Parenting in a Peak Oil World pt 2 (merged)

[uNkNowN ElEmEnt]

Kids need connection for more than just social interaction. Yeah, they need to learn how to deal with all kinds of different people, but giving your kids friends (aka roots) in the community is one of the most important things you can do.

In tough times, they have to ahve their own social network. Especailly if its an only child. In place of siblings they will need friends when YOU are gone. For their teen years and for learning or making a place for themselves in this world. These are things you can't do for them, but you can provide a safe and good place for them to connect to others.

Of course, its not like it will be sunshine and roses all the time, but they need to deal with bad people as well as good, and its best they learn those skills (ie: trya nd fail and learn from their mistakes) while they are still with you and have your support and guideance.

[Newfie]

Isolation and religion go hand in hand because so many people find their community through religion, even if they don't completely agree with the precepts. Atheists tend to report being more isolated, and shunned, because their views are unpopular and scary.

There are some alternatives. Various secular Humanist groups are out there, but I find them kind of shrill and preachy (anti-religion.) And hey kinda don't address the whole spiritual thing.

The compromise I have found is Ethical Humanism (parent organization is the AEU - American Ethical Union (as in group - not labor).) They are a NON-secular Humanist group. Deist beliefs are irrelevant (but majority are atheist/agnostics.) They generally have a Sunday meeting which generally has a bit of a churchy flavor. Christian holidays are supplanted by natural holidays (Easter = Spring Equinox, etc.) They do weddings, namings (= christening), funerals, etc. A bona fide religion (as attested to by the Texas Supreme Court and IRS among others.) In short they seek to help you meet spiritual goals without relying upon divine intervention.

Sometimes the religious part gets a bit too much for me so I sit out those meetings. They often have good talks on interesting topics. There is a group in Austin and about 20 other groups spread around the country but they are concentrated in the North East Corridor.

Just an idea. AEU.org

[mos6507]

send the kid to private school

That doesn't jive with simplifying your life and cutting expenses.

[AgentR]

send the kid to private school

That doesn't jive with simplifying your life and cutting expenses.

I don't have a need to.

Something to consider too; there are expenses you can turn off on a moments notice, and there are those that you can not. I don't really concern myself with those expenses I can turn off at will.

As examples, my electric and phone bills are much, much higher than most people living in the size of house that I own, while otoh, I have no car payments and my mortgage is rapidly dwindling away. I have two cell phones and a cellular data connection, full satellite and cable, but no contract commitments. The difference is, that if things went pear shaped and my income disappeared, I could throw breakers and disconnect services to the extent that it would be years before there would be risk of foreclosure or tax forfeiture. Thats more than enough time to gather up the kiddie, pack the bags, and bail to the doomstead in a calm and orderly fashion.

This is also a convenient approach because you need not convince family members of a structural threat before it manifests. No need to predict doom; if and when it happens, it will be hideously obvious; they'll panic, you'll shrug your shoulders and say, "relax", then execute. Its funny what people will do when you can confront them with "stay here and starve or get in the truck and not starve."

And hey, if the powers that be string this disaster on long enough for me to croak of old age, all the better, leaves my kid with a nice next egg of assets to make her own plans with.

[WildRose]

Hi, Shanny. I have some ideas; maybe a few of them will be of help.

My daughter was an only child for five years before our second came along. I was concerned about her need for socialization as she went through those first years, so I looked for "mom and tot" types of programs. I took her to coffee break groups with other moms and kids, gymnastics classes we did together, mom & tot swimming, and just visiting lots of playgrounds. I know you are isolated when on your land, but if you are within reasonable driving distance of a town you may be able to find programs such as these. You could look on community message boards in grocery stores, or local newsletters, or school message boards to find programs in the area for young children. It's a great way to meet other parents and kids, and even if you don't come across any that you'd really like to be really close to (i.e., the religious thing would be a problem), your son could still mix with the kids just for playtime. Even just a couple of hours a few times a week at a playground with a few local children would provide him the opportunity to share laughs with other kids and learn about sharing, taking turns, all that kid stuff. If you met some people you think you'd like to know better, you could arrange play dates at your homes. Similarly, my niece, an only child, lived on an acreage until she was high school aged and her parents arranged sleepovers and play dates with kids from surrounding farms. She met most of her friends at school but also met some through horseback riding lessons and events.

I know that with people who have very strict religious views, it can be difficult, if not impossible, to have friendships with unless, of course, both sides can overlook each others' beliefs and just enjoy the relationship for whatever else it brings. My kids had very close friendships with a family who have become more and more involved with their church and its teachings over the years and when the kids all became teenagers, the friendships became strained and fizzled because of their differing views on things. Even that was a learning experience, though.

Something else I thought of was socializing through the written word. As your son gets older, he could seek out pen-pals to write to, even internationally. That would be interesting and fun. I wonder if there are any sites where really young kids can communicate on-line? That would be another idea, but I know you'd want to be sure the site was really safe for your son.

All the best, Shanny. You'll find things that work for you and your son.

Edit: Cubs, boy scouts, 4H programs all would be excellent for skill building and socializing, if anything like that is available in your area.

[dinopello]

Decent article on free-range kids from this week's Salon

Amid the cacophony of terrifying Amber Alerts and safety tips for every holiday, Skenazy is a chipper alternative, arguing that raising children in the United States now isn't more dangerous than it was when today's generation of parents were young. And back then, it was reasonably safe, too. So why does shooing the kids outside and telling them to have fun and be home by dark seem irresponsible to so many middle-class parents today?

In other news:

3 year old found OK after wandering forest for days

Father : "he's a tough little bugger"

This resonates with me as I also wandered off somewhere around 2-3 years old and was found over a mile away. I remember I went out to try and find out where my Dad went every day. Some lady picked me up and somehow figured out where I lived.

[bodigami]

The reality is I, with my current power will lead people and gain more power as time goes on. I don't necessarily want this power, but I take it to ensure my freedom, knowing full well other deserving people have less due to it. I will acquiesce this power and take less if I can still move to a situation where I have my freedom, but until then I just take what I want, when I want and live a life with more freedom than the average person. I advise anyone else capable to continue grabbing more power to ensure their own freedom.

I think you are overlooking a sort of "sliding scale" in the freedom/power analysis. To me, the degree of desire you are trying to satisfy determines how much power you must accumulate in your quest for freedom. If, however, you accept the Bhuddist idea that maybe REAL freedom lies not in accumulating enough power to facilitate your current notions of freedom, but rather in reducing the scope of desire wrapped up in your notions of freedom, so that it may not be necessary to accumulate enough power to satisfy a vast and maybe ultimately vain notion of freedom.

Think about the political leaders who have pursued the kind of power you describe and have not ended their careers in what I would describe as a state of "freedom."

Check out Harry Browne's "How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World." I believe it's out of print now, but you can pick it up used. He has a lot of interesting ideas along the lines of some of the topics you are raising.

***

Good discussion guys.

It's an interesting thing really, the whole "I may be in a 6x6 prison cell but in my mind I'm free". But yeah. I've been happy in my life since I met my wife and even happier when we met our girlfriend a few years after that (we all live together and have kids). The whole idea of obtaining more power is just due to wanting to have a relatively free life without control. I don't get enjoyment out of having slaves, as I said previously I would give it all up if I could ensure future freedom for my group. Having said that I value my family above everyone else and will do whatever is possible to ensure we survive for the 40-50 or so years I have left.

I want a simple life of growing all of my own food, making my own wine/beer and looking after the family and friends. All the excess in my current life is mostly for show and to ensure the investments for shit hitting the fan are maximized, I don't actually enjoy that type of life at all and am eagerly awaiting the point when I don't have to do it with either shit hitting the fan or there being no point in being involved in maximizing the profits. Both my girls came from modest upbringings so they know what it's like without all the "fancy" shit and it isn't really a problem for them either.

your intentions are disgustingly predictable for calling yourself a "new" human. new human my _

[bodigami]

I think you are overlooking a sort of "sliding scale" in the freedom/power analysis.

It's an interesting thing really, the whole "I may be in a 6x6 prison cell but in my mind I'm free". But yeah. I've been happy in my life since I met my wife and even happier when we met our girlfriend a few years after that (we all live together and have kids).

The 6x6 prison cell is probably an extreme POINT on the sliding scale I am describing. It's really not what I was suggesting. What I was suggesting was more like living life without feeling the need to conquer or dominate your surroundings for the purpose of achieving a state that you describe as "freedom." You can achieve the same state of mind--i.e., control over your world and a sense of peace by reducing the initial impulse to conquer in the first place.

But if you have your life set up with a mini-harem, you probably have a farm league monarch's outlook on things in the first place, so what I'm saying may not be helpful to you. You may have already invested too much in your "conquer and control to be free" approach for any other ideas about freedom to have much resonance.

If it works for you, enjoy.

The whole idea of obtaining as much power as possible is such that there isn't much harm in having too much, but there is a lot of harm in having too little. I can run the guantlet and take a "See what happens" approach but why should I? To me it's better to have a few layers of protection.

In my mind I can be anywhere with enough training, but if I'm getting poked with needles as I hear my loved ones get raped the reality is my life is quite shit. The life I want to actually live is a very simple one, so it's not about maintaining something other than what most animals should have. I just don't want to be a caged bird.

your cage is not of a bird, but oh do you have a cage.

[EnergyUnlimited]

Here you are:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12130140
Very interesting (and responsible) move by Chinese authorities.

[Pretorian]

In Slavic cultures it was all right to smother an elderly parent(s) if feeding him/her/them was straining enough.

[GASMON]

What we need in the west is laws for parents to be legally bound to take care of their children.

Gas

[vision-master]

Ah, so England is in the West? Interesting..........

[Windmills]

What we need in the west is laws for parents to be legally bound to take care of their children.

Yes, but that would mean parents could no longer blame teachers and schools for all their children's failings. We can't have that!

[SeaGypsy]

In Slavic cultures it was all right to smother an elderly parent(s) if feeding him/her/them was straining enough.

Is that a hint or a sledgehammer?

[radon]

In Slavic cultures it was all right to smother an elderly parent(s) if feeding him/her/them was straining enough.

In Anglo-Saxon cultures it was alright to smother an elderly parent(s) if feeding him/her/them was straining enough.

[GASMON]

Ah, so England is in the West? Interesting..........

Zero degrees longitude passes through Greenwich, near London (we English proclaimed it so !!)- So most of England is in the West, but a small part is also in the East !!!!!

You learn something every day !!!!

Gas

[vision-master]

lol, taht wuz changed. You stold it from the French.

Oh, those limeys, think they run the World do they.

Prime Meridians


Although the Greenwich Meridian is by far the most commonly used prime meridian, there are other precedents, historical meridians such as those that passed through Isle de Fer and Tenerife for example. The first known prime meridian was introduced by Hipparchus in the 2nd Century BC, and passed through Rhodes. 400 years later Ptolemy used a meridian that ran through the western boundary of the known world, the Canary Islands. Various islands in the Atlantic Ocean were used as zero longitude until April 1634, when an assembly called by Cardinal Richelieu chose the Isle de Fer, the most westerly of the Canary Islands. However, there was still no general agreement about this amongst the nations and many prime meridians were still in use. A French chart from as late as 1753 shows at least four prime meridians in common usage - it denotes Paris, Greenwich, Isle de Fer and Tenerife, and there were many others.

In Astrolocality Astrology, Martin Davis points out that some astrologers have questioned the Greenwich Meridian line as the starting point for the World Geodetic Map. For example, a Pyramid chart is used by some astrologers, shifting the starting point from Greenwich to the Great Pyramid at Giza. This displaces everything by just over 30°, or one Zodiac sign. Davis himself supports Greenwich, saying he finds that the Greenwich co-ordinates work best of those that he has used.

Astrologers using the Greenwich Meridian as their Prime line may not realise that they are adopting an arbitrary modern man-made line. The Greenwich Observatory, through which it passes, was established by King Charles II in 1675 purely as a means to determine longitude for naval and commercial navigational purposes.

Since Geodetic Astrology is concerned with natural Earth signatures, and how they influence the native, this anomaly seems to contradict the whole basic principle of Geodetics, a branch of astrology which deals with the spirituality of Earth harmonics and man’s relation to it.


http://infoman16.tripod.com/Articles/Si ... ridian.htm

[Pretorian]

In Slavic cultures it was all right to smother an elderly parent(s) if feeding him/her/them was straining enough.

Is that a hint or a sledgehammer?

just a historical fact, for whatever its worth. Considering that Energy is a Slav, I thought he would like to know his history.

[Pretorian]

In Slavic cultures it was all right to smother an elderly parent(s) if feeding him/her/them was straining enough.

In Anglo-Saxon cultures it was alright to smother an elderly parent(s) if feeding him/her/them was straining enough.

I didnt know that, though am not surprised at all. So when did they stop, and how do you know this?

[dolanbaker]

I would suspect that in most cultures that once the old wise ones became "gaga" and no longer "wise" it was easy to forget to feed them.

It is only our modern society (energy) that has the luxury of allowing geriatric people to live as long as they currently do (and much longer than they would have preferred to have lived).

I expect that when I reach that stage of life, I won't have the "luxury" of having my life extended to tyh ebitter end!