Degrowth

1137 readers

9 users here now

Discussions about degrowth and all sorts of related topics. This includes UBI, economic democracy, the economics of green technologies, enviromental legislation and many more intressting economic topics.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Genuine question - is degrowth compatible with human nature? (slrpnk.net)

submitted 2 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

33 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Degrowth is a noble ideal to strive for, and it would certainly mitigate a lot of our current problems if implemented. However, I fear that it is an ideal that can be adopted by the few but not the many. Growth, progress and personal ambition are inherent human traits - it may not be the case for all people, but it is certainly evident in today's society and many societies that have come before. In my opinion, we need solutions and frameworks that most (if not all) personalities can exist within. I worry degrowth is wishful thinking, and would love to hear your thoughts.

All of that said - I believe it is a very worthwhile thought exercise and even if all degrowth principles cannot be implemented, some can and that is what matters.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Throughout most of human history economic growth was nearly not a thing on a global scale. Obviously some cities, states and individuals ended up with economic growth, but not even close to what we saw in the last two centuries. Before that with hunter gatherers it was basically economic stagnation for thousands of years.

Most personal growth is really about gaining status within the group. In our society it is mainly about making more money. However there are also a lot of paths, which have much less to do with money. Artists gain fame from their art, politicans from the position in the political hierachy and scientists from the discoveries they made. All of that is also status in the group and could replace a lot of wealth.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (3 children)

I'm not sure how useful this exercise is, but I like to boil things down to the basic "cavepeople fighting for survival scenario".

In this scenario, art is irrelevant. So are any politicians that don't offer immediate results such as more food or more water.

What matters is survival by means of effectively allocating resources and defending those resources. This is where ambition comes in.

These drives don't go away when survival is no longer at risk. They are inherent to our being because they ensure our survival. Unfortunately, we also love excess.

I fear the current system exists because our nature has resulted in it existing.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago

What makes you believe art was irrelevant back then. And there might not have been politicians but still some kind of structure or social hierarchy.

load more comments (2 replies)