"We produce a lot of food for everyone"

[dede2002]

This Korean project clashed head on with Western interests, hence the change of government.

Well, I hadn't imagined the problem from this angle ...

Behind the scenes of the "change of government" I see a contest between the USA (and the big multinationals) and France which reigned supreme for decades.

The Korean project also struck head on the sovereignty of the Malagasy over their Earth, which is sacred and cannot be sold as a commodity. It was seen as an attempt at (neo) colonization, whether it came from Korea or elsewhere.

There were still 5 long years of "international punishment" between these two governments ...

[dede2002]

As for our opulence, it is permissible (as you suggest) to put it in perspective if we put in balance the general malaise which results (among other things) in the consumption of psychotropic drugs ...

We could say "to highlight", rather than in balance ...?

Following the example of Bhutan, where the consumption of psychotropic drugs and medication influences (downwards) the calculation of BIB (Gross Inner Happiness).

[sen-no-sen]

The quote is at the beginning of note 27 on his blog, here.

In short, if I follow your reasoning correctly, we should fight the current dissipative mode on the grounds that it would be too intense in a too short period of time to allow it to continue, and go in the direction of less instantaneous dissipation. , because it alone allows dissipation to last and therefore ultimately maximize this dissipation?

You summed it up very well!
Nature is the most efficient system that exists, life has lasted for about 3,5 billion years ... let's say it's something "well-established"!
The current model, as you recall so well in your messages, goes against the means that allow this same life to continue.
Why our universe tends to maximize in such a way is a fascinating subject, but which goes far beyond the framework of the subject, so I remain there!

It would therefore be the mechanical character which would have favored the first mode of dissipation "stupidly", it would behoove us to orient the process more subtly ...

I would not use the term stupidly, because the process at work is not of this order.
To make a small comparison, we can for example look at the technical system, "the Beast", as a bacterium: the bacteria tend to want to invade a host even if it means putting the latter in danger of death, thus potentially putting themselves in a situation of danger. situation that could lead them to disappearance ...
I noted potentially because the bacteria can, depending on the conditions, go and colonize another host ... if we can read between the lines and are interested in futurology we may be led to note that the techno line -scientist is clearly oriented towards the idea of ​​colonization of other planets ....

More generally, there remain some difficulties in the logical articulation; for example, if we understand that the rich dissipate more energy and are therefore evolutionarily advantageous, overall, a society where the gains would be distributed very equally would it not be more efficient in terms of energy waste (it is Keynesianism)?

Oh yeah!
An egalitarian merchant society would be the worst thing that could exist for the maintenance of life on earth!
This is very easily demonstrated by simple calculation of energy / raw material correspondence divided by human unit.
This statement is very disturbing because it goes against what many of us think!
It is also the leitmotif of the left of the left ...
This got me into some trouble ... because I often say to provoke:
Better your one rich in Rolls than thirty smicards in logan (you can insult me ​​by MP!).
However, it is good to remember that total equality is not possible, certain models wanted to achieve it and have always concluded for a dictatorship.
Either way the dominance scale always ends up emerging through a process of scale invariance.
The only way to get closer to a truly virtuous society where inequalities would be smoothed out would be to move towards what I call "efficient sobriety".

[dede2002]

You summed it up very well!
Nature is the most efficient system that exists, life has lasted for about 3,5 billion years ... let's say it's something "well-established"!
The current model, as you recall so well in your messages, goes against the means that allow this same life to continue.
Why our universe tends to maximize in such a way is a fascinating subject, but which goes far beyond the framework of the subject, so I remain there!

Hello,

It is clearly the use of fossil fuels that breaks the balance, among other things by pumping the oxygen patiently distilled by photosynthesis, which is naturally intended for animals like us.

A society that uses energy over the sun could last longer ...?
It should also protect its resources, forests, rivers, oceans, land, etc.

[Ahmed]

On the last point, it is clear that egalitarianism in a framework such as ours would be even more unfavorable than the current state.
It is no less obvious that growing inequality is a very bad trend which leads, in other ways, to chaos!

In reality, the debate is obviously not between an egalitarian model or not, it is that the totalitarian market system has no desirable outcome.

This is why I find it difficult to coexist (as I have already written) with the absurd idea of ​​a popular capitalism which would benefit everyone *, as it calls for. Mélenchon and his followers.

The ideas of Roddier are so interesting that you should create a dedicated thread, here.

* Popular capitalism, is an oxymoron.

[sen-no-sen]

Hello,
It is clearly the use of fossil fuels that breaks the balance, among other things by pumping the oxygen patiently distilled by photosynthesis, which is naturally intended for animals like us.

Not only!
If humanity came to master thermonuclear fusion and generalized it we would arrive at a level of destruction certainly higher than that already allowed by fossils, but of another nature ...

Unlimited energy = unlimited destruction

A society that uses energy over the sun could last longer ...?
It should also protect its resources, forests, rivers, oceans, land, etc.

Certainly!
On the condition, however, of not falling into the traps of "sustainable / sustainable development", we can very well screw up ecosystems with renewable sources!

[dede2002]

Not only!
If humanity came to master thermonuclear fusion and generalized it we would arrive at a level of destruction certainly higher than that already allowed by fossils, but of another nature ...

Unlimited energy = unlimited destruction

...
If humanity invested what it invests to try to control thermonuclear fusion, in the protection of the grounds and the promotion of family, cooperative and clean agriculture, the people of the cities could perhaps have good things to eat. .

[Ahmed]

... which proves that there is no fatality, that the choice of disaster is deliberate (albeit in full unconsciousness).
This also proves thatAdam Smith made a big mistake when he said that everyone's selfish interest miraculously coincides with everyone's interest.
This indicates above all the blindness of those who seek their advantage at the expense of the community and the ecosystem. which they are part of!

[dede2002]

To move the discussion forward, allow me to read a comment from a forumiste malagache *, which I find worthy of interest

The discussion being, in relation to the title of the subject, to understand why some starve while others are intoxicated ...
And also to share our opinions on possible actions.

"By tsimahafotsy (# 6734)

The great reproach that we are justified in leveling the West is for having shattered in their tracks civilizations which had not yet kept all their promises, for not having allowed them to develop and develop. to accomplish all the richness of the forms contained in their head.
When you say that and you belong to a people formerly colonized, the propensity of people is to cry ingratitude and to remind with complacency what the world owes to Europe. But what must be understood and put in mind is that Europe is the first to have invented and to have introduced, wherever it has dominated, an economic and social system based on money, and having ruthlessly eliminated everything, I said EVERYTHING, CULTURE, philosophy, religions, solidarity, everything that could slow down or paralyze the progress towards the enrichment of a group of men. And at this level the elites and the successive Malagasy political leaders have been the best students in France! We have been living the result since "independence"
Wherever colonization erupted, indigenous culture faltered, deliberately erased (the suppression of Fandroana is one example). And among its ruins is born not another culture, but a kind of subculture condemned to remain marginal compared to the European culture and in which lives a small group of "elite" men placed in artificial conditions and condemned also to imitate everything the Europeans do. This is what we are all doing now. Plagiarism of speech, Constitution, way of life, socio-economic system ...
In Madagascar, the insignificance of National Education and Culture in all past governments clearly shows the bankruptcy of the system as the title of the article by the president of Mamelomaso says so well. Education is left to the private sector and Culture has always been an under-secretary of state. The great statesmen had great ministers of culture because they had great ambitions for their country. De Gaulle with André Malraux, Mitterrand with Jack Lang.
If we want to regain our freedom and only have a law for our needs, we must put CULTURE and EDUCATION back as a priority and not reduce the Malagasy to its sole economic dimension. Economic development and cultural rebranding requires a psychological condition, the self-confidence of a people and historical audacity. We must do everything to ensure that these factors come together to get out of our molasses! "

* http://www.madagascar-tribune.com/Chron ... 19747.html

[Ahmed]

It is indeed a very lucid text, even if it does not go to the end of its approach.
The most important sentence is this: "we must not reduce the Malagasy to its economic dimension".

Wishful thinking if ever there was one! Especially since he then speaks of economic development: greet the artist ...