I was refering to the folks, mostly celebs, that promote hut living, manual labor organic farming as superior to modern day agriculture, yet wouldn’t be caught dead living in a hut, or tilling the ground by hand, horse and plow, or even with a tractor. Then in their next sentence attack slash and burn as destroying the ‘lungs of the world’ or some other such rubbish as they drive to the airport in their SUV, to fly to their next appearance, or from one mansion to another before flying to their 3rd mansion -all via their private jet.
Everywhere they look they see only problems, not the ways that the problems can be, or already have been overcome. All they do is make a buck at the expense of everyone, waste resources, and tell everyone else how to reduce carbon footprints.
Look, I'm a techie too and I hate the weed patches organic farms have become, but believe me, it isn't hard to see what is happening when the chemical farmer forgets to lay down the ammonia in a certain patch, or watch his soil dry into a cracking sandy cake bereft of organic matter.
What would you say if I could show you how using animals to consume stubble or trample fields, not only introduces nitrogen fixing inocula deep into the soil without screwing up the beneficial critters therein, but it preserves fruit crops and nucleates raindrops? Is that "sophisticated" enough for you? Do you know how to use animals to maintain native bees without need of keepers?
If somebody wiped out all elecrtonic devices by EMP attack, would we have sufficient animals to provide food, till the land, or move goods? My point there is that there are definable benefits of "low tech" currently unrecognized in the marketplace because we have socialized those risks. Markets that trade contracts for the use of those assets in such a way as to mitigate the risks. That is what real civil defense looks like. What if I told you that the design of that risk mitigation system was Biblical, and has been totally misunderstood for 3,000 years, until now?