[lbo-talk] ayfkm?

[bitch at pulpculture.org]

At 01:06 PM 10/1/2007, you wrote:
>Bitch wrote:
>
>
>
> >are ya fuckin' kiddin' me? i just read some thread here abt 100 mile diet.
> >i looked it up. the jokers at the site say that there is no why to "100
> >miles". It sounds better than 165 kilometer diet.
>
>
>People in the nineteenth century American West would have starved
>without canned food.  There's a picture in a book called Legacy of
>Conquest with these miners posed in front of a pile of discarded food
>cans taller than they are.

I've seen something like that before. Before I started reading the site, I 
assumed that maybe this was precisely what they had in mind, so I was 
intrigued. In other words, if we lived via the 100 mile diet, we'd be less 
likely to engage in other more destructive (and productive) activities. No 
conquests possible, if you can't bring along some limes to avoid scurvy or 
canned goods or salted/spiced meat to avoid starvation. Similarly, with 
your energy spent preparing food, you won't have time to get in trouble or 
come up with ideas that might encourage you to do something even more 
harmful to the environment and each other.