Have you heard about the concept of "degrowth"? What do you think about it?
Business Marketing with Nika
9 replies
For the very first time, I heard about it 2 years ago from one (quite a controversial đ guy in our country) and even the idea sounds like this:
degrowth = you can be more self-sufficient, produce less and live contentedly
It felt like communism/socialism...
Can you imagine that this could work?
(I suppose in the world hardly orientated towards growth, progress and increasing number of population and needs â impossible)
Because...
Replies
Business Marketing with Nika@busmark_w_nika
minimalist phone: creating folders
because... not every country and people in their societies are equal (the country may not have enough resources and natural and economic conditions), people will not be equal even in such a society (they may have some handicap or their skill level is not equal to that of others).
But what are your thoughts and arguments?
Share
Very interesting topic. And I do have an opinion about this. As someone who grew up in the soviet era and lived the soviet union life I can tell you that there were a lot of pros. Everyone who wanted to work, worked. Everyone who needed a home had one. Everyone had food on the table. People cared about the culture and life as a community. There were no homeless people or drug adicts. There was no illegal imigration problem. Yes there was less choice in things to buy and do, but the sense of the community was much stronger. People actually spoke to their neighbours and helped each other.There was less crime. Everyone worked for the common good instead of trying to get rich. Young people had respect and care for the elders which is becoming less and less the case in the modern western world. People are losing their purpose, identity...the world is not going in the right direction IMO. The thing is, the reason why some countries are so poor is because they've been robbed and terorised by the rich countries for decades. Not because they didn't have enough resources. It's very easy to use the pretext of "we're coming to save you". Wars are driven by greed! Greed is not driven by the fear of scarcity, as the people who have the least are the kindest and most selfless ones. Greed is driven by too much ambition and too little care for others. I could go on about this and why rich are always getting richer for ages, but bottom of the line is - we've become a throw away society with less values and more greed. So perhaps the saying "degrowth = you can be more self-sufficient, produce less and live contentedly" is not so controversial and is actually something we should consider.
minimalist phone: creating folders
@simona_o_neill3 Yep, in many things you are saying you are right. The capitalistic approach makes us more autonomous, relying only on ourselves (which can drive our ego, greed and so on, all you mentioned.)
I think the idea of ââsharing is good to a certain extent, but there are always people who know how to abuse it, and if such people can get into power, it can be dangerous for the country and people inside the country.
These ideologies are historically linked to politics and their regimes and unfortunately from previous experiences, we didn't have much freedom, closed borders that we couldn't cross, censorship and the like. (talking about the Eastern Bloc before the Velvet Revolution in 89). This can be still felt in Slovakia and we still have fanatics who would like to return in these censorship times.
minimalist phone: creating folders
@simona_o_neill3 and my country is becoming of the example how democratic system is going to be silenced. Sometimes it feels that through a democratic voting system, people can over time elect themselves into totalitarianism if they do not take steps against.
@busmark_w_nika I agree, there's a very fine line. It's about finding that happy medium which historicaly don't think ever was possible.
Hey Nika,
This is such an interesting (and often polarizing) topic! Iâve come across the concept of degrowth a few times, and it always sparks a fascinating debate.
The core idea of degrowthâprioritizing sustainability, reducing consumption, and living with âenoughââsounds idealistic, but I think its feasibility depends heavily on the context and scale. Here's my take:
Self-Sufficiency vs. Market Dependency
In theory, becoming more self-sufficient and consuming less could reduce strain on the environment. However, for many people, achieving this is unrealistic without disrupting the systems we rely onâlike global trade, technology, and specialized labor. Modern economies are deeply interconnected, and pulling back significantly could lead to unintended consequences (e.g., supply chain collapses).
Human Psychology and Progress
As humans, weâre hardwired for progress and improvement. Degrowth challenges this by promoting a mindset shift: contentment over constant ambition. But letâs be honestâcan we realistically undo millennia of human nature and a system built on growth as a metric for success?
Growth â Wastefulness
Not all growth is bad. Innovations in green tech, circular economies, and AI are forms of "growth" that aim to decouple economic progress from environmental harm. This might align better with the worldâs trajectory than a hard stop on traditional growth.
Global Inequalities
Degrowth might make sense for wealthy nations where overconsumption is rampant, but what about developing economies still catching up? The idea feels unfairly skewed toward those whoâve already benefited from industrialization.
So while degrowth raises valid concerns about the sustainability of unchecked growth, it feels more like a critique of excess rather than a universal solution. Maybe the middle ground lies in âgreen growthâ or creating systems that allow for progress while respecting ecological boundaries.
Whatâs your take? Do you think weâll ever see a global shift toward this, or is it more of a thought experiment to challenge how we measure success?
minimalist phone: creating folders
@alex_prompt perhaps moderate consumption would make sense or be more successful if we participated in it collectively as a whole. But as you outlined, the inequalities and imbalances between countries will not reach the same point. Hard to tame a population of 8 billion people
I think that the main issue is the meaningless growth for a sake of growth and corporations focusing only on shareholder value and not the value for society, so maybe we shouldn't oppose growth seen as a progress, but have a reality check on the current state of capitalism. I don't think socialism/communism oposes growth, as it has a more technocratic tendencies. It just have a different model for it.
Also, I recently read an interesting paper: How much growth is required to achieve good lives for all? Insights from needs-based analysis
minimalist phone: creating folders
@karl_mechkin The thing is that the most useful things (like train, industrial revolution and so on) also brought with itself "dark side". Those problems weren't intended but the pace of solving those problems is slower than technological progress (maybe?). Because with one good solution there come another 10 or 20 bad side effects. Somehow it looks like that.