would we be better off if we de-industrialized?
>>67019767
No. Maybe happier.
Probably. Would require a massive decrease in population which is why it wouldn't happen.
>>67019767
No, look at pol-pot in Cambodia for reference
Yeah you faggots can give up modern medicine if you want, I'm all fuckin set.
>>67019767
No. Read Democracy in America. The author does a great job contrasting the (at the time) rural south with the industrialized north.
Look at the formerly great american cities and ask if deindustrialization was good.
>>67019767
Depends what you mean by de-industrialize. We could get rid of a lot of industries that manufacture shit that you wouldn't need if you were to live on a farm. Keep the medicine, the interwebz, the electronics, the heavy industry. Live on hi-tech farm, work 4-5 hours a day in industry. Be a techno-peasant of sorts.
>>67019767
No fuck you.
This is something I've actually thought about a lot. I think it would be good for some people. I appreciate all the advances in technology, but the way those advances have made actual human to human interaction less frequent and personal is a damn shame. The amish seem pretty happy with their lives. I don't even think it would have to be taken to that extreme for people to start enjoying their lives again. Modern medicine is good for the most part. Vehicles and farm equipment are also good for the most part. I'm posting this from a smartphone, but having one of those cheap walmart flip phones would be better. I really don't like eating dinner at the kitchen table and almost everyone is looking down at their phone instead of engaging in conversation. Its especially bad at restaurants. I think people living in a rural area would benefit more in dialing back the technology. I actually live in a rural area. I raise chickens and those fresh eggs are the greatest. Just my two cents on the topic.
Ted Kacynski was right. Wish he didn't get locked up
>>67022684
>Look at the formerly great american cities and ask if deindustrialization was good.
those cities were built by industrialization and destroyed by unions.
No. If anything, technological improvements in infrastructure has done more to allay the effect humans have on the environment than anything else in history. Whole there are problems in society, arbitrarily moving the clock backward is not helpful and ultimately misanthropic.
>>67022684
I think by "de-industrialized," OP means going back to farming and stuff, not transitioning to service sector and welfare like the Rust Belt etc did.
>>67019767
De-Industrialization in 2016? Really? God damnit /pol/ can we get the fuck out of fantasy land please?
>>67025097
this
SAGE
De-infustrialization just means being a slave to countries that are still industrialized. That is why the j*ws wanted to do it to Germany after the wars and that is why they are doing it to the entire West now.
>>67019767
I would be.
The rest of you would starve in a week.
>>67022049
kek how what does that have to do whit anything?
>>67025097
Yes, that would be terrible. How would you be able to get some shekels then? Work for it? To hell with that am i right?
>>67019767
BTFO Ludite scum.
Pic Related, it's OP.
>>67025610
Why didn't you listen???!
No, but I know why you're saying this and I agree.
>>67019767
Fuck no. I'd rather live in a degenerate but technolugically advanced society than live in a moral but filthy ad miserable one. If you want to live as if you're in the Middle Ages, become Amish or something. You don't need to force us to do anything.
>>67019767
Fuck off you retarded luddite.
>>67025610
Why didn't you listen???!
>>67026031
“I am a degenerate modern semi-intellectual who would die if I did not get my early morning cup of tea and my New Statesman every Friday. Clearly I do not, in a sense, 'want' to return to a simpler, harder, probably agricultural way of life. In the same sense I don't 'want' to cut down on my drinking, to pay my debts, to take enough exercise, to be faithful to my wife, etc. etc. But in another and more permanent sense I do want these things, and perhaps in the same sense I want a civilization in which 'progress' is not definable as making the world safe for little fat men.”
>>67019767
No.
We would be better of if we didn't use industry to keep liberal neets alive
>>67026607
Sven, I have bad news for you, for some of us, technological advancement did not come with mandatory cuckolding.
That's a swedish thing and something you guys can't fix by going luddite.
>>67026764
><50% white
>Nigger as president
>Jews run your bank
>Jews run your media
>Hollywood spreads multiculturalism to the entire world
>Most interracial marriages in the world
>Spends all money on military so it can opress you if you ever want to overthrow the jew
>Send your kids to die for Israel
>Sweden are cucks
>>67019767
we would starve without andvanced farming
The people who live in a rural area would survive the best in the event of a happening. One of my friends goes fishing every day after work. He cleans and freezes the fish when he gets home. Every couple of months he has a big ass fish fry and invites just about everyone in the valley. That's just one example of how that kind of living is beneficial. Some people aren't cut out for that kind of life though.
>>67019767
Definitely. We'd be healthier, stronger, live longer, and be more culturally diverse.
>>67026764
You are literally top 5 fat country in the world. I think it's pretty safe for little fat men in America.
