Degrowth

947 readers

46 users here now

Discussions about degrowth and all sorts of related topics. This includes UBI, economic democracy, the economics of green technologies, enviromental legislation and many more intressting economic topics.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

MrMakabar@slrpnk.net

Genuine question - is degrowth compatible with human nature? (slrpnk.net)

submitted 6 days ago by RideAgainstTheLizard@slrpnk.net to c/degrowth@slrpnk.net

30 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Degrowth is a noble ideal to strive for, and it would certainly mitigate a lot of our current problems if implemented. However, I fear that it is an ideal that can be adopted by the few but not the many. Growth, progress and personal ambition are inherent human traits - it may not be the case for all people, but it is certainly evident in today's society and many societies that have come before. In my opinion, we need solutions and frameworks that most (if not all) personalities can exist within. I worry degrowth is wishful thinking, and would love to hear your thoughts.

All of that said - I believe it is a very worthwhile thought exercise and even if all degrowth principles cannot be implemented, some can and that is what matters.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

This is interesting and thought-provoking, thanks. I must admit I share the obvious skepticism of OP about the potential for cultural change but my skepticism has definitely softened in recent years as I've learned about historical anecdotes like yours. Clearly humans are a just a species of ape so there there are some limits on how much we can bend our minds into new shapes, but culture does seem fairly flexible, maybe more than I once thought.

BTW, personally I'd make a distinction between the pathologies of Trump and Musk. The former is certainly cartoonishly obsessed with "accumulation and selfishness". But for Musk and a few of the other tech barons, like Zuckerberg with his hoodies and identical T-shirts, relative wealth does not seem to be what interests them at all, it's more of a messianic obsession with expansion and colonization, i.e. the opposite of zero-sum. Transhumanism, basically. For me the issue with that vision that it's clearly utopian and disconnected from reality and it's distracting us from solving problems right here and now. Just my personal take.

[–] Dogyote@slrpnk.net 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

If I remember correctly someone else in this thread mentioned The Dawn of Everything. I'm sure you'd like it if you haven't read/listened to it yet. It's about periods of history where there weren't kings and what life might have been like during those periods.

Ugh those tech barons. It seems like they're drunk with power and and high on their desire to make their imagined futures a reality. The problem is they don't seem to care what the rest of us think, and will gladly subvert democracy to impose their "utopian" visions on the masses. Their absurd levels of wealth and power are likely corrupting their utopian ideas as well. I'd go as far to say that they are the current problem, more than a distraction. This shit never ends.

It'd be fine to have a national/global discussion about the ideas these guys have. Their ideas can't be completely bad, there must be some good bits, but the way they're working behind the scenes with Trump and especially Vance (Musk, Thiel, Andressen, Horotwitz, Armstrong, and Sacks) really ruins any trust I could possibly have in their ideas.

[–] JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago

The Dawn of Everything. I’m sure you’d like it if you haven’t read/listened to it yet

Yes I have heard of it. Personally I'm uneasy with the fashionable practice of going straight to the revisionism without first being sure to understand what's being revised. And I've also had my fill of 700-page social-science books whose thesis could easily fit in a pamphlet, but again that's just my take. The authors are credible and respected, I know that.

Their ideas can’t be completely bad, there must be some good bits, but the way they’re working behind the scenes with Trump and especially Vance (Musk, Thiel, Andressen, Horotwitz, Armstrong, and Sacks) really ruins any trust I could possibly have in their ideas.

Completely agree. I listened to Andreessen talking to Ross Douthat on the NYT podcast recently. The smugness level and self-satisfaction was though the roof, it was the sound of literal sneering. Awful, made Bannon seem like a nice warm guy by comparison.