In an ideal world I would love to, but in this world I prefer strict anonymity. At least for now. I hope that’s okay. There are a lot of details beyond geographic location that I also restrict.

This is a line I drew for my own well-being after multiple encounters with unstable people IRL and on social media. It’s not worth the worry for me.

With that said, I encourage others to ask questions if they want more specifics on anything. I’ll either answer or explain why I don’t want to. I would also be comfortable comparing/contrasting in more detail if other users were participating in similar conversations.

I’ve started harvesting from my garden (started from scratch ~2 years ago) and I’ve gotten some nice specimens, but yields were low. Some plants didn’t make it to harvest, some didn’t mature enough, and some didn’t fruit. My soil started with almost no nutrition and I’m doing this on a - quite frankly - very cheap budget; I haven’t done another soil test but it’s pretty clear I need to further improve the soil. I’ll run another test, grab some fertilizers and spread them out hopefully later this year.

I’m looking to adapt the soil to the plants but also the plants to the soil to some extent, so I’ve been keeping an eye out on what grows without much soil improvement. There’s definitely a few. More did well with the vegetative stage than the flowering stage (due presumably to a lack of phosphorous).

The things I’m growing in pots are generally doing pretty well, but they require a lot of watering (the whole garden does - without a reservoir system, if running water goes out people’s gardens will soon follow).

I tend to give things a little more shade these days than I would have when I was younger. Maybe I’m being counter-productive but it seems like I see more sunburn and drying out here/now. At some point I should take measurements but I don’t have time right now.

The weather was harsh at times for the spring/summer seasons. I have above average windbreaks and eliminated standing water so I didn’t lose too many plants.

I’ve had a lot of opportunist “weeds” crop up in areas of disturbed soil. They do very well at all stages haha. I let some grow for awhile to let them improve the soil in various ways, and then pulled anything non-native.

I’ve had lots of baby trees popping up, too. I keep mowing to a minimum. I let some stay, move others, and generally avoid getting rid of them as much as I can. But there’s a lot. I might have to start a business selling them lol. Anyway, there are reasons that people turn to famine foods in famine - because they’re the only thing that grows. A pretty simple concept, but probably not something we usually think about while mowing.

I’m not looking forward to moving pots in/out with the seasons changing. I also have propagations to tend to, and need to prepare more.

Not a bad season overall. I have some seed lineages I’m excited to continue. Modern conveniences make all of this possible, at least without other infrastructure prepped. Certain weather instabilities have definitely been a hassle although nothing was too extreme so far this year. Let’s see long how that lasts.

Now if only we valued nature itself, or our continued ability to appreciate either.

Culture is not a static system. Elements may be destined to be counter-rational for now, but a better of awareness could also destine us for a more fair and effective system in the future. Just because something hasn’t happened yet doesn’t mean that determinism dictates it never will.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

If you want to start growing plants inside and plan to move them outside, do yourself a favor and invest in a proper light timer. I’ve been surprised by how many supposedly non-photoperiod plants can really struggle with a sudden day period mismatch.

Also be mindful of getting plants too warm and then moving them to a cooler outdoor environment, as that really messes up their seasonality. (That’s probably common sense but I thought I might as well point it out.)

deleted by creator

Not everything is the worst. Just the important things.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

That’s not what the paper says is the problem.

Right.

As the argument of population control is one I think not at all worth having for many of reasons, such as, you just can’t do much about it!

I’ve often argued a similar line. This topic is notorious for bringing out bad-faith posters trying to shape the narrative. Sometimes it seems hardly worth discussing to me as well. Especially among redditors which is what I was used to for many years. But to not be able to discuss it at all is too much for me as a mod, especially when those who would take advantage of us discuss it freely.

And it will become reality easy enough if it becomes mandatory and that’s sad enough.

My concern is that there are still different ways that this can all go down, and that we aren’t charting towards handling the crisis in a wise and humane manner. We’re basically blindly following capitalists into the void. And acting “naively” (following systemic biases) is not moral or ethical in our position. People are already dying of exposure today, in our local communities and around the world. It is the most disadvantaged that suffers most and it will continue to be that way unless something is changed.

But I guess if we find ourselves truly not welcome here anymore than it seems we would just have to move with you guys.

Whatever works best for everyone involved.

Okay then, what do you propose we do if you believe we’ve overshot our carrying capacity?

You mean what to do to improve the average quality of life?

Anti-colonial, anti-hegemonic action. Which I am always happy to discuss. It will just have to occur in a different space.

We need to start distributing resources more effectively, not culling people.

This is exactly what I argue and the removed study supports it as well imo.

Let me ask you this: if you believe the earth has exceeded its carrying capacity, wouldn’t your conclusion be to start getting rid of people or halting their reproduction? That’s textbook eugenics…

No. First you look at where the strains are. You see that people with exceptional privilege in developed countries create extremely disproportionate strain, and that the capitalists support the increased reproduction of that group - even without their consent - to keep their ponzi scheme running. You would then seek to divert resources from the over-privileged group to reduce their disproportionate strain, and a proven way to reduce resource demands among them is to prioritize family planning measures and bodily autonomy in the hegemonic states. This reproductive care and agency is, of course, only one piece of the puzzle that is deconstructing colonialism and emissions inequity.

The removed study gives a nod to this by acknowledging that otherwise viable solutions are not politically viable. The consequences of the politically viable (Business-As-Usual) solutions is at least as much of a humanitarian nightmare. And yet, the limits exist. What does this indicate? That politically nonviable solutions (such as degrowth in developed nations, and/or revolution and a new economic framework) need to be re-examined. That we’re between a rock and a hard place, and that the default trajectory does lead to ecofascist solutions.

Requesting a reduction of resource demands even if it means the lowered reproduction of the most privileged socioeconomic classes is no more eugenics than creating an inhospitable planet and accepting the consequential deaths of the billions of people who are not able to support themselves under such conditions. Plenty of studies demonstrate that humans are able to naturally adapt their reproductive rates based on their environments, and other studies show that this is happening right now in over-developed states where people manage to retain reproductive agency. What is disastrous for us as a collective whole is how capital circumvents our natural tendencies in order to augment industrial productivity and the retention of the control of power structures within a select ethnonationalist ingroup.

A different but related issue at present is that reproductive rates are driven through the roof by capitalists looking to exploit weakly organized labor, which drives unnaturally high birth rates in some developing nations exploited by foreign corporations. However, the reality is that the inflated populations in developing countries are still less destructive than the declining (not including immigration) populations of the developed nations. Which then brings us back again to more agency and more equitable distribution of resources, and the natural balance of reproductive adaptations that follow reversing colonialism.

I would agree. With Capitalist Realism as well. I’ve argued both many times.