Trecerea de la viata de vanator-culegator la cea urbana s-a facut treptat. Intr-adevar si unele triburi de indieni din America de nord practicau agricultura sau aveau asezari permanente sau semipermanente. Erau si triburi nomade si seminomade atat in nord cat si in sud. Dar e greu sa tragi o linie de demarcatie si sa spui, astia sunt in mod cert vanatori-culegatori, iar astialaltii sunt civilizati.
E drept ca conquistadorii, colonizatorii sau misionarii, ii numeau pe toti amerindienii salbatici. Dar mare parte din ei erau civilizati. E drept ca ei au avansat mai incet decat europenii sau au apucat un alt drum al emanciparii. Dar erau civilizati, constriau orase, aveau cultura, stratificare sociala, etc.
In prezent mai gasesti vanatori culegatori in jungla amazoniana sau in zonele desertice sau semidesertice din Africa si in alte cateva locuri izolate de pe glob. Ceea ce este de admirat la acesti oameni este ca isi pastreaza stilul de viata in ciuda presiunilor externe care le restrange habitatul si le face viata din ce in ce mai dificila. Dar la un moment dat discutam cu cineva, in cazul unui cataclism mondial, ghici cine va avea mai mari sanse de supravietuire? Ei, "bosimanii"! Sunt cei mai adaptabili. Nu cunosc ei prea multe, dar stiu sa scoata apa din piatra seaca si sa gaseasca hrana acolo unde noi am muri de foame. Ei nu au ce pierde. Noi putem pierde totul. Daca ne iei infrastructura devenim neajutorati. Distruge drumurile, taie apa, lumina, incalzirea, inchide porturile si aeroporturile si supermarketurile... ce parere aveti? vom mai supravietui? In cazul unui cataclism cam asta se va intampla. S-ar prabusi infrastructura.
Am vazut la un moment dat un film despre dezastre naturale, un fel de top. Iar unul dintre dezastre era un scenariu interesant. O furtuna electromagnetica solara care ar afecta profund infrastructura moderna si ne-ar retrimite in epoca de piatra.
Eu zic sa nu ii dispretuim ci sa invatam de la ei. Ei traiesc mult mai sanatos decat noi. Nu contest faptul ca progresul tehnologic ne ofera confort si ne simtim mult mai bine asa, dar merita ca din cand in cand sa ne punem in pielea lor si sa intelegem ca ei prefera un alt mod de viata si ca nu e chiar asa de rau sa traiesti in acel fel.

Germania/Japonia anului 1945 . Infrastructura complet prabusita , drumuri distruse, orase bombardate , apa, lumina, incalzirea nu functionau.

Au supravietuit pentru ca stiau cum sa se descurce, aveau cunostiintele pentru a reface totul. Stiau ce trebuie facut ca sa refaca civilizatia.

Omul cand ajunge in situatii extreme isi regaseste o multime de instincte de pe vremea copacului si le aplica. Din pacate , vanatorii-culegatori nu sunt capabili sa se duca mai departe de aceste instincte.

Vrei sa spui ca nu suporta sclavia. E de neconceput pentru unul din ei sa ii spuna altul unde sa fie in fiecare zi 8 ore, ce sa faca, cand sa se scoale, etc. Aia sunt oameni liberi si relatiile intre ei sunt relatii inte oameni asa cum trebuie sa fie, nu ca intre lacuste. Fiecare pentru el, impotriva tuturor, cautand fericirea pierduta in lucruri materiale si de fapt nu stie ce-i lipseste. Tribul, comunitatea, oamenii din jur, aia lipseste.
Aceasi libertate o cautam noi prin "imbogatire". Adica dupa ce ai fost sclav toata viata, cand ai 60 de ani zici ca esti "liber", "la pensie".

Triburile din Amazon:


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-46...e-Tanzania.html


http://www.berwick-advertiser.co.uk/leisur...ives.3234370.jp


Acest topic a fost editat de jet li: 23 Apr 2009, 01:48 PM

Jet , tulburator, dar nu ti se pare ca daca inlocuiesti cuvantul triburi cu satra si tribesmen cu tigani, iti cam da acelasi rezultat?

In Germania si Japonia inainte si imediat dupa razboi au murit foarte multi oameni. Multi dintre ei civili, multi dintre ei din cauza nefunctionarii sau functionarii defectuoase a infrastructurii.
Totusi, nu se poate vorbi de o "infrastructura complet prabusita", ca sa duci un razboi iti trebuie infrastructura. Daca nu ai cai ferate, drumuri, fabrici, energie, etc, nu poti sa porti un razboi. Asa ca fie aparatorii, fie invadatorii, se grabeau sa refaca infrastructura partial deteriorata.
Germania si Japonia invadate au fost refacute cu ajutorul invadatorilor, iar invadatorii aveau infrastructura mai buna, fabricile lor erau functionale, vapoarele functionau, aveau unelte, tehnologie, aveau comunicatii, cam tot ce le trebuiau. Nu compara asta cu un cataclism care ar distruge complet infrastructura globala.

Am vizitat orase si muzee din orase din Germania. Imaginile si marturiile celor care au trait anul 1945 sunt cumplite.

Nu numai berlinul si marile orase erau devastate ci si orasele mici erau distruse in proportie de peste 50%. Foametea incepuse sa se raspandeasca , copiii erau obligati sa aduca lemne la scoala pentru a participa la lectii. Oamenii se inghesuiau claie peste gramada in casele care ramasesera in picioare.

Razboiul nu s-a mai purtat efectiv si coordonat de prin februarie cand adolfel a dat ordinul de distrugere a infrastructurii pagubele fiind imense. Caile ferate au incetat practis ca functioneze la fel alimentarea cu energie.

Pentru nemti a fost perioada "mortilor vii", ce mai ramasese din natiunea germana nu era in stare nici sa mearga la servici iar oamenii se plimbau ore in sir pe strazi fara sa faca nimic. Erau socati si a durat luni pana cand oameni aceia si-au revenit din soc.
Aliatii ( partea de vest ) erau disperati ca nu puteau sa scoata tara dintr-o grava depresie. Oamenilor nu le mai pasa de nimic. Intr-un final , de abia frigul iernii i-a mai dezmortit.

Dar si atunci oamenii au stiut sa se adune. Ziarele dadea indicatii de supravietuire ( cum sa faci focul /tai lemne/ prepari chestii exotice). Cunoasterea este mai importanta decat averea intructa poate fi replicata.

http://www.glasspages.org/symph5lyrics.html

Am si eu cateva intrebari:

1. Cam care e speranta medie de viata la un vanator-culegator din asta?
2. Cam care e rata mortalitatii infantile in aceste triburi?
3. Cam ce suport stiintific exista pentru afirmatia ca populatii de milione de oameni ar putea sa isi procure mijloacele necesare vietii muncind 2-3 ore pe zi?

Pai intrebarile tale sunt strans legate intre ele!

1. E foarte mica.
2. E foarte mare.
3. 1 si 2 => control demografic riguros, populatia nu depaseste niciodata cateva sute de membri per trib => resurse suficiente.

Mai exista si exceptii, rusii spre exemplu au luat de la germani si nu numai, cam tot ce se putea lua, ca daune de razboi, fabrici, vapoare, locomotive, minereuri, mana de lucru, etc. La noi sovromurile au lasat urme care se mai vad si azi, unde mai pui ca nici nu ne-au lasat sa profitam de planul Marshall.

1. E foarte mare, tocmai am dat exemplul cu tribul ala de alergatori, traiesc in pesteri, mananca ce apuca dar la 57 de ani alearga 100 de mile si castiga.
2. Mare. Cred ca la mortalitate infantila mor mai multi in tari din lumea a 3 a de azi. Care sunt "civilizate", organizarea tribala unde toti aveau grija de toti a disparut.
3. Da un search pe CIA world factbook si vezi cat din forta de munca lucreaza in agricultura in tari ca Franta, USA, mari exportatori de produse agricole, cum era si Romania odata. Maxim 3%. Asta din forta de munca nu din toata populatia.


Apoi uita-te in jur la cati "muncesc" pentru lucruri inutile care se vor arunca la gunoi, la cati sapa gropi ca sa aiba cine le umple si la cati muta hartii de pe un birou pe altul. Crede-ma nu forta de munca e problema. Apoi uita-te aici :

http://www.ascentofhumanity.com/chapter1-5.php


Deci astia fara sa munceasca ca niste sclavi si fara tractoare si ingrasaminte se descurcau, si hraneau si toti calugarii din manastiri. Noi insa cu toata tehnica noastra moderna suntem traumatizati de experienta iobagiei (1907) si de asta nu ne putem imagina decat "multa munca" i, "toti trebuie sa munceasca" in agricultura.

Ca sa intelegeti cum traia un trib de vanatori culegatori si cum traiesc dupa ce a ajuns civilizatia la ei - in momentul asta sunt toti intr-un sat, mor de foame si sunt bolnavi de TBC, si nu mai au voie sa fie nomazi, ordine de la "guvern" :

The story of a !Kung woman

Cum credeti ca se masoara mortalitata infantila inainte si dupa "civilizatie" ? Eu cred ca mult mai prost. Civilizatia o fi ajuns la ei, dar nu orice "civilizatie" e mai buna decat traiul de vanator culegator. Doar cea din Europa si USA sa zicem. In rest sunt 3 miliarde de oameni care traiesc cu 2.5 $ pe zi si nu o duc prea bine. 1 miliard nu au acces la apa curata. Salvati-i pe astia inainte sa civilizati ultimele triburi.

Acest topic a fost editat de jet li: 29 Apr 2009, 09:03 AM

"Boli psihice" ?

Hospitalism (or anaclitic depression in its sublethal form) was a pediatric diagnosis used in the 1930s to describe infants who wasted away while in hospital. The symptoms could include retarded physical development, and disruption of perceptual-motor skills and language.[1] It is now understood that this wasting disease was mostly caused by a lack of social contact between the infant and its caregivers. Infants in poorer hospitals were less subject to this disease since those hospitals could not afford incubators which meant that the hospital staff regularly held the infants.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hospitalism


Treaba asta e generalizata. Peste tot in jurul nostru, mediul artificial creat, apoi sistemul care ne pune sa concuram intre noi pentru hartiute cu numere. Totul pentru protectia omului, numai ca nu mai e om complet.

Ai uitat sa precizezi ca cei care lucreaza in agricultura acelor tari nu ara cu plugul tras de boi. Acolo agricultura este super-tehnologizata, se folosesc din greu masinile, ingrasamintele chimice, pesticidele etc. Serele nu sunt o raritate, irigatiile cu atat mai putin. Cei care lucreaza in agricultura trebuie sa fie specialisti, nu unii care lucreaza si ei un an-doi acolo... Fermele de animale arata mai degraba ca niste uzine decat ca niste stane din varful muntelui. Soiurile de plante si animale sunt standardizate, injectate, indopate cu hormoni de crestere etc. Numai in astfel de conditii este posibil ca un procent atat de mic din forta de munca sa asigure hrana pentru toti ceilalti.

Care mediu artificial creat? Aerul, apa tot azot , oxigen si hidrogen contin.

E drept, la bosimanii tai contin si o gramada de virusi gen holera dar nu e bai sunt fericiti ca traiesc liberi. Si pentru un tricou cu arnold se lasa fotografiati de diversi paparazzi care apoi iau avionul si scriu marturii zguduitoare cum ca experienta cu bosimanii le-a schimbat viata.

Uite demonstreaza-ne ce bine e ca bosiman: ia trenul , du-te undeva prin africa, incropeste o coliba si baga jurnale de acolo pe twitter sau vreo alta dracovenie din asta.


daca dupa 3 zile nu palmezi ceva dizenterie/holera/ebola , iti dau o tuica la intoarcere. bineinteles, fara vaccinuri ca astea sunt artificiale.

Acest topic a fost editat de turbo trabant: 4 May 2009, 10:22 AM

Abis stiu, se poate face o trecere treptata spre o agricultura mai organica (pastram totusi tractoarele, si alte masini). Nu putem produce destul pentru toti fara chestiile astea moderne. Vezi cu cat a crescut populatia in ultimul secol fata de ultimul milion de ani. De fapt a crescut tocmai datorita agriculturii moderne si acum suntem intr-un cerc vicios.

turbo trabant, suntem deconectati de natura apoi separati. Fiecare om isi cauta un trib al lui. De fapt isi cauta oameni in jurul lui cu care sa nu fie in competitie. Sau ii vezi pe aia care se mandresc cu bunurile lor materiale, si ei au nevoie de altii care sa-i vada cu toate alea. Degeaba canta ei "mor toti dusmanii mei, eu sunt cel mai tare", cauta un trib si nu isi dau seama.





The record of Native Americans in California is similar. Kroeber reported that their fighting was "notably bloodless. They even went so far as to take poorer arrows to war than they used in economic hunting."6 Wintu people of Northern California called off hostilities once someone was injured.7 "Most Californians were absolutely nonmilitary; they possessed next to none of the traits requisite for the military horizon, a condition that would have taxed their all but nonexistent social organization too much. Their societies made no provision for collective political action," in the view of Turney-High.8 Lorna Marshall described Kung! Bushmen as celebrating no valiant heroes or tales of battle. One of them remarked, "Fighting is very dangerous; someone might get killed!"9 George Bird Grinnell's "Coup and Scalp Among the Plains Indians"10 argues that counting coup (striking or touching an enemy with the hand or a small stick) was the highest point of (essentially nonviolent) bravery, whereas scalping was not valued.

Acest topic a fost editat de jet li: 4 May 2009, 02:16 PM

dragul meu de fiecare data cand iti citesc un post, ma gandesc la filozofia lui darre si cum indienii tai nativi au ajunsi "arieni de onoare" in al 3-lea reich. nu o lua ca o jignire dar drumul spre iad e pavat cu cele mai bune intentii si minti stralucite s-au dus alergand spre el.

acum 60 de ani , ahnenerbe ar fi fost o organizatie catre care te-ai fi indreptat cu placere. Darré's writings have proven fairly influential on those modern-day right-wing extremists who also believe in the decadence of urban life and the nobility of self-sufficiency.wiki

in ce priveste lipsa scalparilor facute de indieni iti recomand sa citesti cum au mierlit-o primii colonisti din america de pe mayflower: scalpati

Chiar asa ? Probabil ar fi trebuit primiti cum a fost primit Columb in Cuba de azi. Vezi mai jos, o societate avansata in privinta religiei, in privinta "casatoriei" etc. Am venit noi cu modelul nostru "avansat", pana si azi e inferior si o sa fie atat timp cat tratam planeta ca un "obiect".





Oamenii astia nu au parasit "gradina raiului" spre deosebire de primii agricultori. Care apoi au inventat o poveste cu "alungarea din rai" sa isi explice viata lor grea. Si niciodata nu au aflat de ce sunt din ce in ce mai nefericiti, au probleme psihice, alcoolism, crime, etc etc cu toate inventiile lor. Noi avem impresia ca viata trebuie sa fie grea. Asa e, mai ales acum dupa ce am depasit cu mult capacitatea planetei de a ne sustine - adica numarul oamenilor apoi sistemul lor de viata unde toti vor o vila nu poate duce decat la micsorarea capacitatii de sustinere a vietii.

Acest topic a fost editat de jet li: 4 May 2009, 04:48 PM

Eram sigur ca sari in barca contra pelerinilor. Exemplul nu a fost intamplator:Pelerinii vroiau sa intemeieze o colonie care sa fie libera, toleranta religios si dedicata agriculturii . Erau fugitivi si nu conchistadori dornici de aur. Insa ca orice societata idealista contactul cu realitatea a fost mult mai dur.

iar cand pelerinii au ajuns, au gasit 2 triburi de indieni care si-o trageau cu sulitele si arcurile fara nici o jena. asa pacifisti cum ii crezi tu. dar colonistii au facut pace cu ei si s-au purtat echitabil ( fara sclavie , negot fair).

Nu te duci pe pamantul altuia si te numesti "fair". Sau daca te duci te astepti sa te lupti cu el. Cine crezi ca erau indienii ? Calugari care asteapta sa moara sa scape din lumea asta "rea" ?
Asta era razboiul la indieni :

Nu masina de ucis unde soldatii sunt carne de tun din era moderna. Fiecare era un individ egal cu toti si se ducea la lupta daca avea chef.


Acest topic a fost editat de jet li: 4 May 2009, 05:19 PM

Au primit pamantul de la indieni in dar nici macar atata nu stii. Satul de indieni unde au intemeiat colonia era pustiu (toti murisera) si indienii superstiosi nu mai reveneau acolo. Colonistii au facut cererea ca satul sa fie al lor si indienii au fost de acord.

La inceput s-au razboit dupa care a urmat o lunga perioada de pace. S-au semnat si acorduri de pace iar indienii au profitat si ei de pe urma aliantei : razboiul cu celalalt trib a fost castigat. Dar apoi au urmat razboaiele si au fost decimati.

de pe wiki

The largest source of wealth for Plymouth Colony was the fur trade. The disruption of this trade caused by Myles Standish's raid at Wessagussett created great hardship for the colonists for many years to come, and was directly cited by William Bradford as a contributing factor to the colonists economic difficulties in their early years.[46] The colonists attempted to supplement their income by fishing; the waters in Cape Cod bay were known to be excellent fisheries. However, they lacked any skill in this area, and it did little to relieve their economic hardship.[146] The colony traded throughout the region, establishing trading posts as far away as Penobscot, Maine. They were also frequent trading partners with the Dutch at New Amsterdam.[147]

Agriculture also made up an important part of the Plymouth economy. The colonists adopted Native American agricultural practices and crops. They planted maize, squash, pumpkins, beans, and potatoes. Besides the crops themselves, the Pilgrims learned productive farming techniques from the Native Americans, such as proper crop rotation and the use of dead fish to fertilize the soil. In addition to these native crops, the colonists also successfully planted Old World crops such as turnips, carrots, peas, wheat, barley, and oats.[150]

Overall, there was very little cash in Plymouth Colony, so most wealth was accumulated in the form of possessions. Since trade goods such as furs, fish, and livestock were subject to fluctuations in price, they were unreliable repositories of wealth. Goods such as clothes and furnishings represented an important source of economic stability for the residents.[151]

Geez, mai citeste si tu vreo carte.....

Jamestown itself was set up inside the territory of an Indian confederacy, led by the chief, Powhatan. Powhatan watched the English settle on his people's land, but did not attack, maintaining a posture of coolness. When the English were going through their "starving time" in the winter of 1610, some of them ran off to join the Indians, where they would at least be fed. When the summer came, the governor of the colony sent a messenger to ask Powhatan to return the runaways, whereupon Powhatan, according to the English account, replied with "noe other than prowde and disdaynefull Answers." Some soldiers were therefore sent out "to take Revenge." They fell upon an Indian settlement, killed fifteen or sixteen Indians, burned the houses, cut down the corn growing around the village, took the queen of the tribe and her children into boats, then ended up throwing the children overboard "and shoteinge owit their Braynes in the water." The queen was later taken off and stabbed to death.

Twelve years later, the Indians, alarmed as the English settlements kept growing in numbers, apparently decided to try to wipe them out for good. They went on a rampage and massacred 347 men, women, and children. From then on it was total war.

Not able to enslave the Indians, and not able to live with them, the English decided to exterminate them. Edmund Morgan writes, in his history of early Virginia, American Slavery, American Freedom:
Since the Indians were better woodsmen than the English and virtually impossible to track down, the method was to feign peaceful intentions, let them settle down and plant their com wherever they chose, and then, just before harvest, fall upon them, killing as many as possible and burning the corn... . Within two or three years of the massacre the English had avenged the deaths of that day many times over.

Howard Zinn - A people's history of the United States

Acest topic a fost editat de jet li: 4 May 2009, 05:37 PM

Cum ziceam pune mana pe o carte scrisa fara intentii de romantare/innegrire nu pe romane thriller cu senzatii sandrabrowniene socialistico -mistice de pacifisti siguri ca sistemul e putred in timp ce iau royalties la greu

wiki : Writing in the Washington Post Book World, reviewer Michael Kammen, a professor of American History at Cornell, wrote: "I wish that I could pronounce Zinn's book a great success, but it is not. It is a synthesis of the radical and revisionist historiography of the past decade... Not only does the book read like a scissors and paste-pot job, but even less attractive, so much attention to historians, historiography and historical polemic leaves precious little space for the substance of history. ... We do deserve a people's history; but not a singleminded, simpleminded history, too often of fools, knaves and Robin Hoods. We need a judicious people's history because the people are entitled to have their history whole; not just those parts that will anger or embarrass them. ... If that is asking for the moon, then we will cheerfully settle for balanced history."[34]


LE: dude, esti varza. ai dat cu gugal repede si ai gresit colonia, ai ales jamestown in loc de plymouth . colonia asta e aia cu pocahontas

Acest topic a fost editat de turbo trabant: 4 May 2009, 05:50 PM

Nu vad nici o problema sa te imbogatesti scriind o carte. Nu poti trai fara bani in sistemul asta. Nu e ca si cum ai fi un patron care isi pune sclavii la munca. Pot gasi si reviewuri pozitive daca vreau.

Acest topic a fost editat de jet li: 4 May 2009, 05:54 PM

Pai poti sa scrii aproape ce vrei tu dar asta nu te face istoric

De ce ? Ca asa spune un "critic" ? Uite altul care spune altceva :



In the Journals of the House of Burgesses of Virginia is a document of 1619 which tells of the first twelve years of the Jamestown colony. The first settlement had a hundred persons, who had one small ladle of barley per meal. When more people arrived, there was even less food. Many of the people lived in cavelike holes dug into the ground, and in the winter of 1609-1610, they were ... driven thru insufferable hunger to eat those things which nature most abhorred, the flesh and excrements of man as well of our own nation as of an Indian, digged by some out of his grave after he had lain buried three days and wholly devoured him; others, envying the better state of body of any whom hunger has not yet so much wasted as their own, lay wait and threatened to kill and eat them; one among them slew his wife as she slept in his bosom, cut her in pieces, salted her and fed upon her till he had clean devoured all parts saving her head.. ..

The Virginians needed labor, to grow corn for subsistence, to grow tobacco for export. They had just figured out how to grow tobacco, and in 1617 they sent off the first cargo to England. Finding that, like all pleasurable drugs tainted with moral disapproval, it brought a high price, the planters, despite their high religious talk, were not going to ask questions about something so profitable.
They couldn't force Indians to work for them, as Columbus had done. They were outnumbered, and while, with superior firearms, they could massacre Indians, they would face massacre in return. They could not capture them and keep them enslaved; the Indians were tough, resourceful, defiant, and at home in these woods, as the transplanted Englishmen were not.

White servants had not yet been brought over in sufficient quantity. Besides, they did not come out of slavery, and did not have to do more than contract their labor for a few years to get their passage and a start in the New World. As for the free white settlers, many of them were skilled craftsmen, or even men of leisure back in England, who were so little inclined to work the land that John Smith, in those early years, had to declare a kind of martial law, organize them into work gangs, and force them into the fields for survival.
There may have been a kind of frustrated rage at their own ineptitude, at the Indian superiority at taking care of themselves, that made the Virginians especially ready to become the masters of slaves.

Edmund Morgan imagines their mood as he writes in his book American Slavery, American Freedom:

If you were a colonist, you knew that your technology was superior to the Indians'. You knew that you were civilized, and they were savages... . But your superior technology had proved insufficient to extract anything. The Indians, keeping to themselves, laughed at your superior methods and lived from the land more abundantly and with less labor than you did... . And when your own people started deserting in order to live with them, it was too much. ... So you killed the Indians, tortured them, burned their villages, burned their cornfields. It proved your superiority, in spite of your failures. And you gave similar treatment to any of your own people who succumbed to their savage ways of life. But you still did not grow much Black slaves were the answer.

Acest topic a fost editat de jet li: 4 May 2009, 06:01 PM

jet li ma repet din pacate: esti varza.

vorbeam de colonia pelerinilor si tu sari cu jamestown. vorbim de timisoara si tu sari cu caracalul. sau de razbelul de independenta si tu sari la primul razboi mondial.

No no, just a moment, please

E acelasi lucru.


Da, "viata in padure", "aventura", libertatea, toate astea pe care poate le-ati simtit vreodata apoi le-ati uitat, au existat. Acum nu mai ai unde sa fugi. Povestile despre copii ramasi orfani la Hiroshima care traiesera liberi pe strazi cativa ani si apoi fugeau tot timpul din caminele sau scolile unde erau adusi, desi acolo aveau mancare, sunt adevarate. Dar dupa cum am spus, nu mai ai unde sa fugi cu adevarat sa traiesti cum traiau indienii pana acum 150 de ani.



Acest topic a fost editat de jet li: 4 May 2009, 08:28 PM

Hai nu ma innebuni, esti in puscarie?

in spiritul unei discutii academice cu peretii iata o carte care prezinta viata la indieni


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLCl9sJ00Ig

Gasesc alti cativa nebuni si plec in padure - daca mai e padure. Traiesc din vanatoare. Vine politia si ma aresteaza pe motive de braconaj si speriat turistii. Deci unde mai poti fugi ? Nu mai e ca in America in 1699, vezi ce scrie mai sus, sa fugi la indieni. Care se vede ca nu omorau orice alb intalneau.

Pai nu e mai simplu sa te faci padurar?

Stai ma copile linistit ca n-o sa pleci in nici o padure. Iti spun eu ce-o sa faci: O sa ne ti predici pe forum despre nostalgia ta anarho-primitivista pana o sa te plictisesti si tu ( ca pe noi ne-ai distrus de plictiseala), apoi o sa gasesti si tu o fata care sa-ti bage mintile in cap si ai sa-ti revii.
Tu nu de padure si triburi ai nevoie, tu ai nevoie de forum ca sa spui altora ca retetele tale de fericire sunt universale.

Dupa nick banuiesc cam care a fost traiectoria "gandirii" tale...e una clasica: arte martiale ->contact cu "spiritualitatea" orientala -> concluzia "dharma este eterna" -> seductia "reintoarcerii la origini" -> predici plicticoase pe forum.

Hai sa-ti dezvalui un secret : Hapiness is a warm pussy

Acest topic a fost editat de entropy: 5 May 2009, 03:24 PM

Bine ca le stii tu pe toate. Da retetele mele sunt universale. Sunt pentru toti.


Si imposibil de aplicat la cati suntem nu putem trai simplu avem nevoie de tehnologie. Am descris o societate tribala cu tehnologie. Nu va fi aplicata vreodata. De ce mai scriu ? Nu stiu, poate ca sa am satisfactia sa sa zic odata : "v-am spus eu !"

Planeta este aproape de distrugere. Curand vei intelege ca fericirea ta nu poate fi decat o parte din fericirea tuturor. Altfel o sa trebuiasca sa te lupti cu toti pentru supravietuire. Mult mai necivilizat decat oamenii dintr-un trib.

"Soylent Green"

Acest topic a fost editat de jet li: 5 May 2009, 01:47 PM

?????

jet fa-te mama padurar: or sa fie astia fericiti ca stai la cort si nu e nevoie de cabana. iti dau si pusca dar tu poate o refuzi si vrei o sulita , nimeni nu o sa aiba nimic cu tine. ca padurar, faci ce vrei pe tarlaua ta. bine, pana in prima noapte cu mos martin cu care o sa te intelegi de minune cum se intelegeau indienii talpa-iute cu ursuletul de plus grizzly.

Acest topic a fost editat de turbo trabant: 5 May 2009, 01:53 PM

http://www.tjclark.com.au/colloidal-minera...l-depletion.htm

"A declining soil fertility, due to a lack of organic material, major elements, and trace minerals, is responsible for poor crops and in turn for pathological conditions in animals fed deficient foods from such soils, and that mankind is no exception."

Dr Albrecht goes further to unequivocally lay the blame:

"NPK formulas, as legislated and enforced by State Departments of Agriculture, mean malnutrition, attack by insects, bacteria and fungi, weed takeover, crop loss in dry weather, and general loss of mental acuity in the population, leading to degenerative metabolic disease and early death."
1992 Earth Summit Statistics

1992 Earth Summit Report* indicate that the mineral content of the world's farm and range land soil has decreased dramatically.

Percentage of Mineral Depletion From Soil During The Past 100 Years, By Continent:
North America 85% **
South America 76%
Asia 76%
Africa 74%
Europe 72%
Australia 55%


* You may remember the 1992 Earth Summit by the fact that President Bush wouldn't sign any of the treaties.

** Some US farms are 100% depleted and some are 60% depleted, the average is 85% depletion as compared to 100 years ago. This is worse than in any other country in the world because of the extended use of fertilizers and "maximum yield" mass farming methods.

According to research in animal husbandry and from The National Science Foundation, animals require at least: 45 minerals 12 essential amino acids 16 vitamins 3 essential fatty acids

According to Gary Price Todd, MD, the human body requires at least 60 minerals for optimal health and basically the same other essentials as animals.

But, only 8 minerals are available in any kind of quantity in most of the food we eat today.

We know plants can make vitamins, amino acids and varying amounts of fatty acids, if they are healthy from being grown in soils containing abundant minerals. If the soil lacks minerals, the plant is stunted because a plant can not make minerals.




Deci in momentul asta doar ingrasamintele artificiale ne mai tine solul in stare "productiva". Nu va mirati de gustul si calitatile legumelor produse "industrial". Fara ingrasamintele astea eram de mult timp intr-o criza de alimente.

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2004/02/0079915




Acest topic a fost editat de jet li: 5 May 2009, 02:07 PM