I vote for nature to take care of city dwellers who buy their food instead of gather and grow it themselves like we do. Those who pave over nature for a new strip mall or condos. They’re a huge strain on the earth with their plastic shit and need for new all the time. Not to mention the masses of viable farmland that are consumed for building.
Yet we are the ones who are hated on and reviled. People are fucked.
Oh, you think all the millions of people in cities would be able to do what you think they should do? Millions of people just disperse through the wilds and hunt and forage and grow a little plot of food?
It was a question, seeking clarification, as you seem to think, based on what you wrote, that “city dwellers” should just up and die because they don’t do what you do? So, I was wondering how you think that would work exactly.
It was a very leading set of questions. But I digress.
I believe cities shouldn’t exist because they are killing our planet, yet they do. What should we do to eliminate them? We can not. Unfortunately.
Should city dwellers wish for the deaths of those who live differently than them even if they live an environmentally concious lifestyle because said city dwellers simply do not understannd this lifestyle? (This is seen in the comment above). No. Can we eliminate it. Apparently not.
Were the cities from thousands of years ago killing our planet? Just trying to get at the crux of your viewpoint, which seems to be that there should be about 90% fewer people on the planet, and the entire population should be hunter/gatherer/small farmers. Not saying that is wrong, per se, if the goal is maximum harmony and minimal impact for planet, but that ship has kinda sailed.
And no, city dwellers should absolutely not being wishing for the death of others that live a different life either, both things can be wrong.
I’d be on that list.
Same. Most hunters abhor trophy sport
Another one here. I’ve never gone out in the field unless I plan on cooking what I bring back. If I fight nature and nature wins…so it is.
Good luck nature!
I vote for nature to take care of city dwellers who buy their food instead of gather and grow it themselves like we do. Those who pave over nature for a new strip mall or condos. They’re a huge strain on the earth with their plastic shit and need for new all the time. Not to mention the masses of viable farmland that are consumed for building.
Yet we are the ones who are hated on and reviled. People are fucked.
Oh, you think all the millions of people in cities would be able to do what you think they should do? Millions of people just disperse through the wilds and hunt and forage and grow a little plot of food?
No I don’t think that but thanks for speaking for me.
It was a question, seeking clarification, as you seem to think, based on what you wrote, that “city dwellers” should just up and die because they don’t do what you do? So, I was wondering how you think that would work exactly.
It was a very leading set of questions. But I digress.
I believe cities shouldn’t exist because they are killing our planet, yet they do. What should we do to eliminate them? We can not. Unfortunately.
Should city dwellers wish for the deaths of those who live differently than them even if they live an environmentally concious lifestyle because said city dwellers simply do not understannd this lifestyle? (This is seen in the comment above). No. Can we eliminate it. Apparently not.
Were the cities from thousands of years ago killing our planet? Just trying to get at the crux of your viewpoint, which seems to be that there should be about 90% fewer people on the planet, and the entire population should be hunter/gatherer/small farmers. Not saying that is wrong, per se, if the goal is maximum harmony and minimal impact for planet, but that ship has kinda sailed.
And no, city dwellers should absolutely not being wishing for the death of others that live a different life either, both things can be wrong.