š¾ Archived View for idiomdrottning.org āŗ communism-against-earth captured on 2023-07-22 at 16:41:04. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
ā¬ ļø Previous capture (2022-07-16)
ā”ļø Next capture (2024-02-05)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Looking at the communist side, I sometimes see climate obstructionism too, opposing any plan that doesnāt also solve humanityās millenia-old (albeit amplified in the industrial age) inequality issues. There was this anti geoengineering site that made the rounds a few months back that mixed some very good points vs some of the worst and least thought-through geoengineering proposals with a foundational opposition to all change that didnāt address inequality.
And I get it, I do want to address inequality and if the sweeping changes that fix CAGW also fixes inequality then thatās freaking baller and absolutely yay.
But if they donāt, then we need āem anyway.
Because I donāt wanna kill the Earth (that one should be a āduhā, butā¦)
Weāve seen centuries of delay and obstruct and deny from the capitalists who are clinging to their wealth (both absolute and relative). And I get that we all wanna put āem up against the wall when the revolution comes. But.
My number one goal is averting doomsday. If that means we have to end up with 10000 years of Mikael Wiehe lyrics then I can live with that if we saved the planet. Anyone pulling the breaks on averting the crisis from either side of the proverbial aisle, whether theyāre Exxon or Bakunin, needs to sober up and start living their life right. When a stick destroys the Earth, weāre not much happier if itās called the peopleās stick.
Tug of war on the brink will lead to both falling over.
Donāt get me wrong, Iām not calling for anti-communism either or for capitalism. You know I rant and rave against that dumdumdadadumdum on the daily. All Iām saying is that for me, the priority is pretty darn stark right now and itās called Earth.
Spool Five has a great follow-up.
I sometimes see an idea on the left that I donāt fully vibe with:
That ecological == just. That climate change is this wonderful godsent opportunity to set things right.
My own view is that weāre juggling two separate chainsaws. And thatās not easy or a boon or a good thing. The unjust world is a problem. Climate change is a problem. If we canāt fix the first one, life sucks. If we canāt fix the second one, life will end.
Yes, the problems are connected. The unjust world is making it difficult to address climate change because the haves donāt wanna give up what they have (or, rather, what they think they have, since most of the worldās wealth is illusory, built on the sandcastle of unaccounted-for fossil externalities, on loan from our cinder wasteland future).
But the solutions are not necessarily as connected as the problems are. Having read a ton of Bakunin and Goldman and Marx and RMS and what have you, the leftist economics ususally donāt solve externalities either.
Climate change is a cruelly tightening vise, a runaway steamroller. Itās going to make treating each other humanely harder, not easier.
Letās keep doing our best to stay human in the face of this calamity, and letās keep trying to fight it. ā„
In my view itās more important that the planet & humanity doesnāt die. There are many woes and injustices that we havenāt figured out a solution to for thousands of years. Letās keep working on them šš» but letās not make one calamityās solution be contingent on the other.
We do need new modes of thinking and new ways to distribute resources & labor tasks given that market capitalism is a cruel and embarassing failure, so maybe the solutions will come hand in hand and if so thatās šÆ baller, Iāll be happy.
But I just donāt want us to try to solve these things on hard mode by overly tightly coupling them. š¤·š»āāļø
I didnāt try to uncouple climate change from capitalism. There are other injustices outside of workers rights issues (since the fascists have been intentionally driving wedge issues and bigotry in order to shift the discourse from workers vs owners to pluralists vs populists).
And itās not just the richest 10% that are part of the consumption problem. Our entire society for the past three centuries have been built on that same unsustainable false foundation, that same fossil based faux-wealth.
I donāt drive cars, eat meat or cheese, or go on airplane rides, but I had takeout yesterday and it came in a styrofoam box. Ergo Iām also part of the problem. Everything is tangled up in the problem.
Thatās not to say the private jets can stay. Of course not. Storm the palace.
I get the impression that weāre pretty much on the same page. Itās more a reaction to how I see people saying āno fighting climate change without also fighting this-or-that other injusticeāāto an extent that would seem like a straw doll to you.*
Yes, capitalism needs to go, and I canāt wait to hear some more practical work in that vein, a gradual (yet rapid as heck) transition to new modes of resource distribution and rationing. Sustainability over hollowing faux growth.
Thatās not what I want. Iām not asking to drop either of the two juggled chainsaws. I just see the chainsaws as related-but-not-identical. As two related but separate problems that might (or mightnāt) end up needing very separate & different solutions & efforts.