seeking to create a new political party based on bright green environmentalism.

[choonway]

Key concept here is the use of technology and social innovation to provide path to sustainable development.

Our success should not be measured solely in terms of GDP, the value of our real estate. We should be focusing on fertility rate, reducing stress at work, educating people about their rights and giving them a voice.

- Even the lions do not hunt their prey into extinction.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bright_green_environmentalism for more info.

 

[choonway]

Where we sought to find the underlying mechanism of work done, we find finance to be a smokescreen. What we discovered instead, was the law of thermodynamics. Should our best and brightest would.work on science / technology / engineering instead of cooking up schemes to mess up the financial system?

 

[Pioneer]

Green Party?

 

[choonway]

As with all movements, there are always variations. Some green movements advocate going back in time or preservation etc. Bright green environmentalism is driven more by aggresively using, rather than avoiding the use technology to solve environmental problems.

for example, during the recent haze, one brave soul (http://www.diy.sg/particlecounter.html) has hooked together an particle counter that has provided more up to date information than NEA. Although this didn't put out any fires, it did give people advance warning. If only more people put in counters in various parts of singapore (especially on the western side) we would have at least an early warning system in place.

 

[Physiocrat]

Technocracy movement ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_Is_Beautiful

Technology can be generally classified as "big" large scale type or those small scale ones which individuals can tap upon, control and utilize. Those small scale technology enhances individual the capability to remain as individuals and thus should be strongly encouraged.

 

[Physiocrat]

Where we sought to find the underlying mechanism of work done, we find finance to be a smokescreen. What we discovered instead, was the law of thermodynamics. Should our best and brightest would.work on science / technology / engineering instead of cooking up schemes to mess up the financial system?

Right on on the financial thing. The more logical approach is the "resource based" approach.

However, despite lacking any sources to back this up, I somehow do feel that financial system does have a part to play in keeping the population in check. If technology can increase output which can sustain more ppl, the tendency is that the population is going to increase accordingly and then......we are back to square one in terms of resources available : human count ratio.

 

[choonway]

Technocracy alone does not address sustainability. Someone can come up with a technically brilliant solution, but it will turn our environment into a wasteland 300 years from now. It must be emphasised that sustainability (which is part of the green movement) is one of the key parameters when phrasing any solution.

There is no real need to keep our own population in check. Why? Look at the foreigners in our land. Do they have any policies in their own homeland to keep their own population in check? Why are we helping them if we can't even take care of ourselves?

 

[Physiocrat]

Why? Look at the foreigners in our land. Do they have any policies in their own homeland to keep their own population in check? Why are we helping them if we can't even take care of ourselves?

I read your posting and perceive it from the usual global universal perspective (which is usually the case whenever such topics are being discussed).
If the concept of nationalism,race is being introduced into such discussions, its difficult to proceed.

 

[choonway]

Should not a country put the interests of it's citizens first and foremost?

 

[Physiocrat]

Should not a country put the interests of it's citizens first and foremost?

this place lacks all the fundamental elements to be called a nation (In terms of the capability to be self sufficient). If our population is 20,000, perhaps its possible but sadly, our population is way beyond what this island's resources can support. We can sustain ourselves is due to trading and leaching (financial hub). Such leaching activities can only continue in a globalized world. Globalization has no room for nationalism.

PS:China is capable of being self sufficient and can go on even without trading with outside world. They have what it takes to talk about nationalism. For SG, its we need others in order to continue to exist with the current population size.

 

[singveld]

 

[Dreamer1]

Should not a country put the interests of it's citizens first and foremost?

Brother Choonway,our current government think "the interests of Singapre citizens = the interests of PAP leaders",we do not agree.
Green Party Singapore must come,it is a matter of time,hope all enviromentalists would start ball rolling.

 

[choonway]

The amount of population that Singapore can support really boils down to the investment in infrastructure that the government makes.

It doesn't matter whether you have 20,000,000 (china during qin dynasty) or 6,900,000 (white paper proposal) or 321,857 (iceland 2013 est.). It really matters how much free time the people have on their hands to invest in their future.

The current government emphasis is on GDP, business, pragmatism etc. resulting in low quality of life is such that people have no bandwidth to think about their future. Why would parents burn books after PSLE?

 

[Physiocrat]

Some article/perceptions/views which I think may interest you.

http://www.theatlantic.com/past/politics/foreign/jfhww.htm

 

[Dreamer1]

Some article/perceptions/views which I think may interest you.

http://www.theatlantic.com/past/politics/foreign/jfhww.htm

Thank you,a good one,God bless