Re: [ox-en] Multi-local societies and Global Villages
- From: "Franz Nahrada" <f.nahrada reflex.at>
- Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 21:05:40 +0200
crox iac-research.ch (Christoph Reuss) writes:
I see a contradiction in this: If you assume a coming crash, you must
take into account that the global communication networks will also crash;
but the Global Villages concept is _based on_ global communication.
OK thank you for reading me precisely.
I think that an "economic crash" is not necessarily a technological crash,
and not necessarily a breakdown of infrastructures.
With the creation of self-supporting and globally cooperating villages or
regions and the shift to "support economies" there will be more chances to
avioid catatrophic scenarios.
It is like the transition from feudalism to capitalism: there were
countries with enormous political and social upheaval, and there were
countries where things happened more peacefully.
So the Global Villages have of course the need to be connected by hubs or
mothercities. It is the interest to strengthen power centers that
strengthen decentralisation which creates a complex historical dialectics.
And generally, I think the concept of "hicks in the sticks preparing for
doomsday" is problematic (à la Quinn's neo-Tribalism ) and rather the
_antithesis_ of the modern _information society_ that Oekonux envisions.
Global Villages have nothing to do with neo Tribalism.
It is not about renouncing technology, but going for the right kind of
So there is - for example - a difference between a petrol based chemistry
and a plant based chemistry. The latter will be the base for Global
Villages technology design and material cycles.
Actually there are many different options in the way technology and tools
Global Villages are based on high-tech self providing and need a specific
kind of technology.
The good news is: the same technology is needed around the world. And its
actually possible to design and produce it.
That gives the idea some material base to succeed!
Contact: projekt oekonux.de