.
See Sun Tzu quote above. Do you know yourself enough to know your needs? Are you a temporarily embarrassed millionaire?
Big steps, big failures, big wins. Don't tell me what exactly, think of becoming more unpredictable. Small steps make you more predictable.
Then you're into /r/degrowth.
3wteasz@reddit
Unfortunately, if it were just between the two of us, we'd have so many solutions for so many problems already, or at least there would be a more or less civil conversation... 😌.
But I fear this is the exception. Modern media is the prime tool to spread ideas, I'd argue. And it's a subset of commination, the one you suggested to be very fast. Hence, why I generalized and then countered with my comment.
And likewise, I know my needs. But that's not the solution to the problem... You suggest things to me personally, when I ask for what you think can be done collectively. How to make large swaths of people more humble? How to convince more people that they actually need less, when their dopamine addiction tells them they need more?
I got my ideas in place and work on them already. They seem bigger than what is discussed... But I did ask you... You avoid my questions with wise statements... 🙃.
And degrowth... meh. Tbh, I don't think it works. It relies on people already having recognized that they need less. Or having access to less, both of which won't happen just yet. It's another buzzword, when they don't talk about it in the grander scheme of a stable state economy. The prominent proponents think they achieve anything in the small-scale battles in blaming everything on the war in the middle east because that is supposedly where everything stands or falls... A load of cap.
dumnezero@reddit
Because I can't comprehend how people can organize without starting out individually. I can't do the math. You don't get to reach +1000 by starting from +900. You have to start from +1.
Indirectly, I'm super fucking sick of leftists promoting and defending the mentality of the scab. Scabbing is where you can see the individualist/collective conflict at a smaller scale in a leftist context.
I don't get this: are people waiting for some secret vanguard to come to the rescue from the underground like some secret society that's been infiltrating everywhere for decades?
The same individual VIRTUES and courage required to reject consumerism and empire are the ones required to organize. We need to look at what scares conservatives and fulfill their nightmares. Do they hate virtue signaling? Start signaling virtue (and have virtue). If we're gonna have solidarity, I need to know to good certainty that you won't be a traitor when the system offers you some extra income and privileges. Start with discarding the capitalist dreams, such as the American Dream (petite bourgeois lifestyle which is a caricature of one of the bourgeois and aristocratic lifestyle facets).
The reason I make it about the individual is because I see, as you noted, the battle front of the class war to be inside the brain. It's no longer in some factory or depot. And I can't really get into others' heads and remove capitalism like doing some exorcism. Not only is it technically difficult, but the ethics of it are very questionable.
I mean, if you blame some chemicals in the brain, it's going to be a very different strategy. My concern would be the ethics of it, as we are talking about ignoring people's personhood and treating them like bots. I understand the cybernetic-biochemical problem. Perhaps there are more upstream strategies too. Also of debatable ethics. Computers do need electricity, you know?
3wteasz@reddit
Scabbing... didn't know that term yet, it means strike-breaker?!
Yeah, I like what you wrote. I see rent-seeking behavior as one of the common activities in many of the issues we have, and it seems like scabbing is, amongst other things, also motivated by it; where can you gain more rent, when others forego their share voluntarily.
I guess, as a society we don't call out those people because we think that we might profit from that behavior ourselves at some point. I do also have the suspicion that our overly complex global world, where people are more anonymous than ever, reinforces that behavior. Your ingroup doesn't scold you for this behavior, and others are disinvited to give their opinion... Or in other words, honor doesn't mean anything anymore.
Sure, but I also wouldn't go there... Just tried to describe a principle that is already in place and given that we know about theories such as the elaboration likelihood model, I'm suspecting that there are factions that knowing and willingly implement this form of social engineering (treating people like commodities to shape into abiding consumers) without any oversight or democratic decision making.
dumnezero@reddit
Yes. It's the worker who goes against the strike. They may even have good sounding reasons, but that's still being selfish. Most workers are likely to have the same good reasons.
I see this defense of selfishness from self-labeled leftists (at least in the English speaking world) all the time. And I don't get how they plan on achieving solidarity when they're defending anti-solidarity.
Yep. This opportunism for enrichment is a problem, in that it's the right-wing capitalist entrepreneurial mentality.
I would focus more on ethics than honor. Honor can be a bit too "PR", too much about individual reputation. But, yeah, the lack of scolding is a problem. If most are like this, who's going to boo?
Oh, most definitely. Here's a neat book: https://www.davidmcraney.com/howmindschangehome
3wteasz@reddit
Nothing more to add... Except maybe that this "personal PR" is simpler to muster than thinking about ethics. It needs to be applicable and any dumbing down increases uptake enormously... I get that it's maybe beneath educated people of any side, but it could also be regarded as a necessary institution everybody has to go through?! Just imagine politicians would resign from their duty after screwing up, like in the "good old times". That could help maintain their good name.
dumnezero@reddit
It is simpler and easier to manage, but you create an alternate persona, an avatar of yourself. That tends to lead to alienation as it becomes unclear if your relationships with other humans are based on this avatar or based on the "real you". Perhaps that's why many would prefer a relationship with a dog. Social media just made this more clear, more managed, more digitized, more statistically analyzed.
I always think of the example from Japan as, perhaps, an extreme variant of true resignation. With a blade.
megaboga@reddit
The only way to deal with this is by overcoming capitalism, and the only guide on this that was successful (to this date, at least) was this one.
JASHIKO_@reddit
While I agree with degrowth 1000%
It will never happen because some countries and companies will cheat.
For example, If the West went all in on degrowth China would jump on the chance to claim all the easy pickings.
We can't agree on really simple things.
Global degrowth is impossible.
Psittacula2@reddit
Degrowth is taking the current economic model and saying reverse that?
That seems to be a fallacy to me. A new paradigm is needed instead.
For example human activity that replace high resource or high energy input output or carbon equivalent per person ie reducing footprint and collective resource use (energy/materials) and use of land more effectively.
It can be done because people a few generations ago were able to live quite well this way.
As for the economy, financial and monetary systems, probably CBDC will be part of that future coming solution?
In such a system you can still have productivity and market growth eg services which use much less physical resources.
oneshot99210@reddit
What you describe is an example of degrowth. I would agree that a new paradigm is needed, and that's putting it mildly!
As someone else pointed out, it has to be a near global shift in perspective, because if only some reduce energy and resource use, initially that will just make resources cheaper for those still willing to abuse.
We see this already, with China being both the largest installer of solar energy, but also still building coal plants, because 'they have a right to catch up'. I hasten to point out, China uses less energy per person than most of the rest of the industrialized world. This is just an example of how greater use of renewable power will not by itself fix anything, and the quite natural reaction to lower fuel costs, is to use more fuel, not an attack.
Furthermore, the richer one is (person or nation), the more power (both politically and literally) one controls, the less likely to see or be impacted by resource depletion.
Still, living the change personally may be the most powerful action one can take.
Psittacula2@reddit
Yes and no or to be accurate, it would be not just be “degrowth” but “decoupling”
* Biosphere re-engineering = Sustainability > Consumption of resources, both reversal of excess use or reduction in use atst as ecological restoration, replacement of fossil fuels with renewables and green energy, removal of pollution and waste eg cradle to cradle vs cradle to grave material life cycles.
* Economic growth and productivity and innovation could still happen in a more digital or decoupled economy for human interaction for major systems eg economics, science etc except with living standards shaped via the above materially. AI might well be a good eg of this along with digital currency.
It is very possible the Biosphere and energy and material extraction ends up with its own units of measure and denomination distribution of use units compared to a currency system running human systems independent of this and free market where the aforementioned is global governance based.
I don’t see the future as a doom scenario, on the one hand to day humans are running the world on ignorance eg waste while ignoring real human needs eg good living space and diet and meaningful work. The above sustainability should enhance human living conditions while technological and cultural and civilisation advances still progress…
Logical-Race8871@reddit
There's an argument for a currency pegged to carbon, backed by...uh... everyone dying I guess. There is a chance for an economic-environmental equilibrium under capitalism, but it's basically when the GHG concentrations are so high that climate sensitivity is immediately apparent to the majority of people.
WorldyBridges33@reddit
Impossible until resource limits force it to happen
Right-Cause9951@reddit
Humans don't typically do things unless actual necessity exists. It's saddening but an aspect of life.
CrazyShrewboy@reddit
From an individual's perspective, it makes sense that the average person wouldn't put degrowth or sustainability as one of their higher life priorities. Our socioeconomic system is incentivizing hyperindividualism.
So all the productive intelligent people just continually reach for the next achievement or hedonistic lifestyle upgrade, because they are able to. Their life goals do not line up with the reality of the situation - society collapses, very few people will get to achieve anything anymore.
Z3r0sama2017@reddit
This is why I've prepped. I'm softening my own personal landing.
Pot_Master_General@reddit
Softening your landing is purchasing a few nitrous tanks and inhaling that shit once martial law and bread lines are back.
Z3r0sama2017@reddit
Its having 35 million plus calories in a variety of foodstuffs that are stable for long term storage.
Pot_Master_General@reddit
And consume it in what kind of world?
Z3r0sama2017@reddit
As comfortable a one as I can make it for myself
Pot_Master_General@reddit
That's fair. Personally, I have no problem going down with the ship. I don't see the point in buying myself a little more time, delaying the inevitable. I'd be frozen in fear anticipating the multitude of things that could easily go wrong, which are trivial right now in our relatively luxurious existence.
Taqueria_Style@reddit
Suggest prep for layoffs. Not just financially but psychologically, and in terms of minimum acceptable systems you'll need in place.
Phase one of this shit show is almost certainly going to be layoffs. Well, at least in the West it is, I think.
P4ultheRipped@reddit
We don’t even do shit when necessity exist. Ie climate change.
Fucking big hurricanes tearing up half of Florida? Nah. Sea level rising? Nah. Huge firestorms destroying forest and crops? Nah. Increasing extremes in weather? Nah.
It’s all a hoax guyssssss
Taqueria_Style@reddit
It's a hoax from capitalism's point of view until it takes out the New York stock exchange, or Dallas, or some major economic hub.
I daresay if San Diego just vanished off the face of the Earth we'd have two weeks of "oh... that's so unfortunate". Followed by "anyways..."
Right-Cause9951@reddit
A destroyed bridge. A empty cupboard. A car that doesn't work. These things are tangible. Climate change may as well be abstract. There's too much room for bullshit rationalization.
P4ultheRipped@reddit
Hm, I have to disagree on most of that, while climate change isn’t as up front as the issues you pointed out, it’s still damning and if you can’t see/don’t notice/flat out deny the change around us, you’re just stupid.
In my area, once the half’s of the year changes, like autumn and winter/spring and summer, massive amounts of crows and ravens fly and chill in our town. Always at around 7-9am on a few days, today this started happening. In my youth, I saw hundreds of those, now, maybe 3 dozen.
It hasn’t really not rained for 2 weeks now, while this can happen, the whole 3 weeks rain, 3 weeks straight drought is starting to affect my area more and more. Weather is becoming extremer.
If you can’t grasp that, like you can grasp an empty cupboard, your either denying it or stupid, which well, is the same to me.
Now I totally get, that if you don’t give a shit, because your bills aren’t paid yet, your mom just died and you couldn’t help her or your house burned down, these things are meaningless. But one can’t sit back and let it all unfold upon yourself.
Right-Cause9951@reddit
The problem is you are expecting people to be logical. We've seen time and time again people deviating from reason.
Getting people to come around is good. Judgement is really not going to do anything on the other hand.
walkinman19@reddit
Most people in America will think climate change is a hoax or won't affect them until the the day they go to Walmart for groceries and see bare shelves. Until then the oil companies gaslighting will reign supreme like it has since the 1900s.
ZenApe@reddit
Yep. People say capitalism like a socialist growth economy wouldn't keep eating the world until the resources were gone.
Thedogsnameisdog@reddit
Agreed, but you are framing the issue incorrectly.
After overshoot, a collapse is inevitable. That curve is coming no matter what we do. It's already baked in. Degrowth is the managed side of the collapse - wilful, deliberate and ideally with better outcomes. E.g. fewer births, reduced consumption etc...
Whatever doesn't get degrowthed, get collapsed - the chaotic side. Deprivation, death, conflict and abandonment.
It's hapening either way. Those who are bold enough to make important, meaningful choices will get better outcomes than those who choose not to.
Ok-Dust-4156@reddit
There's relatively simple solution for overshoot for any given contry - just take necessary resources from others by force. If you have said force.
FluffyLobster2385@reddit
Those? I can personally practice degrowth but that won't result in better outcomes for me. Honestly maybe if our country practiced degrowth as whole and started stock pilling resources but even than that would just make us more of a target for other countries to come and forcefully take it. We pretty much all have to share the resources.
Thedogsnameisdog@reddit
Yes it will if you make meaningful choices. A regular house will be deprived when energy is exoensive/unavailable. A passive house with solar gain/shading doesn't care about energy prices or availability.
Eating lower on the trophic scale costs less. Money in your pocket that can be apllied to other places.
Giving up a car and walking transit put money in your pocket and insulates you from fuel, car and insurance prices.
Stockpiling is not degrowth.
addition@reddit
This is why competition isn’t always great. For degrowth to happen we’d need global enforcement because if one country starts breaking the rules others will follow.
This is called a coordination failure and is also one of the main criticisms of libertarian philosophy.
Taqueria_Style@reddit
Once we ran out of saber tooth tigers, competition stopped making sense. But. Oh well.
icantgetthenameiwant@reddit
You're right
Just look at the relative carbon emissions change of the USA vs China and India over the last decade
Degrowth would require global cooperation. Thing is, it would lock non-industrialized countries into their current standard of living. And everyone wants to live better. The cat's out of the bag.
bipolarearthovershot@reddit
Global degrowth is INEVITABLE. FTFY
Fair-Lingonberry-268@reddit
Impossible because : “it is an academic idea that states that infinite growth cannot happen on a finite planet”.
Are you shitting me? How’s that an academic idea? That’s common sense but no one who owns a large chunk of money want to give it up to save himself or others.
FluffyLobster2385@reddit
100% agree. The only real solution is a one world government where all actually work together but that at least at this brief moment in time feels impossible.
endadaroad@reddit
If the west went all in on degrowth, China would be forced to go along because the market for much of what they make would evaporate.
WorldyBridges33@reddit
Impossible until resource limits force it to happen
JASHIKO_@reddit
We'll be at war long before that. Over those said resources.
We'll get regrowth one way or another but it won't be voluntary.
WorldyBridges33@reddit
Impossible until resource limits force it to happen
ZiggedShouldaZagged@reddit
Just going to leave this fascinating article here:
"We Already Live in a Degrowth World and We Do Not Like It"
Abstract:
The Degrowth Movement calls for "degrowth" – a reduction in GDP in advanced economies – to avert an ecological crisis. This paper argues that the Degrowth Movement misses that the West is already in a state resembling degrowth – a Great Stagnation. This state of degrowth and its correlates, declining entrepreneurship, innovation, science, and research productivity, are described. It is concluded that the notion that a degrowth economy can generate the technological progress necessary to tackle ecological and social crises and challenges is far-fetched. Moreover, as economic stagnation has taught, the consequence of degrowth is a zero-sum society: redistribution, instead of production, becomes the basis of the economy. In such a context, more degrowth will only make problems worse. This paper concludes by discussing scenarios for moving beyond Degrowth. Whether collapse or unimaginable riches through breakthrough technological progress will be the future, these scenarios suggest that there is more to humanity's future than envisaged by the Degrowth Movement.
mloDK@reddit
The paper basically hopes that AGI will somehow bend existing physic knowledge to avert collapse. How no one considers that the AGI might just remove the biggest risk and reason for catastrophic climate change from the equation to solve it quickly is beyond me.
imnotknow@reddit
But this would make the line go down. What about my 401k?
Interfpals@reddit
Let's not beat around the bush: The only way out of capitalism is through communism, or in a hearse. There is no "Degrowth economics", there is only communist global coordination of civilisation, or there is the forced dismantling of civilisation. "Degrowth" is not a policy but a brick wall we are on course to crash into.
BTRCguy@reddit
The only way that communism works is if capitalism is forbidden. Which is essentially saying that communism cannot compete with other systems on a level playing field and that people will only adopt communism if they are forced to.
Which is sort of ironic, as communism is supposed to be...communist, not dictatorial.
thefrydaddy@reddit
In a certain sense, capitalism is forbidden, by Mother Earth. We're quite literally choosing the hearse lmao
FreeSoul789@reddit
I don't think communism is our magic bullet to get out of this. Hearse seems more likely.
"Self-styled revolutionaries imagine themselves to be very radical when they propose merely to get rid of capitalist procedures for providing burgeoning populations with economic progress by accelerated drawdown, and to replace them with socialist procedures for providing burgeoning populations with economic progress by accelerated drawdown. In an ecological sense, they leave the problem intact. Proposals are not radical if they accept the continued drawing down of non-renewable resources; there is nothing radical about proposing to speed up that crash-inviting process." - William R Catton Jr. in Overshoot
Ready4Rage@reddit
Spoiler alert! We're already enslaved and dying. It's just that some of us are "house slaves" who don't care that the "field slaves" have it so bad & are dying. Guess where we're headed when the field slaves all die? No, that's right, we'll all still live comfortably in Daddy Leon's economy. /s
If you're not in the top 1% (that would be 6% of you Americans) then you're a poor. Sorry not sorry if that offends you, but you're in the group that only owns 5% of the world's wealth, and you're splitting it with nearly everyone.
If you're not fighting to free your fellow poors (hello, Trumpists!) then you're an asshole and your time on the block is definitely coming. See you in the fields
Mission-Notice7820@reddit
Whoops the fields are on fire.
thefrydaddy@reddit
Say "bye, Ms. Laura."
Common_Assistant9211@reddit
Do people realise that part of degrowth is limiting growth already too big population for our planet?
Which means finding ways of controlling child birth all over the world including poor countries. But how do you do that with uneducated population of poor countries? There aren't any ethical ways to force it on them, but in dire situation of climate change, those decisions are a must to go all in, or we will face uncomparably larger catastrophe than just forcing people to have less children and live modest lives.
I feel like many people of this subreddit agrees with degrowth on the economic part, but once they heard they cannot have more than 1 child they wouldn't be able to agree, let alone general delusional uneducated population in countries of the world who couldn't even handle not flying planes during covid.
We are doomed beyond saving
Apostle_B@reddit
You educate them and make them independent of money to access birth control.
I think that if we move away from the infinite growth-paradigm, population growth rate and the population density would automatically go down, perhaps even the total population numbers.
I blame the so-called "red scare" scare tactics of the U.S. for that. Just about everything that isn't capitalism is immediately dismissed as communism, and hence considered de facto bad. Meanwhile, the toxic positivity associated with capitalism has made entire generations of people think that taking a plane for a 2-week vacation across the ocean is "normal" . Delusional is a good way to put it, but it won't go away if we fail to address the root cause: money.
Common_Assistant9211@reddit
That was a nice read, thanks
BaseballSeveral1107@reddit (OP)
We're not overpopulated
Common_Assistant9211@reddit
You know that with half the population our CO2 emissions would be halved, yet you tell me we aren't overpopulated?
If we had 25% of current popualtion we would still have a good shot at avoiding climate change. See this is the problem I was talking about where people lack education or the ability to think critically.
pakZ@reddit
Degrowth is a romantic idea, until you realise that it's simply incompatible with our current monetary system.
Apostle_B@reddit
And then you realize that just about every solution anyone will ever propose to solve the problems caused by capitalism, is incompatible with our current monetary system.
The solution is hence ... ?
Ok-Dust-4156@reddit
Actual (not academic) degrowth will make inequality much worse. Super rich won't degrow themselves, they'll degrow everybody else so they can stay rich forever.
jbond23@reddit
For Humans to cope with Climate Change relatively painlessly for the greatest number, we have to :-
This raises some interesting questions :-
There's a LOT of detail wrapped up in that. Not least because we're starting from where we are now in late 2024. And because the questions imply we're talking about trying to direct a hive mind of >8B individual nodes supported by 20b processors. And come up with answers from first principles. Neither of which may actually be possible.
Much more likely is "Humans will strive to expand their global civilization until it becomes physically impossible to do so." and "Since we can't fix it as individuals and we can't get off the planet we might as well point out the interesting bits to each other as the ship sinks." If the trajectory is 3-5C rise and >11B people by 2100, then what?
charlestontime@reddit
But the capitalist pyramid scheme would collapse.
lowrads@reddit
That makes putting a tax on plastics, or an end to livestock subsidies seem realistic.
Alarming_Award5575@reddit
We're going to get it one way or another
Possible-Article-929@reddit
Could someone suggest a reading list to understand degrowth in theory and application please?
BTRCguy@reddit
Without being snarky, there is no "application" step. Degrowth as a policy is only possible with a non-representative global government. Otherwise, advantage would accrue to the first party to not adhere to it, and a representative degrowth government would fall to the first demagogue to promise an extra chicken in every pot.
fractalineglaze@reddit
World governments cooperating to implement degrowth is the least likely path imo.
But we can't really discuss the path that I think is most likely so I guess it's a moot point.
Possible-Article-929@reddit
It seems like you are saying that degrowth is possible in an ideal world without ulterior motives. While completely agreeing, are there any books you know of about how degrowth can ideally be implemented in practice?
Adept_Translator1247@reddit
I would suggest Slow Down by Kohei Saito and Less is More by Jason Hickel!
Possible-Article-929@reddit
I have read Hickel's book and loved it! Will definitely check out the other one. Thanks!
nikola_mp3@reddit
sounds like communism to me
SkinnyBtheOG@reddit
does anyone know more about the trams? never heard about that
P4ultheRipped@reddit
Effectively we need a working system, one in which resources are shared equally and labor is distributed fairly among all people.
Wait.
bbccaadd@reddit
Degrowth will save nothing. It does not remove the GHGs and chemicals already emitted. Not to mention that just maintaining the status quo for 8 billion people is super destructive. It is like trying to cure cancer with yoga.
Saving our (including other animals) future will require a miracle that no one has even imagined, but I don't believe it is possible.
herpderption@reddit
Sometimes changes can be worth doing even if you don't get the transactional security of knowing the work prevents the inevitable. The only thing I'm absolutely certain of is that my body will die someday (as will everyone else's.) For as much bullshit I'll have to go through before that happens I can do things that make it feel less bad, not because I'm participating in the Hail Mary salvation play that'll save this culture (not least of which because IMO it does not deserve saving) but because feeling less bad allows me to help myself and others.
We've killed this iteration of the Earth, but some of it can still be known and respected. We do hospice care for the dying because we want them to experience some vestige of peace in this world before they leave it, because we've decided as people that good experiences are important even knowing that they are ephemeral. Trying to find meaning (big or small) is never a bad thing, and it's the only thing they can't take from you. Do not let them get at it without a fight.
One way or another you WILL lose everything physical in this world, but trying can still be worth doing. Your mileage may vary, but we're all on the same road and the only thing that seems to be in our control is how we drive. If you're gonna be here witnessing the end of it all, may as well really take it in. We won't get this opportunity again.
Logical-Race8871@reddit
Honestly I'm with John Hammond. Bring back the predatory megafauna.
Due-Dot6450@reddit
Meanwhile, this 1% who own over 40 trillion are sitting in the International Investment Summit 2024 as we speak and PM is talking about growth.
Nah, I have no hope here.
ShadowRaptor675@reddit
How without global cooperation and without killing half the population
Wave_of_Anal_Fury@reddit
Convince people to buy less. No, really, it's that "simple" because degrowth is the opposite of growth, and growth is largely a result of consumers spending more money to buy more stuff.
Consumption spending makes up two-thirds of the U.S. economy on average, so as the U.S. consumer goes, so goes the U.S. economy.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/cea/written-materials/2023/10/30/as-the-u-s-consumer-goes-so-goes-the-u-s-economy/
There's a lot of bullshit in economics (trickle-down is high on that list), but growth being dictated by consumer spending is about as basic as the concept of supply and demand. Everything sold by "capitalism" is bought by a consumer, either directly or indirectly, and our willingness to always buy more is what's enabled modern capitalism's perpetual growth model. It's why the economy is a two-sided coin -- capitalism on one side, consumerism on the other.
And as I've pointed out many times, the country that needs to reduce its consumer spending the most is the US, which accounts 43% of all consumer spending in the world. We have largely been the driver for global economic growth.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_consumer_markets
Governments encourage growth through policy -- taxes, incentives, subsidies, etc.
Businesses pursue growth through prices, advertising, product development, etc.
Consumers provide growth by spending more.
If you think the first two are ever going to give up on growth, I have a bridge to sell you. Unfortunately, if you think consumers are ever going to voluntarily buy less stuff and choose a lowered standard of living -- well, I'll sell you my pet unicorn. No, really, he's in my yard, munching contentedly on grass.
IsItAnyWander@reddit
You forgot the part where growth is reinforced through violence.
Hilda-Ashe@reddit
Third worlders: "We consider your growth mentality to be insane and so we will not participate in it."
Uncle Sam: "Knock knock! It’s the United States. With huge boats, with guns. Gunboats. Open the country. Stop having it be closed."
BTRCguy@reddit
Actual Third world:
SunnySummerFarm@reddit
Agreed. We moved off grid, and live a very rough life by many standards, especially American ones, and 99% of my friends reactions have been “I could never.”
Background-Head-5541@reddit
You don't have to convince people to buy less, just limit wage growth and increase prices on food, water, clothing, and shelter (hint: it's already happening)
SpliceKnight@reddit
Regrowth requires human group psychology (sociology) to be flipped onto its head.
The thing isn't that it can't mechanically be done. As so many scientists have demonstrated before, WE HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY to achieve it, we don't have the political will across the planet, or even in one country to achieve it.
If you look at best examples on the planet, there's always some kind of faustian bargain allowing it to be funded.
Humanity's innate ability to become used to a certain level of comfort and then desire more is largely what got us here. We're an adaptive species, but mainly in one direction.
Lawboithegreat@reddit
The invention of Capitalism by Michael Perelman is an amazing deep dive into primitive accumulation (the privatization of the ~14th century till the colonial period in Europe)
AcanthisittaNew6836@reddit
We don't need a plan for degrowth. Mother Earth will take care of that. No agreement between humans has to be made. Congratulations, everything will work itself out
Bigtimeknitter@reddit
Right like this is a self limiting system and the limit is hurtling toward us in our lifetimes homies. Nobody gets elected for preventing a crisis. So it goes.
Somekindofparty@reddit
De growth is definitely going to happen. Unfortunately it’s going to happen chaotically and quite involuntarily.
NyriasNeo@reddit
There is no such thing as "need" in politics. We can always live with, or die from, the consequences. In fact, in this case, that is exactly what we will do.
throwmeaaaawwwayyyyy@reddit
50 years ago if we had used fossil fuels to ‘keep the lights on’ while we transitioned we’d be in Star Trek by now
BUT NO little Timmy need 4000 pieces of useless plastic shit so his parents could watch the crown in peace
James_Fortis@reddit
Great read. I especially liked the #s needed to decarbonize.
StatementBot@reddit
The following submission statement was provided by /u/BaseballSeveral1107:
Many politicians, media, experts and activists talk about green growth. They talk about making capitalism green.
But they forget the fact that capitalism requires infinite growth on a finite planet.
That capitalism requires exploitation, environmental destruction, and some cheap nature to exploit for free.
We cannot wind turbine, solar panel and EV our way out of the climate and environmental and social crises.
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/1g3cmx9/why_we_need_degrowth/lrutdc4/
Hipcatjack@reddit
This put into words what , i feel, a LOT of people have been feeling for years now.