• Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Last sentence:

    “Forage for food and materials from their local forest.”

    Talk about burying the lede. They can only function on a quarter acre by “stealing” from the public forests.

    If everyone did that there would be no public forests. There’s not enough wood and food for everyone.

      • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        I carefully reread the transcript. They don’t say that anywhere.

        He talks about sustainability. But if everyone lived sustainably like him the forest would be gone in a few years for firewood.

        There are too many people.

    • Cyborganism@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      LoL “stealing”. Are you “stealing” the air you’re breathing right now? That’s a weird choice of word. Anyway.

      But you’re right. If everyone started to live like this, it would be devastating. But when you think about it, think about how many forests were cut down and how much land was taken and transformed just for agriculture around the world just to feed us humans. It’s insane.

      • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        I put it in quotes because I didn’t have a better word. If it’s a public park and I walk in with turf cutter, and take all the grass for my own yard, that’s clearly stealing from everyone.

        How much can I take from a public forest without it being stealing? Can I cut down 1 tree for firewood? 10? How much foraging can I do before local wildlife is affected?

      • LordSinguloth@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yes. Stealing. From the taxpayers that maintain that forest. From the public who owns the property.

        Stealing is exactly right. Because while everyone can breathe air, there isn’t enough of that forest to go around if everyone lived like this.

            • andrewth09@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              No it’s not.

              The tragedy of the commons is when too many people use a public resource in a way that is unsustainable. For example, air is not privatized but air pollution impacts everyone who checks notes uses air.

              That’s not to say there aren’t solutions to the Tragedy of the Commons problem and resources cannot be made publicly available, but systems need to be created to manage common resources.

      • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        He talked about community trade so I’ll give him that. I don’t want to give the impression that his lifestyle of living with less is wrong or bad.

        I only question his sustainability claims when he is clearing the forest to heat his house.

  • Hanrahan@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    If we want to have a stable livable climate we need to.live with the emissions of the average Cuban (Professor Kevin Anderson) That allows the worlds poorest to have more emissions per capita and the worlds richest to come down a lot, and by a lot I mean a metric shit load.

    How we do that and what that looks like is up to us but if we don’t soon, we’ll likely collapse. civilisation anyway and none if it will matter and we won’t be talking about it on here.