Literature for farming

[Anonymous No.15172216]

Best farming literature for complete beginners? I am looking to obtain a more traditional style wife and impress her with my knowledge.

[Anonymous No.15172230]

>>15172216
bill mollison's 'permaculture'

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.15172346]

>>15172230
:D
And here’s a couple more

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.15172350]

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.15172356]

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.15172364]

[Anonymous No.15172371]

>>15172350
>>15172356
Not bad, but I dont think OP asked for much ideology on the side.

>>15172216
There are actually some neat government and farmer manuals from the great depression that go pretty in depth on the topic.

[Anonymous No.15172378]

>>15172364
have you actually read any of these books?

[Anonymous No.15172388]

>>15172371
the manuals are fine, but they also practice agricultural systems that people are moving away from. i also find the tripfag annoying, and fukukoa's practices are not extremely useful, but i think the overlap between philosophy and agriculture should be explored by anyone approaching agriculture right now, especially if it's just for a family.

[Anonymous No.15172420]

>>15172388
>overlap between philosophy and agriculture
Genesis tells you all you need to know. Especially good if OP wants a trad wife to read some psalms with while working the land.

>The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it.

[Anonymous No.15172424]

>>15172388
Understandable. Yah they are dated, but I usually go through pre copywrite books. But desu, if OP just wants a book on farming, its not something you need a specific recommendation for. They are pretty easy to find.

Also, I dont exacly know what OP's ideology is besides wanting a "traditional lifestyle" which can be anything from just farming like your grandpa, to being in some weird commie/fascist/pagan/eco/incertwhateverhere thing. So I kinda didnt want to encroach on the topic.

[Anonymous No.15172457]

>>15172424
reasonable. i think for someone with no knowledge of farming (i recommended mollison) then permaculture is a reasonable form of agriculture that isn't too heavy on eco-ideology. my assumption was that he wanted a lifestyle that involved agriculture for sustenance rather than production for capital.

>>15172420
genesis doesn't specifically explain agricultural practices.

[Anonymous No.15172481]

>>15172216
De agri cultura - Marcus Porcius Cato

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.15172490]

>>15172378
Mollison and Stamets. I have a lot of reading and no land

>>15172371
Oh wouldn’t want anyone getting ideas!
>>15172388
>fukukoa's practices are not extremely useful
So I hear. Mollison called them a little extreme

[Anonymous No.15172505]

>>15172371
don't let the tripfag derail this thread please

[Anonymous No.15172507]

>>15172457
Permaculture is always a reasonable go to. Personally im interested in it, but am not too concerned about eco-ideology as, well, an ideology. I always held lowercase nature as just an subset of uppercase Nature. Rather temporal.

[Anonymous No.15172531]

>>15172507
that's an interesting take. i'm also involved in permaculture, horticulture and regenerative agriculture. i think mollison (and the others) philosophy are interesting driving forces to their work. i'm unsure if people would be talking about permaculture if those philosophies hadn't been propounded.
it's interesting you don't find the philosophies intrinsic to the processes.
is it just that you don't want to participate in the philosophy of it, or that you aren't interested in thinking about them?

[Anonymous No.15172535]

>>15172490
Do you not Have land? If you live in the US and you are really serious about this stuff, its not too hard or too expensive to get some. If circumstances permit of course. Sometimes people have other things on their plate.

>Oh wouldn’t want anyone getting ideas!
Dont mind that specifically but thats slightly besides the point. though I guess you can interpret OP as such.

>>15172505
ok

[Anonymous No.15172562]

>>15172531
Oh, I do find them interesting, but Personally I am more in line with The Hegelians and existentialists philosophically. So a lot of abstract ideas when it comes to meaning. But of course there is some overlap. a lot of existentialism employes and uses lowercase nature as a vessel for uppercase Nature (nature as fundimental order), and as contingent beings it is largely at home for use to experience Nature through nature if you get my drift.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.15172568]

>>15172535
I have a lot on my plate, but getting some somewhere is on my mind.

[Anonymous No.15172598]

>>15172562
i follow. i'm also interested in german idealists although i've moved away from exploring the existentialist movement although i was very into them maybe 4-5 years ago. i've actually been looking into hegel for the past year or so. who do you mean by hegelians? i've been reading heideggers bauen, wohnen, denken lately and that really caught my attention as an intersection of abstract thought and architecture (which i took to be related to agriculture, especially when he starts talking about the fourfold).
i think eco-ideology like mollison's is pragmatic in nature, which i don't neccesarily think is mutually exclusive to hegelian thought or even existentialism.
from what it seems i don't think you'd find anything too disagreeable in mollisons book in terms of process. i definitely recommend him as a starting point if you ever want to dive into that realm.

[Anonymous No.15172614]

How To Grow Food For Your Family - Samuel R Ogden

[Anonymous No.15172688]

>>15172598
>who do you mean by hegelians?
Specificly, funnily enough, Hegel himself, Kierkegaard, Feuerbach, heidegger. Its weird, but I actually found hegel more understandable than Kant, LOL.

>i don't neccesarily think is mutually exclusive to hegelian thought
Oh, pretty much everything is compatible with hegelianism due to its abstract nature. and the fact that pretty much everything after is somehow related.

> is pragmatic in nature
That I guess is why i'm not particularly keen on it. Now, im not some mystic, but I usually take these sorts of frameworks as particular means (one of many) rather then ends in themselves. Same reason I wouldnt call myself a marxist or capitalist or whatever. Because I can apreciate different frameworks, but im not particularly married to any (Though i understand the fencesitting is itself its own marriage in a way and it is necessary for more extreme actions sometimes.) . I think The second part of Hegels preface of The Phenomenology of mind is what im trying to get at. Truth can be itterative rather than right or wrong. You wouldn't call a flower any less complete then the fruit.

[Anonymous No.15172718]

WORK AND DAYS - HESIOD

[Anonymous No.15172720]

>>15172216
Steinbeck novels.

[Anonymous No.15172731]

Growth of the Soil by Hamsun

[Anonymous No.15172743]

>>15172364
stamets is based

[Anonymous No.15172800]

>>15172688
>Truth can be itterative rather than right or wrong.
Based unrigth and itterative statement my friend.

[Anonymous No.15172812]

>>15172216
Forget how to ried.

[Anonymous No.15173271]

>>15172216
>more traditional style wife
Interested in literature about this too. Do these even exist and what does a male need to do to get them?

[Anonymous No.15173925]

bump.

[Anonymous No.15173931]

>>15172216
>I want to do X for the pussy
never gonna make it

[Anonymous No.15173945]

>>15172490
that fucking apostrophe

[Anonymous No.15175169]

Based and bunpred

[Anonymous No.15175191]

>>15173945
A manual of all designers.

Prove this wrong, protip: you cannot.

[Anonymous No.15175700]

survivorlibrary.com

[eLIT !!+yp8kR80iN5 No.15175786]

>>15172216
5 acres and independence