#241

AZ_IZ_OT posted:

That right to land and its Lockean counterpart are indistinguishable from each other absent the proper context of a functioning state apparatus through which to draw a differentiation in intent. I'll contend that most people are not even aware of a difference between the two.


What are you talking about? Practically all significant struggles for national self-determination occur have occurred in the absence of a functioning state apparatus. the instances in which national self-determination has resulted in state formation has been the effort of protracted struggles of stateless peoples for self-determination. these states did not exist somehow prior to such assertions of nationhood, they necessarily followed it

#242

AZ_IZ_OT posted:

it looked like people handed over authority to tribal elders without real cause,


it's their fucking land. sorry if you think being a citizen of Planet Earth or some other fluffy environmentalist bullshit allows you to pull rank but if you want to help protect native land you better fucking fall in line behind native leaders and put your shit meaningfully on the line, not spout pseudo-intellectual nonsense in a pathetic attempt to mock them

#243

pogfan1996 posted:

These kinds of discussions can be significantly more useful and productive by focusing on how there was a vacuum of revolutionary leadership and building for future conflicts


sure we could talk about COINTELPRO, managed dissent, the escalating militarization of the suppression & disruption tactics employed against civilians, and good security culture. move on to organizing people around concrete goals, maintaining party discipline, cultivating organizational resiliency and sustaining the pursuit of long term strategic aims.


OR we could brew up a big ole mug of something warm, slip in a little somethin to take the edge off, and watch AZ_IZ_OT vomit up a markov chain of smug jargon insisting that we're The Real Racists.

personally, i'm in the mood for something lighthearted and fun.

#244

pogfan1996 posted:

Criticizing the no dapl movement for it's lack of an effective marxist vanguard is an accurate but ineffective criticism. Nobody here is going to disagree on the value of democratic centralism in the effective mobilization of resources and resisting state oppression, but the root cause of the movements shortcomings is not based in indigenism. The left's degeneracy is far more deeply rooted.

These kinds of discussions can be significantly more useful and productive by focusing on how there was a vacuum of revolutionary leadership and building for future conflicts


I'm trying to say that the indigenous leadership had, thanks to various social dynamics that included white racism, the status of a vanguard. It didn't need to be a specifically Marxist-led vanguard to operate more effectively than it did. Nobody likes Marxists to begin with. Apart from the PSL I cannot see any explicitly Marxist org avoiding the taint of white academia.

#245
the vanguard is an advanced revolutionary party, not just a synonym for "leadership"
#246
im not going to miss this thread
#247

blinkandwheeze posted:

the vanguard is an advanced revolutionary party, not just a synonym for "leadership"


They're a vanguard in the context of their uninterrupted organization and agitation against oppression. They built support slowly over time until a revolutionary opportunity presented itself. My issue is with how they handled that opportunity. If you don't think they're a vanguard that's a whole other argument.

#248

Petrol posted:

AZ_IZ_OT posted:

it looked like people handed over authority to tribal elders without real cause,

it's their fucking land. sorry if you think being a citizen of Planet Earth or some other fluffy environmentalist bullshit allows you to pull rank but if you want to help protect native land you better fucking fall in line behind native leaders and put your shit meaningfully on the line, not spout pseudo-intellectual nonsense in a pathetic attempt to mock them


Fine, yes, I was being an asshole.

#249
“As of today, the United States will cease all implementation of the non-binding Paris accord and the draconian financial and economic burdens the agreement imposes on our country,” Trump said.

http://www.thejournal.ie/donald-trump-us-climate-change-deal-3422042-Jun2017/
#250
[account deactivated]
#251
*screaming at no one in particular* more speed! accelerationism bay bee woo hoo!
#252
These gosh darn liberals keep on frickin blaming climate change on deniers. you stupid mother fuckers. none of the assholes that have huge interests in profiting off their environmentally destructive industries are in any state of denial. All of them know about climate change. They are well aware of the impact. But they are not going to give up literally all their power and wealth to protect the environment. If they would, we wouldn't be in this situation in the first place.

And the liberals might say, hey, what about the states that have a good environmental track record, and all their wealthy individuals are building windmills and solar panels because their citizens strongly believe in climate change. Well, I would say, first of all, they are nowhere near close enough to to meeting targets that would realistically keep our planet from cooking. Second, how much of their environmental baggage is shipped off to developing countries. third, how many of these companies have sister corporations or investors that have interests in fossil fuel industries.

I know i'm preaching to the choir here. but I just don't understand how someone can claim to understand so much about climate change,but never go as far as criticizing capitalism. it's all laid out there for you. god damn it.look you dummies! this whole idea of endless growth and consumption is actually bad. and they way to solve climate change.... is not more consumption and growth. FUCK
#253
how dumb. just how fucking dumb do youi have to be. holy fuck. literal apocalypse. collapse of civilization. fucking unprecedented changes to our climate that will drastically change (with a high likelihood of extinction) every single living thing on this planet. this is what capitalism has to offer. this is the end game. death and destruction.it's all right there. but nope. communism is still bad. god damn it. what the fuck.
#254
I just hate anti-vaxers. gross. unbelievable. I can't believe someone would listen to pseudoscience and put other children's lives at risk. they should go to jail. abhorrent people.

What do you mean my lifestyle is causing an extinction level event? Yes, I know climate change is awful. that's why i voted democrat. i am making a difference. If it wasn't for trump we would be.fa dhueb893gq3q24h80g4o3H89fqh89fp89[w34i[3th8i2th8i3qh834[qu89034[qfh34qhg89[34h8t4io
#255
When talking to leftcurious liberals about the bewildering persistence of climate denialism, try pitching the scientific truth of historical materialism
#256


study can be found here http://www.climatechange-foodsecurity.org/uploads/Drought_review_Dai_11.pdf
#257

hey posted:

this whole idea of endless growth and consumption is actually bad


reachfor the stars

#258
Wow look how much of the scary graph is red!!!!!! oh red is a minus 4 on a scale that goes to minus 20, hmmm.
#259

Keven posted:

Wow look how much of the scary graph is red!!!!!! oh red is a minus 4 on a scale that goes to minus 20, hmmm.

Right Keven. If the scale goes to 20, -4 can't posisbly be very much under any circumstances.

#260
4 is red because that's about how bad droughts get in our current climate system. california got basically no rain for 3 years, and half the state was at PDSI=4.

#261
blurp

Edited by toyotathon ()

#262

Keven posted:

Wow look how much of the scary graph is red!!!!!! oh red is a minus 4 on a scale that goes to minus 20, hmmm.


Wow you really owned that grapgh

#263
I kicked its ass. Someone post one of the ones thats completely indecipherable scribbles over each other so we can all performatively freak out.
#264
Climate change is obviously real & unstoppable at this point please understand I'm criticizing graphs (which are liberal btw).
#265

roseweird posted:

hey posted:

this whole idea of endless growth and consumption is actually bad

reachfor the stars


that's where it gets better. there are people. real god damn people. that honestly believe that one of the solutions to climate change and resource depletion is space travel and science fiction. Silicon valley liberals (really all liberal engineers it seems) have so much faith in the fast evolving tech offered by fuckos like musk that they think the solution is going to magically appear. That climate change is just a matter of enough sleeper pods, games room, candy machines, hard work, long hours, open concept spaces, and venture capitalists to figure this out. You want to talk about denial. That's fucking denial. The poor ass republican from rural Louisiana that never graduated high school that doesn't believe in climate change isn't the problem. you are the problem. you were presented with solutions to climate change, but you decided to gamble on something you read in a comic book. you fucking asshole

But that stupid rich asshole fuck might make it through this. Because there is always a possibility of a hail mary, and at this point it may be the only thing that saves us. And that nerd is going to feel vindicated. "see, look, we control the world's climate now, we made it through this, it was technology that saved us". so what if a billion people had to suffer before we returned to stability. they're just happy they were right

#266
the Great Drought is coming
#267
who the fuck is tim and why did you have to drag him into this?
#268
Over the past 40 years, about 2 billion hectares of soil - equivalent to 15% of the Earth's land area (an area larger than the United States and Mexico combined) - have been degraded through human activities, and about 30% of the world's cropland have become unproductive. But it takes on average a whole century just to generate a single millimetre of topsoil lost to erosion.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2013/jun/07/peak-soil-industrial-civilisation-eating-itself

permaculturalists talk about 'building soil' with a variety of techniques that dont involve fertiliser (well, composting) ... no idea if it works on a big scale.

same author wrote these before the saudi/us/uk invasion of yemen ...

http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/yemen-s-collapse-taste-things-come-456530551
http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/new-age-water-wars-portends-bleak-future-804130903
#269

hey posted:

roseweird posted:

hey posted:

this whole idea of endless growth and consumption is actually bad

reachfor the stars

that's where it gets better. there are people. real god damn people. that honestly believe that one of the solutions to climate change and resource depletion is space travel and science fiction. Silicon valley liberals (really all liberal engineers it seems) have so much faith in the fast evolving tech offered by fuckos like musk that they think the solution is going to magically appear. That climate change is just a matter of enough sleeper pods, games room, candy machines, hard work, long hours, open concept spaces, and venture capitalists to figure this out. You want to talk about denial. That's fucking denial. The poor ass republican from rural Louisiana that never graduated high school that doesn't believe in climate change isn't the problem. you are the problem. you were presented with solutions to climate change, but you decided to gamble on something you read in a comic book. you fucking asshole

But that stupid rich asshole fuck might make it through this. Because there is always a possibility of a hail mary, and at this point it may be the only thing that saves us. And that nerd is going to feel vindicated. "see, look, we control the world's climate now, we made it through this, it was technology that saved us". so what if a billion people had to suffer before we returned to stability. they're just happy they were right



hey,
reach
for
the
stars.

#270
billions of people exist because of and suffer for technology. fucked up. infinite growth is either good or inevitable and the necessary must be equivalent to the good for a sane mind. or else it's the alternative to stagnation and death. it's easy to chart a path of development without suffering, but difficult to implement it. is there an idea, or a hope, here, wherein contradictions within capitalism lead to a collapse so total that conditions favor primitive communism? let's share our scraps and turnips together. such hopelessness...
#271
sorry just spitballin bout the ultimate fat e of humanite here
#272
http://apjjf.org/2017/11/Vltcheck.html
#273
The fact that the timeline we're working on is going so fast, I'm terrified. I think a lot of people tend to bracket out this stuff because the left is in such bad condition it seems like we'll need a lot of time. But the time isn't there. Like everything hinges on what people can do in the next couple decades and no matter what there's going to be some level of unimaginable catastrophe. It really is do or die in an absolute sense.
#274
someone post that Fist of the North Star climate change gif again
#275


lol
#276
Robert Biel's "The Entropy of Capitalism" (which that is from) does a good job explaining a few things without devolving into complete maospeak,

Firstly is how the entropic build up in the earth system as a result of capitalism has been paid forward, the attempt to maintain the mythology of progress and development always comes at the cost of increased and accelerating environmental destruction. The example he gives is how (techno)solutions are route bound, and deviating from that route is impossible within capitalism, the only way the system copes is doubling down - The solution to food shortages was to replace loss of actual soil fertility with NPK fertilisers, this leads to an impoverishment of the soil complexity and organic composition. The solution to this is not to restore soil organic complexity, but to develop GM crops which can deal with shit soil, these in turn are more susceptible to plant pests, so spraying has to increase, which leads to resistance -> chemicals become more toxic, in larger volumes.... and so on - each "solution" pays the problem forward with interest, the complexity in the system is progressively worn down into a simple system, each technological "solution" creates a bigger problem, until the whole system snaps - the thermodynamic limit is reached, game over, mass starvation.

Secondly he demonstrates how the core-periphery model applies at a thermodynamic level, that imperialism sucks energy from the periphery into the core to maintain itself - a truly parasitic existence.

Thirdly he flags up something which another poster here said in regards to Afghanistan. That as this system enters its terminal phase (which the author characterises as lining up with the bush 2 era), the Euro-American Imperialist system of attempting to maintain complete control has become untenable enough that imperialism has moved into a fall back position - where if domination of regions and populations can't be guaranteed in a chaotic situation then destructive chaos is the next best option. This has only increased since Biel was looking at Iraq and i guess s we've got a lot more to come.

And lastly he explains how imperialism has become both parasitic on the destruction it creates - on its own decay, and auto-cannibalistic - as global control fails, the core is forced to eat its own democratic rights and conventions, re-importing its external repressive methods back from the periphery to the core.

In Biels own words, the "end of history" discourse is correct, but not in the way they thought of it.



but beil is still a bad writer, tho its better than the eurocommunism book he wrote.
#277
i liked that book when i was reading it, but nothing sunk into my brain at all.
#278
the writing style is dire, the structure needs serious work and like almosy all books it could do with 50% of the words being crossed out... but despite that the british maoist third worldist professor of sustainible agricultures take on how fucked we reall are is worth it
#279

tears posted:

Firstly is how the entropic build up in the earth system as a result of capitalism has been paid forward, the attempt to maintain the mythology of progress and development always comes at the cost of increased and accelerating environmental destruction. The example he gives is how (techno)solutions are route bound, and deviating from that route is impossible within capitalism, the only way the system copes is doubling down - The solution to food shortages was to replace loss of actual soil fertility with NPK fertilisers, this leads to an impoverishment of the soil complexity and organic composition. The solution to this is not to restore soil organic complexity, but to develop GM crops which can deal with shit soil, these in turn are more susceptible to plant pests, so spraying has to increase, which leads to resistance -> chemicals become more toxic, in larger volumes.... and so on - each "solution" pays the problem forward with interest, the complexity in the system is progressively worn down into a simple system, each technological "solution" creates a bigger problem, until the whole system snaps - the thermodynamic limit is reached, game over, mass starvation.



This is very important. Our agriculture system is already experiencing non-climate change related issues, and already heavily relies on highly advanced globalized industries/technologies to sustain itself. Climate change is going to put huge amounts of pressures on both the natural cycle of crop growth, as well as interfere with agriculture products (parts, fertilizers, 'cides, hydrocarbons, even R&D) through regional destabilization.

Globalized industry is highly precarious. Once globalization takes root (which it has), it must exist to sustain itself. The John Deer tractor claims to be built in America, but it relies on parts, processes, and materials from around the world. If the people of Shenzhen decide to riot because of food shortages, the entire world's electronics supply line has been cut. The collapse of our globalized society will be spectacular and horrifying.

#280
agreedo, one thing that i find people often get confused by is what is complex and what is simple. The globalised industry of food production for the population of the earth is actually extremely simple and becoming more so, single pathways with multiple steps, fragility shouldnt be confused for complexity - resiliance, of eco-systems, of human food production etc actually grows from complexity. This should be extremely obvious to anyone thinking about how growing 1000 food crops is so much more resiliant to problems with one of them than growing 7 main food crops