every little bit works towards the solution. Build local solutions, build mutual aid
build mycelial networks of resistance, and you might find that you’re less alone and more powerful than you realised before you did this.
I didn’t mean to say otherwise in my initial comment, but that is what i am trying to say. It is a collective effort-- all from all individual effort, from your neighbours, to yourself, to companies, to politicians, each of which combined together progress towards a meaningful path. We all have to hold each other accountable. It has not come perfectly of course, but at the very least there is some move towards combating climate change, which is better than doing nothing.
My comment is towards those who resign themselves to apathy when they find out that saving water doesn’t do as much or what they put into recycle bin turned up in landfill. These little things are better than doing nothing at all. Some people have a notion that they are some sort of superhero. That’s why I hate the phrase "hero of your own story. No, we are all just mere humans doing what we can to survive and help one another.
A lot of the funds go to strange projects, such as building luxurious hotel with solar panel, and even fossil fuel plants that are somehow considered green.
Nicaragua was right not to sign the 2015 Paris climate deal because they correctly believe it doesn’t go far enough. Governments, businesses and people have to be held accountable if we are serious about this.
Okay, when I talk about mutual aid and mycelial networks of resistance, I am talking about materially undermining those institutions that you seem to think we can hold accountable.
States & corporations are not going to do their part. I am talking about fighting a class war. They are not on our side in any way.
All this talk about everybody doing their part to recycle or whatever is part of the problem, because it distracts us. Instead of fighting against them, you seem to think they can be brought to heel, that we can work with them. That’s simply never going to happen.
While I agree that corporations are scum, we still need some form of governance to manage and actually implement net zero emissions on a global scale. If you are advocating for anarchism, I have a bridge to sell.
I share the same disdain of authority as you, but I would be an anarchist if I weren’t a social democrat.
I am advocating for anarchism, which is the basic principle that we should liberate ourselves from structures of domination by building horizontal power structures that undermine them.
There really is no reason why dominance hierarchies need to be involved. There are plenty of places in the world where horizontalist power structures have displaced the state, and many, many more where the mycelial networks of resistance are growing but are simply not yet openly visible. There is someone local to you who you could join and improve life locally now, and begin laying the groundwork for liberation. I can almost guarantee it.
If you advocate for the state, then you are advocating for your own domination by something you yourself have admitted is corrupt. If you ever think these corrupt structures whose whole purpose is to disempower you can be used for good, then you might be the bridge buyer.
Anarchism sounds great if you’re a college freshman, but in reality that will devolve into even less progress than we currently have. Obviously there’s no perfect solution, but anarchism has never and will never work at any kind of scale that matters. We need to purge the corruption from our current system and heavily reform it, but at the end of the day it’s going to make more progress than a bunch of screaming college kids.
Oh wow “anarchism is for babies lol” is definitely something I’ve never heard. That’s devastating, I’m going to completely change my whole political outlook.
There are plenty of examples of it working at scale. Let me know if you want more information.
I would love to know where it actually worked at scale, because I’m at least decently well educated in history and I’ve never heard of one instance. The key word here is “scale” by the way, it’s important how you define that.
Anarchism assumes independent, self-organising societies working together on mutual understanding and cooperation. What do you think nation states are and doing now?
Just like communism, anarchism sounds good in theory but in practice does not work and empirically deviate entirely-- almost perversely different from the concept. They only work on a small scale with people of who are like-minded and similar culture to respect each others boundaries. Issues as wide reaching as climate change requires global scale solution; and not everyone thinks the same. It doesn’t matter if you and I organise locally, if groups on the other side of the world are not pulling their weight to combat climate change. Going back to my initial comment, sure we both save water, but it is a drop in the bucket compared to what is lost to pipe leaks or even other people using water excessively and needlessly. As we speak, some people in Arizona and China are playing golf, and golf parks always need constant watering. Those gallons water used in golf parks could be used to something more productive instead. Good luck with your community telling Arizonan and Chinese golfers to stop wasting water. I am guessing you did not even read the article on rich countries giving money to poorer countries to help mitigate the climate change, but poorer countries spend them elsewhere, even though they are the ones who beg for funds to help with transition to clean energy.
Maybe anarchism on global scale will work one day (I sure hope so), but it will take probably couple of hundreds of years of advancement in technology and communication to allow for cultural exchange that would permeate across the world, and thus lead to having a common global culture to facilitate the system. But at the moment, anarchism would not work to solve climate change. That is literally what is happening right now.
I didn’t mean to say otherwise in my initial comment, but that is what i am trying to say. It is a collective effort-- all from all individual effort, from your neighbours, to yourself, to companies, to politicians, each of which combined together progress towards a meaningful path. We all have to hold each other accountable. It has not come perfectly of course, but at the very least there is some move towards combating climate change, which is better than doing nothing.
My comment is towards those who resign themselves to apathy when they find out that saving water doesn’t do as much or what they put into recycle bin turned up in landfill. These little things are better than doing nothing at all. Some people have a notion that they are some sort of superhero. That’s why I hate the phrase "hero of your own story. No, we are all just mere humans doing what we can to survive and help one another.
Can you explain what you mean by “hold each other accountable”?
Funding for global climate change has no oversight and is rife with corruption.
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/climate-change-finance/
A lot of the funds go to strange projects, such as building luxurious hotel with solar panel, and even fossil fuel plants that are somehow considered green.
Nicaragua was right not to sign the 2015 Paris climate deal because they correctly believe it doesn’t go far enough. Governments, businesses and people have to be held accountable if we are serious about this.
Okay, when I talk about mutual aid and mycelial networks of resistance, I am talking about materially undermining those institutions that you seem to think we can hold accountable.
States & corporations are not going to do their part. I am talking about fighting a class war. They are not on our side in any way.
All this talk about everybody doing their part to recycle or whatever is part of the problem, because it distracts us. Instead of fighting against them, you seem to think they can be brought to heel, that we can work with them. That’s simply never going to happen.
While I agree that corporations are scum, we still need some form of governance to manage and actually implement net zero emissions on a global scale. If you are advocating for anarchism, I have a bridge to sell.
I share the same disdain of authority as you, but I would be an anarchist if I weren’t a social democrat.
I am advocating for anarchism, which is the basic principle that we should liberate ourselves from structures of domination by building horizontal power structures that undermine them.
There really is no reason why dominance hierarchies need to be involved. There are plenty of places in the world where horizontalist power structures have displaced the state, and many, many more where the mycelial networks of resistance are growing but are simply not yet openly visible. There is someone local to you who you could join and improve life locally now, and begin laying the groundwork for liberation. I can almost guarantee it.
If you advocate for the state, then you are advocating for your own domination by something you yourself have admitted is corrupt. If you ever think these corrupt structures whose whole purpose is to disempower you can be used for good, then you might be the bridge buyer.
Anarchism sounds great if you’re a college freshman, but in reality that will devolve into even less progress than we currently have. Obviously there’s no perfect solution, but anarchism has never and will never work at any kind of scale that matters. We need to purge the corruption from our current system and heavily reform it, but at the end of the day it’s going to make more progress than a bunch of screaming college kids.
Oh wow “anarchism is for babies lol” is definitely something I’ve never heard. That’s devastating, I’m going to completely change my whole political outlook.
There are plenty of examples of it working at scale. Let me know if you want more information.
I would love to know where it actually worked at scale, because I’m at least decently well educated in history and I’ve never heard of one instance. The key word here is “scale” by the way, it’s important how you define that.
Anarchism by basic definition is a collective of self-organising society. What do you think nation state governments are?
This is wrong on every point.
Your definition of anarchism is wrong.
Nation states are not anarchistic.
Nation states are not “self-organising”.
Let me know if you have any actual questions about any of this.
Anarchism assumes independent, self-organising societies working together on mutual understanding and cooperation. What do you think nation states are and doing now?
Just like communism, anarchism sounds good in theory but in practice does not work and empirically deviate entirely-- almost perversely different from the concept. They only work on a small scale with people of who are like-minded and similar culture to respect each others boundaries. Issues as wide reaching as climate change requires global scale solution; and not everyone thinks the same. It doesn’t matter if you and I organise locally, if groups on the other side of the world are not pulling their weight to combat climate change. Going back to my initial comment, sure we both save water, but it is a drop in the bucket compared to what is lost to pipe leaks or even other people using water excessively and needlessly. As we speak, some people in Arizona and China are playing golf, and golf parks always need constant watering. Those gallons water used in golf parks could be used to something more productive instead. Good luck with your community telling Arizonan and Chinese golfers to stop wasting water. I am guessing you did not even read the article on rich countries giving money to poorer countries to help mitigate the climate change, but poorer countries spend them elsewhere, even though they are the ones who beg for funds to help with transition to clean energy.
Maybe anarchism on global scale will work one day (I sure hope so), but it will take probably couple of hundreds of years of advancement in technology and communication to allow for cultural exchange that would permeate across the world, and thus lead to having a common global culture to facilitate the system. But at the moment, anarchism would not work to solve climate change. That is literally what is happening right now.