We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Friday, November 19. 2010
"Sustainability" is the latest greeny-Lefty fad, especially in academia. As with all Lefty fads, a tendency for threat and coercion quickly develops. At the same time, nobody is entirely sure what it means other than that some sort of conspicuous virtue with no meaningful effect seems to be involved.
From Thorne at NAS: The Sustainability Inquisition. It begins:
Read the whole thing. I think it's the replacement for the discredited Global Warming meme, or the Diversity meme, or whatever.
Whatever "sustainability" may mean to people, the only thing I know of with real sustainability is a perpetual motion machine. Or God. Everything else requires input, and the chemical destruction of something.
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
The Lefties are searching for some line of attack that can be relentlessly, endlessly sustained regardless of the relentless and endless march of evidence against it. This time around they are going to try "sustainability".
Tell us where they're wrong... I'm waiting.... They may finally have found that precisely undefinable thing that yields "conspicuous virtue with no meaningful effect" just in time to find that the dolts toiling wearily away in workaday world have become too wary to fall for it. Poor dears. They only want what's best for us.
If only they recognized that the entitlement schemes they so earnestly defend are almost always more unsustainable than the so-called environmentally destructive practices they rail against.
"Sustainability" refers to the durability of bullet-proof absurdities which can be introduced into public discourse at any time, as the rationale to take any desired action.
"Meeting all our needs with renewable energy by 2030" is "sustainable." "
Replacing your lightbulbs with CFLs, which are just as good as incandescents, cheaper, and not a threat to the environment" is "sustainable."
"Reducing carbon output by 50% by 2020 is "sustainable."
"Replacing your lightbulbs with CFLs, which are just as good as incandescents, cheaper, and not a threat to the environment" is "sustainable." "
Can somebody explain that to me? How can a device that is infinitely more complex that an incandescent bulb be "sustainable"? Haven't quite got my mind wrapped around that. I guess I never learned "green science" the way that certain priests of gaia would have me to know.... So, I will see y'all in the post green reeducation camps with my wooden spoon trying to pry up concrete to wipe away traces of man's exploitation of the planet.....
Is really a nice Phrase, but what does it mean? Some recent suppressed info suggests that oil is produced in the core of good ole Earth and simply rises to near the surface for Us to drill for and use. I personally believe (stop reading now) Price will determine Which energy source that we use not Cretins like al gorE and that any shortage will naturally settle the issue.
have a nice century...
Yeah - sustainability is all a big joke and its all putting one over on us all.
Nope - wrong again.
Our fisheries are slowly disappearing due to over fishing and irresponsible commercial quotas. The Atlantic Bluefin base stock quantity has been reduced almost to the point of extinction. Between 1997 and 2007, base bluefin stocks were reduced by almost 60%. Recent survey estimates on both Atlantic and Mediterranean base stocks have shown a further decrease in both size, quantity and quality - all due to over fishing and greed of competing comercial interests - most notably the Janpanese who consume almost 90% of all bluefin tuna caught.
Cod and flounder ground stocks are almost to the point of collapse and because stripers were taken off the restricted category and commercial fishing, both net and rod/reel, quotas were increased, they are starting to become more scarce. In just the past three years, it has become very noticable - stripers are smaller, sicker (sea lice and other parasites).
The latest is the salmon fishery - almost 70% of all "wild" salmon caught are stocked - the natural fishery has all but disappeared.
So yes - sustainability is something real. Its not a joke because eventually, with the constant pressure on fish stocks. You can't just look at oil - you have to look at other issues to truly undestand what's going on.
Well stated T F.
Be you a righty,lefty or rush limbeger groupie!
We gotta take care of momma nature and her house!
Put politics aside, in the sh*t bin, where politics dwell now days.
think about the critters and our kids and thier kids future>
"Be you a righty,lefty or rush limbeger groupie!"
I am a Rational Anarchist. A Rational Anarchist understands that some government is necessary for social order, but also that individual responsibility and common sense are significantly more important than wider social and political acceptance.
I follow no one other than those I choose to let lead. By extension, I prefer to follow from the front rather than from behind.
I believe complex systems evolve to the point of being useless and that simple is best. The natural corollary is that the more complex the system, the easier it is to break or destroy.
I believe that the constant barrage of complaints from social liberals, moderates and conservatives and the perpetually moving political positioning/posturing over the simplest of ideas is destroying our society from within.
I believe that men and women of good will always rise to the occasion and do what is necessary when it is necessary.
I believe in God, Family, Country, Friends and the United States Marine Corps. Nothing else matters.
Aren't you glad you asked? :>)
Well, the same controllist throwbacks who coapted "environmentalism", "liberalism", the idea of being "progressive", etc., are now trying to take ownership of "sustainability". But based upon their previous behavior it will likely follow that what they will decide to call "sustainable" will turn out to be only the usual regressive, unsustainable Totalitarianism.
I haven't 'Wikied' anything on 'sustainability' but if IRCC this meme is decades old, almost as old as Earth Day. Belief is that resources (animal, veggie, mineral) all are in finite supply here on planet earth. So, for example, if you mine bauxite for aluminium cans for your soda pop, then make up for it by re-cycling cans. I think this meme effectively launched the whole re-cycling phenomenon (which Penn & Teller rightfully lampoon). So now, anything you do which may affect the environment (of any plant, animal, mineral no matter how inert), has to justify itself in terms of 'sustainaility'. On its face 'sustainability' is another way for greenies to shout 'no growth' to any progress.
There's a difference between "sustainable harvest," as deals with the best, wisest use of renewable resources like timber, fish, crops and wildlife (mmmmm, deer sausage) and "sustainability" as a political and environmental movement. "Sustainability," as far as I've been lectured/preached to about it, emphasizes reducing one's standard of living such that you can keep living at that level for as long as your civilization lasts. As I point out to my students, that's far too vague. Native Americans in New England had a lifeway that was sustainable over time - slash and burn agriculture augmented with hunting and gathering - but not in place - each band had to relocate every few years as soil fertility declined. So was it "sustainable?"
The question is, "How long can we keep doing what we are doing?" Systems such as fishery show that resources are not infinite. We can either reduce the consumption of the blue fina tuna, allowing it to maintain a stable population for generations to come, or we can consume it all and not leave any for the next generation.
Another example: the top soil in Iowa has been reduced by 50% due to compaction and runoff. Much of what is left is not good to grow with because of the constant, intense growing of the same crops - sucking the nutrients out of the soil, making it hard to grow. When the rest of the 50% is lost or leached bare of nutrients, sorry farmers - you can't grow on bedrock and sterile soil. So the question is, what will we do to keep the top soil, and keep it healthy? Other areas have been doing it for generations - rotate plants that use different nutrients, occasionally leave fields alone to get replenished, mixed crop plantings, not planting right up to the crevasses that pull the dirt off when it rains, the list goes on. Instead, most agribusinesses continue to look for short-term gains, then sell the poor land to the Amish who end up using more natural processes to replenish the soil (I'm not Amish, but admire a lot of what they do).
Eventually, no more oil to use up in our cars, power plants, heaters, etc. Then what? So, back to the original question, "sustainability" means asking yourself, "how long can this continue?"