I'm sitting on the VIA train to Toronto, overhearing a very nice conversation
between a guy and a girl my age, both who apparently go to Guelph University.
They started off talking about farms and the feasibility of farming in the
Kingston-Ottawa area. The girl said she really wanted to live on a small farm,
not for business, but to be sustainable. She wanted to have some goats and
some chickens and some big gardens so she could feed herself and her family
without having to rely on products of society. The guy was nodding and
approving this idea and really encouraging her to go for it.

She said she just really wanted to get out of the city. The guy said that the
only thing he liked about living in the city was being able to get around
without a car. The girl agreed, but predicted that if she was sustainable then
she wouldn't really have to leave home. If she could live off her land and
loved her home so much, then there wouldn't be any need to drive around.

She said if she wanted to eat meat, she'd have to kill it herself. She'd have
to learn how to slaughter chickens. She's not sure whether she'd be able to
learn that, but she believed that was the only right way to be a meat-eater,
and the guy agreed. He said he knew someone who worked at a chicken factory
farm, where he had to make sure all these chickens would fit in some crate or
basket, and if one ever fell out, he had to pick it up and kill it by cutting
its neck. He couldn't believe how anyone could stand to do that for a living.

The two of them started talking about how it's really hard to buy anything
ethically these days. You'd have to avoid virtually every company in order to
be ethical. But they still avoid the really bad ones like Starbuck's and
Wal-Mart because it makes them feel better about themselves. They've both read
"that book" by Naomi Klein - no doubt it's the one with the picture of the
guy's head stamped with a barcode... can't recall its title right now.

They both love travelling; they've travelled in Quebec and the eastern
provinces. They've gone to protests in New York, Toronto, and Quebec City.
The guy described how he would use a bandana to avoid the tear gas.

The girl is describing how she used to just get angry whenever she heard about
the depressing things happening in the world, but now she just accepts it. She
reasons that anger isn't going to be effective or productive in any way. (I
feel I'm the same way.) She's describing how everyone is entitled to their
opinion. Just negating things said by those with whom you don't agree doesn't
solve anything. You musn't discount another person's opinion just because you
don't agree with it. (I agree.)

The guy's really impressed with the recycling system in Guelph (I don't know
anything about it, but oh well). He believes it's something that will happen
in other places, but it will take people to fight for it. And you might as
well have a good attitude while you fight for it. He says students have so
much power when it comes to voting.

There are a lot of conservative people in Guelph; we just forget that they're
there because the left wing is so noisy there. Sometimes the way to get across
a message to them is by taking a very anthropomorphic view. Pesticides, for
instance: say that you are giving your children leukemia, not that you're
harming the environment.

When global warming gets extreme, Canada's going to be a great place to live.
The climate is going to be warm and the vegetation is going to be lush.
(Hmm... :P )

The way the media describes "epidemics" and natural disasters is so extreme,
as if these things have never happened before. Virtually whenever there is
any new disease, there *is* an epidemic - that's just how diseases work. To
make a big deal of it is stupid.  Natural disasters like earthquakes and
hurricanes happen every year. But the media makes it seem like a huge deal
when it happens because they only report a selection of them that occur.

Regarding the end of the world: "*Something's* gonna happen, I know that."
"Yeah, who knows what."

There was an experiment in which there were two trees separated off from each
other. They started burning one of the trees, and monitored the conditions of
the other tree while this happened, and they found all sorts of flucuations in
their readings as soon as the other tree began to burn. Clearly we don't
understand everything. Just because we think the trees don't have a central
nervous system doesn't mean they aren't "alive."

Books they were recommending:
  - /The Celestine Prophecy/
  - /The Death of Ivan Illich/
  - /The Climb of the West/ - history of the world from the point of view of
  the rise and fall of civilizations. This pattern happens and we're just a
  part of it and we must just accept it. Need to know a bit about history
  in order to understand it; the guy apparently wasn't smart enough to get it.