Expand the picture a little bit, though, and you're living a life where you have hours to spare and gardening, with advances in small-scale farming tech, is an enjoyable hobby. Something you do as your main source of food, or something you do to supplement your apportionment of the centralized, industrial scale farming industry (which also enjoys advanced in technology that make it more harmonious with nature and more efficient with its use of land).
When you consider the technology we have today that was considered sci-fi whimsy 40 years ago, the technological advance required for the pictured aesthetic is well within our capability.
What you say is completely fine and i support it, but in my experience the solarpunk aesthetic has been largely used by "back to nature" reactionary movements that see "industrial society" as corruption etc...
industrial society in its current form HAS poisoned our planet. You're suggesting that solarpunk would send us back to the fucking stone ages but it really just means phasing out harmful and obsolete technology in liu of ecofriendly alternatives. There's alot of agricultural methods that industrial society has phased out to it's own detriment, depleting the soil and replacing biodiversity with... corn. endless corn.
Yeah very true. The difference isn't in the solarpunk-aesthetic vision but in the path to get there (industrial innovation vs primitivist regression), and when reactionaries try to falsely claim the idea of a green future as something that is exclusive to de-industrialization. I think it's important not to let that false exclusivity stick.
Expand the picture a little bit, though, and you're living a life where you have hours to spare and gardening, with advances in small-scale farming tech, is an enjoyable hobby. Something you do as your main source of food, or something you do to supplement your apportionment of the centralized, industrial scale farming industry (which also enjoys advanced in technology that make it more harmonious with nature and more efficient with its use of land).
When you consider the technology we have today that was considered sci-fi whimsy 40 years ago, the technological advance required for the pictured aesthetic is well within our capability.
What you say is completely fine and i support it, but in my experience the solarpunk aesthetic has been largely used by "back to nature" reactionary movements that see "industrial society" as corruption etc...
industrial society in its current form HAS poisoned our planet. You're suggesting that solarpunk would send us back to the fucking stone ages but it really just means phasing out harmful and obsolete technology in liu of ecofriendly alternatives. There's alot of agricultural methods that industrial society has phased out to it's own detriment, depleting the soil and replacing biodiversity with... corn. endless corn.
Yeah very true. The difference isn't in the solarpunk-aesthetic vision but in the path to get there (industrial innovation vs primitivist regression), and when reactionaries try to falsely claim the idea of a green future as something that is exclusive to de-industrialization. I think it's important not to let that false exclusivity stick.