[kahljorn]

i actually had something about centralization but i cut it out because it's so implausible that people would even care about something like decentralization. However, if our society is ever going to progress we're going to need to address these types of problems
the end of my post also said it would be "difficult", but is it difficult as a matter of choice and laziness or just because our society can't reasonably transition? Also, I'm not saying this with any sense of immediacy, just that it's one of the many necessary things for alleviating human problems. I understand transportation problems involved with decentralization and many of the other problems so don't think I'm just ignoring it.

i don't really care if there's capitalism in capitalism, as you said regardless of what capitalism is it's "Self-parasitic and destructive" to have garbage islands bigger than texas(if that's true). Pathology of normalcy. Not only that but I gaurantee you the foods we eat cause developmental problems. Same with carcinogenic air.
Centralization is a huge problem because you have thousands of people shitting within one 5,000 squarefoot building. No ecological system is designed to withstand that much shit, so we have to ship it out to other places which just fucks up ecology elsewhere.
Also I didn't say there shouldn't be growth or progression, just that it should take a more reasonable form. Again, I understand transitions are difficult and may take some time. Although I do think capitalism has "grown" enough. Enough people are breeding, humanity doesn't even need to breed anymore. Reproduction is supposed to be a biological necessity, and yet it's not anymore. Yet, the people who reproduce the most are often poor which causes negative sociolization, and poor people have to rely on poor foods which cause developmental problems. I really think thereshould be a limit on how much people are allowed to breed. Two children per two adults is fine.

Anyway I don't know why Growth and progression are recognized as the same thing as centralization and industry, if anything that seems a bit ethnocentric and sub speci saeculi. What exactly is "Growth"? To me it seems like an empty, cancerous concept. LETS GROW BUT WITH ABSOLUTELY NO CHECKS AND BALANCES AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS THE MORE PEOPLE WE HAVE THE BETTER. Quantity without Quality?
Not only that but a system that's designed explicitley to meet the needs of an ever complexing, ever growing populace does not mean you've "Grown". The only reason we have industry and centralization is to attempt to meet the needs of gigantic, unnecessary population. It's not growth so much as trying to keep up with yourself.

by the way I'm not trying to imply that industry hasn't helped advance or grow some parts of our society, just that, at best, it's a transitional phase and that it isn't the endall of progression and growth.

city dwellers will have to move and quit being reliant on a city to provide their needs.