Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Avatar: The Holocaust We Will Not See

monbiot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 180 posts

Re: Avatar: The Holocaust We Will Not See

#151

Post by DaniFong »

timwiseman wrote: post #130
DaniFong wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the book recommendation. I will read it. As I'm sure you appreciate, I've been thinking a lot about it. In my current thinking, it seems that there must be a new moral code. The powers of individual people, or even small groups, are too great. A million dollar act can cause billions of dollars of damage (e.g. 9/11) causing a many trillion dollar response (our current wars) and we haven't even seen the firs…

A very interesting and very long post. Am I understanding you are advocating a limit on the human population? How would you suggest actually achieving that?

More specifically, I am proposing a limit to the impact of human populations on the rest of Earth's environment -- in practice this is a limit on human populations too, though it could still go far.

I don't have any answers I really believe in as yet. One incomplete idea I have been toying with is that much of human population growth is driven by the 'biological clock,' one's reproductive age ends relatively soon, and so if (a woman) wants to have children she needs to do so relatively early in life. Were lives longer and were the reproductive years extended, perhaps there would not be such a drive to reproduce so quickly; in a similar if distinct way to how reducing infant mortality reduces birthrates.

Reducing the age of reproduction is nearly as important as reducing the number of children, in terms of limiting the rate of exponential expansion. I don't know any collection of strategies that seem complete, however.

Re: Avatar: The Holocaust We Will Not See

#152

Post by Tichy »

potatolicious wrote: post #149
Tichy wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does it even matter who was "evil" and who wasn't? The fact remains that one party killed off the other. It seems clear that among the killers there were some "evil savages", but of course not every European was evil. It doesn't even make sense to think in such generalizations. However, if some actions were ordered by "the state", then it seems to me to make sense to hold "the state" responsible for it. Whatever…

> "if the European invaders where not evil, ruthless and completely without moral compunction, how were they capable of doing the killing?" That's precisely why it matters who was "evil" and who wasn't. This kind of "pure evil" doesn't really exist, and by assuming it does you are glossing over the real causes of the native genocide. It's far too easy to ask "why did the Europeans murder the natives?" and answer with…

"This kind of "pure evil" doesn't really exist"

I'll argue that it exists - not everybody who torments a baby has an excuse for it. Of course it is useful to try to figure out what made them do it, there might be a kind of excuse in terms of an explanation of what made them do it (bad childhood whatever). Or why - um, presumably they wanted the land? I think what happened in America is that some people had the better weapons and they wanted the other people's property.

"by playing the blame game"

How is it playing the blame game? A bunch of people killed another bunch of people. There is nothing to play about it. What to do about is another question - I am not even sure what you are worried about. Nobody in this thread has called for any kind of reparations or anything, I think?

Isn't pointing out the history of European settlers exactly what you want: pointing out that Europeans can be bad, too, so we always have to keep asking what makes the "bad" come out? I don't think by forgetting history, we are helping the kind of understanding you seem to seek.

Ultimately, though, I think the bunch with the better weapons will always get and take what they want...

Re: Avatar: The Holocaust We Will Not See

#153

Post by _h4xr »

pradocchia wrote: post #144
_h4xr wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The third-world isn't some laggard full of overbreeding simpletons. Any concrete reason for that belief? It looks like the "overbreeding" is objectively true: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_birth_rate . As far as simpletons go, you tell me: is there any intelligence test you know of that routinely ranks people in Djibouti over people in Japan? If not, it sounds like your statement is unfounded. The…

When you complain about how the Victorians ran things, you have to compare it to something. How about pre-Victorian rule? European profit seeking turned Congo in to a hell hole.

I don't understand. That Time article is very clear about how beneficial European rule was. It goes on and on--about the mines and the industries and the shops and the general sense of law and order.

Did the Belgians just find a country like that, and take it over?

Re: Avatar: The Holocaust We Will Not See

#154

Post by mahmud »

tfh wrote: post #58
seldo wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're missing the point. It's not that genocide is sometimes good, it's that civilizations that commit genocide also do good things. The Germany that produced the Jewish holocaust also invented rocket science, which indirectly led us to the space program, satellites, and a big chunk of our modern communications network. Does this excuse genocide? No. Does it make it difficult to label German civilization as "all goo…

> The Germany that produced the Jewish holocaust also invented rocket science.. You get into trouble by saying that in Germany my friend :)

Today's Germany is a fictitious entity, a comedic prop setup by a philosophe prankster.

Re: Avatar: The Holocaust We Will Not See

#155

Post by moorej »

billswift wrote: post #98
Tichy wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sou you think being all but exterminated was for the better of the native Americans? Maybe you are trying to argue for something good, but dead people are dead. They don't benefit from a civilization that emerged a couple of decades later.

And they would be dead now even if no one had killed them back then. And those that killed them are all dead now. And no doubt more Amerindians were killed by other Amerindians over the centuries than ever had any contact at all with Europeans. This is like all the whining about slavery. Slavery has been one of the most widespread practices in the world. Europeans were the ones who have come closest to putting a stop…

It's true many western enlightenment thinkers wrote wholeheartedly against slavery. However, they rarely, if ever, were actually referring to the actual slaves in their midst. Instead most of the intellectual discourse surrounding slavery concentrated on rights for those who could vote (often a small section of the population). Was European morality at work when Leopold II destroyed half the population of Congo?

Re: Avatar: The Holocaust We Will Not See

#156

Post by narag »

b-man wrote: post #88
narag wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has anyone travelled to both Spain and Latin America? Spaniards are white. Latins have on average a mixed colour. So it's clear that extermination did not take place... there.

There was miscegenation for sure, not only with native people but between Europeans, Africans and everyone else that came here. But that does not imply that there was not an extermination. [1] [1] A single and not isolated example. -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupi_people#European_colonizati...

There was miscegenation for sure, not only with native people but between Europeans, Africans and everyone else that came here.

The racial traits are different from african to american natives. It's clear the difference between Brazil or Cuba (where most slaves were brought) and Mexico. And remember I'm writting of average,

About the word "extermination" it seems you're using it to describe killing of many individuals. I would keep it to refer to something like killing 99.99 indigenous population.

Re: Avatar: The Holocaust We Will Not See

#157

Post by bokonist »

DaniFong wrote: post #121
bokonist wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have to believe that somewhere in the parameter space of human diplomacy and relationships there is the possibility for expansion and coexistence without utter annihilation of one side. I always thought that the Romans empire expanded solely out of greed and power lust. One day I was reading about one of their very, very early battles. Turns out the population of Rome and of the neighboring city had expanded to the…

Thanks for the book recommendation. I will read it. As I'm sure you appreciate, I've been thinking a lot about it. In my current thinking, it seems that there must be a new moral code. The powers of individual people, or even small groups, are too great. A million dollar act can cause billions of dollars of damage (e.g. 9/11) causing a many trillion dollar response (our current wars) and we haven't even seen the firs…

I'm not an expert on energy. But my impression is that Thorium is the current front runner for a) being able to meet our energy needs and b) having enough to last hundreds or thousands of years.

Using the sun cannot be plan A, because as far as I've heard, solar panels barely output enough energy to pay back the energy it takes to make them. I hope that technology will improve, but it's by no means certain that solar power's EROEI will ever match the 5X of nuclear power, or the 10X of fossil fuels.

Energy is by far the most limiting constraint. With sufficient energy, you can alleviate other constraints. For instance, if you have enough energy you can desalinize ocean water and use it to irrigate crops to feed large amounts of people. You can always convert energy into other resources, such as food or steel. But if you don't have energy, you get Max Max.

Finally, the real problem is not necessarily hitting a constraint. If the U.S. reaches a point where we cannot continue to grow our resource usage intensity, that's not a catastrophe. The disaster is when you hit a constraint, but your population keeps growing, because then each person will face a declining standard of living. The other disaster is when you max out a resource and then it grows more scarce, as again, you'll face decline.

Re: Avatar: The Holocaust We Will Not See

#158

Post by DaniFong »

bokonist wrote: post #157
DaniFong wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the book recommendation. I will read it. As I'm sure you appreciate, I've been thinking a lot about it. In my current thinking, it seems that there must be a new moral code. The powers of individual people, or even small groups, are too great. A million dollar act can cause billions of dollars of damage (e.g. 9/11) causing a many trillion dollar response (our current wars) and we haven't even seen the firs…

I'm not an expert on energy. But my impression is that Thorium is the current front runner for a) being able to meet our energy needs and b) having enough to last hundreds or thousands of years. Using the sun cannot be plan A, because as far as I've heard, solar panels barely output enough energy to pay back the energy it takes to make them. I hope that technology will improve, but it's by no means certain that solar…

"Using the sun cannot be plan A, because as far as I've heard, solar panels barely output enough energy to pay back the energy it takes to make them."

This was true 20 years ago, but now it's closer to 1% than 100% (and as that happens the cost per watt has gone down from $50 to $1 and below), though I don't have the direct reference on hand. But I think it's cited in this presentation (http://khoslaventures.com/presentations/Google-4-22-09.ppt) or this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euXfy9c3Vuw&feature=chann...)

Re: Avatar: The Holocaust We Will Not See

#159

Post by seldo »

astine wrote: post #108
tfh wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's quite possible for the Native Americans to have been savages, and the Europeans to have been savages (with better weapons), and for one group of awful people to have murdered another group of awful people. I don't understand what do you mean with that. I don't think there's an absolute good or bad. But according to the fact that Europeans are the ones who came to America and slaughtered the Natives, they are t…

One thing to remember is that the slaughter was not wholly one sided. The carib indians for example were known to be cannibals, reputedly attacked Spanish settlements (supposedly for the purposes of consumption) before they themselves were conquered and enslaved. Cortez only managed to conquer Mexico by getting caught up in the wars which were already being waged. The Massacre at Cholula, (depending on whose account…

The reputation of the Caribs as cannibals is almost entirely myth: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carib#Cannibalism

Re: Avatar: The Holocaust We Will Not See

#160

Post by pradocchia »

_h4xr wrote: post #153
pradocchia wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you complain about how the Victorians ran things, you have to compare it to something. How about pre-Victorian rule? European profit seeking turned Congo in to a hell hole.

I don't understand. That Time article is very clear about how beneficial European rule was. It goes on and on--about the mines and the industries and the shops and the general sense of law and order. Did the Belgians just find a country like that, and take it over?

You honestly don't know the history of Congo? Here's a starting point: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congo_Free_State

The baskets of severed hands, set down at the feet of the European post commanders, became the symbol of the Congo Free State. ... The collection of hands became an end in itself. Force Publique soldiers brought them to the stations in place of rubber; they even went out to harvest them instead of rubber... They became a sort of currency. They came to be used to make up for shortfalls in rubber quotas, to replace... the people who were demanded for the forced labour gangs; and the Force Publique soldiers were paid their bonuses on the basis of how many hands they collected.

Post reply on HN