The first question it prompts is unanswerable. "What have we done?" A full accounting is really impossible now. Perhaps some historian in 4000 AD will have sufficient perspective to quantify the full sum of the suffering caused and destruction done in the pursuit of oil. For now we can merely reflect on the horror of the question.
The second is perhaps more addressable. "Why?"
I don't mean, in asking this question, to discuss some surface nothings, why oil or
why capitalism or why Iraq. I mean the very heart of it, the core of these historical actions that produce this result. At the focal point of any action is a person thinking it through and making a decision. I understand that there are those who dismiss the significance of individuals in the action of history, but I am trying to drive at the real human heart of something I just sincerely do not understand.
The reasoning, so far as I understand, of those who hold the levers of power in the modern capitalist nation-state, is that their own state's security in a long-term, practically infinite-term sense, rests very firmly on the security of the resources the state depends on. There is no secret capitalist conspiracy here, this is not a hidden agenda - we must have what we need to carry on.
I understand this, but underneath that lays the implicit assumption that my nationstate, my particular organizational allegiance is absolutely essential in every way to life, happiness, the continuation of everything I hold dear. Or in short, fanatic nationalism.
Personally I have a basic feeling of affinity with the people in the state of my birth. We share general cultural touchstones. Basic abilities to relate. But I have very little sense of roots, mostly because I have moved dozens of times in my life as my parents and then I were swept along to wherever the jobs were with no real sense of community-identity. Is that what it all comes down to? Is it just a kinship association? Or is fanatic nationalism something deeper? Can I understand it? Why is it so appealing? Can it be overcome, now that the genie's been let out?
I have strongly believed for years now that the best chance a socialist alternative has in the future is one which embraces a focus on community, locality, sustainability, and independence from a non-local and essentially non-human capitalist system. But is that focus just a disguised version of fanatic nationalism too?
I am asking so I can learn, I hope. I doubt everything. Herzog's documentary faces me with images to which my reaction leaves no room for irony or detachment. So I thought maybe we could talk about it.
Goethestein posted:the way to the future is porno.
in that case, goat, tell me what the far, far, far, far, far, far future is like.
getfiscal posted:Goethestein posted:the way to the future is porno.
in that case, goat, tell me what the far, far, far, far, far, far future is like.
the far, far, far, far future in an infinite void of cold nothingness forever
Lykourgos posted:wow a boring, pedestrian OP. an immature, meandering monologue that has no real value to the rest of us. so many assumptions, too. bleh. downvoted.
Lykourgos posted:wow a boring, pedestrian OP. an immature, meandering monologue that has no real value to the rest of us. so many assumptions, too. bleh. downvoted.
von Trier: Herzog would say that he has dreamed me, or some other such thing of that nature. He wouldn’t call it psychological, because he hates all forms of philosophy that isn’t classical, set in glyphs on stone. He believes in prohpecy. He likes Greek dreams, but he cannot get back to the simplicity of the first dream and so he takes refuge in neo-classical hallucinations. He is like an addict chasing the first time of something, what? Maybe a suppressed war memory. I don’t know.
Lykourgos posted:wow a boring, pedestrian OP. an immature, meandering monologue that has no real value to the rest of us. so many assumptions, too. bleh. downvoted.
i decided it was more important to just hit the post button with a bunch of half-baked concepts so i could maybe have a discussion with some people instead of spending my time trying to refine it or rework it into some really big deal. i'd rather be honest about the shadows of ideas & talk about them than try to form things into some neat package for you. and look, crow was nice enough to talk about it with me. having a discussion on a discussion forum. so eat a dick.
swampman posted:Its a powerful movie, but first of all remember what its about: a planet in our solar system, white clouds, the land shrouded in mist. and second of all, herzog is very unafraid to fake footage, coach interviews, and so on. I think he just feels the narrative is subservient to the celluloid, but I have Herzog on Herzog arriving in the mail soon, and can tell you more when i've read it. Lektionen en finsternis is pretty full on, but the scale of the disaster is deliberately expanded on the screen. Herzog thought he'd have a long time to shoot the burning wells, but had to hire a camera team he'd never worked with before, who were also in the area, after he found out they'd be closed much sooner than he expected. This isn't to say that the scale isn't enormous but Herzog shouldnt be your primary evidence for moral thought. Thank for posting the thread.
I have read/seen other media about it, I'm trying not to let it be the sole guide of what is Really Happening, etc. The geological devastation made less of an impact on me (though still quite a lot) than the juxtaposition of actual humans placed in the middle of it all, the clapped-together machinery, the oil-covered faces. The ridiculous pressure of the wells and the full knowledge that the pipework could have ruptured any moment they were trying to re-cap them.
I understand that oil well firefighting and recapping is a lucrative industry and of course everyone is well compensated and it's a refined (ha) process at this point, and it's not just like Herzog might be visually implying, except for a few brief shots, that they're just dour, half-mad men eternally battling hellfire. It still looks like no place for humanity, whether or not anyone is happy to do it.
the future is one which embraces a focus on community, locality, sustainability, and independence from a non-local and essentially non-human capitalist system. But is that focus just a disguised version of fanatic nationalism too?
to me, to a certain degree, yes, with the "community - locality" emphasis rather than "community - humanity" emphasis
socialism to me sounds much more like
drwhat posted:dour, half-mad men eternally battling hellfire. It still looks like no place for humanity, whether or not anyone is happy to do it.
with spoils and power to the global majorities rather than to the national minority ownership, with plans and safeguards in place, surely "sustainability" but perhaps not in the ways that we can imagine now, pushing society, technology and humanity to ever greater heights and beyond previously rigid limits, but now with the interests of not only the survival but ever greater advancement of all humanity a primary goal
drwhat posted:Lykourgos posted:wow a boring, pedestrian OP. an immature, meandering monologue that has no real value to the rest of us. so many assumptions, too. bleh. downvoted.
i decided it was more important to just hit the post button with a bunch of half-baked concepts so i could maybe have a discussion with some people instead of spending my time trying to refine it or rework it into some really big deal. i'd rather be honest about the shadows of ideas & talk about them than try to form things into some neat package for you. and look, crow was nice enough to talk about it with me. having a discussion on a discussion forum. so eat a dick.
it's tough discussing half-baked topics posted by someone so different. I mean, people of your exerience, class, and beliefs might be interested because they're troubled by the same issues and have a similar perspective, but otherwise it's so meh. I don't agree with your many assumptions, I don't share your apparent perspective, and I don't find the same things mysterious or taxing. Therefore, I would like something more thoughtful and accessible than some meandering monologue.
also I don't see any posts by crow here
Lykourgos posted:it's tough discussing half-baked topics posted by someone so different. I mean, people of your exerience, class, and beliefs might be interested because they're troubled by the same issues and have a similar perspective, but otherwise it's so meh. I don't agree with your many assumptions, I don't share your apparent perspective, and I don't find the same things mysterious or taxing. Therefore, I would like something more thoughtful and accessible than some meandering monologue.
why is this post discussing itself?
drwhat posted:er i meant swampman not crow. i regret the error
hahah thats funny because in terms of style content and voice hey are both pretty indistinguishable from eachother and also untermensch unlike myself and lykourgos
EmanuelaOrlandi posted:drwhat posted:er i meant swampman not crow. i regret the error
hahah thats funny because in terms of style content and voice hey are both pretty indistinguishable from eachother and also untermensch unlike myself and lykourgos
crow is much more well read than me, while my posts are orange colored
What have we done?
who is we? is we the US? the west? humanity? the oligarchs who profit from oil extraction? not everyone shares an equal burden of guilt. you can oppose things like this without surrendering your identity
A full accounting is really impossible now. Perhaps some historian in 4000 AD will have sufficient perspective to quantify the full sum of the suffering caused and destruction done in the pursuit of oil. For now we can merely reflect on the horror of the question.
i dont think a full accounting is so impossible to comprehend. bigger wars have been fought over less, albeit without such touching imagery i suppose.
