Two thoughts on this meme - self-reliance is necessary, and self-reliance is not sufficient, because if capitalism destroys the climate your homestead goes with it.
this post was submitted on 12 Feb 2024
401 points (95.7% liked)
solarpunk memes
2806 readers
196 users here now
For when you need a laugh!
The definition of a "meme" here is intentionally pretty loose. Images, screenshots, and the like are welcome!
But, keep it lighthearted and/or within our server's ideals.
Posts and comments that are hateful, trolling, inciting, and/or overly negative will be removed at the moderators' discretion.
Please follow all slrpnk.net rules and community guidelines
Have fun!
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Self reliance isn't feasible, way to many people and not enough arable land. Plus you lose all benefits of specialization, putting you to pre industrial levels.
Whether or not you believe that self-reliance is feasible, there's nothing stopping you from learning to do more things yourself.
Failing to do so only works to solidify the status quo.
I definitely enjoy learning to fix electronics and appliances things on my own, and I enjoy designing and 3d printing helpful parts. But I have no urge to learn how to grow my own food or make a house or furniture etc. I don't see a feasible situation where that would be helpful.
That's great! You're already cutting out middlemen and the necessity of shipping things across the globe.
And that's ok too. But the more you learn in those regards, the better. It cuts out that reliance on middlemen and international shipping.
I mean... Were you not affected in at least some way during Covid? That first year of lockdowns and massive shipping delays was eye-opening for lots of people. It's hard to imagine that you can't see at least some benefit to these ideas.
International shipping is absolutely fantastic. I'm not going to manufature electronics or injection mold stuff. I'm fine with middle men if they actually add value, like shipping and economies of scale do. I'd rather fix shipping rather than deindustrialize and revert 100 years.
I didn't really miss anything over covid, I don't usually buy much other than food, and that was still available. I luckily got my computer before the shortages, so wasn't effected there, but it's not like I could have manufactured my own.
I think you're missing my point.
Middlemen merchants and international shipping are things that regular folk have absolutely no control over. And if those things go away, whether that be due to a pandemic or a CEO deciding it's just not profitable, those who rely entirely on that are fucked.
Having at least a bit of knowledge on how to sustain yourself, even if it's not a 100% self-reliant, will only be a net positive
If it's not a monopoly, we (in aggregate) do have control over them, since they still need our money to operate. But that is one reason why monopolies need to be crushed or heavy regulated, so that they can't have life and death control like you are mentioning.
I think it's net negative because of the amount of time and money you'd need to invest for a very low probability event. It's like the preper mindset. I can add a lot of positive specializing in my field that I wouldn't be able to if I also trained myself in society collapse self sufficiency.
I have the desire but but the ability to grow my own food right now, so I've subscribed to a CSA in the meantime. A few hundred dollars upfront that stays in my community, and I've got an entire season of fresh produce when it's at its ripest.
self-reliance is great for surviving, but for living you need a community.
100% no resources from anyone else self reliance? Sure
Otherwise? Solar panels exist.
I just don't think it's worth pursuing for it's own end. There are some things it makes sense to do yourself, but for most things it costs way to much time for the small amount of security it gives.
You may not. I personally don't either. Doesn't change the fact that some people do, for a wide variety of reasons, and that's fine.
The post said it was necessary though. I'm fine with people working on self reliance if it makes them feel more secure, or just if they enjoy it or it gives them fulfillment. But I think relying on the social web of connections and commerce is fine.
I don't think OP was meaning you have to be 100% self sufficient. I interpreted it more that you need community but you also need to know how to take care of yourself. How are you going to help your community if you can't help yourself. How is your community going to help you if they don't know how to do things. Local supply chains doesn't mean you're producing everything, it means it's coming from your community. Thats exactly how an untold amount of people survived the depression, communities banding together and taking care of each other.
Most homesteaders help our their neighbors if it's needed, and will receive help when they need it. They're not 100% isolated on their own.
E: Why're y'all downvoting that guy. Not like they were being a dick or anything.
This is exactly what I meant :)
According to Google, there's
5.34 million miles of arable land on earth
8 billion population
8 billion / 5.34 million = 1489 miles per person
Have I done something wrong? Seems like enough space, no?
Edit: lol I'm dumb
You divided backwards. It should be land divided by population. 5.34m / 8b = 0.0006675 miles^2 per person.
That math makes it 1,489 people per mile of arable land.
Edit: don't forget that not everyone lives on arable land. We also have apartments and skyscrapers that house people, thus packing in many more people per mile than individual.
Arable just means it's possible to turn it into farmland, not that it would actually be useful to grow crops.
The largest problem is that the global population has exceeded the natural limitations of the nitrogen cycle. Meaning we are utilizing more nitrogen from the soil than it can naturally fixate.
Without petroleum based fertilizers we wouldn't be able to sustain the global population we have today. Without the Haber-Bosch process our population would likely be hovering around 4 billion instead of 8 billion.
My math came out to one 41 meter square of land per person. 1.34b hectares/8b people*(100m*100m/hectare)=1675m^2/person which is a square of 41m per side.