|
DOCTOR ZIMBARDO posted:How's the energy out there everyone seems very positive and decidedly non-insane
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 00:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 15:27 |
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 04:07
|
|
|
Homework Explainer posted:i'm at left forum experiencing every cliche of the "organized" left, ama How does Bob Avakian's ring taste?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 20:30
|
|
|
Homework Explainer posted:i forgot this was posted and lol Wait are you really disputing that "More people are living better than ever. Welcome to reality."? I mean we're clearly incredibly lucky and wealthy compared to our dirt-farming human ancestors - that doesn't mean there isn't inequality or that the capitalist class isn't parasitic, but a byproduct of the production surplus human beings of created is a higher quality of life for us all. It always annoys me when certain leftists actually think communism or socialism or whatever is about the peasants being spiritually fulfilled and happy with a mud hut and a turnip to eat every day, when in fact communism is the most materialist philosophy around. More time off, more money, more leisure activities, more healthcare, more education, all through surplus production. Now, is it more important to provide a "reasonable standard of living" for all human beings through energy production, or is it more important to save the planet and arrest technological and industrial progress in an attempt to prevent climate change?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 21:42
|
|
|
Homework Explainer posted:it's a big conference, you're expected to find food for yourself in manhattan, somehow p ironic that they choose to hold their conference on an exclusive island of wealth and opulence that you have to pay money just to set foot on
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 21:44
|
|
|
 Homework Explainer: purged by revolutionary justice
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 21:48
|
|
|
The Saurus posted:Now, is it more important to provide a "reasonable standard of living" for all human beings through energy production, or is it more important to save the planet and arrest technological and industrial progress in an attempt to prevent climate change? The existential crisis of humanity is way more important than trying to give everyone a First World lifestyle, yes.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 21:50
|
|
|
Saving the planet will require technological advancement, which requires as many educated people as possible, which requires bringing up as many people to a reasonable standard of living as possible. if you can solve the food production problem (important because of knock-on effects) and adapt to weather effects/rising sea levels(dykes & dams), humanity as a whole could pretty much sit through it's own mess and come out okay.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 13:30
|
|
|
Why should I or anyone else sacrifice their standard of living because most people are too stupid to read some omar khayyam and stop breeding?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 14:15
|
|
|
rudatron posted:Saving the planet will require technological advancement, which requires as many educated people as possible, which requires bringing up as many people to a reasonable standard of living as possible. What you're proposing is positive feedback because a more educated society yields developed countries that consume more resources in global capitalism. It's countries with major GDPs and educated societies that cause most of the carbon emissions/pollution- not their world countries.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 04:03
|
|
|
If humanity can adapt sufficiently to the the changing climate, that doesn't matter. Fossil fuels don't have to last forever, they only have to last until fusion, cheap solar, or orbital solar. Get them as fast as possible, minimize damage. That's how you avoid the Megadeaths you'll get from deindustrialization.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 04:55
|
|
|
Homework Explainer posted:i forgot this was posted and lol Yeah I guess we can ignore large increases in world HDI because entitled brats in America are mad they don't have it quite as good as their parents did.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 05:34
|
|
|
rudatron posted:If humanity can adapt sufficiently to the the changing climate, that doesn't matter. Fossil fuels don't have to last forever, they only have to last until fusion, cheap solar, or orbital solar. Get them as fast as possible, minimize damage. That's how you avoid the Megadeaths you'll get from deindustrialization. Or -- hear me out here -- we continue on our present path, come to compete ever more aggressively over scarce resources during an era of climate catastrophes, until the button is finally pushed, substantially depopulating the globe, and ushering in nuclear winter to counteract global warming. This is an equally good solution.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 06:18
|
|
|
Military activity accounts for a large portion of resource use and emissions. Animal agriculture also accounts for a significant portion of worldwide emissions and makes use of alot of land. There are plenty of emissions cuts we can make that in my view would not constitute a lower quality of life like desurbanization (cities are more sustainable), replacing the mass use of cars with public transport, light rail etc, shared luxuries in cases of scarcity, getting rid of things like planned obsolescence, upgrading and repairing products instead of replacing them entirely etc. High levels of education, technological advancement, and "first world lifestyles" can be done without emitting carbon at the rate we do. Resource usage is not static as we can always find new reserves, recycle the material, find better ways to make existing things, and in a planned economy slow down production on something and focus production/research on acquiring more of the resource, and/or finding ways to make things without it. Also the population is expected to level out by the end of the century. Most people, even on the left, are not going to support a revolution calling for austerity in the first world and opposing increases in the level of education and living standards everywhere else, and there is no way to ensure this without military force, which would lead to a ton of emissions anyway. If we do not keep making technological progress, we will be ill equipped to deal with the warming that is set to occur no matter what. IronyGuy6669 fucked around with this message at 07:17 on May 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 07:11
|
|
|
Even mainstream economists concede that global warming represents an intractable coordination problem. Actually the Jacobin "four futures" piece is OK if you're curious about it.crabcakes66 posted:Yeah I guess we can ignore large increases in world HDI because entitled brats in America are mad they don't have it quite as good as their parents did. Agreed but about the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 12:57
|
|
|
First World lifestyles are predicated upon the gross overconsumption of resources by individuals. Desuburbanization and transforming transportation from individually-based automobiles to public transit would mean a drastic reduction in the quality of life for a First World worker. The point is to create liveable conditions for the whole of humanity while attempting to deal with the climate crisis, and that's going to involve significant rationing of goods for people who have never experienced it once in their entire lives.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 13:19
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:First World lifestyles are predicated upon the gross overconsumption of resources by individuals. Desuburbanization and transforming transportation from individually-based automobiles to public transit would mean a drastic reduction in the quality of life for a First World worker. The point is to create liveable conditions for the whole of humanity while attempting to deal with the climate crisis, and that's going to involve significant rationing of goods for people who have never experienced it once in their entire lives. what goods are we talking about? not video games, right?
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 13:22
|
|
|
jarofpiss posted:what goods are we talking about? not video games, right? lol Serious Take: Well there's no point in "rationing" a digital product, but I guess your electricity used to play the game might have to be rationed if necessary.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 13:26
|
|
|
You realise that plenty of people in the first world already live in the green wondercities you''re describing?
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 14:32
|
|
|
The Saurus posted:You realise that plenty of people in the first world already live in the green wondercities you''re describing? Maybe for old world cities designed for foot traffic that might be the case, but not for the sprawling concrete nightmares that Americans call "cities."
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 14:42
|
|
|
Pretty funny how the American car companies bought out and destroyed all of America's mass transit and then as soon as they had to face actual competition and produce decent products in the 70s and 80s they crashed and burned immediately lol. One day we will once again be able to ride the trolley downtown for a nickel.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 14:46
|
|
|
The Saurus posted:Pretty funny how the American car companies bought out and destroyed all of America's mass transit and then as soon as they had to face actual competition and produce decent products in the 70s and 80s they crashed and burned immediately lol. A Saurus post I can get behind. 
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 14:47
|
|
|
I'm a Jeremy Corbyn supporter and really indistuigishably marxist from most d&d posters so it's funny the ire there is for me sometimes
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 14:50
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:First World lifestyles are predicated upon the gross overconsumption of resources by individuals. Desuburbanization and transforming transportation from individually-based automobiles to public transit would mean a drastic reduction in the quality of life for a First World worker. The point is to create liveable conditions for the whole of humanity while attempting to deal with the climate crisis, and that's going to involve significant rationing of goods for people who have never experienced it once in their entire lives.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 14:54
|
|
|
rudatron posted:What are you talking about, first world lower classes have to ration everything, it's why gas prices being high leads to people flipping out - it cuts into the household budget. The people for who everything is available, for whose desires can be satisfied easily, are the incredibly well off, which are an incredibly small portion of society. That's an incredibly nitpicky argument, but even people on limited budgets are consuming a significant amount of resources in spite of their unsustainable position in capitalism. Like, people making 6 figures can end up having to do a lot of rationing because they're burdened by massive debts for trying to live beyond their means, but they still have a big house and an unproductive lawn, they use up tons of water to maintain their property and guzzle a buttload of gas just to go to work and run their errands. It's extremely wasteful. And for people on the lower rungs of the economic ladder, they have to ration heavily because they've been the victims of internalized colonization, and entire sections of the country have been turned into super exploited 3rd world zones.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 16:12
|
|
|
Even those super-exploited zones use a lot of resources, because part of the exploitation process is locking those communities into inefficient patterns of resource use. Gasoline is one example. Crack cocaine, methamphetamines, etc. would be another.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 17:13
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:And for people on the lower rungs of the economic ladder, they have to ration heavily because they've been the victims of internalized colonization, and entire sections of the country have been turned into super exploited 3rd world zones. This isn't about "sections of the country" - those areas exist cheek by jowl with the upper classes in most cities. Just look at Washington DC inside the beltway and out
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 17:16
|
|
|
DOCTOR ZIMBARDO posted:Even those super-exploited zones use a lot of resources, because part of the exploitation process is locking those communities into inefficient patterns of resource use. Gasoline is one example. Crack cocaine, methamphetamines, etc. would be another. Drugs are super efficient, though. Use amphetamine to get your brain to release lots of dopamine and you'll cheerfully sit in a room, by yourself, in the dark, eating nothing, muttering to yourself. If you force people to get "high on life," i.e., force people to seek out more traditional methods of dopamine release, they'll use vastly more resources in the process.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 17:40
|
|
|
errr.... wrong thread
XboxPants fucked around with this message at 19:33 on May 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 19:28
|
|
|
good to be back. i hope no one forgot communism will win while i was gone.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 03:53
|
|
|
Jack of Hearts posted:Drugs are super efficient, though. Use amphetamine to get your brain to release lots of dopamine and you'll cheerfully sit in a room, by yourself, in the dark, eating nothing, muttering to yourself. If you force people to get "high on life," i.e., force people to seek out more traditional methods of dopamine release, they'll use vastly more resources in the process. Pener Kropoopkin posted:That's an incredibly nitpicky argument, but even people on limited budgets are consuming a significant amount of resources in spite of their unsustainable position in capitalism. Like, people making 6 figures can end up having to do a lot of rationing because they're burdened by massive debts for trying to live beyond their means, but they still have a big house and an unproductive lawn, they use up tons of water to maintain their property and guzzle a buttload of gas just to go to work and run their errands. It's extremely wasteful.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 04:48
|
|
|
god drat the only good thing in life is zevon and he's dead as poo poo
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 07:35
|
|
|
i hope everyone likes the new thread title and also our seizure of state power.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 06:50
|
|
|
The Saurus posted:Pretty funny how the American car companies bought out and destroyed all of America's mass transit and then as soon as they had to face actual competition and produce decent products in the 70s and 80s they crashed and burned immediately lol. American automobiles are considering less poo poo these days. crabcakes66 posted:More people are living better than ever. Welcome to reality. It becomes harder and harder to justify inequality and not having GMI in the face of automation and globalization Dead Cosmonaut fucked around with this message at 08:20 on Jun 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 08:18
|
|
|
How is the PSL looking for November? Got onto any more ballots yet?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 15:22
|
|
|
la riva just got ballot placement in california by winning the peace and freedom party's primary. with a different running mate, though. not sure if they've made other gains
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 17:58
|
|
|
Homework Explainer posted:i hope everyone likes the new thread title and also our seizure of state power. Congrats on realizing the revolutionary vanguard of good posting.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 09:12
|
|
|
i assume she will be a registered write in option in texas?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 03:16
|
|
|
Hey this seems like a cool thread to ask this. Why are so many socialists dogmatic and treat this poo poo as doctrine akin to the way a holy man reveres his holy books? Lenin was cool for his time. He also made some dumb, wrong rear end assumptions that found himself frequently revising what would be called leninism up until his death. He continued to be wrong afterwards. Stalinism is worth analysis, same things went down with a lot more death, purging, and invasions, but the people who bother seem to get really sad and apologetic for these guys who were at least partically incorrect in their assessments, making excuses for a human monster or two in the process. A lot of american/western leftists, not just socialists but leftists really do love to whine about the US constitution, and people who revere it, who don't want to change it, and absolutely hate it when the rights of americans are re-written and re-interpreted as times change. Yet many those same people have some pretty insane feelings about the perfection of Marx, Engels, Lenin, etc. It's worth memorizing, and understanding as fundamental truths, it's not worth analyzing as something to improve on. And so, so much needs to be re-analyzed. All existing communist states have either liberalized to sustain themselves, and the DPRK are straight up being propped up by China, along with drug and counterfeiting rackets. Cuba was the last bastion, but as American relations normalize... they've been liberalizing too for years already, and now it's going to happen break-neck. Why then do people recite Lenin as if quoting the Pauline Epistles?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 08:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 15:27 |
|
|
Do you have any actual substantive objections to either Lenin or Marx that you want to talk about, or are you just here to whinge and moan?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 13:40
|
|