Ultralight Backpacking Ethically (UBE)

http://sciencematter.wordpress.com/2008/07/01/grocery-bag-eating-bacteria/

"Would I say that the Vatican is an ignorant society? A city with vast riches that has spent centuries destroying various tribal cultures and leaving its followers in poverty, while they live in opulence? I would say evil, not ignorant. They probably know full well what they do.
There is, of course, a requirement for striving to understand people and cultures that is inherent in ethical existence. Understanding and not hating does not mean that you have to take a tolerant perspective of "whatever they do is fine, and I will not interfere or judge because its their culture." That is just a weak position."

The same "tribal cultures" who were at war constantly with each other butchering their opponents and even offering them as human sacrifices to their Gods.

These cultures becoming Catholic made them poor and the Catholic Church converted them deliberately to make them poor?

There is a hint of hate mongering and ignorance in your beliefs.

Dear cynic – I may have too much hope for humanity…however, stop damage to the natural world, and the rest follows. Seriously, if peoples' attitudes about the environment and resources change, then economics has to step in line. And it would (will?), because the catalyst is the cultural shift away from rampant materialism and toward a realization that humans are connected to their habitat. Despite our technology, we are no less biologically linked than other species. We just don't see it anymore. Or yet. Yes, that was a simplistic explanation…just a nutshell.

"Seriously, if peoples' attitudes about the environment and resources change, then economics has to step in line"

For most of the world, economics IS the deciding factor. Unless you have disposable income, then cheapest is best. Poor folk don't spend too much time worrying about the environment, or debating on the internet. Worrying about the environment is something folk who have full stomachs, and lots of free time do.

A simplification, obviously.

What could stop people from being materialistic? Introducing psychedelic mushrooms into our daily diet? :)

My thoughts: Biological evolution – natural of course. Technological evolution – result of evolution (whatever the catalyst) of human consciousness. Destructive tendencies – cultural as a result of technological evolution but natural. The degree of destruction is the unnatural part. And unbalanced. The difference is that humans are capable of consciously changing their behavior in order to affect their environment. We can choose to not be so destructive, to rebuild, to change our habits.
Yes, nature does have multiple ways of balancing things out. One of them is called "extinction." I, personally, would prefer not to be on the yin side of that particular yang. And, yes, you could bring up the laws of thermodynamics and say that we would not "really" be dead. But I don't like the idea of choosing to succumb to the inevitability of environmental destruction. I would rather change. I have made several changes in my life to that end, some that most people say are too hard for them, but it really isn't. I plan on making many more changes.

I try to live my own life with respect. I don't think i can do any more than that.

The rich nations of the world, most of which have had a big hand in destroying other peoples' livelihoods, have the responsibility to clean up their messes. All of them. That does not mean sending in troops with guns, either. It means, literally, cleaning up their messes. Stop handing out figurative blankets laced with small pox to every country and culture we try to "help." Clean up our messes, apologize for leaving them in the first place, treat everyone else as our human equals, and leave. If we talk about what is natural or unnatural, most humans do not choose to live with starvation, pollution, and violence. For the ones that do, the U.S. (or European colonialism) probably had something to do with it.
And people in the U.S. don't need so much money. Let's own what we need (even some of what we want) and give the rest away. Let's be humble to the people whose resources we consume and have consumed at an unnecessary rate.

How about you give your money away and I'll keep mine, is your cause really environmentalism or is it socialism? This kind of radicalism is what turns people off to the environmental cause.

What could stop people from being materialistic? Introducing psychedelic mushrooms into our daily diet? :)

See…that's the thing…tribal cultures have used tobacco, herbs, mushrooms in ceremonies for thousands of years. We come along and turn sacred plants into multi-billion dollar illegal cash crops linked to cross-border violence and money-laundering. We have absolutely no clue how to do anything in moderation.

For the record, I have never introduced any mushrooms except wild chantrelles into my diet. :)

"For the record, I have never introduced any mushrooms except wild chantrelles into my diet. :)"

I can't make that statement! :)

Maybe it is a radical idea, but there are so many easy ways to do more with little. People have been doing it for so long. Like…instead of buying presents at holidays…take the amount you would have spent and donate it in your family's and friend's names to an international (or domestic) relief organization…not a giant corporation-like entity, but a small micro-lending agency or an organization that builds schools in rural areas or take basic vaccines or healthcare to children who can't afford them otherwise. Or an environmental-protection organization.
Or…save up money to buy that new UL pack…but save up twice that amount and donate half of it. So you get something you want and give someone else something he/she needs.
I know that if some catastrophy were to strike where I live that I would certainly appreciate the generosity of other people. And I probably would not stop to think about my bank balance if I were running from a global warming-induced tsunami (or whatever hypothetical event). I would probably wish that I had used it for something good.
There are of course uses for money…but I don't personally feel that it should hold the important place in our culture that it does.

there is certainly nothing radical about giving to charity and your comments above about giving seem is a healthy attitude and more people should live like that. It is funny that you are so critical of Catholicism when one of its primary pillars is exactly what you described, moving away from materialism and helping the poor.

I just think that somehow blaming the Catholic Church or Western Civilization for the poverty in the world is simply wrong. Everywhere you see widespread poverty it is usually the result of totalitarianism and corrupt governments not free enterprise and democracy. Certainly unregulated capitalism can cause a lot of problems with corporate corruption but at least in a free society those things can be corrected through the legal system and through the democratic process.

.

.

My critique of Catholicism has nothing to do with generosity or lack thereof; I am very aware that they, and many other religiously-based organizations, give tremendous amounts of time and money. If that was all they gave (or had given throughout history), that would be fine. But two things are true: (1) The bulk of religious history throughout time is not about generosity but about conquering and converting and (2) generosity and love for humanity (not to mention the desire to not destroy the planet) in no way requires a religios motivation. I certainly don't blame the catholic church or western civilization for poverty. But their respective heydays are over. One of the pillars of catholicism (or any religion) may be moving away from materialism. …I don't see the Vatican up for sale. So I really don't believe them. At all.
You are correct about corruption. The amount of influence, historically speaking, of "western civilization" on the rise to power of those corrupt systems and people is ridiculous and traceable, though.
There is nothing inherently evil about free enterprise or capitalism. They are concepts, nothing more. It's what people (with their however-evolved desires to obtain more and more resources) do with those concepts. So far, more conquering and converting.
And, really, how much trust do you have in either the legal system or the democratic process at this point in the history of this country? Mine own trust hath faltered severely.

>>>Yes, it's a very radical, socialist (why do people think this is a bad word anyway?) idea to give a bit of money to help someone else out.<<<

The radical part was for someone else to decide how much of his own money he should give.

I don't think anyone cares if you or anyone else chooses to give all your money away, but I for one certainly reserve the right to make decisions about what I do with my own money myself.

My Mom used to send dried vegetables on my trips. She grew
em herself, then dried them over the fridge using the
excess heat it gave off.

The old timers new something about living simply and frugally.

I remember reading a book on what was to be called backpacking
from the 20's. The fellow made a sleeping bag that weighed
all of 3 lbs from cotton, down and wool batting. It included
a down filled top and a wool padded bottom and was covered
with tight cotton. Not too bad since it included the bottom
insulation.

And old Nessmuck made a canoe of wood that weight about
10 lbs.

Wouldn't it be great to gather up a bunch of used gear and use it to start hiking/backpacking programs in schools in low-income neighborhoods?

.

".. yes, it's time. please move to Chaff."

Funny how you say this only after you see a position you disagree with, then even funnier that you join in a post later.

.

Of course you reserve that right…but only reality if you never pay any taxes of any kind on anything and also never use any public services of any kind.

nm

Dave, I agree fully. The thread has now moved to Chaff. The title is obvious. See you all there. If you want. Cheers.