Leashlaw: Wow, you found the flaw. They are obviously a bunch of freeloaders. Of course, they bought a solar panel and they probably didn't grow/harvest/manufacture/sew the jeans they are wearing. So you're right, they are all full of shiat and should have their home bulldozed post haste, then be forced to move into "real" houses and get jobs at the factory. Why should they get to live off the land when hard working people like you have to wake up at 6 am and re-enact Dilbert scenes in your cube world. The economy needs everyone to work and shop, work and shop, work and shop...for the greater good.

Point being that the only way people can "live more simply" and "sustainably" is by piggybacking on the products of thousands of years of technology. It's fine if they want to live that way, but they should not pretend that everyone could. That's obviously impossible.

And anyway why should we live more simply? What does that mean? Does it mean having a farm with a plow? Does it mean having a horse to pull the plow? Does it mean having the advantage of centuries of materials technology and design to build a strong house out of wood that won't rot or be eaten out by bugs?

Where do you draw the line?

/answer: you don't
//eco-fascism is retarded

Wizard Drongo: farkturf: Wizard Drongo: A pity we might not get it. If anyone's got 1015 acres of land they don't mind having weird people living on, do e-mail me.

That's the problem. If we all did this and needed, say, 50 acres each to live off the fat o' the land, we wouldn't have the space. Damn inefficient hippie lifestyle. That is, unless our hippie band took over national parks and other gummint-owned lands. Can I haz Yosemite? If not, I'll settle for Anwar.

I actually meant 10-15 acres, not 1,015 acres.

Although if anyone has got a thousand acres, I'm not greedy.

Hell, 5 acres would be fine.

Damn, even 1 acre, as long as I can use that entire acre for crops and workshops etc.

Although I'd probably have as much of the land given over to crops and livestock as possible with workshops for me and the commune underground; build down not across. Crops can't grow underground so well (*special* crops with grow-lamps aside)

Using the most efficient crops available, you cannot grow enough on 1 acre to feed even 1 person for a year, much less a community.

Ral: Leashlaw: Wow, you found the flaw. They are obviously a bunch of freeloaders. Of course, they bought a solar panel and they probably didn't grow/harvest/manufacture/sew the jeans they are wearing. So you're right, they are all full of shiat and should have their home bulldozed post haste, then be forced to move into "real" houses and get jobs at the factory. Why should they get to live off the land when hard working people like you have to wake up at 6 am and re-enact Dilbert scenes in your cube world. The economy needs everyone to work and shop, work and shop, work and shop...for the greater good.

Point being that the only way people can "live more simply" and "sustainably" is by piggybacking on the products of thousands of years of technology. It's fine if they want to live that way, but they should not pretend that everyone could. That's obviously impossible.

And anyway why should we live more simply? What does that mean? Does it mean having a farm with a plow? Does it mean having a horse to pull the plow? Does it mean having the advantage of centuries of materials technology and design to build a strong house out of wood that won't rot or be eaten out by bugs?

Where do you draw the line?

/answer: you don't
//eco-fascism is retarded

Anybody have a good face palm picture for this post?

nastro

haha, uninstalled that for the last time (again) yesterday.

Ral:
Point being that the only way people can "live more simply" and "sustainably" is by piggybacking on the products of thousands of years of technology. It's fine if they want to live that way, but they should not pretend that everyone could. That's obviously impossible.

And anyway why should we live more simply? What does that mean? Does it mean having a farm with a plow? Does it mean having a horse to pull the plow? Does it mean having the advantage of centuries of materials technology and design to build a strong house out of wood that won't rot or be eaten out by bugs?

Where do you draw the line?

/answer: you don't
//eco-fascism is retarded

Jesus Christ. How do you get eco-fascism out of that? A bunch of people moved onto private property nearly two decades ago and kept quietly to themselves until the local government stepped in. To you that means that they're throwing their opinion in your face or something? What the hell? It appears from your post that you consider anybody living their life in a manner different from you to be shoving their views down your throat.

I was a vegetarian for many years and I used to get a lot of crap from people like you. Somebody would tell somebody that I didn't eat meat and that person would get in my face asking why I was judging them.

Bob_Laublaw: They're living the way our descendants will be 200 years after oil is exhausted - producing their own food and energy; self-contained and self-sufficient.

Just like the "self sufficient" american indians (native americans) who required only 100,000 acres per person for their self-sufficient buffalo / crack habit.

Gotta love the Daily Mail, right in there sniping at the Middle Class Liberal Greens... I mean what a shower of bastards trying to save the planet.

Then subby goes for the Welsh.

Seems no one can decide on which innocent party to savage first.

Pity there were no foriegners or black people to provide even more targets for the Daily Mail.

Lupercanalius Assbarnacle: Ral:
Point being that the only way people can "live more simply" and "sustainably" is by piggybacking on the products of thousands of years of technology. It's fine if they want to live that way, but they should not pretend that everyone could. That's obviously impossible.

And anyway why should we live more simply? What does that mean? Does it mean having a farm with a plow? Does it mean having a horse to pull the plow? Does it mean having the advantage of centuries of materials technology and design to build a strong house out of wood that won't rot or be eaten out by bugs?

Where do you draw the line?

/answer: you don't
//eco-fascism is retarded

Jesus Christ. How do you get eco-fascism out of that? A bunch of people moved onto private property nearly two decades ago and kept quietly to themselves until the local government stepped in. To you that means that they're throwing their opinion in your face or something? What the hell? It appears from your post that you consider anybody living their life in a manner different from you to be shoving their views down your throat.

I was a vegetarian for many years and I used to get a lot of crap from people like you. Somebody would tell somebody that I didn't eat meat and that person would get in my face asking why I was judging them.

THIS

Farking ass-barnacles, the lot of you who insist on hating these people simply because they choose to live their lives differently to you. WTF do you care?? How pathetic are you if you can't accept that there are people in the world who have different values than you do?

YouPeopleAreCrazy: So it's OK if they build something weird and dangerous, but if I put a peat heated yurt on the empty plot next to you, there will be a shiatstorm.

If you put a peat heated yurt on the lot next to me, assuming you own it, I have no problems with that.

Appartly the Vogons are now running the British government.

0Icky0: Merltech: Self sufficient means using available technologies to support one's self.

Ah. Well good thing there is a large, technologically advanced civilization next door to help them become self sufficient.

THIS

nastro

My necromancer and his merry band of undead things would rip them to shreds!


/so lonely
//not really

nucular bum: Was he the only gay in the village?

Don't forget about the poor eskimo.

Lupercanalius Assbarnacle: Jesus Christ. How do you get eco-fascism out of that?

How do you not?

It appears from your post that you consider anybody living their life in a manner different from you to be shoving their views down your throat.

I was a vegetarian for many years and I used to get a lot of crap from people like you. Somebody would tell somebody that I didn't eat meat and that person would get in my face asking why I was judging them.

I know several people who are vegetarians. Their reasons vary from health concerns to a moral objection to eating animals. I don't really care as long as they don't attempt to inform me that I'm evil or wrong for eating meat. None of them do, hence my continued association with them.

Perhaps I jumped to conclusions in presuming that the folks in this article are, in fact, judgemental about technology and progress. Maybe they're just hermits. If the latter is the case, fine with me as long as they own the land they occupy (and they do, so it's cool).

Ral: Lupercanalius Assbarnacle: Jesus Christ. How do you get eco-fascism out of that?

How do you not?



I guess I do not get eco-fascism out of that because I know the definition of the word fascism. As for the rest of your post, where you say "unless they're hermits", it appears that not only did you not read the farking article, but you didn't even read the headline of the thread that you were posting in. farking brilliant.