Every year in India and Pakistan over 100 bear cubs are illegally poached from the wild and sold at markets to nomadic gypsies known as Kalandars. Many of the cubs die from neglect, dehydration and distress during the long trek back to the Kalandar village. Those cubs that do survive are put on a punishing regime of starvation and beatings as a way to begin the brutal conditioning process to teach them perform for tourists. Their sensitive muzzles are pierced using a hot iron needle without anesthetic, which often leads to infection. A course rope is threaded through the hole and is used to roughly pull the bear around the crowded city streets. "The tug of this rope, along with the intense fear of the strike of a heavy stick, motivates the bear to lift its legs in turn and dance" says Geete Sashamani, a WSPA researcher who witnessed this painful and traumatic process.
Due to poor diets, abuse and neglect, dancing bears rarely live past the age of eight; whereas in the wild they can live up to 30 years. Once captured and cruelly tamed, a dancing bear can never be returned to the wild; its most optimistic outlook is retirement to a sanctuary. This endangered species will become extinct if this trade continues.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Happy Nation
QUESTIONS & ANSWERS ABOUT DEMOGRAPHIC WINTER
Question : What is population stability, and why is the number 2.1 so important?
Answer:
Population stability is the point of equilibrium at which a country’s population is neither growing nor declining. In order to maintain current population, the average woman must have 2.1 children during her lifetime. Essentially, she needs to replace herself and a man. Because some children will die before reaching maturity, slightly more than two children are needed. Hence, 2.1.
A birthrate of more than 2.1 equals population growth. A birthrate of less than 2.1 means long term population decline. The rate of 2.1 is based on currently low infant mortality rates. In countries where infant mortality is higher, the birthrate required for population replacement would also be higher.
Question: What does the expression “Demographic Winter” mean?
Answer:
“Demographic Winter” denotes the worldwide decline in birthrates, also referred to as a “birth-dearth,” and what it portends.
Demographer Philip Longman (author of “The Empty Cradle: How Falling Birthrates Threaten World Prosperity”) observes: “The ongoing global decline in human birthrates is the single most powerful force affecting the fate of nations and the future of society in the 21st. century.”
Worldwide, birthrates have been halved in the past 50 years. There are now 59 nations, with 44% of the world’s population, with below-replacement fertility
Sometime in this century, the world’s population will begin to decline. At a certain point, the decline will become rapid. We may even reach population free-fall in our lifetimes.For some countries, population decline is already a reality. Russia is losing three-quarters-of-a-million people a year. Its population (currently 145 million) is expected to fall by one-third by 2050.
The term “nuclear winter,” popularized in the 1980s, alluded to the catastrophic environmental impact of a nuclear war. The long-term consequences of demographic winter could be equally devastating.
Question: What is replacement fertility, and why is the number 2.1 so important?
Answer:
Replacement fertility is the point of equilibrium at which a country’s population is neither growing nor declining. In order to maintain current population, the average woman must have 2.1 children during her lifetime. Essentially, she needs to replace herself and a man. Because some children will die before reaching maturity, slightly more than two children are needed. Hence, 2.1.
A birthrate of more than 2.1 equals population growth. A birthrate of less than 2.1 long-term means population decline.
Question: If birthrates are declining, why does the world’s population continue to grow?
Answer:
If it’s already in motion, a car in neutral will continue moving for a while, especially if it’s going downhill, even if gas isn’t being injected into the engine.
Today’s population growth is due to two factors: 1. higher fertility rates in the 1950s and 60s, and 2. people living longer than ever before.
The thing to remember is this: Declining birthrates will equal a declining population worldwide at some point in the next few decades. In the West (especially in Europe) population decline will become a reality much sooner. In some countries, such as Russia, it’s already happening.
A nation’s demographic future can be seen in its current birthrate. In Europe, the number of children under 5 has declined by 36% since 1960. Worldwide, there are 6 million fewer children, 6 and under, today, than there were in 1990. If present trends continue, the United Nations estimates that by 2050 there will be 248 million fewer children in the world then there are now.
Question: Where are birthrates lowest?
Answer:
Of the 10 countries with the lowest birthrates, 9 are in Europe. Overall, the European fertility rate is 1.3, well below replacement level (2.1). No European nation has a replacement-level birthrate.
Italy’s fertility rate is 1.2. Spain’s is 1.1. That means in the not-too-distant future, absent massive immigration, these countries will lose half of their people in every generation.
Russia’s birthrate fell from 2.4 in 1990 to 1.17 today – a decline of more than 50% in less than 20 years. Each year, there are more abortions than live births in the Russian Federation.
While birthrates are also plummeting in developing nations, most still have above-replacement fertility – for the time being.
The U.S. fertility rate is around 2.1, just about replacement level, and continues to hover around that rate, due in part to higher immigrant birthrates. How long this will continue is anyone’s guess.
Question: What are the consequences of demographic decline?
Answer:
Economist Robert J. Samuelson wrote in a June 15, 2005 column in The Washington Post: “It’s hard to be a great power if your population is shriveling.” Samuelson warned: “Europe as we know it is going out of business…. Western Europe’s population grows dramatically grayer, projects the U.S. Census Bureau. Now about one-sixth of the population is 65 and older. By 2030, that could be one-fourth and by 2050, almost one-third.”
By the mid-point of this century, 16% of the world’s population will be over 65. By 2040, there will be 400 million elderly Chinese.
If present low birthrates persist, the European Union estimates there will be a continent-wide shortfall of 20 million workers by 2030.
Who will operate the factories and farms in the Europe of the future? Who will develop the natural resources? Where will Russia find the soldiers to guard the frontiers of the largest nation on Earth?
Who will care for a graying population? A burgeoning elderly population combined with a shrinking work force will lead to a train-wreck for state pension systems.
This only skims the surface of the way demographic decline will change the face of civilization. Even the environment will be adversely impacted. With severely strained public budgets, developed nations will no longer be willing to shoulder the costs of industrial clean-up or a reduction of CO2 emissions.
Question: What factors contribute to demographic decline?
Answer:
A number of social trends of the post-war era have converged to create a perfect storm for Demographic Winter.
Men and women are delaying marriage, making it less likely they’ll have more than one or two children. Today in the West, almost one in two marriages ends in divorce. The children of divorce are less likely to marry and form families themselves.
More married women are putting off having children for careers. After 35, it becomes progressively harder for women to conceive.
The news and entertainment media tell young adults that satisfaction comes from careers, romance, travel and “personal growth” – not from having children. It’s rare that Hollywood even portrays large families (today, more than 2 children). The culture’s message is live-for-moment and live primarily for yourself, with no sense of obligation to generations past or concern for posterity.
The growth of cohabitation also has an impact. (In Scandinavia, almost as many couples are living together as married.) Cohabitation is not conducive to childbearing or childrearing.
For the past 20 to 30 years, children have been taught that over-population (the so-called population bomb) will wreak havoc on the environment and economic development. Not surprisingly, children thus indoctrinated frequently choose to have fewer children when they reach maturity.
Religious observance has been shown to correlate with higher birthrates. The increasing secularization of Western societies has been accompanied by lower birthrates.
Thus, every aspect of modernity works against family life and in favor of singleness and small families or voluntary childlessness.
Question: Can’t the problem be fixed by increased immigration?
Answer:
In a demographic sense, this is robbing Peter to pay Paul.
The host country gains people, but the home country loses. The developing world, which has seen its own birthrate cut in half since 1970 (from almost 6 to barely 4), can ill afford to lose large numbers through emigration. The loss of labor from these countries adversely impacts their own economy and since the majority of those who leave are the men, many children are now growing up without a father, creating other social problems for these countries. The developing world is paying a high price to bail out the developed world’s lack of labor due to low fertility rates.
Mass immigration changes the national character of the host country. Immigrants tend to have a lower education level than natives. Many never learn the language of their new home or identify with its history and heritage.This changes the social and political makeup of the host countries, in some cases so dramatically that it is causing social and political unrest.
Question: Can’t demographic winter be countered by governments encouraging people to have more children?
Answer:
This is being tried in Western Europe and Russia. The Russian Federation pays families a bonus of 250,000 rubles (the equivalent of $9,200) for every child after the first – in a nation where the average monthly wage is only $330. It’s not working.
Couples decide to have children for all kinds of reasons – religious, emotional, cultural, etc. Money doesn’t seem to be one of them, although money concerns are sometimes cited as a reason for having fewer children.
Children are a life-long commitment. While governments should make childrearing easier, by lowering the tax-burden on families (out of self-interest if not fairness), cash incentives so far haven’t worked.
Question: If the United States has near-replacement fertility, why should we care?
Answer:
All of the factors that are leading Europe into the depths of Demographic Winter are present in the United States as well, including high divorce rates, the rise of cohabitation, families putting off procreation to pursue careers, an anti-family culture and voluntary childlessness.
We may be a few decades behind Europe, but we’re heading in the same direction.
National economies are interconnected to such an extent that the impact of economic collapse in one country or region can be felt around the world.
The social, political and economic decline of previously stable nations can destabilize entire regions and create perils for neighbors and far-away allies. The United States is connected to Europe economically and through multiple security treaties.
Question: What Is “Demographic Winter: Decline of the Human Family”
Answer:
“Demographic Winter: Decline of the Human Family,” is the first of two documentary films. Together they explore every aspect of demographic decline based on interviews with scholars, researchers, economists, demographers, government representatives, civil and religious leaders from 33 countries.
Produced by Barry McLerran and directed by Rick Stout, with executive director Steven Smoot, “Demographic Winter” brings together a number of disciplines to examine and analyze what could be the greatest threat confronting humanity in the 21st century.
Question : What is population stability, and why is the number 2.1 so important?
Answer:
Population stability is the point of equilibrium at which a country’s population is neither growing nor declining. In order to maintain current population, the average woman must have 2.1 children during her lifetime. Essentially, she needs to replace herself and a man. Because some children will die before reaching maturity, slightly more than two children are needed. Hence, 2.1.
A birthrate of more than 2.1 equals population growth. A birthrate of less than 2.1 means long term population decline. The rate of 2.1 is based on currently low infant mortality rates. In countries where infant mortality is higher, the birthrate required for population replacement would also be higher.
Question: What does the expression “Demographic Winter” mean?
Answer:
“Demographic Winter” denotes the worldwide decline in birthrates, also referred to as a “birth-dearth,” and what it portends.
Demographer Philip Longman (author of “The Empty Cradle: How Falling Birthrates Threaten World Prosperity”) observes: “The ongoing global decline in human birthrates is the single most powerful force affecting the fate of nations and the future of society in the 21st. century.”
Worldwide, birthrates have been halved in the past 50 years. There are now 59 nations, with 44% of the world’s population, with below-replacement fertility
Sometime in this century, the world’s population will begin to decline. At a certain point, the decline will become rapid. We may even reach population free-fall in our lifetimes.For some countries, population decline is already a reality. Russia is losing three-quarters-of-a-million people a year. Its population (currently 145 million) is expected to fall by one-third by 2050.
The term “nuclear winter,” popularized in the 1980s, alluded to the catastrophic environmental impact of a nuclear war. The long-term consequences of demographic winter could be equally devastating.
Question: What is replacement fertility, and why is the number 2.1 so important?
Answer:
Replacement fertility is the point of equilibrium at which a country’s population is neither growing nor declining. In order to maintain current population, the average woman must have 2.1 children during her lifetime. Essentially, she needs to replace herself and a man. Because some children will die before reaching maturity, slightly more than two children are needed. Hence, 2.1.
A birthrate of more than 2.1 equals population growth. A birthrate of less than 2.1 long-term means population decline.
Question: If birthrates are declining, why does the world’s population continue to grow?
Answer:
If it’s already in motion, a car in neutral will continue moving for a while, especially if it’s going downhill, even if gas isn’t being injected into the engine.
Today’s population growth is due to two factors: 1. higher fertility rates in the 1950s and 60s, and 2. people living longer than ever before.
The thing to remember is this: Declining birthrates will equal a declining population worldwide at some point in the next few decades. In the West (especially in Europe) population decline will become a reality much sooner. In some countries, such as Russia, it’s already happening.
A nation’s demographic future can be seen in its current birthrate. In Europe, the number of children under 5 has declined by 36% since 1960. Worldwide, there are 6 million fewer children, 6 and under, today, than there were in 1990. If present trends continue, the United Nations estimates that by 2050 there will be 248 million fewer children in the world then there are now.
Question: Where are birthrates lowest?
Answer:
Of the 10 countries with the lowest birthrates, 9 are in Europe. Overall, the European fertility rate is 1.3, well below replacement level (2.1). No European nation has a replacement-level birthrate.
Italy’s fertility rate is 1.2. Spain’s is 1.1. That means in the not-too-distant future, absent massive immigration, these countries will lose half of their people in every generation.
Russia’s birthrate fell from 2.4 in 1990 to 1.17 today – a decline of more than 50% in less than 20 years. Each year, there are more abortions than live births in the Russian Federation.
While birthrates are also plummeting in developing nations, most still have above-replacement fertility – for the time being.
The U.S. fertility rate is around 2.1, just about replacement level, and continues to hover around that rate, due in part to higher immigrant birthrates. How long this will continue is anyone’s guess.
Question: What are the consequences of demographic decline?
Answer:
Economist Robert J. Samuelson wrote in a June 15, 2005 column in The Washington Post: “It’s hard to be a great power if your population is shriveling.” Samuelson warned: “Europe as we know it is going out of business…. Western Europe’s population grows dramatically grayer, projects the U.S. Census Bureau. Now about one-sixth of the population is 65 and older. By 2030, that could be one-fourth and by 2050, almost one-third.”
By the mid-point of this century, 16% of the world’s population will be over 65. By 2040, there will be 400 million elderly Chinese.
If present low birthrates persist, the European Union estimates there will be a continent-wide shortfall of 20 million workers by 2030.
Who will operate the factories and farms in the Europe of the future? Who will develop the natural resources? Where will Russia find the soldiers to guard the frontiers of the largest nation on Earth?
Who will care for a graying population? A burgeoning elderly population combined with a shrinking work force will lead to a train-wreck for state pension systems.
This only skims the surface of the way demographic decline will change the face of civilization. Even the environment will be adversely impacted. With severely strained public budgets, developed nations will no longer be willing to shoulder the costs of industrial clean-up or a reduction of CO2 emissions.
Question: What factors contribute to demographic decline?
Answer:
A number of social trends of the post-war era have converged to create a perfect storm for Demographic Winter.
Men and women are delaying marriage, making it less likely they’ll have more than one or two children. Today in the West, almost one in two marriages ends in divorce. The children of divorce are less likely to marry and form families themselves.
More married women are putting off having children for careers. After 35, it becomes progressively harder for women to conceive.
The news and entertainment media tell young adults that satisfaction comes from careers, romance, travel and “personal growth” – not from having children. It’s rare that Hollywood even portrays large families (today, more than 2 children). The culture’s message is live-for-moment and live primarily for yourself, with no sense of obligation to generations past or concern for posterity.
The growth of cohabitation also has an impact. (In Scandinavia, almost as many couples are living together as married.) Cohabitation is not conducive to childbearing or childrearing.
For the past 20 to 30 years, children have been taught that over-population (the so-called population bomb) will wreak havoc on the environment and economic development. Not surprisingly, children thus indoctrinated frequently choose to have fewer children when they reach maturity.
Religious observance has been shown to correlate with higher birthrates. The increasing secularization of Western societies has been accompanied by lower birthrates.
Thus, every aspect of modernity works against family life and in favor of singleness and small families or voluntary childlessness.
Question: Can’t the problem be fixed by increased immigration?
Answer:
In a demographic sense, this is robbing Peter to pay Paul.
The host country gains people, but the home country loses. The developing world, which has seen its own birthrate cut in half since 1970 (from almost 6 to barely 4), can ill afford to lose large numbers through emigration. The loss of labor from these countries adversely impacts their own economy and since the majority of those who leave are the men, many children are now growing up without a father, creating other social problems for these countries. The developing world is paying a high price to bail out the developed world’s lack of labor due to low fertility rates.
Mass immigration changes the national character of the host country. Immigrants tend to have a lower education level than natives. Many never learn the language of their new home or identify with its history and heritage.This changes the social and political makeup of the host countries, in some cases so dramatically that it is causing social and political unrest.
Question: Can’t demographic winter be countered by governments encouraging people to have more children?
Answer:
This is being tried in Western Europe and Russia. The Russian Federation pays families a bonus of 250,000 rubles (the equivalent of $9,200) for every child after the first – in a nation where the average monthly wage is only $330. It’s not working.
Couples decide to have children for all kinds of reasons – religious, emotional, cultural, etc. Money doesn’t seem to be one of them, although money concerns are sometimes cited as a reason for having fewer children.
Children are a life-long commitment. While governments should make childrearing easier, by lowering the tax-burden on families (out of self-interest if not fairness), cash incentives so far haven’t worked.
Question: If the United States has near-replacement fertility, why should we care?
Answer:
All of the factors that are leading Europe into the depths of Demographic Winter are present in the United States as well, including high divorce rates, the rise of cohabitation, families putting off procreation to pursue careers, an anti-family culture and voluntary childlessness.
We may be a few decades behind Europe, but we’re heading in the same direction.
National economies are interconnected to such an extent that the impact of economic collapse in one country or region can be felt around the world.
The social, political and economic decline of previously stable nations can destabilize entire regions and create perils for neighbors and far-away allies. The United States is connected to Europe economically and through multiple security treaties.
Question: What Is “Demographic Winter: Decline of the Human Family”
Answer:
“Demographic Winter: Decline of the Human Family,” is the first of two documentary films. Together they explore every aspect of demographic decline based on interviews with scholars, researchers, economists, demographers, government representatives, civil and religious leaders from 33 countries.
Produced by Barry McLerran and directed by Rick Stout, with executive director Steven Smoot, “Demographic Winter” brings together a number of disciplines to examine and analyze what could be the greatest threat confronting humanity in the 21st century.
Demographic Winter: Decline of the Human Family
One of the most ominous events of modern history is quietly unfolding. Social scientists and economists agree - we are headed toward a demographic winter which threatens to have catastrophic social and economic consequences. The effects will be severe and long lasting and are already becoming manifest in much of Europe.
A groundbreaking film, Demographic Winter: Decline of the Human Family, reveals in chilling soberness how societies with diminished family influence are now grimly seen as being in social and economic jeopardy.
Demographic Winter draws upon experts from all around the world - demographers, economists, sociologists, psychologists, civic and religious leaders, parliamentarians and diplomats. Together, they reveal the dangers facing society and the world’s economies, dangers far more imminent than global warming and at least as severe. These experts will discuss how:
The “population bomb” not only did not have the predicted consequences, but almost all of the developed countries of the world are now experiencing fertility rates far below replacement levels. Birthrates have fallen so low that even immigration cannot replace declining populations, and this migration is sapping strength from developing countries, the fertility rates for many of which are now falling at a faster pace than did those of the developed countries.
The economies of the world will continue to contract as the “human capital” spoken of by Nobel Prize winning economist Gary Becker, diminishes. The engines of commerce will be strained as the workers of today fail to replace themselves and are burdened by the responsibility to support an aging population.
Government programs will slow-bleed by the decrease in tax dollars received from an ever shrinking work force. The skyrocketing ratio of the old retirees to the young workers will render current-day social security systems completely unable to support the aging population.
Our attempts to modernize through social engineering policies and programs have left children growing up in broken homes, with absentee parents and little exposure to extended family, disconnected from the generations, and these children are experiencing severe psychological, sociological and economic consequences. The intact family’s immeasurable role in the development and prosperity of human societies is crumbling.
The influence of social and economic problems on ever shrinking, increasingly disconnected generations will compound and accelerate the deterioration. Our children and our children’s children will bear the economic and social burden of regenerating the “human capital” that accounts for 80% of wealth in the economy, and they will be ill-equipped to do so.
Is there a “tipping point”, after which the accelerating consequences will make recovery impossible without complete social and economic collapse? Even the experts can’t tell us how far we can go down this road, oblivious to the outcomes, until we reach a point where sliding into the void becomes unpreventable.
Only if the political incorrectness of talking about the natural family within policy circles is overcome will solutions begin to be found. These solutions will necessarily result in policy changes, changes that will support and promote the natural, intact family.
Just as it took the cumulative involvement of activist organizations, policy makers, the business world and the media to create the unintended consequences we are beginning to experience, so it will take the holistic contribution of all of these entities, together with civic and religious organizations, to change the hearts and minds of all of society to bring about a reversal.
It may be too late to avoid some very severe consequences, but with effort we may be able to preclude calamity. Demographic Winter lays out a forthright province of discussion. The warning voices in this film need to be heard before a silent, portentous fall turns into a long, hard winter.
A groundbreaking film, Demographic Winter: Decline of the Human Family, reveals in chilling soberness how societies with diminished family influence are now grimly seen as being in social and economic jeopardy.
Demographic Winter draws upon experts from all around the world - demographers, economists, sociologists, psychologists, civic and religious leaders, parliamentarians and diplomats. Together, they reveal the dangers facing society and the world’s economies, dangers far more imminent than global warming and at least as severe. These experts will discuss how:
The “population bomb” not only did not have the predicted consequences, but almost all of the developed countries of the world are now experiencing fertility rates far below replacement levels. Birthrates have fallen so low that even immigration cannot replace declining populations, and this migration is sapping strength from developing countries, the fertility rates for many of which are now falling at a faster pace than did those of the developed countries.
The economies of the world will continue to contract as the “human capital” spoken of by Nobel Prize winning economist Gary Becker, diminishes. The engines of commerce will be strained as the workers of today fail to replace themselves and are burdened by the responsibility to support an aging population.
Government programs will slow-bleed by the decrease in tax dollars received from an ever shrinking work force. The skyrocketing ratio of the old retirees to the young workers will render current-day social security systems completely unable to support the aging population.
Our attempts to modernize through social engineering policies and programs have left children growing up in broken homes, with absentee parents and little exposure to extended family, disconnected from the generations, and these children are experiencing severe psychological, sociological and economic consequences. The intact family’s immeasurable role in the development and prosperity of human societies is crumbling.
The influence of social and economic problems on ever shrinking, increasingly disconnected generations will compound and accelerate the deterioration. Our children and our children’s children will bear the economic and social burden of regenerating the “human capital” that accounts for 80% of wealth in the economy, and they will be ill-equipped to do so.
Is there a “tipping point”, after which the accelerating consequences will make recovery impossible without complete social and economic collapse? Even the experts can’t tell us how far we can go down this road, oblivious to the outcomes, until we reach a point where sliding into the void becomes unpreventable.
Only if the political incorrectness of talking about the natural family within policy circles is overcome will solutions begin to be found. These solutions will necessarily result in policy changes, changes that will support and promote the natural, intact family.
Just as it took the cumulative involvement of activist organizations, policy makers, the business world and the media to create the unintended consequences we are beginning to experience, so it will take the holistic contribution of all of these entities, together with civic and religious organizations, to change the hearts and minds of all of society to bring about a reversal.
It may be too late to avoid some very severe consequences, but with effort we may be able to preclude calamity. Demographic Winter lays out a forthright province of discussion. The warning voices in this film need to be heard before a silent, portentous fall turns into a long, hard winter.
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Monsanto Contaminates Romania with Genetic Engineering
 Recent Greenpeace research in Romania has exposed the fact that Monsanto's introduction of genetically engineered soybeans has virtually destroyed both conventional and organic farming in many regions. Neither the Romanian government nor Monsanto applied the precautionary principle in assessing the impact of these crops in agriculture.Berlin, Germany, 11 January 2006 Greenpeace today, joined by a former manager of Monsanto and Limagrain in Romania, Mr Dragos Dima, at a press conference at the International Green Week in Berlin exposed how Monsanto will contaminate EU agriculture with genetically engineered (GE) Soya. U.S. biotech giant made an application in December 2005 to the European Union to grow its genetically engineered (GE) 'Roundup Ready' soybeans across the whole of Europe once its current licence - permitting the beans' import but not cultivation - expires in 2006 (1).more |
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Thursday, October 09, 2008
Some things we can do...
Consumption
- Avoid buying newly manufactured things, instead buy second hand or make our own.
- Avoid large chain stores and supermarkets.
- Buy things from small and local businesses.
- Favor worker cooperatives over corporations.
- Wherever possible buy direct from producers.
- Support local currencies.
- Trade or give gifts in preference to using money.
Communities
- Smile at people and meet their eyes.
- Give open-minded/hearted time to those people around us.
- Organise parties and celebrations (eg. a dinner party where everyone brings a homemade dish or a childrens party where each parent organises a game)
- Organise rotating work parties and skill-sharing events.
- Vision together the future of our communities and make it happen by a combination of negotiations with local councils and direct action. (If you think that unused roadside could make a good veg garden then get some friends together and just go ahead and do it)
Food And Land
- Propagate and plant edible perennial plants wherever possible on any available land.
- Learn how to grow food and save seeds.
- Set up personal and community food growing.
- Stick to seasonal, local and organic foods.
- Eat meat in moderation.
- Have a go at making bread, preserving food, making cheese, brewing etc..
- Enjoy cooking and eating good food. Treat our food with reverence.
- Learn what wild plants grow in our areas and learn how to use them for food and medicine.
- Protect and encourage biodiversity and wild areas (eg. a small wild patch at the bottom of your garden could be a haven for birds and small animals).
- Make a pond.
Energy
- Use wood (biomass) for heating. Install wood burners. Take firewood from the waste stream and plant local or personal firewood supplies. In a climate like Britain's, short rotation coppice crops such as willow can be fully productive in 3 years and a 30 x 50m area can heat an efficient family house.
- Heat water with wood and solar energy. (A solar water heater can easily be made from scrap materials in a day or two.)
- Use renewable electricity. Switch mains connections to suppliers who only deal in renewable energy.
- Set up and use local or personal energy production systems. Small scale hydroelectric systems in particular offer simply maintained systems with high and reliable returns for the amount of invested energy.
- Practice basic woodwork, metalwork etc to make and repair basic items and tools.
- Compost food and human waste to build soil fertility and reduce energy demands of waste disposal.
Lifestyle
- Withdraw investment from houses. Move to a cheaper home or make our own (most cheaply done without permission).
- Work less.
- This will free up time and energy to develop sustainable ways of living as well as removing support from destructive systems.
- Do not take employment from organizations which are unsustainable or who's actions are not benefiting the world.
- Maximize our autonomy from state and corporate control structures.
- Move from urban to rural areas and start working some land.
Consideration
- Consider what elements of our world and society are of greatest value to us (air, water, food supplies, medicines...?)
- Consider what elements /service / products we could happily do without (war, this year's fashion, more DVDs, a bigger car...?)
- Be aware that the more we have of the latter, the more we threaten the former.
- Whenever we spend money or play an active role in society, take time to consider the consequences of our actions. (Buying a tank of fuel supports the violent occupation of the middle east, buying cheap clothes supports sweatshops and child labour, buying from transnational corporations funds the extraction of capital from poorer countries and the erosion of human rights)
- Consider our modern world from the point of view of our ancestors.
- Count our blessings.
- Appreciate the beauty and fragility of life, human and otherwise.
- Make time to appreciate and congratulate ourselves - we are all amazing and powerful beings.
- Smile, laugh, love and dream. Be present and don't worry.
Tuesday, October 07, 2008
ADEVARUL incorect politic - epistolie
|
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)