The Cedar Choppers
texasmonthly.com
The Cedar Choppers
1–10 of 25 posts
Re: The Cedar Choppers
#2> “They didn’t care about possessions,” Roberts says, “and they lived in housing fit for animals.”
I find it interesting how disrespectfully nose up folks talk about humble people like the Cedar Choppers, when if we all continued to live like they did, we wouldn't be in this climate mess we are in.
It's caring about possessions and extravagant homes (unfit for animals?) that has destroyed the planet for all animals.
Re: The Cedar Choppers
#3> “They didn’t care about possessions,” Roberts says, “and they lived in housing fit for animals.” I find it interesting how disrespectfully nose up folks talk about humble people like the Cedar Choppers, when if we all continued to live like they did, we wouldn't be in this climate mess we are in. It's caring about possessions and extravagant homes ( un fit for animals?) that has destroyed the planet for all animals…
If we lived like they did, we'd probably also have half the life expectancy and way more deaths during childbirth, just to name a couple of differences.
Re: The Cedar Choppers
#4> “They didn’t care about possessions,” Roberts says, “and they lived in housing fit for animals.” I find it interesting how disrespectfully nose up folks talk about humble people like the Cedar Choppers, when if we all continued to live like they did, we wouldn't be in this climate mess we are in. It's caring about possessions and extravagant homes ( un fit for animals?) that has destroyed the planet for all animals…
If we lived like they did, we'd probably also have half the life expectancy and way more deaths during childbirth, just to name a couple of differences.
That’s an extreme of course, but we have examples from other small communities which shun luxuries to some extent like mennonite and Amish communities. In any event we don’t need everyone to live barebones but even 30-40% volunteering or seeking this lifestyle could help against our mass consumption society. At least a significant portion of people wouldn’t live connected lives 24x7. Maybe 12x7. That could reduce energy consumption.
Re: The Cedar Choppers
#5Earlier quoted context omitted.
If we lived like they did, we'd probably also have half the life expectancy and way more deaths during childbirth, just to name a couple of differences.
That’s an extreme of course, but we have examples from other small communities which shun luxuries to some extent like mennonite and Amish communities. In any event we don’t need everyone to live barebones but even 30-40% volunteering or seeking this lifestyle could help against our mass consumption society. At least a significant portion of people wouldn’t live connected lives 24x7. Maybe 12x7. That could reduce ene…
I think the movement's already started to some effect with modern homesteaders.
https://psmag.com/environment/opting-homesteading-matter-tod...
https://www.literallydarling.com/blog/2016/11/04/millennials...
Re: The Cedar Choppers
#6> “They didn’t care about possessions,” Roberts says, “and they lived in housing fit for animals.” I find it interesting how disrespectfully nose up folks talk about humble people like the Cedar Choppers, when if we all continued to live like they did, we wouldn't be in this climate mess we are in. It's caring about possessions and extravagant homes ( un fit for animals?) that has destroyed the planet for all animals…
I cringed at the 'fit for animals' phrase too. Imagine if the author had used it regarding, say, some other group.
That said, it's certainly possible to live in a simple, low-resource way without being disorderly and unclean. I think along the lines of those rural places with a whole bunch of shit strewn about the yard when I think of 'living like animals', as opposed to a small, simple cabin in the woods.
Re: The Cedar Choppers
#7The "cedar" in the Hill Country is actually the Ashe Juniper tree and it thrives in the area. It is drought tolerant in an area of frequent and prolonged drought and the hungry deer population won't touch the saplings while they obliterate the competing saplings from most other tree species that they are able to get to.
My parents live in the Hill Country and when I go to visit, I end up spending some time in the back of the property, barefoot with a brush hand saw, taking down large bottom branches from the Junipers. I do this for recreation and also to divert the growing energy of the tree upwards as it matures.
The aroma from the cut branches is quite pleasing and the systematic work of turning the branches into posts is satisfying. Usually, the long bottom branches are cut first, so much of the time, the work is in the shade of the upper branches, which can also transpire significantly on a hot day, with a prominent cooling effect. I can understand how getting paid for doing this might be an attractive life.
Re: The Cedar Choppers
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s an extreme of course, but we have examples from other small communities which shun luxuries to some extent like mennonite and Amish communities. In any event we don’t need everyone to live barebones but even 30-40% volunteering or seeking this lifestyle could help against our mass consumption society. At least a significant portion of people wouldn’t live connected lives 24x7. Maybe 12x7. That could reduce ene…
I think the movement's already started to some effect with modern homesteaders. https://psmag.com/environment/opting-homesteading-matter-tod... https://www.literallydarling.com/blog/2016/11/04/millennials...
That sounds good, but realistically, and perhaps somewhat differently from what most people imagine, denser city living (as opposed to suburban sprawl) is probably the best bet for the environment for most people who can't go live in the woods.
Re: The Cedar Choppers
#9> “They didn’t care about possessions,” Roberts says, “and they lived in housing fit for animals.” I find it interesting how disrespectfully nose up folks talk about humble people like the Cedar Choppers, when if we all continued to live like they did, we wouldn't be in this climate mess we are in. It's caring about possessions and extravagant homes ( un fit for animals?) that has destroyed the planet for all animals…
If we lived like they did, we'd probably also have half the life expectancy and way more deaths during childbirth, just to name a couple of differences.
I disagree. In fact, the opposite could be true. The focus on material possessions like clothes, diamonds, cars, homes, and just in general -- consumption -- has made us less healthy than we otherwise would be and we don't have money to spend on good food, the time to exercise or find peace of mind.
Just because we got bigger houses and less polio in the same timeline doesn't mean those too things are correlated to the same cause. In my experience, most of the scientific researchers producing cures for disease and prolonging life aren't doing it for material wealth. There's a deeper drive to it than that.
Maybe the progress in healthcare proceeds against the tide of social forces. It probably does, considering doctors artificially limit the supply of doctors, precisely so they can buy bigger houses, fancier cars, and more jewelry.
It's estimated that Jonas Salk would have made $7 Billion if he'd patented the polio vaccine.
I believe if we are going to reverse the damage we have done to the planet, we have to invert our social reward structure. We should shame those who spend extravagantly and praise restraint.
Re: The Cedar Choppers
#10The tree pollinates during a 2 to 3 month period during the winter months, and for many people, the allergies it causes are horrendous. If you're allergic to it, you're basically screwed from December - February. The pollen is so thick in the area that your car will covered with orange dust every morning.