[miahwilde]

Disagree. "Throw-away" culture has been a historic norm and can actually become a moral "should". Cultures that produce "toxic" waste products (such as the current dominant one) do indeed have a moral imperative to do what they can to reduce waste. However, cultures that produce "beneficial" waste have a moral imperative to produce more. "Throw-away" culture has its roots in the long history of humans where "throwing things away" was just returning resources into the larger ecological systems. In this model, who gets alienated over the long arc of time?

[rcktmrtn]

> Disagree. "Throw-away" culture has been a historic norm and can actually become a moral "should"

> However, cultures that produce "beneficial" waste have a moral imperative to produce more

To me "throw-away" culture very much implies with it that what you're throwing away something toxic without considering the about consequences -- maybe you could say "composting" culture as an alternative. And in that context, there isn't really "waste" at a system level, only on an individual one. It's a good point that there is all the difference between just managing waste (repair) and recycling it. Both are independent skills and good in their own way.

[gumby]

This is a great point: 'long history of humans where "throwing things away" was just returning resources into the larger ecological systems'.

One of our team is an anthropologist. She once mentioned that there's a lot of trash around in many agricultural communities in "developing countries". And indeed, earlier the culture was that when you ate a piece of fruit you just tossed the rind into the bushes or on the field and went on your way. There aren't public rubbish bins in these small villages, so what happens is plastic bottles and chips bags fly around.