![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
[Follow the "self interrogation" tag to find my previous answers to questions #1-4.]
Here's #5, finally:
If I could do this, why am I not doing it right now? If not now, when? What's my excuse for waiting?
By "this", question #5 refers to question #4, regarding limiting my own personal consumption to my own personal sustainable share of global production.
In answering question #4, I consulted an actuarial table to find my expected lifespan, and decided I would reduce my own personal consumption over the course of my natural life by 3-4% per year until I reached Green Communism by the end of my life.
So what's my excuse for dragging this out over the course of 29.0 years?
It's really about the other commitments I've made in my life. I can cut my own spending by 3% next year, and another 3% the next, without cutting into the commitments I've made to my career, to the two most important people in my life, and to the three pets I've adopted. Over the next seven years, as I approach retirement, these commitments will begin to fall away. Instead of sharing two homes (house with T, condo with K), I expect to reduce to one home at some point between age 55 and 60. These three pets are all entering the second decade of their lives, and will eventually pass away. And then I will retire from my career, at which point my consumption will drop anyway to fit into my post-retirement income.
It clearly would not be possible for me to continue any of these commitments if I were to immediately cut my consumption by over 90%. I could not afford to live in the DC area, so I'd have to quit my job, sell the house, stop sharing the condo. T would probably keep the pets if I dove below the poverty line. I'd have to move to a cheaper part of the world and find a new job.
I can aim to move toward Green Communism, but I'd have to break my life to do it immediately. And, Green Communism isn't something I can accomplish by myself anyway. I'd be setting an example for the rest of you, at best, but global warming and mass extinctions would continue. Living sustainably is something we all have to do together. And it would take time for all of us to do this, even if we wanted to. It would probably take as long as a human lifetime to reorganize all of our systems of government, production, and distribution to live within a rational ecological footprint. My own back-of-the-envelope plan for getting rid of fossil fuels would take 30 years to fully implement.
So, I'm not expecting any more of myself than I'd expect of humanity. Over the next 10 years I'll stop getting any of my energy from coal, and I'll cut my overall consumption of stuff by >30%. Over the following 10 years I'll stop getting any of my energy from oil, and I'll continue to cut my overall consumption by >60%. Over the final 10 years I'll stop getting any of my energy from natural gas, and I'll finish cutting my overall consumption by >90%. There will be time to adjust these goals if it turns out my share of sustainable global consumption is more or less than it would be today.
I'm embarking upon my own personal journey toward living Green Communism. It would be great if the rest of the human race joined me, but I'm not waiting for y'all. Yet, I'm also treating myself and those I care about with compassion, instead of unilaterally breaking my life and disappearing into a different world all at once.
After we all decide to begin this journey together, if we ever do, it will take the rest of our lives to get there. We can't just click on "OK" to load the next page. This loading screen is gonna take a billion seconds to complete.
Here's #5, finally:
If I could do this, why am I not doing it right now? If not now, when? What's my excuse for waiting?
By "this", question #5 refers to question #4, regarding limiting my own personal consumption to my own personal sustainable share of global production.
In answering question #4, I consulted an actuarial table to find my expected lifespan, and decided I would reduce my own personal consumption over the course of my natural life by 3-4% per year until I reached Green Communism by the end of my life.
So what's my excuse for dragging this out over the course of 29.0 years?
It's really about the other commitments I've made in my life. I can cut my own spending by 3% next year, and another 3% the next, without cutting into the commitments I've made to my career, to the two most important people in my life, and to the three pets I've adopted. Over the next seven years, as I approach retirement, these commitments will begin to fall away. Instead of sharing two homes (house with T, condo with K), I expect to reduce to one home at some point between age 55 and 60. These three pets are all entering the second decade of their lives, and will eventually pass away. And then I will retire from my career, at which point my consumption will drop anyway to fit into my post-retirement income.
It clearly would not be possible for me to continue any of these commitments if I were to immediately cut my consumption by over 90%. I could not afford to live in the DC area, so I'd have to quit my job, sell the house, stop sharing the condo. T would probably keep the pets if I dove below the poverty line. I'd have to move to a cheaper part of the world and find a new job.
I can aim to move toward Green Communism, but I'd have to break my life to do it immediately. And, Green Communism isn't something I can accomplish by myself anyway. I'd be setting an example for the rest of you, at best, but global warming and mass extinctions would continue. Living sustainably is something we all have to do together. And it would take time for all of us to do this, even if we wanted to. It would probably take as long as a human lifetime to reorganize all of our systems of government, production, and distribution to live within a rational ecological footprint. My own back-of-the-envelope plan for getting rid of fossil fuels would take 30 years to fully implement.
So, I'm not expecting any more of myself than I'd expect of humanity. Over the next 10 years I'll stop getting any of my energy from coal, and I'll cut my overall consumption of stuff by >30%. Over the following 10 years I'll stop getting any of my energy from oil, and I'll continue to cut my overall consumption by >60%. Over the final 10 years I'll stop getting any of my energy from natural gas, and I'll finish cutting my overall consumption by >90%. There will be time to adjust these goals if it turns out my share of sustainable global consumption is more or less than it would be today.
I'm embarking upon my own personal journey toward living Green Communism. It would be great if the rest of the human race joined me, but I'm not waiting for y'all. Yet, I'm also treating myself and those I care about with compassion, instead of unilaterally breaking my life and disappearing into a different world all at once.
After we all decide to begin this journey together, if we ever do, it will take the rest of our lives to get there. We can't just click on "OK" to load the next page. This loading screen is gonna take a billion seconds to complete.
No, you didn't miss question #2, I've skipped ahead to question #3 :-)
-----
The interaction between my on-again-off-again Zen meditation with this all Green Communism stuff.
-----
First I had to restart my zen meditation to answer this question.
My zen meditation, my zazen, my every fucking day Ānāpānasati, tells me all this Green Communism stuff is a mere product of the Frog Brain. That's all. A dream of how the world ought to behave, not a description of how the world does behave. Anybody can come up with a dream of how the world ought to behave, that's easy. Next!?
-----
Implementing Green Communism would come at great personal cost. I would see my own standard of living decrease by over 95%. But I cannot implement Green Communism on my own. I would need to convince a majority of the world's population to join my utopian vision, and we would need to overcome the opposition of the rest of the world's population -- opposition that could turn to violence, if subterfuge were not enough to derail our majority.
But first, assembling that majority. If I were following the Buddhist principles of Right Speech (samma vaca), then I would not speak with the goal of convincing anybody of anything. I would merely speak truth, after considering whether speaking such truth would likely be helpful to those who might hear it. It's up to the listener to decide for herself whether to join me in my utopian vision.
So, I will speak truth, to those who will listen. That, and I can move toward living within the limits that would be prescribed by Green Communism. But now I'm getting into question #2, heh.
Yeah, question #2:
If it can possibly happen now, what am I going to do to help make this happen?
I will speak the truth about our ongoing catastrophic environmental destruction, and I will move toward living within the limits that would be prescribed under Green Communism.
And, question #4:
How would I voluntarily limit my own production/consumption to my own personal sustainable share?
According to the Social Security Administration, I can expect to live another 29.0 years. Yes, let's go to that extra decimal place, Social Security, thanks, 29.0 years. If I were to achieve personal Green Communism within my own lifetime, I would need to cut my personal consumption by at least 3% per year.
I suppose the best way to implement this would be to, during 2021, give away 3% of my take-home pay to carbon offset activities. Then, during 2022, give away 6%. Then, during 2023, give away 10%. When I retire, at the beginning of 2028, my consumption will drop a bunch anyway due to reduced income, I can recalibrate at that time, based on my then-income and then-life expectancy.
Right now the best "bang for the buck" carbon offset activity I've discovered is funding abortions in the US. I'm already doing this now, but not at the 3% of take-home level. In January I'll increase my monthly donations to that 3% level. On track to implement personal Green Communism within my own lifetime, leaving a trail of aborted fetuses in my wake, heh. I wonder what their names would've been.
-----
The interaction between my on-again-off-again Zen meditation with this all Green Communism stuff.
-----
First I had to restart my zen meditation to answer this question.
My zen meditation, my zazen, my every fucking day Ānāpānasati, tells me all this Green Communism stuff is a mere product of the Frog Brain. That's all. A dream of how the world ought to behave, not a description of how the world does behave. Anybody can come up with a dream of how the world ought to behave, that's easy. Next!?
-----
Implementing Green Communism would come at great personal cost. I would see my own standard of living decrease by over 95%. But I cannot implement Green Communism on my own. I would need to convince a majority of the world's population to join my utopian vision, and we would need to overcome the opposition of the rest of the world's population -- opposition that could turn to violence, if subterfuge were not enough to derail our majority.
But first, assembling that majority. If I were following the Buddhist principles of Right Speech (samma vaca), then I would not speak with the goal of convincing anybody of anything. I would merely speak truth, after considering whether speaking such truth would likely be helpful to those who might hear it. It's up to the listener to decide for herself whether to join me in my utopian vision.
So, I will speak truth, to those who will listen. That, and I can move toward living within the limits that would be prescribed by Green Communism. But now I'm getting into question #2, heh.
Yeah, question #2:
If it can possibly happen now, what am I going to do to help make this happen?
I will speak the truth about our ongoing catastrophic environmental destruction, and I will move toward living within the limits that would be prescribed under Green Communism.
And, question #4:
How would I voluntarily limit my own production/consumption to my own personal sustainable share?
According to the Social Security Administration, I can expect to live another 29.0 years. Yes, let's go to that extra decimal place, Social Security, thanks, 29.0 years. If I were to achieve personal Green Communism within my own lifetime, I would need to cut my personal consumption by at least 3% per year.
I suppose the best way to implement this would be to, during 2021, give away 3% of my take-home pay to carbon offset activities. Then, during 2022, give away 6%. Then, during 2023, give away 10%. When I retire, at the beginning of 2028, my consumption will drop a bunch anyway due to reduced income, I can recalibrate at that time, based on my then-income and then-life expectancy.
Right now the best "bang for the buck" carbon offset activity I've discovered is funding abortions in the US. I'm already doing this now, but not at the 3% of take-home level. In January I'll increase my monthly donations to that 3% level. On track to implement personal Green Communism within my own lifetime, leaving a trail of aborted fetuses in my wake, heh. I wonder what their names would've been.
The human race does not seem to have ever embraced Green Communism on a global scale in the past, why do I think this can possibly happen now?
It's a gamble, probably a losing gamble, however many chips I put on this French Roulette wheel, I'm probably going to lose them. But I'm putting all my chips on the green number 0! (Odds are 1/36.)
As I read more about the ecological history of the human race, my pessimism deepens. Many on the Left tell themselves myths about prehistoric or indigenous peoples, believing these peoples lived in harmony with nature. The archeological record shows they did not. The fossil record shows they did not. The climatological record shows they did not -- the anthropogenic global warming trend actually started thousands of years ago. As we move into the period of written history, the historic record shows they did not. As we look at ourselves today, the global human race -- we are not living in harmony with nature. Why should we start now, homo sapiens has never lived in harmony with nature!
Betting on humans to change their ways is usually a losing bet. I've always been skeptical that humans can surmount the climate crisis. It would require too much sacrifice. It would require more sacrifice than the South giving up their slaves in the 1860s. I'm not the first to make this comparison. Others have said that trying to enforce abandonment of fossil fuels would require a World War -- and not simply between nations, but within each nation, across all nations, a Global Civil War between the Green Militias and the White Mercenaries.
There's $100 trillion in fossil fuel wealth at stake. You think those people are going to leave their $100 trillion in the ground without a fight? People have fought wars over far less.
This is a war I will not join. I'm not going to kill people over this. If persuasion, consent, and democratic governance are not the solution, then I'm not going to solve this.
-----
We've got the potential for technologies changing human behaviors. If renewable energy sources become so cheap that fossil fuels become uneconomic, and if inexpensive birth control becomes widely available everywhere, then enough countries may voluntarily give up fossil fuels and reduce births below replacement. So, maybe a Green science fiction fantasy will come true. But I think the more likely outcome is what we're already seeing as a result of new technologies -- we just continue to use more of everything -- technology makes fossil fuels less expensive also! and finds more of them! It doesn't even matter whether we stabilize human population during this 21st Century, because those 10 billion humans will continue increasing their consumption of everything at exponential rates via new technologies.
The problem with new technologies is that we still have to ban fossil fuels. Just like we still had to ban slavery to get rid of it. This is a political problem. We need a global ban on fossil fuels. I think the chance of this happening is, yeah, French Roulette: 1/36. I'm placing our entire planet on the green number 0. Let's spin that wheel ...
It's a gamble, probably a losing gamble, however many chips I put on this French Roulette wheel, I'm probably going to lose them. But I'm putting all my chips on the green number 0! (Odds are 1/36.)
As I read more about the ecological history of the human race, my pessimism deepens. Many on the Left tell themselves myths about prehistoric or indigenous peoples, believing these peoples lived in harmony with nature. The archeological record shows they did not. The fossil record shows they did not. The climatological record shows they did not -- the anthropogenic global warming trend actually started thousands of years ago. As we move into the period of written history, the historic record shows they did not. As we look at ourselves today, the global human race -- we are not living in harmony with nature. Why should we start now, homo sapiens has never lived in harmony with nature!
Betting on humans to change their ways is usually a losing bet. I've always been skeptical that humans can surmount the climate crisis. It would require too much sacrifice. It would require more sacrifice than the South giving up their slaves in the 1860s. I'm not the first to make this comparison. Others have said that trying to enforce abandonment of fossil fuels would require a World War -- and not simply between nations, but within each nation, across all nations, a Global Civil War between the Green Militias and the White Mercenaries.
There's $100 trillion in fossil fuel wealth at stake. You think those people are going to leave their $100 trillion in the ground without a fight? People have fought wars over far less.
This is a war I will not join. I'm not going to kill people over this. If persuasion, consent, and democratic governance are not the solution, then I'm not going to solve this.
-----
We've got the potential for technologies changing human behaviors. If renewable energy sources become so cheap that fossil fuels become uneconomic, and if inexpensive birth control becomes widely available everywhere, then enough countries may voluntarily give up fossil fuels and reduce births below replacement. So, maybe a Green science fiction fantasy will come true. But I think the more likely outcome is what we're already seeing as a result of new technologies -- we just continue to use more of everything -- technology makes fossil fuels less expensive also! and finds more of them! It doesn't even matter whether we stabilize human population during this 21st Century, because those 10 billion humans will continue increasing their consumption of everything at exponential rates via new technologies.
The problem with new technologies is that we still have to ban fossil fuels. Just like we still had to ban slavery to get rid of it. This is a political problem. We need a global ban on fossil fuels. I think the chance of this happening is, yeah, French Roulette: 1/36. I'm placing our entire planet on the green number 0. Let's spin that wheel ...
The human race does not seem to have ever embraced Green Communism on a global scale in the past, why do I think this can possibly happen now?
If it can possibly happen now, what am I going to do to help make this happen?
The interaction between my on-again-off-again Zen meditation with this all Green Communism stuff.
How would I voluntarily limit my own production/consumption to my own personal sustainable share?
If I could do this, why am I not doing it right now? If not now, when? What's my excuse for waiting?
If it can possibly happen now, what am I going to do to help make this happen?
The interaction between my on-again-off-again Zen meditation with this all Green Communism stuff.
How would I voluntarily limit my own production/consumption to my own personal sustainable share?
If I could do this, why am I not doing it right now? If not now, when? What's my excuse for waiting?
