It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


What would it take to have a sustainable civilization?

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 08:45 PM
Sometimes I wonder if humans will ever get to a point where we as a global family will be able to say that we can keep living the way we do now, and still be around in a few thousand years. It should not be impossible for us to get to this point with some changes in our habits and mindset. There are a few things that seem obvious, but a whole host of little things that we take for granted that would have to go away as well. As Americans it is our responsibility to start looking at these kinds of questions with some seriousness and try and start to make some of these changes wherever possible. The way I see it we are either going to swing way too far in the wrong direction, in which case our children may not even be able to pick up the pieces, or we make the hard decision to start doing without and acting responsibly now. We need to have a head start on cleaning up the mess that we have made for ourselves if we want to leave behind any legacy at all. Future generations, if there are any will have a better understanding of what really happened during our time if we make an effort to remedy our mistakes. The sooner we act, the more we will be able to pass on. We have to get responsible now or suffer dire consequences. Either way, our time will be looked upon as a time in which the people had lost their way and forgot the most important lessons that our ancestors had confronted before us. We have played with fire and are dangerously close to burning the place down.

Here are a few ideas about how we need to change our mindsets to give a better example to ourselves and to the rest of the world. A few things that we should do away with as well. It is important that we teach these things to our children, so that they may grow up having already learned the right habits. The time has come that we cannot afford to neglect these ideas any longer.

What kind of effect will it have on our children? Or the mindset of bouncing each idea or decision off of the seventh generation to come after us. What kind of environmental impact will it have, and what are the consequences if something goes wrong? We must ask ourselves these questions on an individual level, as companies or governments. We must be more responsible to our environment. Most of the damage we have done has been for very short term advances. The punishments to individuals or companies has not been fit to the crime, and it has to become more balanced until we can learn to just live without damaging our environment. This I think is the most important lesson we can teach to our children


The earth is our ONLY option and it provides everything we need to survive. We have created much for ourselves that we don't need and we have to stop now, or suffer the consequences. Think of it this way. If everyone on the earth had one would it wreck the place. Look at each of the things that you have acquired in your life, and ask this question about each thing. Now ask yourself if you could learn to live without each thing. If you could, it is probably contributing negatively. Without so many gadgets and toys, children would learn to appreciate the things that they have, as well as spend time doing things that are more productive. We would not have to work so hard to provide ourselves or our children with unneeded things, and could afford to spend more time with them.


I'm not suggesting that we throw everything away. Look at it this way. We have to stopp buying anything else that we don't have to have and stop throwing as much away. Keep fixing your car. It may be expensive, but leasing a new one may not be an option in the future. How about buying an old one that is easy to work on and finding someone close who can teach you how to maintain it. Look at the things that you acquire as tools, and give them more value, take better care of them, and try to reuse them for other things if the original value is lost.


If it is disposable it should not exist. This goes for almost anything. We need to nudge our manufacturers into making things that last forever and can be used for as long as possible. Buy a steel coffee cup and use it for the rest of your life. Realize the importance of it and just do not lose it. Don't stop by the deli every day for a fresh helping of plastic, styrofoam and cardboard in your coffee container. Follow this train of thought all the way through your day. Don't buy things that are packaged, if they have to be, spend the money on the stuff that has reusable containers or something biodegradable. Realize the trash heap that you are leaving behind in your life and reduce it down to something that could exist in your own back yard without destroying the place.


We humans are victims of advertising to no end. We have to outlaw it if we want to live on into the future. There is probably as much money spent on advertising as there is on war and it has to go for so many reasons. How much time is your brain going to have spent on advertisements by the time you die. This is not just an environmental issue, but a quality of life issue. If they have to advertise it to you in a commercial, then you probably don't need it and it is probably having negative consequences on either your health or your environment. You may not realize it but advertising is like heroin to the brain. It makes you feel good, and stimulates things in you that cause you to lose focus on the things that matter. Don't believe me? Go to a place where there is none for a while, like remote Alaska and find out how much emptiness you have in you, I have done it and believe me, I know what kind of hole it leaves. It's scary, but we have to get away from it. This idea would have an enormously positive effect on the environment.


I think that these four ideas would have a huge impact globally and followed through would leave us open to much more healthy and fulfilling lives that are closer to nature and the earth that provides everything for us. Basically what I am saying is that if we do not throw ourselves into a self induced depression now, so that we may hold on to the few creature comforts that we want to keep. Then we are going to end up going through a much tougher depression that the laws of nature punish us with, and we may not only lose our creature comforts but ultimately the thing that matters most to us, our planet.

If the human family could learn to live by these ideas, we would not have to let go of technology, our gadgets, toys, lifestyles, religions. If you try and imagine how the world would be, you might find some of the other larger issues like poverty, war, and crime might diminish. We could become closer to our communities, and have more time to spend doing things that keep us healthy, and following our enjoyments. We might even be able to save some money in the process.

We have a very short time folks to make these kinds of decisions. It may be less than ten years I fear. For sure though, the sooner we act the more we will be able to hold on to and pass on to our children. Stand up, and stand strong for them, our children, they need us now more than ever. Tomorrow is already here.


posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 08:52 PM
Tesla Technology

posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 09:26 PM
I'm sure this has surfaced on here a while ago. It has been banned in several countries. It is about another planet that has evolved past our state with there foundation based on nature. Whenever I get myself hammered down in life I flick on this,

The Film The Green Beautiful/ La Belle Verte

edit on 4-11-2011 by LaHaver because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 11:20 PM
2 ways
one a totalitarian regime with a handful of people at the top pick your poison between "1984" or
"Brave New World"

or a order based around nature were there is no technology, no non nature related sciences, or government above a township size

ether way the population will have have to be controlled.

posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 11:34 PM
There are many many people, a stream becoming a river becoming a tide who are already transitioning to this type of lifestyle using practical & common sense ideas.

Google transition towns, permaculture & eco villages just for starters. There is SO much good stuff happening out there it's hard NOT to be optimistic at this point. You can try go self-sustaining survivalist or work towards building really strong local communities and economies (which I suspect is a better option for the majority of people). There are some more advanced ideas & technologies to feed into this movement, and they are definitely coming in now, the picture is becoming clearer by the day.

There will be a tipping point where this becomes the norm for humanity, as the current system based on predatory instincts & mass consumption is simply not sustainable on this planet. There are finite resources to go round, and the clock is ticking until we run out of time to become completely sustainable and renewable. As we burn through the world's resources, nobody is even having any real fun, except maybe the nihilists. So the momentum is tilting back towards a better way. Smart companies are picking up on this, and those which dont will go the way of the dinosaurs.

These are interesting times, no doubt.

posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 11:50 PM
reply to post by phoenix0714

resilient communities:
you might be interested in this as well as anybody interested in starting their own tribe

How to Create an Occupy Tribe:

There's no question that the Occupy groups have done a great job with constructing the outlines of resilient communities in the heart of many of our most dense urban areas.

People pitch in to do work. They are considerate despite the difficulty of the arrangement. Food gets served. The area gets cleaned. There is entertainment. There's innovation (equipment, tech, workarounds). There is education (lots of seminars being taught). There is open, participatory governance. All of this is great and this experience will definitely pay off over the next decade as the global economy deteriorates, panics, fails. It will make building resilient communities easier (there are lots of ways to build a resilient community, we're trying to document all of the ways how on MiiU).
However, is this experience building a tribal identity? An Occupy tribe? Something that can eventually (there's lots to do in the short to medium term) go beyond protest and build something new? One even strong enough to create new resilient economic and social networks that step into the breach as the current one fails?

direct link to MiiU ("me:you")
The Resilient Community Wiki:

Welcome to MiiU ("me:you")
The Resilient Community Wiki

A resilient community is a place that produces most of what it needs locally. It connects virtually for everything else. It's a vibrant local economy as well as a community that is immune to a) global depression, b) political instability, c) shortages, famines, etc., and d) most effects of natural disasters. In short, it's resilient.

MiiU is a collection of all the resources and places that make personal, family, and community resilience possible. Resilience isn't only about surviving global failures, it's about building a better life for you and everyone around you.

if prople were to educate themselves and organize we could completely drop out of the current system with no violence on our part

of course, self-defense against the parasites in control of the system attempting to drag the escaped slaves back to the plantation, of course does not constitute violence

posted on Nov, 5 2011 @ 01:21 AM
reply to post by phoenix0714

Here's another way to look at it, if you want to stand back and get a big-picture look:

Anything will survive if the sum of all its survive vectors is greater than the sum of all its succumb vectors.

The planet-related vectors are very important for us. That's why some sort of nuclear non-proliferation agreement was so important, and why we spend money on an early-warning system for large asteroids and comets heading in our direction. That's also why the development of non-polluting (or lower-pollution) technologies is also very important to our survival.

There is also a confidence factor. If the survive and succumb vectors almost balance, it might be very exciting, but you could lose the whole planet from one bad mistake. So it helps to plan for a scene that includes survival in abundance and minimizes the succumb factors that we can control.

A huge overlooked factor is crime. We are seeing this play out in society today. We think of criminals as being a bunch of lowlifes. But that's never really been true. Some of the richest people in the history of this planet have made their fortunes by dishonest means. The most famous story of this type is of Nathan Rothschild who in 1815 was in a position to crash the London stock market by spreading the false rumor that the British had been defeated at Waterloo. By buying heavily into the market after it crashed, he made huge profits when the true news arrived in London.

Other bankers and wealthy and influential individuals have been involved in the slave trade from Africa to the Americas, opium smuggling from India into China, land grabs by forcing landowners into bankruptcy, and modern crime organizations of every conceivable type and description.

With criminal groups being funded by wealthy elites through their corrupt bankers, life on earth has become a kind of hell. The biggest step we could make towards sustainability would be to stop the corrupt practices of the wealthy elites by exposing them for the crimes against humanity which they have committed.

It has been reported that the current economic problems in the US were at least partly caused by an attempt of certain countries and groups to send a message to the wealthy elites by refusing to accept payment for their goods in US dollars. The US has cooperated heavily with the elites, so we are now getting bashed for it. So the quicker we can stop this poisonous relationship, the better. And before it can be stopped, it must be exposed. That's what I'm concentrating on now. If we win this one, we'll have time to repair our old unsustainable bad habits. If we can't win this one, the rest won't matter. "Sustainability" will be accomplished by forcing 99% of the population into poverty and servitude.

edit on 5/11/2011 by l_e_cox because: make it read better

posted on Nov, 5 2011 @ 02:33 AM
A sustainable civilisation cannot be built on the framework of a failed and unsustainable one. The very first step would be to disassemble the current monstrosity and eliminate those who defend or perpetuate it.If we don't do this everything else will be a waste of time.

Also, the majority of people will oppose this, especially when they come to realise the sacrifices that must be made in order to create a sustainable civilisation at the global level. Many of these people will be the very ones espousing the notion right now. Such an endeavour will require hard work and unerring commitment as well as the abandonment of many luxuries we take for granted.

We can't even be sure right now that what seems sustainable at a local level will necessarily be sustainable at national or global level. Solutions will need to be multifaceted and tailored to work with resources, climates topgraphy etc. There will not likely be very many "
ne size fits all" solution.

While I yearn for a sustainable civilisation at a global level, my mind boggles at the complexity of it's implementation especially when the majority of the world's population currently lives at subsistence level at best, are poorly, if at all,educated and heavily conditioned to the way things are.

posted on Nov, 5 2011 @ 03:58 AM
A massive change in conciousness and the total removal of money from society.

posted on Nov, 5 2011 @ 04:06 AM
From the sound of things about 5 million people................
edit on 5-11-2011 by SmashPapayaKC because: sarcasm

posted on Nov, 5 2011 @ 04:10 AM
This is a really difficult question

There are at least two ways:
1. Kill everyone with a higher IQ. of 80, this is the "Rue Pol-Pot"
2. Chose only People who believe in God (the Abrahamitic God who can be angry)
"Salt Lake City"

Don't trust in the People who are idealistic or/ and depending on Drugs
like Sugar, Tobacco, Beer, etc! (Christiania

Chose a Place "behind the Mountains" or an Island and do not start with more
than a 15% Testosterone producing Male Population
because the first few Generation need a stable and secure House!

Have a look for
this is by far the best Project open for the Public!
edit on 5-11-2011 by Human0815 because: add link

posted on Nov, 5 2011 @ 04:12 AM
Global reproduction control of the poor.

posted on Nov, 11 2011 @ 06:18 AM
reply to post by Maslo

Global reproduction control of the poor.

While the rich are encouraged to breed like rabbits? Charming.

Shall we kill all the cripples and mental defectives at the same time? How about massacring a few Jews?

edit on 11/11/11 by Astyanax because: the first couple of drafts would have got me banned.

posted on Nov, 11 2011 @ 06:38 AM
reply to post by Astyanax

While the rich are encouraged to breed like rabbits? Charming.

Yes, the rich and the middle class, and not like rabbits, but long-term sustainably.

Shall we kill all the cripples and mental defectives at the same time? How about massacring a few Jews?

No, are you nuts?

edit on 11/11/11 by Maslo because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 11 2011 @ 06:50 AM
reply to post by Maslo

I am not nuts, but anyone who thinks a sustainable civilization can be created by oppressing the majority of the human race in the way you propose certainly is. And not only nuts, but profoundly handicapped in terms of ethical sense and common humanity as well.

edit on 11/11/11 by Astyanax because: of outrage.

posted on Nov, 11 2011 @ 07:22 AM

Originally posted by Astyanax
reply to post by Maslo

I am not nuts, but anyone who thinks a sustainable civilization can be created by oppressing the majority of the human race in the way you propose certainly is. And not only nuts, but profoundly handicapped in terms of ethical sense and common humanity as well.

edit on 11/11/11 by Astyanax because: of outrage.

Well, then maybe I am nuts. I dont consider it to be oppression, nor unethical. In fact, it is an ethical thing to do, and the lack of such policies is profoundly unethical, IMHO.

posted on Nov, 11 2011 @ 07:27 AM
reply to post by phoenix0714

What would it take to have a sustainable civilization?

My first thought? Oh hell, there's one of those concept grab-words again. 'Sustainable' is political speak for that which meets and melds with a particular view of the world. Sustainable can be a toilet that fills with just 6 ounces of water, never mind that you have to flush it 13 times to evacuate what you just deposited.

Basically, it is a poli-babble catch-all term for anything that means doing more with increasingly less.

We've been trained to believe that those who have more of something are bad and those that have less are victims of the mores. So, to sustain our civilization, we should all have the same sum of less than we might otherwise acquire. This will inevitably fail because any human success will require work and nobody wants to work to produce more while getting less.

Your job is to buy into the scheme that there is less available so that you will work harder for that less without expecting more. To sustain civilization under this concept for the next 1000, 10,000 or even 1,000,000 years, you will be required to work like a dog, eat like a chipmunk, live like sewer rat and enjoy every minute of it.

Speaking for myself, I am going to stock up on batteries and beer. There will be a lot of pictures to be taken and a lot of days when I won't want to wake up sober, lol.

posted on Nov, 11 2011 @ 07:42 AM
It's impossible, in my opinion. Humans are driven by animal instincts whether we realize and accept it or not, and as long as those instincts steer the boat (and they always will) we will never live in balance with the earth; there will always be territories to protect, wars and violence, power/social struggles and clashes...etc. For example, building large population centers.. the earth is a changing environment and those cities won't last. We don't seem to learn from our past mistakes and have a complete disregard for even trying. It seems to me that truly intelligent, rational beings wouldn't squander and pollute the very resources we need to survive.

posted on Nov, 11 2011 @ 07:47 AM
reply to post by Maslo

Well, then maybe I am nuts.

If the foregoing is a sample of your logic, I shouldn’t discount the possibility. Children, as the cliché has it, are the future. This is true for everyone, but it is particularly true for the world’s poor, who, lacking any hope for themselves, can only pin their aspirations on their children. You propose to strip them of the one thing they can have that makes life worth living.

Also, for the poor, children also represent old-age insurance in poor countries where no social safety net exists. Take away the children, and you may well be taking their lives.

And all for what? So that you and other rich, well-fed, privileged people like yourself may multiply and spread yourselves in comfort. How utterly purblind, selfish and nauseating.

Perhaps you have some harebrained social-Darwinist argument that justifies your insane – and, I am happy to say, ridiculously impracticable – proposal. Well, it won’t wash.

I dont consider it to be oppression, nor unethical. In fact, it is an ethical thing to do, and the lack of such policies is profoundly unethical, IMHO.

Show us how it can be. Reassure us that you are, after all, neither evil nor insane, just naïve and misguided.

edit on 11/11/11 by Astyanax because: of revulsion.

posted on Nov, 11 2011 @ 07:49 AM
Of course in addition to the above - responsible procreation in harmony with ability to provide wealth and good quality of life, sustainable civilisation needs long-term sustainable energy sources capable of satisfying the demand (LFTRs and other advanced nuclear now, hydrogen fusion in the future), and sustainable material sources (asteroid mining). So colonizing at least our solar system is also a reqirement.

All resources needed for a civilisation can be in essence summed into three categories - matter, energy, knowledge/wisdom (ability). Humans have problems with all three, currently.

<<   2 >>

log in