This is ridiculous. "Economic growth" just means more "satisfaction of needs". How can you be a human being and not want to satisfy your needs? Even if you just want to stay in your home the whole day and don't want to be stressed, that is a need.

Maybe they're just asking for shifting the growth to regions/people where an increase in welfare is the most easy to reach. In this way, an 'ungrowth' can actually end up in an averaged welfare that is substantially higher than if we would try to reach this goal by pushing the limits of our own welfare. Therefore, a claim for increasing global welfare by economical action doesn't have to be the same as 'economical growth' in the way we interpret this term nowadays. I admit that the latter does not exclude the former, although I support this initiative since it promotes a more global way of thinking about economical welfare.

I am French. I am for the ungrowth. I am astonished by your lack of reflection. The reflection behind this concept is non obvious of course, and one needs to think about for a couple of minute and to read what people explain about that. But, if you like money as the first value in your life, then, no need to try. I am so sorry ...

First of all, I would like to emphasize that I am not the same person as the author of the last reaction. He blames us, liberals, a lack of reflection? What does he mean with such an astonishing statement? Is he mad about liberal reform inside the archaic institutions of the EU? Is he mad about the never-ending liberal success story for more than forty years? Is he mad about the simple fact that hard working people are getting more from the government than lazy parasites? Is he mad about the continuing peace in Europe since the liberalization of the EU in the post WW2-era? Is he mad about the wealth and prosperity in Western Europe? Is he mad about economic growth, which makes our welfare state and excellent level of education possible? Is he mad about the great future we all will have in a liberal EU? Why is that man so bitter, cynical and mad about capitalism and economic growth? Maybe it's time for him to go back to his "may 1968 hippy community"? Maybe it's time for him to go back to the dole office to collect his stamps? Maybe it's time for him to open his eyes and heart to our great society? Maybe it's time to start reflecting about the pros and cons of economic growth in the EU? I can assure him, the positive elements outnumber the negatives by millions to zero! If any one suffers from a so-called "lack of reflection", it is my name-fellow above and his left-wing orientated hippy-gang!

Dear Vincent De Roeck, I am also French and also for ungrowth and also astonished! You sound so single-minded and so reluctant to any kind of alternative thinking. "Is he mad about the great future we all will have in a liberal EU?" What great future? Ever heard of the oil peak, for instance? You just seem to be so ignorant about the physical limits of our planet. Now you should open your eyes. You should read books from Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen, among others. You should read and think a lot more about that and not stop your reflection just because the guy on the picture above looks like a buffoon to your eyes or whatever. Think and be honest to yourself and rational. By the way, the ungrowth concept is not a left-wing thing, its values are actually universal. It is not about deciding whether economic growth is good or bad, it is just about being conscious that it can not possibly last more than 20-150 years anyway. I hope you will try to be honestly more aware, or give me arguments to prove me wrong.

In the 1970's - when the Western World faced an oil crisis for the first time - the "Club of Rome" estimated that by the year 2000, mankind would have consumed all the oil available! This is a simple fact. Today, analysts estimate that we'll still have enough oil for at least 50 years. This is also a fact! I believe in the greatness of our civilization. I believe in the brightness of our scientific thinkers. I believe in the infinite resolve. Man only achieve if they are forced to! Because of the "oil peak" (the rising oil prices are more influenced by speculation and stock investments than by the available amount of gallons!), our society will spend more money and efforts on this issue than it would have spend before! No one denies the upcoming problems due to the limited oil supplies, but there are only two ways for dealing with this problem. Primo, you can turn your back to our way of life and start panicking! You can blame the Americans and all other capitalists who rejected Kyoto and who started war in the Middle East to secure their oil supplies! In my eyes, this way is the pessimistic one! The other possibility is embracing this new challenge and supporting our scientific projects instead of stabbing them in the back! This attitude towards our future is the most real one, the realistic - not the optimistic - as you said. I can't force you to adopt my point of view! I only find it sad that people in the Western Hemisphere are so depressed and frustrated that they attack their own way of life! Economic growth rescued Europe after WW2! Were you against that too? I can't understand that educated people wants to destroy the foundations of their society, their prosperity and their freedom!

First of all, thank you Vincent for answering and explaining your point of view. I don't say "thank you" in order to stab you with more strength afterwards, I mean it, but still I have to contradict you again. I will try not to answer to your message point by point, because I hate it when people do that, but I so much think you are mistaken in nearly everything you say that I feel like I have to quote some pieces of your reply to my message. You say: "I believe in the brightness of our scientific thinkers." And "our society will spend more money and efforts on this issue than it would have spent before!" I am abashed, as usual, to see how confident some people can be about the fact that men in the future will be able to solve the problems generated by themselves, men from the present time. How mature! How responsible! Just ask the scientific thinkers what they think about their own brightness to solve these problems. I am a "scientific thinker" myself. Scientists know there is no solution to the energy problem in the frame of a sustainable growth. The problem is quite simple indeed. Let me quote Kenneth Boulding on that topic: "Anyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist". So? What category are you? An economist, I guess. Scientists won't invent any stock of oil or uranium. Scientists won't make renewable sources of energy efficient enough for humankind to support the same living standards as now in the western hemisphere. Also, the social and economic impacts of the end of oil supplies in the (near) future are one thing, environmental impacts are another thing that justify a massive decrease of oil consumption, and thus economic ungrowth (as our economy is mainly based on oil). Scientists won't make the sea level decrease and make inundated islands and coasts emerge again. Scientist won't make disappeared species come back to life after that global warming (due to anthropogenic activities) has killed them. But I can understand that some people are not touched by that kind of argument. Humans are more important than animals after all? Then again, be conscious that western countries, consuming so much oil now, are jeopardizing the potential of the future development of "undeveloped" countries. African countries, for example, certainly need oil to develop to a decent level of living, but they will never be able to, because it is too expensive for them now and in a few decades, there won't be any left, we will have consumed everything. By encouraging growth in our society, we are condemning Africa to eternal misery, and every one of us is responsible of that. The demonstration may be unclear, but think about it. This makes me think of one of Gandhi's famous sayings: "Live simply so that others may simply live". This idea is not new. Your thoughts seem to be based only on beliefs, and these beliefs are not based on rational facts but rather on the fear that things could be different than what you want them to be. The problem is that most people share your views. I think this is due to the fact that the human brain, when confronted to scaring ideas with apparently no solution, prefers to simply deny them. "It can not happen". You must go beyond that step. You must hear what scientists say. scientists... not novelists, or journalists, or politicians, or economists. And make your own idea, have an independent thought, and stop being brainwashed by mainstream ideology.

First of all, I also appreciate your point of view (as I appreciate the liberty of each individual to develop a different opinion), but I still find it astonishing that you - as a so-called scientist (no harm) - do not believe in the strength of humanity. You are saying that I simply deny those scaring ideas without a decent solution. You say that I am convinced that they cannot happen. You are right! Indeed, you made the right analysis of my recent reactions. I believe positively in our way of life. I believe that - as soon as we have upgraded our solar power systems for example - men is capable of changing this crisis into new opportunities. You can blame my positivism and call it naive (maybe that's even true, the future will undoubtedly tell...) or even stupid without hard feelings, but you can't deny that people in the Middle Ages also thought they had reached the summum of civilization. There still are so many worlds to explore, so many scientific projects to develop, so many discoveries to achieve and so many dreams to live. Our best days are still ahead of us. And even if it is not, than our nature will force us to live every day to the fullest and by forcing us to do this, the situation will only deteriorate. By panicking or ceasing to believe in infinite scientific progress, you only legitimate anti-globalism and - indirectly and undesired, I presume (and hope) - anti-capitalist violence as the world faced in Seattle or Genoa! I believe in the greatness of my world, of my ancestors and - mostly - of my descendants, who will live in a society without sorrow, where individual freedom prevails. I respect every other opinion but I will never cease to defend my positivism and to express my love and gratitude for the society wherein I may live, every day.