Burnout gets praised by idiots

[Havet]

After managing a couple of organic food (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/food) companies made me realise that even "ethical business" would never be quite enough, an afternoon's philosophising with a mate changed everything. We were looking at the world's issues – environmental destruction, sweatshops, factory farms, wars over resources – and wondering which of them we should dedicate our lives to. But I realised that I was looking at the world in the same way a western medical practitioner looks at a patient, seeing symptoms and wondering how to firefight them, without any thought for their root cause. So I decided instead to become a social homeopath, a pro-activist, and to investigate the root cause of these symptoms.

One of the critical causes of those symptoms is the fact we no longer have to see the direct repercussions our purchases have on the people, environment and animals they affect. The degrees of separation between the consumer and the consumed have increased so much that we're completely unaware of the levels of destruction and suffering embodied in the stuff we buy. The tool that has enabled this separation is money.


If we grew our own food, we wouldn't waste a third of it as we do today. If we made our own tables and chairs, we wouldn't throw them out the moment we changed the interior decor. If we had to clean our own drinking water, we probably wouldn't contaminate it.

Source (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/green-living-blog/2009/oct/28/live-without-money)

Sounds slightly hypocritical, especially considering he didn't build his own caravan or his solar laptop.

---

Anyway, here's what I want to ask:

- Is he right in his criticisms of money? After, money is only a tool of exchange. Shouldn't he focus his criticisms on the type of money (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_money) we're using instead of the concept of money?

- How would industrialization and technology develop if people were expected to do everything by themselves individually? Surely some level of co-dependence and trade is beneficial?

Oh, and for those who don't understand the title of the thread (burnout), see here (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=burnout).

[GPDP]

Ugh. Typical liberal consumer advocate idiocy, if you ask me.

I'd rather we have a world without money (after all, I am an advocate of a parecon-esque gift economy), but money is not the "root" of the world's problems. That's about as superficial as an analysis gets.

This guy would have us go back to the middle ages, before the days of mass-production, when everyone would build their own stuff. It is a massive step backwards in technology. Sure, we can have debates over whether there is more alienation now than back then in terms of the fruits of our labor, but I do not believe more progress in the realm of mass-production necessarily equals more alienation. It's more about the relations to production than anything. And that's the realm of socialist analysis, which this guy is either ignorant of or has rejected outright for some idiotic reason.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

But I realised that I was looking at the world in the same way a western medical practitioner looks at a patient, seeing symptoms and wondering how to firefight them, without any thought for their root cause. So I decided instead to become a social homeopath, a pro-activist, and to investigate the root cause of these symptoms.

The individual appears to be an alt-med loony, if this analogy was made in any seriousness. The distortions of "western medicine" are a big give-away.

[Havet]

Ugh. Typical liberal consumer advocate idiocy, if you ask me.

I'd rather we have a world without money (after all, I am an advocate of a parecon-esque gift economy), but money is not the "root" of the world's problems. That's about as superficial as an analysis gets.

This guy would have us go back to the middle ages, before the days of mass-production, when everyone would build their own stuff. It is a massive step backwards in technology. Sure, we can have debates over whether there is more alienation now than back then in terms of the fruits of our labor, but I do not believe more progress in the realm of mass-production necessarily equals more alienation. It's more about the relations to production than anything. And that's the realm of socialist analysis, which this guy is either ignorant of or has rejected outright for some idiotic reason.

Don't you find it scary that quite some people glorify this kind of action by his part (while sitting at their non-DIY computers and desktops)?

[GPDP]

I don't find it scary. I find it stupid and childish.

I have more things to be genuinely afraid of than the pedantic rants of whiny liberals.

[Jazzratt]

Don't you find it scary that quite some people glorify this kind of action by his part (while sitting at their non-DIY computers and desktops)?

I find them quite funny. At least these people do not actively advocate that I starve or take massive pay cuts in the name of the market.

[SocialPhilosophy]

Don't you find it scary that quite some people glorify this kind of action by his part (while sitting at their non-DIY computers and desktops)?

Living that kind of lifestyle is impossible unless all you want is food and water. even then you're stretching it.

[Mo212]

Ugh. Typical liberal consumer advocate idiocy, if you ask me.

I'd rather we have a world without money (after all, I am an advocate of a parecon-esque gift economy), but money is not the "root" of the world's problems. That's about as superficial as an analysis gets.

This guy would have us go back to the middle ages, before the days of mass-production, when everyone would build their own stuff. It is a massive step backwards in technology. Sure, we can have debates over whether there is more alienation now than back then in terms of the fruits of our labor, but I do not believe more progress in the realm of mass-production necessarily equals more alienation. It's more about the relations to production than anything. And that's the realm of socialist analysis, which this guy is either ignorant of or has rejected outright for some idiotic reason.

The problem is that in a specialized society as tech progresses more and more people do not have anything to trade for resources. The real issue is lack of people's political control over business and the distribution of resources but that is a powder keg issue. The next big problem is how do you make sure the work that needs to be done gets done against the resources and services people want?

The imperfection of people themselves play a large role in why the world is so fucked up to begin with no matter what stripe of ideology you fly your flag by.

[Ele'ill]

What's wrong with practicing a more sustainable personal life?

[Havet]

What's wrong with practicing a more sustainable personal life?

It becomes unsustainable to keep the same pace of technological progress (with an eye on the environment and the well-being of other people, of course)

If people were expect to do absolutely everything by themselves it would dramatically reduce the level of innovation and advancement in many scientific areas that came through cooperation and/or competition

[Ele'ill]

It becomes unsustainable to keep the same pace of technological progress (with an eye on the environment and the well-being of other people, of course)

If people were expect to do absolutely everything by themselves it would dramatically reduce the level of innovation and advancement in many scientific areas that came through cooperation and/or competition

Yes but surely there can be a huge benefit from people becoming aware of where their products come from and what issues are involved with the companies they are buying from.

I also think people can do A LOT more for themselves than we currently see.

[Havet]

Yes but surely there can be a huge benefit from people becoming aware of where their products come from and what issues are involved with the companies they are buying from.

Oh certainly


I also think people can do A LOT more for themselves than we currently see.

Agreed

The problem is that that guy advocates people doing absolutely everything by themselves individually.

[NecroCommie]

Well, there is a point of alienation from labour here, which is valid. Pretty much everything else from "money is the one to blaim", to "lifestylism is the answer" is major BS.

As to the replies, sustainable lifestyle is not a hinderance to progress. One can have furniture and transportation which lasts for decades, yet minor upgrades are always doable. Like my grandma for example, who has a 20 year old Lada Samara as a car, which has lasted practically without a dent. She just installed new more fuel efficient engine in it just a few years ago, and still running great.

Besides, no one is suggesting the primitivist model of "do it yourself". The simple act of workers selling their products themselves should do the trick well enough, although the culture of consuming would be a hinderance still.