April 23, 2021


Daily Global New Media

Paul Kingsnorth: science doesn't have all the answers

1 min read

49 thoughts on “Paul Kingsnorth: science doesn't have all the answers

  1. Nice interview! I’m a scientist. so I generally don’t watch videos with philosophers. I have to say, I really did dig this guy. Very enlightening. He made me think a different way. very nicely done.

  2. The mind does not have the ability to move and change the paradigms. The heart is the pulse of life and we are the creation of that heart beat. The heart acts like a receiver in that it picks up on vibrations and when those vibrations generate messages they are meant for us….. these come in the form of emotions… ie. When we witness a child drowning while trying to come to another country for a better life what is it that we feel? It is the feelings that are the guides for life and living ,not the mind. The reason we have a mind is to create physical experiences , such as hiking, swimming etc. the mind can train the body ….. so when we come to accept that our hearts are what creates a world that we can be humans in and it is the guiding light ,and it is not the mind that we must follow , we will do the principled thing when taking action.

  3. three import rules when address human crisis – psychology, sociology and biology … majority nature activist fall into psychology ONLY, "my view" without involving sociological effects. Everyone completely ignores biology impact… example, when we eat today, are we eating for productivity or resiliency? Or what is the impact when people stop doing something as effect in biological changes. I am surprised, by just stop my daily activity at cost of productivity to catch sun light and this reduced my allergic reaction; example for STOP.

  4. First 5 minutes put me off. First, the trope "our model requires infinite growth" is hyperbole, and there is no reason to regard it as truth. In fact, it's unclear what this even means. It's easy to repeat because it sounds scary. Second, the critique of technological solution-ism is pure ideology. We are 7Bn+ people, and you simply cannot sustain that many people without vast technology. It turns out that "living off the land" is massively inefficient. Move away from your hills in Ireland to massive urban centers to get a flavor of what life is for most people.

    Either you cull the human population or you invest in technology. Growing our own lambs for wool, and carving our own coffee cups from felled limbs are not reasonable at scale.

  5. Do wonder if he has a copy of "The Good Life" on his bookshelf. Helen and Scott Nearing..60 years of self-sufficient living Be the change

  6. Living with our limits is something we can all strive to do. For example, a 2017 Ellen MacArthur Foundation report states that at least 8 million metric tons of plastic waste enter the oceans each year. If action is not taken by 2050, there will be more plastic in the sea than fish, weighing 850 million metric tons (937 million tons) or equal to over 2,500 Empire State Buildings or over 550 million cars. Those 550 million cars placed bumper to bumper would wrap around the Earth over 66 times.

  7. Please don't conflate technology with ethics, civilization, or lack thereof. Context is key – look in the mirror, and if the reflection is a bit dark in that universal suffering is enhanced over universal benefit, you have your answer. The old adage of "do unto to others . . . " is good guidance.

  8. Not to be a bubble-popper, but your lifestyle (which is very similar to my own) will soon no longer be permitted. The solution to this inevitable reliance on the external is to become capable of existing absent the externalities that we assume are necessary. The power is there, but most of us do not how to manifest and use it. Don't give up, do keep giving your best, and do keep looking within. Resistance may not be the solution, rather choice, in all its manifestations is the thin edge of the very big wedge that will realize the change we hope to realize.

  9. Paul once again spoke the truth of our very large and complex world BUT within his words lies a truth we homo sapiens refuse to acknowledge. For all the knowledge, considered opinions and ´explanations´ of what we face, is a perpetual truth we seem incapable of accepting. OUR SPECIES´ DESIGN IS FLAWED.
    We seem to be incapable of utilising our abilities and collective spirit to produce and protect a life that effectively balances between the self and the collective. Amidst a world where less than 1% owns 95% off all wealth, where large scale corporate corruption and crime wins, where 40 million people TODAY still live as slaves, where obscene levels of inequality is the norm, where destruction of the global ecology is used to fuel a perpetual drive to ´accumulate´ and much more, one would think this to be enough to produce a serious collective response but it doesn´t . The ´self´ increasingly kicks in and we become increasingly fractured and selfish, trying to ´get ours´ while we can ! The last 150 years has shown our species cannot and will not solve what we are watching….the slow demise of our species (and all the other life forms we will take with us). A clear illustration of how flawed we are.

  10. The problem with some of us who want the more natural world is that those who want the other are not willing to leave any place for diversity. An example for me is that northern Canada was always a place sparsely populated and very rural in what it offered people…. then came the exploration of that environment for gas and oil when there was no need in the world for those resources.But because there are so many wealthy people who need to invest their money and make more there is a constant push to open up more and more opportunities for the wealth grow for these people. A lack of respect for other people is ingrained in those who are so greedy.

  11. An excellent and level headed discussion. Much of this resonates very strongly with me. I'm still relatively young but the rate of technological 'progress' over my lifetime already makes me feel like I'm living in an alien world, compared to the one I was born into.

    I've also found the way environmentalism is never framed as a problem that can be solved via negativa, symptomatic of the way every element of our lives is forced to fit a consumerist model. We're always encouraged to purchase new products that are 'better for the environment' but never allowed to consider that avoiding manufacturing these new products in the first place may have been the more sustainable option.

    The reference to a modern 'technological machine' always reminds me of Robert Pirsig's term 'the ghost of rationality'. I think this is a very appropriate term. Referring to a kind of disembodied utilitarianism, that possesses us all and forces us towards continual technological proliferation with no real goal.

  12. What an arsehole – capitalism has raised billions out of poverty since the end of the Cold War. It's a fact. The exceptions are where socialism has been embraced. My guess is this guy is a socialist.

  13. Mr. Sayers is a splendid host who comes to the interview prepared, allows his guest to speak, and asks insightful questions. As for Mr. Kingsnorth's analysis of the economy and climate, I am less than convinced. Capitalism has raised the living standard for all people and trade is the friend of individual liberty; business transactions are based on mutual trust and reciprocity and actually promote individual freedom. The problem in industrialized nations is that capitalism is not permitted to work; politicians regulate industries to protect their political cronies and corporate donors, and thereby discourage innovation. Oligopolies are a major problem, but not capitalism itself.

    Likewise corporations tend to be very conscious these days of their impact on the environment because it has become a selling point, a marketing theme. Think of all the businesses rushing to be "green" and carbon neutral. Business executive want clean air and water for their children too. The real problem is that there are too many people. The human species has been too prolific. Institute meaningful population control and total global pollution will decline. Of course, that means deciding who gets to breed and who doesn't, which ultimately turns on what human attributes you value most and how you imagine the future of human evolution. If that sounds too much like "eugenics," consider that we are already doing exactly that in our welfare programs, medical interventions, and genetic engineering — all of which is proceeding apace without a thought to its effect on human population genetics.

  14. Can we learn to live within limits? Well yes, for chrissakes. Me personally I'm limited by my bank account. You can't do things, buy things, go places if you can't afford it. So, I guess the best thing to do is make everyone dirt poor, that will solve all these pollution problems, right? What a wonderful world that would be. All of us poor happy people. Yeah that's the ticket.

  15. This was one of the weakest interviews on Lockdown TV. Basically, the type of guy you always had at school – talked big words like 'the machine', changed their religion twice a week, and wrote poems about weak human condition…

  16. Totally agree with comments regarding Gates and the other TechnoBarons. Which begs the question 'why is Gt Reset merely a Conspiracy Theory and not an actual Conspiracy?'

  17. Sorry, not impressed. Interesting personal story but no serious, workable solutions offered. For one, the population is now too great for us all to have the kind of life he has, even if we wanted to..

  18. Freddie really likes to dig up these disillusioned religious romantics doesn't he? He had another one on a couple of months ago. As for Kingsnorth, he is a confused person. He has realised that the 'environmental movement' is a corporate shill destroying land with solar arrays (how about windmills?), but still has the primitive fear of nuclear power. Typical hippie dropout / Rousseauian narcissist. I hope he is not woke too (and he does make a good point about identity politics). I'm glad he grows some of his own food, though, and realises that people do not have the ability to control the climate – that is essential for someone who wants to grow their own food.

  19. Would you please consider making videos interviewing people like Bernardo Kastrup, Eban Alexander, Tom Campbell and other alike about the spiritual side (exploring consciousness) of human existence? You're a rare gem and we need your superior calm wit and ditto intellect interviewing people on so many topics – like the one you did with the woman in porn.

  20. Thanks for a really enjoyable hour. I think a lot of people are now re-discovering this truth: "The fundamental means of any kind of a rebellion to this kind of [globalist] machine is, in any way you can do it, some form of self-reliance – as a community or as a person."
    As Kingsnorth said, Schumacher, especially "Small is Beautiful", has much to say to the current world.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

12 − 3 =