Conservation and Communism

[Makalakumu]

One of the things that I try to keep in mind is to NOT get to attached to capitalism. As Andrew Green said, "as the world changes so does its economic and governing structures." It is entirely possible that in the future, capitalism will not be in our bests interests. As global competition for resources increases, we will have to become much more conservation minded...and thus far capitalism and conservation have not proven to mix well.

Heh Heh. I think there's more honesty in this post than you realize. It sheds a little light on the REAL motives behind the doom-and-gloom prognostications. If we can't foment revolution through class-warfare appeals, we'll SCARE people in to revolution by telling them the world is going to end, right? It's actually pretty creative, I have to admit.

Communists didn't disappear, they just changed their names and tactics.

Somehow "Reduce/Reuse/Recycle" has been transformed in some people's worlds to mean, "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." That, actually, could make an interesting thread...is conservation communistic? I'd love to see that spin round a few times...

Yes, but it wasn't ME who transformed those things. Reduce, Reuse, Recycle isn't anathema to capitalism. The statement that captialism may have to yield to those things, however, is an attempt to create a doom and gloom scenario where socialism MUST win for us to survive.

Conservation isn't communistic, but the issue has moved FAR beyond conservation, in to some sort Quasi-religious, pseudo-scientific, environmental belief system. Heck, even the terminology has become religious. 'Mother Earth' 'Gaia'.

Would be an interesting thread discussion. Start one, and i'll follow you in.

So, do these things have to equate?

 

[Monadnock]

I think using/re-using resources responsibly is in everyone's best interest, capitalist or communist.

As for which ideology it best matches, I am not sure...

Do recycled goods cost more money to recycle and then re-manufacture? If it costs more, it's probably not as favorable to the capitalist. I think most have a short term view and as long as they stay ahead on profits, let the next generation worry about what's left of the environment and natural resources. (I said most )

As for the little guy at home, I think recycling is an optional activity(in some places) that benefits the society. This falls under the conservative idea of personal responsibility. When it's forced, I think it falls under the more liberal idea of welfare.

 

[Makalakumu]

I think using/re-using resources responsibly is in everyone's best interest, capitalist or communist.

As for which ideology it best matches, I am not sure...

Do recycled goods cost more money to recycle and then re-manufacture? If it costs more, it's probably not as favorable to the capitalist. I think most have a short term view and as long as they stay ahead on profits, let the next generation worry about what's left of the environment and natural resources. (I said most )

As for the little guy at home, I think recycling is an optional activity(in some places) that benefits the society. This falls under the conservative idea of personal responsibility. When it's forced, I think it falls under the more liberal idea of welfare.

Good comments Mike, however, I would change the the statement of "liberal idea of welfare" to "liberal idea of bigger government."

My thoughts on this are that our current conception of capitalism does not favor conservation ideals. The fundamental assumption inherit in supply and demand theory is that as demand increases, so does supply. This assumption is flawed because the amount of resources is not infinite.

Our current conception of capitalism encourages unsustainable growth and waste. Our population has grown in a time of growing resources...including the most important resource, energy. Systems naturally fluctuate though and as our global economy switches over to a time of falling resources, people will find themselves with less and less.

Thus, our economic system will need to find a way to cut waste and grow sustainably. We will either have to reinvision capitalism or embrace some socialistic practices. Cooperation, sharing, and reduce/reuse/recycle are the hallmarks of societies that have survived times of diminishing resources. Can capitalism accomodate these principles?

 

[michaeledward]

The premise that 'personal responsibility' belongs to the 'conservative' point of view is bothersome. I think it is based on stereotypes and talking points.

It fits right in with the attitude that 'welfare' is 'liberal', and the reason municipalities 'force citizens to participate' (I'm wondering how). Maybe it is the term 'welfare'.

Don't conservatives do anything that is for the 'public good'? Or is the conservative attitude "Hurray for me, and to hell with everyone else"?

 

[Makalakumu]

Don't conservatives do anything that is for the 'public good'? Or is the conservative attitude "Hurray for me, and to hell with everyone else"?

I think the answer is going to be, "we do, but it is by our own choosing." I don't know why democratically voting the government the power to aid in the process would somehow not count as a personal choice...

The other thing that is important to remember is that our current economic system favors the bottom line over everything else. In a world of diminishing resources, other concerns become more important.

 

[Andrew Green]

Do recycled goods cost more money to recycle and then re-manufacture? If it costs more, it's probably not as favorable to the capitalist. I think most have a short term view and as long as they stay ahead on profits, let the next generation worry about what's left of the environment and natural resources. (I said most )

It's the reduse and the reuse that are going to cause the problems for capitalism.

Capitalism is based on consuming, the more that is being consumed the healthier the economy. Conservation means consuming less, which in capitalism will lead to a recession.

 

[jdinca]

Don't conservatives do anything that is for the 'public good'? Or is the conservative attitude "Hurray for me, and to hell with everyone else"?

Conservatives do things for the public good because they want to and feel it's the right thing to do. Liberals want to force other people to do what they think is right because they think it's appropriate for the public good. Which one impacts personal freedoms more?

Just thought I would match cynicism with cynicism.

Conservation should be an individual responsibility not tied to a political ideology. It's just good citizenship. I'd much rather do it for that reason than to be forced to "for the greater good", as it would be under communism, while at the same time bringing down my standard of living to the lowest common denominator.

 

[Flying Crane]

It's the reduse and the reuse that are going to cause the problems for capitalism.

Capitalism is based on consuming, the more that is being consumed the healthier the economy. Conservation means consuming less, which in capitalism will lead to a recession.

I think Andrew has hit it on the head here, and this is one of the things that I believe is going to become a huge problem for our society.

Nothing is made to last, and neither is it made to be repaired. Toasters last a year or two if you are lucky, then you throw it away and buy a new one. They used to last 20 years, and if it had a problem it could be repaired.

We bought our first DVD player about 4 years ago for about $350. After a couple of years it started to malfunction, and we finally replaced it about a year ago for $40. The only reason I didn't buy the $20 player was because the $40 one was a brand name I recognized. Now don't get me wrong, I like getting things for cheap as much as the next guy, but where is this heading? Not only are we continually using up the planet's resources, but we are also throwing these things into the junk pile after just a short use. It is impossible to get them repaired for less than the cost of a new one, so it makes sense to just throw it away and buy a new one.

The resources of the planet are Finite. So far we have been able to get away with our consumption, but with the increasing population comes increasing consumption and at some point the resources will dry up. Nobody knows when this will happen, it could be in a couple centuries, or it could be next month.

Prices are coming down due in large part to overseas labor. This raises a lot of questions regarding how well overseas labor is paid and treated. I don't know the specifics, perhaps in some areas the people are paid on a scale that is good in their economy, but cheap by our standards. Perhaps others are paid poorly by their own standards as well. At any rate, it opens the door for tremendous abuses which, tho I don't have specifics to cite, I am sure happens often enough. This is all done so that we can have cheap products, and continue to buy, buy, buy.

Our economic approach has encouraged us to develop a "consumer" mentality. We all feel like we never have enough stuff so we go out and keep spending money to buy stuff that is, in my opinion, mostly worthless junk. Much of it is stuff that we never needed before in our lives, but now is marketed to make us believe we can't live without it. Why do people keep doing this? I just don't understand it. But our economy relies on our willingness to keep spending, spending, spending. I find it really amazing.

Capitalism also tends to create a huge inequality of wealth between a small upper class and the less wealthy. The difference between the Upper Class and the Middle Class has become huge, vastly greater than the difference between the Middle Class and the Working Class or the Poor. Something about this just doesn't seem right.

I don't believe communism is the answer. Communist governments do tend to be oppressive. Maybe they could function better than they have, but we haven't seen it happen yet.

Perhaps a capitalist economy is the best answer going at the moment but capitalism has some serious problems that we need to address. Admitting this doesn't make someone a Communist, or unpatriotic. It is just being realistic and looking for a better way. Maybe Conservation is a step toward something better. Can Conservation and Capitalism somehow go hand in hand? That is a tough question.

 

[Monadnock]

It's the reduse and the reuse that are going to cause the problems for capitalism.

Capitalism is based on consuming, the more that is being consumed the healthier the economy. Conservation means consuming less, which in capitalism will lead to a recession.

I can kind of see where you are coming from there. To go further, I think conservation includes consuming less raw materials and reusing what we have. So, consumption rates can still go up with population demand, but with less need for raw materials. But nothing is 100% efficient, so I think we'll always need to go digging into "mother earth" for some of it.

More to the topic, recycling represents innovation, which is a hallmark of capitalism.

 

[Makalakumu]

I'd much rather do it for that reason than to be forced to "for the greater good", as it would be under communism, while at the same time bringing down my standard of living to the lowest common denominator.

One thing to keep in mind is that when (not if) our global economy faces a time of diminishing resources all of our standards of living will go down. The amount we conserve will then (and now) will determine how far down.

 

[Flying Crane]

More to the topic, recycling represents innovation, which is a hallmark of capitalism.

Actually, no. Once upon a time, people reused most everything they had. Things were made to last, and they weren't thrown away after little use.

Modern technology and industry has enabled us to use materials like plastics and other synthetics that were not used in the past. Some of these materials cannot be easily broken down to be recycled, and people don't have the need or desire to reuse them in their current form.

The Modern Innovation was only in developing the technology to recycle these materials. But the idea of reuse is as old as humanity.

 

[Andrew Green]

Actually, no. Once upon a time, people reused most everything they had. Things were made to last, and they weren't thrown away after little use.

Yep, now just about everything comes in dissposible form. Where towels where once used paper towels are, Styrofoam cups, paper plates, disspossible diapers, plastic drink bottles.

It's one of the keys to a successful product, create something cheap, that people will keep buying regullarly. Either use it up or throw it out and come buy it again. The more they consume, or throw out, the better the economy.

 

[Monadnock]

Actually, no. Once upon a time, people reused most everything they had. Things were made to last, and they weren't thrown away after little use.

Modern technology and industry has enabled us to use materials like plastics and other synthetics that were not used in the past. Some of these materials cannot be easily broken down to be recycled, and people don't have the need or desire to reuse them in their current form.

The Modern Innovation was only in developing the technology to recycle these materials. But the idea of reuse is as old as humanity.

Actually, my point still stands. They guy that invents a car that runs off of plastic dinnerware is going to make a fortune. My point was that recycling can fit into capitalism.

Also, weren't some plastics made from sawdust? Another form of reuse?

In any event, I think what would bring about more innovation is competition. The race to make something out of recycleable materials. In this regard, I hold capitalism in high regard.

 

[Monadnock]

Yep, now just about everything comes in dissposible form. Where towels where once used paper towels are, Styrofoam cups, paper plates, disspossible diapers, plastic drink bottles.

It's one of the keys to a successful product, create something cheap, that people will keep buying regullarly. Either use it up or throw it out and come buy it again. The more they consume, or throw out, the better the economy.

This is true. I think it is also base on our increasingly busy lifestyles. Who has the time or wants to wash out old cloth diapers anyways...yechhhh.

 

[Flying Crane]

Yep, now just about everything comes in dissposible form. Where towels where once used paper towels are, Styrofoam cups, paper plates, disspossible diapers, plastic drink bottles.

It's one of the keys to a successful product, create something cheap, that people will keep buying regullarly. Either use it up or throw it out and come buy it again. The more they consume, or throw out, the better the economy.

In fact, the idea of reuse was the norm. Everyone expected it. It is just in the modern times we have moved away from this idea and developed disposable goods. This throw-away mentality is very recent, compared to the history of humanity. I'd say it is one example where we have gone astray.

 

[Flying Crane]

Actually, my point still stands. They guy that invents a car that runs off of plastic dinnerware is going to make a fortune. My point was that recycling can fit into capitalism.

Also, weren't some plastics made from sawdust? Another form of reuse?

Your first point, yes, you are right. It improves the situation that we had already created. But recycling now requires an entire industry, since the average citizen does not possess the equipment or the know-how to recycle today's goods. We have sort of backed ourselves into a corner.

As far as plastic from sawdust, I don't know. But sawdust is organic and decomposes naturally into the environment and helps replenish the land. Some plastics will last virtually forever in a landfill, if it is not properly broken down first.

 

[Bigshadow]

In fact, the idea of reuse was the norm. Everyone expected it. It is just in the modern times we have moved away from this idea and developed disposable goods. This throw-away mentality is very recent, compared to the history of humanity. I'd say it is one example where we have gone astray.

I believe Gillette was the first with the disposable idea. He developed the disposable razor. The idea was to create something that couldn't be reused (very much) so that people would continue to buy, reducing the cost to produce, increase the convience to customers, and generate volumes more profit.

 

[Flying Crane]

I believe Gillette was the first with the disposable idea. He developed the disposable razor. The idea was to create something that couldn't be reused (very much) so that people would continue to buy, reducing the cost to produce, increase the convience to customers, and generate volumes more profit.

I don't know if what you are stating is historically accurate about Gillette, but yes, this is one of the main ideas that modern capitalism is based on.

 

[Bigshadow]

I don't know if what you are stating is historically accurate about Gillette, but yes, this is one of the main ideas that modern capitalism is based on.

Actually if my memory serves me correctly, I saw that in a documentary on the History channel. Unfortunately, documentaries and the History channel are not always completely accurate. LOL

 

[Makalakumu]

I often wonder if people in our future will look back on generations and wonder at our imprudence. We are so rich in resources and we are literally throwing it away. Important resources, like oil, will probably important in the future, therefore, our efforts at wasting them right now are incredibly short sighted and selfish.