Two thoughts on this meme - self-reliance is necessary, and self-reliance is not sufficient, because if capitalism destroys the climate your homestead goes with it.
Two thoughts on this meme - self-reliance is necessary, and self-reliance is not sufficient, because if capitalism destroys the climate your homestead goes with it.
Self reliance isn’t feasible, way to many people and not enough arable land. Plus you lose all benefits of specialization, putting you to pre industrial levels.
deleted by creator
I definitely enjoy learning to fix electronics and appliances things on my own, and I enjoy designing and 3d printing helpful parts. But I have no urge to learn how to grow my own food or make a house or furniture etc. I don’t see a feasible situation where that would be helpful.
deleted by creator
International shipping is absolutely fantastic. I’m not going to manufature electronics or injection mold stuff. I’m fine with middle men if they actually add value, like shipping and economies of scale do. I’d rather fix shipping rather than deindustrialize and revert 100 years.
I didn’t really miss anything over covid, I don’t usually buy much other than food, and that was still available. I luckily got my computer before the shortages, so wasn’t effected there, but it’s not like I could have manufactured my own.
deleted by creator
If it’s not a monopoly, we (in aggregate) do have control over them, since they still need our money to operate. But that is one reason why monopolies need to be crushed or heavy regulated, so that they can’t have life and death control like you are mentioning.
I think it’s net negative because of the amount of time and money you’d need to invest for a very low probability event. It’s like the preper mindset. I can add a lot of positive specializing in my field that I wouldn’t be able to if I also trained myself in society collapse self sufficiency.
I have the desire but but the ability to grow my own food right now, so I’ve subscribed to a CSA in the meantime. A few hundred dollars upfront that stays in my community, and I’ve got an entire season of fresh produce when it’s at its ripest.
self-reliance is great for surviving, but for living you need a community.
100% no resources from anyone else self reliance? Sure
Otherwise? Solar panels exist.
I just don’t think it’s worth pursuing for it’s own end. There are some things it makes sense to do yourself, but for most things it costs way to much time for the small amount of security it gives.
You may not. I personally don’t either. Doesn’t change the fact that some people do, for a wide variety of reasons, and that’s fine.
The post said it was necessary though. I’m fine with people working on self reliance if it makes them feel more secure, or just if they enjoy it or it gives them fulfillment. But I think relying on the social web of connections and commerce is fine.
I don’t think OP was meaning you have to be 100% self sufficient. I interpreted it more that you need community but you also need to know how to take care of yourself. How are you going to help your community if you can’t help yourself. How is your community going to help you if they don’t know how to do things. Local supply chains doesn’t mean you’re producing everything, it means it’s coming from your community. Thats exactly how an untold amount of people survived the depression, communities banding together and taking care of each other.
Most homesteaders help our their neighbors if it’s needed, and will receive help when they need it. They’re not 100% isolated on their own.
E: Why’re y’all downvoting that guy. Not like they were being a dick or anything.
This is exactly what I meant :)
According to Google, there’s
5.34 million miles of arable land on earth
8 billion population
8 billion / 5.34 million = 1489 miles per person
Have I done something wrong? Seems like enough space, no?
Edit: lol I’m dumb
You divided backwards. It should be land divided by population. 5.34m / 8b = 0.0006675 miles^2 per person.
That math makes it 1,489 people per mile of arable land.
Edit: don’t forget that not everyone lives on arable land. We also have apartments and skyscrapers that house people, thus packing in many more people per mile than individual.
Arable just means it’s possible to turn it into farmland, not that it would actually be useful to grow crops.
The largest problem is that the global population has exceeded the natural limitations of the nitrogen cycle. Meaning we are utilizing more nitrogen from the soil than it can naturally fixate.
Without petroleum based fertilizers we wouldn’t be able to sustain the global population we have today. Without the Haber-Bosch process our population would likely be hovering around 4 billion instead of 8 billion.
My math came out to one 41 meter square of land per person. 1.34b hectares/8b people*(100m*100m/hectare)=1675m^2/person which is a square of 41m per side.