Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Equating energy use with a moral position (i.e. (ab)use of slaves) is an interesting argument.

I don't agree that slave use dooms civilisation. In fact it's a very practical, if ethically unsupportable, answer to the energy crisis. Slave-based civilisation seem to do just fine - it's usually some external crisis or unchecked internal greed that kills them.

It's possible to imagine a weird quasi-Athenian slave-based 'democracy' that can provide replacement energy once we run out of fossil fuels. I wouldn't be surprised if that's where we end up, collectively.

Which suggest the real problem isn't energy economy, it's psychology and politics - specifically how do you create a political environment that goes beyond Marxists vs Capitalists and values long-sighted sane decisions than short-sighted insane ones?

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Tue Aug 14th, 2007 at 05:41:54 AM EST
Equating energy use with a moral position (i.e. (ab)use of slaves) is an interesting argument.

I have seen the argument presented as a simple accounting metaphor for the amount of human/animal energy equivalent of fossil fuel use, without the moral overtones.

Can the last politician to go out the revolving door please turn the lights off?

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Aug 27th, 2007 at 03:50:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series