pstarr wrote:The Tragedy of the Commons is a myth
BS. What kind of world do you think we're living in?
pstarr wrote: and there are endless examples of complex societies living in harmony with their ecologies.
Considering that we're entering a mass extinction event of our own making, your "countless examples" don't amount to squat. The jury's coming in on homo sapiens, sir. What our theoretical capabilities are don't matter. What our aggregate demonstrative behavior is doing, that's what matters.
pstarr wrote:You know there is a simple solution
There is no simple solution otherwise it would have happened already. Whenever anybody throws out phrases like that, I know they are full of sh*t. Forgive me for having a short-fuse, but I'm just burnt out on all this simplification that some people have, where they have "THE SOLUTION"(TM). There is no simple solution because people don't all get together and march in time, and that's what we'd need to stop this train-wreck, a global epiphany, basically.
pstarr wrote:they are entities under specific edits engineered by greedy corrupt individuals
Greedy individuals are "us" if you want to step back and look at homo sapiens. They are not a separate species. They are not subhumans. They are not sociopaths. They are US. You read The Oil Drum, don't you? The psychological angle has been explored quite thoroughly by Nate. It's not so easy to just brush aside.
pstarr wrote:You have me confused with someone else. I have spent a lifetime in professional sustainable development. I know who is wrong.
I thought you were talking about WE? Now you're talking about I (meaning you, the individual). If you want to talk about where humanity is headed, your anecdotal situation is meaningless. We're talking about the aggregate impact of humanity. If you're some higher being, and 99% of the rest of us are not, who gives a rat's ass? So you can stop feeling guilty for the planet dying? Big deal.