I think that's a good idea. Someone has just sent a posting to the
Green Party energy email list to the effect that the coming shortage of
oil and gas is now receiving mainstream media attention, and we ought to
be using that to promote the idea that economic growth is no longer
necessary, and since it is so dependent on finite fossil fuels will be
coming to an end anyway.
But unless we prepare very well for this, we will get economic collapse,
as a lack of demand drives economies everywhere into depression. Paul
Mobbs told me that he went to a peak oil conference and the BNP were
there - they knew it was going to happen, and were waiting to take
power, as Hitler did in the 1930s, as a result of the ensuing economic
chaos.
What we need is a way of maintaining an economy without growth. Does
anyone know one?
Chris
John Scull wrote:
>> Is it out of fatalism, habit, or perhaps religious belief that you
>> and others
>> on [and beyond] this list persist in framing this [the
>> 'nuclear-decision']
>> issue only in in terms of a vision that leaves the demand-as-usual curve
>> unchallenged?
>
>
> I agree with Aubrey. The only real solution is Consevation. But "not
> consuming" is a threat to the economic system in a way that nuclear
> power is
> not, so it seldom gets on the agenda in a serious way.
>
> Instead of reactively opposing nuclear, how about seriously and
> proactively
> advocating conservation?
>
> John
> =================================
> John Scull
> http://members.shaw.ca/jscull
> There is more to life than increasing its speed.
> --Gandhi
>
|