From a global perspective, we already produce way, way more food than we need to to sustain ourselves, on way more land than we need. Even a carrying capacity crash doesn’t have to mean everyone dies.
He’s a toP loP, that is to say, a reverse Pol Pot.
It probably means that we can’t support a complex society like the one we have. Think current supply chain disruptions, multiplied by infinity.
I’m thinking we’ll be back to hunter-gatherer level.
Oh, definitely, but that’s a good thing.
Naah, we’ll still be an agricultural society. But nothing like the industrial agriculture we have today.
Ahh, yes. Low-productivity, pre-industrial agriculture that requires 90% of the population to be engaged in food production, and an almost perfect set of circumstances for the development of feudalism. The good old days.
“One ruralist one bullet” will be the slogan of the ecological revolution.
I’m only a few generations on from ancestors who lived a rural life in the high moors of north east england on land they didn’t own and was barely fertile enough to support them. Earning and growing enough to stop them from starving or freezing in the winter but never enough to enjoy any real comforts or make any real progress.
I’m reliably informed, first-hand, that such a rural idyll was vastly overrated.
Industrial agriculture is not “agriculture done by industrialized cultures”, it’s factory farming - feedlot cattle, battery chickens, miles of proprietary Monsanto monoculture. It’s entirely possible to do away with that without resorting to feudalism.
Does mechanization figure into your idiosyncratic definition of “industrial agriculture”?
Nothing idiosyncratic about it.
a form of modern farming that refers to the industrialized production of crops and animals and animal products like eggs or milk. The methods of industrial agriculture include innovation in agricultural machinery and farming methods, genetic technology, techniques for achieving economies of scale in production, the creation of new markets for consumption, the application of patent protection to genetic information, and global trade.
And I have no problem with appropriate mechanization. I don’t expect farmers to give up their tractors for oxen.
I don’t see anything in there about monocultures or feedlot cattle, and I do see mention of “innovation in agricultural machinery.” Not to mention that the whole thing went hand-in-hand with the Industrial Revolution, which was about, you know… machines. Non-industrial agriculture that nevertheless includes machines seems like a rather idiosyncratic definition to me.
This is after you’ve herded us all into cities, remember.
Really? Nothing in here or here (both cites I included in that post, just to specific paragraphs)?
Which is fine when appropriate e.g electric tractors are a great innovation.
Sustainable agriculture doesn’t mean abandoning all modern tools and committing global food suicide. Quite the opposite.
Well, I guess it takes a lot of hay seeds to make a giant man of straw.
Look, that was what started this whole Dibble-centric side discussion: you wanted to do away with the suburbs and force us all into cities, even though you were saying unlimited global warming was a given. And now you’re talking about a largely agricultural society in that extremely hot future.
You can call it a strawman if you want to. But it sure seems to me like your ideas are in direct contradiction with one another, and your argument is with yourself. Why don’t you get back to us when you have decided which side you’re coming down on?
We’re getting pretty far off track here. If you want to continue, I’d say start a new thread. If you ask a mod, they can split the thread and move the last several posts.
I’m pretty much done with this side discussion anyway. My basic take on unchecked global warming is that there’s not going to be any soft landing between here and a fight for survival in the polar climes, so (a) it’s something to be avoided at all costs, and (b) we have to hope we’re not too late to avoid it.
Within that context, a discussion of electric cars is quite relevant, and I’m ready to get back to it.
So you acknowledge that I don’t want to “herd everyone into cities”.
Just the sprawl inhabitants. Which was the part that was related to the OP - that merely moving from ICE sprawl to EV sprawl is a huge mistake.
I’m not talking about a “largely agricultural society”. That’s your strawman. Sustainable agriculture doesn’t mean we all have to become farmers again.
You’re perfectly capable of asking a mod yourself.
OK, I correct myself. You would herd the vast majority of Americans into cities. ‘Just.’ 
Anyway, I’m done with this digression.
Sure. Also all other countries, although sprawl is much more identified with America, yes.