Peak Oil is only a Symptom

A Peak-oil relation

Have you ever stood on the sidewalk when the light is red? When it is telling you to stop and wait, for your benefit- surviving the industrial and dangerous world. Wait! For the oil thirsty machines to pass before you do. What if the traffic stopped and there was a traffic jam but the red light was still on? You know to listen to authority (as much as you wear the anarchical mask) and to follow routine. What if remaining on this side of the side walk was no longer a benefit to your survival? When such a situation occurs for a moment it is not complicit with the rest of the oppressive hegemonic system, in which you are convinced that its existence is there for your benefit. This is a glitch in the computer if you will, that most notice but don’t bother to identify. When you know that something is off but you are not sure what all of the sudden doesn’t make sense, what is confusing you?

Thus you still wait for the light to turn an unnatural and burning green. It will signify that it is the right and safe time for you to go on walking; you may go on with the routine it has set for you.

Until, some one else walks up to where you are waiting for the light to turn green. Sounds silly doesn’t it? However this person does not come to a halt, rather they walk on a head CROSSING the street; in fact it is the only thing that seems logical to do. Now you follow. Naturally. There is an almost instantaneous referencing that goes on in which you see some one do something that you think you ought to be doing yourself. So you think to yourself with out realizing “If he survived than so will I” (which was obvious even before but you just needed someone to go first). Hence, you saw and interpreted what a fellow citizen did, you referenced, through simple and understandably used logic- his experience will most likely be my experience.

This last step described in the scenario above, in which once some one has taken the first step and others follow. In terms of peak oil if this step was a true revolutionary step towards a happier and sustainable life then re focusing the human tendency of referencing would be the right and not the underhanded action to take. I long for a future condition of a small community, village sort of life but I don’t like to think that I have no power over it. This is why I will not say that I am hopeful; I will take action and most likely very soon.


In relation to peak oil as a symptom of a much greater problem with our culture and fundamentally civilization…

The Symptoms:

1. Peak-oil
2. Global warming
3. Industrial growth
4. Overpopulation of people
5. Smash and grab mentality
6. Wars and Nuclear weapons: violence
7. Global dimming due to pollution(one morning the sun might actually not come out)
8. Disease: cancer is a modern disease/ Disorders: depression is a modern disorder
9. Inflation
10. Water shortages
11. Massive (species) extinction
12. Military’s existence

Possibly The Problem:

People have a sense of divine entitlement. Many people think that the earth exists for humans, this is often the view taken by members of the central religions of the world. As for the evolutionists and atheists this divine right is not though to be given to humans by the hand of god, but by the fact that we have managed to dominate all other living beings (survival of the fittest). There are a few core reasons as to how or why the human species have come to this feeling of entitlement; however I am not expert in the area. I have to spend more time thinking about it.

Ying Min,
Interesting post, it is helpful when people closely relate and further expand what we discuss in class. I was most interested on this idea about how adaptability and survival rate in the post peak world you think will most likely be directly related to generation. “I would think the older generation would be more patient with heat, more fused with nature (flexible with the resources at hand and smart in utilizing them, as in the leave-toilet paper example), more frugal because of the hard times they have been through.” I like that you were honest when you said “As for me, even though I am made more aware of the Peak Oil situation and recently oil prices, I still prefer riding in a car over taking the subway. No other reason than comfort and convenience over energy efficient transportation.” Since this is true for most people and more importantly most people in our class. The train is not as drastic as it gets either; did you notice the disturbing military machinery made for high class occasions hummer/ SUV limos on prom night? Why do you think that with all of the new insights gained in and outside of social science class, we still aren’t making drastic changed in the way we live? I think it has a lot to do with the larger problem of our mentality(as I know you discuss in this blog post), I mean to say the idea of referencing or being put down by the uninformed as far as peak-oil and civilizations core anti- life nature(no pun intended). For example I have wanted to go out and buy eight gallons of water (two per person in my house hold) ever since we have started to think about immediate personal preparation responses to our predictions in class. However since I only know a few people who have taken this measure I feel insane actually going through with it. In addition when I mentioned it to my family they thought I was just too paranoid and obsessed with peak-oil and its implications.
“Skills we might have, but whether they are pragmatic for survival largely depends on our location…Our ability to be flexible really depends on how flexible our environment allows us to be.” This is also a good point basically the urban poor will be the worst off in a post peak world; the poor farmers and villagers have their land to grow food- in a post peak situation it would be even more nonsensical to determine wealth by material possessions.


Ying Min,
I enjoyed this style of writing, which consists of asking many questions and not answering all of them. Just by the way that you ask the question and its contents with in a specific context is enough to clearly imply which ever point you would like to make. This writing style is actually more academically honest than most other arrogant styles are. It is reasonable and expected that most people don’t know most things. Even when you have spent a lot of time, were very interested and put in a lot of brain power in an attempt to reach a valuable insight- often time you can only infer but never say definitively. This is a worthwhile thought, that there might not be an absolute answer. I agree in a social context with your statement which tries to explain why some rocks are worth more in value than others. “The value of things is determined by the market, which is determined by the people, who unconsciously build a consensus on the price label on products through trade.”
“…how did the base, the very primary producer, determine the cost of its product, which very likely is taken from the Earth for free[?]” This is an interesting thought, if you spend sometime thinking about it. We read a lot of words and when they don’t strike us as deep or insightful the first time we mindlessly read them, the thought is dismissed. However, I took sometime to try and understand your confusion with “Value” and why is it such a complex idea. This made your words much more thought advocate and meaningful, to me at least.
- Nina Jankovic

People’s reactions when discussing post peak life are groundlessly optimistic…

Why we are so surprised? What do we expect from the people of this culture? Or the culture of these people? It is the people of the culture; we don’t decide our first way of life nor mindset.

Derrick Jensen’s Endgame Presentation

The following is a list of what I think are the most important and engaging Premises of End Game:
Premise One: “Civilization is not and can never be sustainable. This is especially true for industrialized civilization.”
Premise Two: Our way of living is based on the quick and violent downfall of civilization. This is because civilization depends on resources to be traded- transported, imported and exported. This violence is often times exported and this is why we don’t see it- currency trade and exploitation of all sorts. “…those who want the resources will do what they can to destroy traditional communities.” This is because braking up the culture and close ties would make it easier for these communities to surrender or be forced to surrender their resources. “They also do not willingly allow their land bases to be damaged so that other resources- gold, oil, and so on- can be extracted.”
Premise Four: “Civilization is based on a clearly defined and widely accepted yet often unarticulated hierarchy.” It is important to see how this hierarchy the hierarchy works in terms of what sort of violence is acceptable and unnoticeable and what is unacceptable through violent out lashes and is publicized. People are very aware of what sort of violence is acceptable, very loosely and sarcastically using the term since how can violence be acceptable or satisfactory? We are aware because in the past we have either personally been put back in to line (for example being arrested) or we have seen the consequences others have faced in the process of correction. Violence only flows down the hierarchy any culture/ civilization in which a hierarchy exists.
Premise Five: “It is acceptable for those above to increase the amount of property they control…by destroying or taking the lives of those below.”
Premise Six: “Civilization is not redeemable. This culture will not undergo any sort of voluntary transformation to a sane and sustainable way of living.” This is an especially important point in terms of figuring out the most likely scenario for the post- peak world and responses- both individual and collective. This point implies that violence must be met and destroyed with violence. If change for the better is not voluntary, than this means that it must be done forcefully and the association is with a lot of violence.
Premise Nineteen: “The culture’s problem lies above all in the belief that controlling and abusing the natural world is justifiable.” This point is related to the discussion about our mindsets and our perceptions as a part of civilization and “Wetiko”. It also is a good précis for Daniel Quinn’s Ishmael in which he clearly defines how man sees the world, what Mother culture tells man his purpose is.

Personal Preparation For a Different Life and More Thoughtful/Thought Provoking Mind

Change is achieved through physical action which must be hard-pressed by mental will. Therefore in order to make my mindset more adaptable there are certain actions I must do to achieve this deep mental change.
1. Meditate regularly
2. Go dumpster diving
3. Go camping and use leaves for toilet paper
4. Fast- or eat less in healthier increments(segments, schedule)
5. Reuse everything that has the possibility- for example don' t buy bottled water but a bottle for water
6. Bathe using half of the water I currently use
7. Become physically stronger by walking and running greater distances than I am currently used to
8. Spend a week living with some one I am closed to and another week with someone I am not close to but enjoy- since this will be a greater difference in mindset and familiarity
9. Replace a cooked or fried or baked meal with raw foods every day
10. Stop using paper towels, napkins, non- reusable pads, plastic bags etc. when possible and use cloth since it is reusable.

Manipulation: A beneficial skill to all parties involved or an egocentric maneuver?

“Deal With Reality or Reality Will Deal With You”

It is difficult to have a conversation when the rationale is based on predictions. After taking this course I have an important new skill, which is to use the social sciences to predict post peak life. I am secure (or maybe insecure) in the sense that I am passionate and arrogant about what I see as the most likely scenario. This is not a good state of mind to be in, especially when trying to argue the unconventional and unwanted scenario. My actions can qualify as insane, because for weeks I kept on using the same aggressive method of conversing about peak oil, more specifically the post peak world. From the very beginning my parents agreed with and accepted that oil is a finite resource which is bound to have some sort of peak, which can be represented in a sort of bell shaped curve. Most people don’t believe that oil is a renewable resource made by microorganisms. They also accepted that modern civilization is based on and therefore highly dependent on oil. What the curve will look like is where the first disagreement came up. They say that they are unsure of what the slope after peak will look like and when peak will happen, but it seems to me that they argued for arguments sake that the peak will happen in half a century or so, and that the decline would be much milder than what I obviously envision, due to alternative fuels. My parents are fairly good listeners but they don’t make it known, or obvious. They don’t acknowledge that they understood what I said(even though indirectly I can see that they actually were listening to me) and sometimes they repeat themselves- probably because I don’t acknowledge that I heard and understood what they said, when in the heat of an argument. I have already established ground when it comes to my parents and peak oil; this is why the three step plan did not work the same way it would for someone with whom I have not spoken about the post peak world yet. All of the essential information about peak oil has already been brought to the table.

Three Step Concepts about Peak- Oil- a simple plan of attack
1. Our way of life is dependant on oil.
2. Oil is a finite resource and will peak, globally.
3. When this happens we will not be able to live the way that we currently do. (Alternatives, cannot replace our present or future energy consumption.)
For the past few weeks I have been doing a mixture of the Brimstone: scare tactic of “when oil peaks, we are all going to die” and Hammer strategies. I did not get the desired effect; I think it is clear why.
First I took a break from the discussions about peak oil and a few days later I started to bring it up again, but using drastically different strategies. I mostly changed the form and the contents stayed almost the same. I became calmer, and open to finding out why they think the way they do. I started to use a combination of talking about the Daily Details: such as gas prices, inflation and the Bandwagon strategy: referencing the New York Times articles or the Hirsch report. I think that the main reason these methods were more effective than those I previously used is that my parents didn’t feel attacked and didn’t think that I was cynical and negative. Also, I tried to distance myself and my parents from belonging to civilization. I used the method of “we” and “they” or “us” against “them”, to rekindle a feeling of solidarity.

Note good casual and humorous line from Life after the Oil Crash:

“In short, people gobble oil like two-legged SUVs.”

Life- Boat Building

What does it take to convince people that they need life boats? It is hard to think ahead and imagine a time when you won’t be able to get in to your car and go buy food when ever you please. This doesn’t mean that people are happy with their lives as they are right now, but they have such an abundance of the essentials for survival that it drowns thoughts of change. In addition everyone is always referencing. This is a comparison either between you and those currently around you, or you in the world now and in the past. When we leave our house and quickly scan those around us, realize our environment and act accordingly nobody is running home from the grocery store anxious about making sure that he has stocked up the house with enough gallons of water and canned foods. And so we all take a look around and say to our selves “relax, maybe it will all be taken care of, after all we have come this far and we can do anything”.
Even if information about peak oil and its implications was widely available and known it is still hard to create change. It is hard to have the will to change your whole way of life and plans for the future if there is no direct or significant impact on your life in the present.
It takes either, media and general discourse of fear establishment in a culture where it will be the accepted attitude of “we are all going to die, if…” or it takes a noteworthy disturbance of your daily routine.

Where are the instructions? A good preamble to a “how to live sustain-ably” manual would be Daniel Quinn’s Ishmael, because in order to change the way we live we must change the way we think about the world and our existence- Ishmael goes even further back(because we need it) and teaches us what it actually is that we are thinking. Mother culture (the embodiment of civilization’s whispers) tells us that the world was created for man; the world was not created for the jellyfish. Because the world was created for man (since he is the last so far in the evolutionary line up) man must conquer it- it is man’s purpose to conquer the world. When man conquers the world he occupies every part of it and takes as he goes what he needs and pleases. Man never accommodates any other living being unless he is forced to. Man does something that no other known species has done- he utilizes and exploits what he needs until it is completely gone, for example animals which are extinct. In short because man never gives back to the Earth he cannot live in harmony with it.

How can we coexist with other beings? I don’t know yet, Mother Culture often shrieks in my ears, infatuates my eyes, clouds, enslaves my mind and stifles my spine.


Skills needed to survive in the Northeast without civilization (or at least as we know it) in a post peak world

1. Fire building without fire starting liquid and if possible without sparkers.
2. Successful vegetation gardening specifically permaculture, because unlike our current large scale farming permaculture is sustainable. i.e. tomatoes, potatoes, carrots
3. Heating water using the sun’s solar energy.
4. Making a bed out of dried leaves, sticks and grass in order to keep warm enough to survive. (If we are not organized enough but still manage to make it out of the city I imagine us living in the forest and not in urban areas.)
5. Before the human race made the worst mistake in history, hunting and gathering food was essential. Since gathering made up more than 85% of their diets it seems that it would be important to know how to gather food. In terms of what foods have lots of nutrients and calories for energy, also what should be avoided due to poisonous effects.
6. Even though there are many lakes in the Northeast with drinkable fresh water. It will be important to know how to access underground water and be able to tell if it drinkable.
7. Learn how to effectively communicate with others. Social skills must be developed to nurture a healthy and efficient community dynamic.
8. Learn how to heal without technology; be knowledgeable about natural medicines. Also learn what different sorts of infections and diseases [which can be seen] look like.
9. We should develop our muscles because we will be doing a lot more physical labor in order to survive. In addition we should start to eat less; since we eat so much more than we need to live our stomachs have been stretched and are bigger than our bodies need. This is why we should allow them to come back to their natural state, and it will be easier to fill them, requiring less food (assuming we won’t have a lot of food to eat in the post peak world).

Comments...

Katrina,
It seems like you have a good idea about what sustainable living means and what we need to do (or can choose to do) to achieve it. It is interesting how choosing where you want to live has many (sometimes contradicting) egocentric aspects. For example when you analyze which self would rather be in a remote village there is disagreement, “Trying to individually gather up amazing people to come live in a distant village land to live together, would be physically beautiful, and emotionally satisfying, but it will not be intellectually or creatively stimulating.” It seems to me that this is a more holistic way of thinking about life, and not seeing peak as only chaotic, forcing you to divide the different selves and assuming they are not interdependent of each other. Thinking about times of collapse and emergency I have always thought of only the most vital parts to survival/life, but you bring up or imply the point that if we are prepared for change and make it on time than we can also think about the most favorable scenario in terms of what is the most intellectually satisfying and metaphysically agreeable/ pleasant.
It really seems like you have thought a lot about what response you are going to take. I’m glad that you brought up waste management in urban areas, because it is something that I also thought was very important but never got a chance to blog about. “We, as in NYC, will remain with piles of crap on our streets, due to an inability to bury crap in the land, because it is encased in concrete.” It is interesting how such a thing as bad waste management will effect us not only physically but will change our lives socially- creating even more depression that there currently is, but there wont be any Prozac. “I fear a haze of unsanitary waste everywhere, causing massive disease and fear of coming into contact with other people for health. That may prevent any form of community from existing, which would be our only hope for survival.”
Post can be read on Katrina

Ying Min,
It was very interesting to see what you had to say about the gold mining film, I think the best point you made was unintentional. “If the film is a portrayal of future life after oil… it is just beyond my imagination.” From the small amount of the movie that we did see, I think that this was exactly the point of putting the footage in slow motion and playing nostalgic, unfamiliar yet beautiful music as we watch the people carry out the laborious task of gold mining without any technology/machinery. I think that the effect which you mention but don’t describe in detail (“For whatever film effect, there were only images and background music, which intensifies the perception of pain from the movement of the miners.”) was intended to sort of disorient you and make you feel insecure because it is a sight that is so very unfamiliar to us. I think that the purpose of the first scene in the movies is so that you can feel like you just don’t understand “What is this? ...and…what now?” I agree that this is another more clear intention of the film “The only point I can make of it is that it shows group cooperation, and how laborious it will be to carry out group cooperation without current technology.” It is always useful when in a response to something we did in class you can extrapolate what was learned to other points and create a strong connection as you did: “But perhaps, with slow progress, oil would be drained out at a slower rate and would last us longer, and be priced higher because of the strenuous effort it takes to extract the resource, and people would in term learn to treasure it more. As they should with clean water and air, now.” Isn’t it symbolic how in the film they are mining for gold and oil is the “black gold”? Also, isn’t it ironic how this group of people is supposed to be representing a strong, deeply connected community, which we identify with a way of sustainable living, yet they are mining for gold? Gold which is something that is completely unnecessary to life and happiness- it is actually a symbol of civilization; firstly it leaks in to the core of a hierarchy, in which the more gold you have the wealthier you are, and you have gained a good status- economic value seems to be life value. Secondly you must have a developed agricultural and irrigational system in order to supply the workers with food. If you have agriculture than there must be cities in this society as well, since large scale farming produces more food than those who work the farm need- the surplus usually goes to the cities. Civilization is roughly defined by the existence of cities and the practice of agriculture or large scale farming. We are all still so alienated from others in the world, even after massive globalization, what will life be like in small, simple and isolated villages when we won’t even be able to film or watch a film like this?
Post can be read on Ying Min

Analysis of “The Long Emergency” by: James Kunstler

“America is still sleepwalking into the future”
The main intention of this article is to introduce peak oil as a fatal problem, and give some insight in to the basic psychological problems of this culture. The quote above is given towards the beginning of the article and is useful in helping identify Kunstler’s point of view and message. Even if you don’t know much about the severity of the peak oil problem, sleepwalking in to the future, which basically means the unknown, is clearly negative and should be changed.

It is a good technique to name specifically what luxuries depend on oil. This makes the issue more tangible to the reader. He names a spectrum of comforts that will be lost post peak because of their dependence on oil- from inexpensive clothing to hip-replacement surgery.

This article is centered on oil consumption in the US and mentions how oil production and consumption in the rest of the world affects Americans. Kunstler goes through some different energy sources such as natural gas and simply explains its difficulties especially due to the transportation of gas. Clearly the first argument that peak oil will not be a problem is that alternative fuels can be developed to replace it. Kunstler quickly refutes this claim (discussing hydrogen, renewables- i.e. solar energy, biomass, coal and nuclear energy) and also touches on a core mentality that makes this claim believable to most people. “…many Americans…believe that anything we wish for hard enough will come true… wishing ardently for a seamless transition from fossil fuels to their putative replacements.” This is backed by the Hirsch report in the sense that there is hope for mitigation of the problem by either increasing production or developing alternative fuels. However the major factor of limited time is not realized, or accepted by most people. People are hopeful; and through some basic logic there is no need for them not to be. Simple logic implies a reliance on patterns, “tomorrow will be like today because today is like yesterday.” People of this culture are procrastinators. This is the closes word I can think of to describe the attitude of this society, eventhough it is more complicated than laziness and eventual action. Procrastination is delaying action due to laziness, this laziness comes from the fact that the action is perceived as unimportant or that life will be unchanged without the act.

Kunstler also points out that the government is aware and has said publicly that peak-oil is a problem unlike any the world has faced before and must be dealt with at least a decade before it actually occurs. However the government has not done anything significant so far! With this Kunstler again brings up another aspect of the American psyche that keeps them from realizing how serious the problem actually is. People have faith in the system, in the corporations and faith that “we can do anything”- even though there are clear examples where we have not been invincible.

The most significant part of this article is found in the last two pages as Kunstler describes some probable and favorable responses. When Kunstler talks of Suburbia being the worst choice made by society in the twentieth century, it is not difficult to realize why. It is unmistakably unsustainable. Why is it that the land that is not covered with roads or houses cannot be used as farmland? Why is the side effect of suburbia “trashing a lot of the best farmland in America”? In the discussion of suburbia Kunstler makes another good point about the society’s outlook “The psychology of previous investment suggests that we will defend our drive-in utopia long after it has become a terrible liability.”

“Daily life will be far less about mobility…anything organized on a large scale, whether it is government or a corporate business…will wither…”
This is an important aspect in the change that must occur. Transportation is the basis of this country, almost everything we consume has been made far away from where we live. 40% of the US oil consumption goes to transportation; you can see why interstate highways are so important to the economy. The available resources will be determined largely by the surrounding environment. This is why the Southwest, which is mostly covered by the desert, will be unlivable for humans- it is meant to be unlivable for most species. Big cities such as New York will also have great problems because of the condensed population on concrete- which” paved over” and ruined the precious soil. Agriculture is also inefficient on the large scale therefore food production must be localized. Not only must production be localized but distribution and trade as well. “The selling of things will have to be reorganized at the local scale.” Essentially “close communal relations” will be the most favorable path for the ordinary person’s survival.

Five Point Plan: To free the world of unsustainable living

1. Each community must create its own local currency and destroy the current one. (Refer to previous post) This will take away a great deal of authority including legal/official authority from the government (at least the federal government). All of the land must be made public so that anyone can work in a community space to grow food, for example.
2. Every space that is needed and is usable must be utilized for the purposes of vegetation. Rip up the pavement in the cities, wouldn’t most living beings rather thrive even on what is now sand underneath most of the pavement. As for places in suburbia they will most likely have enough soil area for the needed gardens. In this case if you don’t own cattle and such farm animals rip out the grass on your lawns. Though the pavement in suburbia should also be torn apart symbolically, no one ever steps foot on it anyway. In addition production of products such as weed eliminators must be stopped. Their existence and use only cultivates (ironic, huh?) a sick and destructive culture. There is an elaborate business of gardening and lawns and to maintain the desired aesthetics (since this is its fundamental and only purpose) you spray chemicals all over your lawn and pathways. This is fitting to the rest of your suburban life style since your children play in the house.
3. All highways, especially interstate highways, must be converted into bike paths. Only transportation of vital goods may be made if they are needed but unavailable locally. Such as medicine. This demand must be made clear, since water is vital to life; but if you are living in the desert, which is clearly an area in which nature did not intend man to live sustain ably, then you must move to a place with fertile soil and fresh water. Water will NOT be transported from Colorado so that people in Los Angeles can survive.
4. Through civil discourse sparked by a changed entertainment system and religious system the fundamental/ mainstream culture will change. All corporate institutions must be dismantled; the economic profit motive must be diminished. This will limit the amount of unfairness that is bound to occur, due to many forms of discrimination; also there will be less conflicts of interest. The survival of the fittest mentality will only benefit as small group of people, the upper class. Therefore the best way (as seen in the Cuba example) for the masses to survive peak oil is to work together. People must share and work together, and this must become tradition. With such a slogan as “Gardeners of the World Unite!”- Running the risk of negative connotations to most. [Note: I am aware that this will probably be the most difficult point to accomplish, but I am hopeful that the next two generations-including the young and still impressionable of today- will survive and therefore have a chance to be taught a better (sustainable and happier) way of life.]
5. Take advantage of solar and hydrogen based energy sources. Even though the need for fuels will drastically decrease there will still be some exceptions. For example in places with cold winters you will have to stay warm in order to survive and water will still need to be heated so that it can be used to maintain good hygiene. Also fuel will be needed to power hospitals and pharmaceutical/ research centers. It is true that we must change civilization because it is unsustainable, but it seems a shame to forget all of the advances science and technology has made.
The most likely plan to succeed will probably be one that involves a combination of mitigating the effects of peak-oil and not only renovating but also drastically changing society to adapt to a life with out fossil fuels. Solving our core problem will take a combination in which there will be more change than mitigation. Since the most common use of this word in terms of peak oil implies relieving the problem by replacing oil with alternative fuels so that there would not be a drastic change in the West’s and other industrialized countries life style.

The Black Panther Party's Ten Point Plan

This serves as a good example for the kind of clear cut, demanding and strong plan that must exist when attempting to create change in society. In a post peak world the anti-civilization, pro-sustainable living and permaculture party says “WE WANT EACH COMMUNITY TO CREATE THEIR LOCAL CURRENCY”: get organized and create a small system of governing which will be a service to everyone, but will not have any real authority. It will be up to the people to agree upon a certain way of living (for example with out crime), eliminating the need for the authoritative police. With a strong community in place, they must enlighten the federal government with its insignificance to the masses. This will be done by the collective burning of all of the federal money; since this will secure its worthlessness.

Governmental Responses to Peak Oil & The Meaning of Currency

Most people rely on their government for help, especially during times of crisis, if this weren’t true would there be a government(rule with authority)? Looking at the most desirable and more importantly most likely actions that will be taken by the government in response to peak oil is essential in predicting post-peak life. The most obvious connection between the people and any government is currency. Therefore this is the first place that we will notice a difference in our lives once oil has peaked. Inflation will start, actually it probably already has but it will get much worst; there will be a dramatic inflation or possibly deflation while this green means anything. At some point a different kind of green will be much more valuable than the faith based currency. Green plants, raw foods which are high in calories such as nuts and avocados will be the most valuable, because if you do not need to heat your food then you don’t need to use any energy to be able to consume it, also raw food contains much more water and other liquids which are essential to survival, than heated food.
Money is a symbolic representation of a barter system or of value as indirectly and collectively decided on. The government prints the money it is able to manipulate the currency some what. So, what if it looses its value(as directly decided on by the people)? Will there be a new local currency that the people of each community decide to have faith in? Or will communities be small enough that a barter system will come in to place spontaneously (even though it will be more complicated)?
Emergency relief camps will be set up by the government. These will basically look like concentration camps in which people will be living in conditions just good enough for survival. They will also be doing a lot of manual work for the state and will not be paid in currency, but in food and water. This is where the urban poor will be because the government will have to provide them with the essentials for life. Given that it seems unlikely that they will organize in to sustainable communities (such as those in Havana) they will be put in to such camps. Along with the camps the government will maintain control through rationing. If food continues to be mass produced and transported in to cities and then rationed this is still unsustainable even though the amount of food consumed will be limited. This way the people will not know how to support themselves, they will just become even more dependent on the government. How will the federal government resolve wars for resources between local communities, if they are created and managed?
It is very hard for me to come up ideas about with what is desirable for the federal government to do. Because I think that this situation is an opportunity for the people to break free of the federal government and create very local governing systems in which the workers(everyone) will do everything they can to better their local community. Hopefully when a strong community is created the self and collective interests will be in a much better balance than they are now. With out a larger web of agricultural mass production as a form of short term sustainability all of the rest of the components of our physical and mental surroundings must be torn down and changed as well. In the city we must rip up the concrete using abandoned construction mega tools, which are in abundant supply. Can cities really be torn down and dismantled, or is civilizations damage irreversible? Is the ground of NYC useable dirt or anti-life sand?

What grass roots and/or governmental responses to peak oil are possible in the U.S & New York?
(For the sake of flow, in this language I use man but I mean man kind or human)

From the Cuba film we learned how an industrialized culture could collectively transition to a sustainable life style that works with their environment. This seemed to be a relatively painless transition in Cuba, therefore the logical question is: what is it about the Cuban culture and more specifically their world view that allowed for this? An obvious factor is in the values taught by the general politics of the society. When comparing Cuba and the US we must consider how a Communist regime versus a Capitalistic regime influences the people’s character. In Capitalism the two main goals are personal gain and consumption and the idea is that this should be achieved in a competitive nature. This is ironic because the Cuba example tells us that survival is possible through solidarity and flow with our environment, the nature of survival here is not a competitive one. You can only push upstream for so long in a river running downstream. From our upbringing, since the time of small and impressionable heads and heart, we are taught life perspectives such as “survival of the fittest” and “through hard work all is attained”. This pins us against the world, a commonly accepted thought in Western culture; if we think that life is tough and we must constantly fight to survive how can we be expected to unify in times of collapse? With out a community based culture, which teaches people the existence of other living beings other than themselves, there is no solidarity. It is false to think that we observe the world, this is what leads to the unsustainable mindset. The fact is that we are a part (no apart from) of the world. There are origin myths that are taught by every culture and in this culture (an idea belonging to civilization it self) world was created for man and man must conquer this world. (Ishmael) This is true in Capitalist and in Communist societies; however in Communism there is no competitive drive. With the absence of competition between men, man is taught to help his neighbor and work to better society (in transitional "communism", really the State) and not himself.
I have no hope for the successful survival of the West (therefore possibly the world). Because I think that changing deep rooted values about men kind’s purpose, the world’s creation and how we should live, takes at least two generations and time is not a luxury that the civilization can afford no matter how many folds profits increase per barrel of oil. Life can not be exchanged for green, red or blue pieces of paper it can only be taught; civilization (as marked by cities) will always be anti-life.
The Cuba film has taught us that mass production of essentials such as food is neither efficient nor sustainable once oil has peaked. Since this is what almost the entire US population depends on to get really anything including food and water, how will we survive?
Humans in the civilization are like a bird in a cage, a bird who has forgotten how to fly. In cities we are caged from nature- we don’t know how to make our own food and find clean water. A bird quickly learns to eat food and drink water out of a plastic container, the same way we quickly adapted to the convenience of store bought everything – we created money and learned how to use it, we put all of the meaning of life and values of all life on Earth in to a piece of inked paper, stained from the blood of the Earth.
Let’s take a look at a domesticated dog’s survival methods, which are much like our own. A dog begs and hopes that sympathy with gain him what he needs and wants. Otherwise, if the first method fails, a dog simply takes, until he is satisfied- but each time he is satisfied it takes more and more to satisfy him. This is the same with obesity- each time you eat more than you need your stomach stretches, the larger it gets the more it take to fill it up and satisfy its needs, eventually it will stretch no more and you die. The Earth has usually given us what we ask of it, and when it doesn’t want to give us things -such as the thousands of millions of years old cumulated energy of the world- it hides them. In this case man forcefully extracts what he needs to power civilizations and attain the short lived comfort for humans.
So, again I ask: how can a capitalistic society transition to a permaculture inclusive and sustainable way of life?
Firstly, the “free” market must be closed; in fact the growth of the economy must be stopped. We cannot learn to and start to live sustain-ably if people are still investing their wealth in order to gain more wealth. In a time of collapse money will not mean much any way. Agriculture, water bottling and such institutions as universities and hospitals must all be decentralized and relocated. Everything that anybody needs to survive must be only a bike ride away. This takes care of some of the problems for suburbia. However in the cities there must be a much more complex system of urban gardening (on roof tops).
I don’t know how crime can be regulated since I don’t think that true solidarity of small communities or villages is attainable.