|
|
|
|
|
by AlotOfReading
1227 days ago
|
|
Not a good look to strawman things like this when you have sibling comments elsewhere in this thread saying the discussion needs more nuance. I actually did napkin math awhile back comparing a particular 16th century indigenous agricultural yields with 20th century American agriculture [0]. The indigenous system came out favorably until the second half of the 20th century despite the limitations of hand tools and natural fertilizer. There's still a gap between that and current yields, but I think it's fair to point out that most advocates of these systems are actually arguing for a synthesis with modern technologies that allow them to scale rather than a complete rejection of modernity. [0] https://reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/l4do8a/aztec_cor... |
|
Claiming that people are arguing for “synthesis” is just a weasel word escape route. Indigenous farming is completely inadequate and the parts that are useful have already been incorporated into modern farming.
What is it you think is still on the table for this “synthesis”?