Nothing But Flowers

In their post-apocalyptic song, the Talking Heads imagine a world that has been quickly de-modernized, where parking lots are covered in daisies. The New Adam and Eve characters are "strong and brave" yet miss the comforts of their old life, growing tired of "nuts and berries". Having just watched a video introducing their book "Bright Green Lies", I can't help envisioning Derrik Jensen and Lierre Kieth huddled around a small fire, brewing dandelion tea to go with their rattlesnake dinner. Not to disparage those parts of their critique which require a considered response.But to say we need a new culture (in a decade or less) isn't really helpful when it comes to solutions. Certainly, ecosocialists don't have it all figured out either. Too often the eco gets left out of the socialism as they struggle for a transitional program or political line. This then is the immediate quandry: given the time frame, what might be salvaged? What level of extraction or agriculture might be acceptable? Though their primary target is the mainstream environmental movement, one of the "Lies" Jensen and Co. go after are techno-modernist proposals, and here I am wondering about the Jacobson Stanford study that claims we can supply all our electricity needs with renewables (WWS or wind, water, solar). My question is: why does it have to be a binary, either/ or? Could we see some de-growth and some technology? Couldn't we say yes, "industrial civilization" is messed up without having to jettison the entire structure? Couldn't we accept certain conveniences to alleviate back-breaking drudgery? Couldn't we accept certain trade-offs (a limited number of grizzlies, less than historic salmon runs, etc) in order to make the proposal a little easier to sell? It needn't be hunting and gathering versus techno-luxury communism. But yes, species with no voice deserve to be considered.