Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
(Thread IKs: Stereotype)
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Epitope
Nov 27, 2006

Grimey Drawer

Zodium posted:

guy's a loving idiot.

No one can understand this stuff. Except me. And you, if you follow me

Messiah potential, 4/10

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Zodium
Jun 19, 2004

brakeless
Apr 11, 2011

Xaris posted:

So, yes it is a grand delusion that liberals are selling people that we can keep the comfy status quo but only make x,y,z minor tweaks; however, it is also just about the only thing you can sell populations on while remaining in power. yet perhaps that's what you sell people on and let inevitable economic and planetary-health contraction take its course because anything else isn't going to happen either and it may be able to slightly stem some bleeding even if it's gone septic.

yeah at this point it's still necessary to sell renewables and sustainablity by talking about preventing climate change and whatnot because that's where the zeitgeist is at
even if the best expected outcome is making your local community less dependant on imported energy and the people a little bit more mentally ready for the end of excess

Serf
May 5, 2011


yeah i don't buy the whole "human brains aren't designed for this" line. seems to me the problem is capitalism accumulating all the power and wealth into the hands of a few people who don't think the rest of the world is real and that they're the protagonists of reality. and that they then pay an army of psychopaths to oppress and brutalize everyone else

Bathtub Cheese
Jun 15, 2008

I lust for Chinese world conquest. The truth does not matter before the supremacy of Dear Leader Xi.
Rees starting the presentation with some extremely contentious and oversimplified claims about human nature is unfortunate, but I thought the rest was useful. Whether or not it's a lifetime of exposure to propaganda that's breaking brains or simple "human nature" is an academic question at this point because of how hosed we are and how totalizing the systems of control are right now (they even bamboozled Rees, who otherwise knows how badly we're hosed).

petit choux
Feb 24, 2016

Serf posted:

yeah i don't buy the whole "human brains aren't designed for this" line. seems to me the problem is capitalism accumulating all the power and wealth into the hands of a few people who don't think the rest of the world is real and that they're the protagonists of reality. and that they then pay an army of psychopaths to oppress and brutalize everyone else

Which, ironically, is exactly what human brains are designed for.

Zodium
Jun 19, 2004

petit choux
Feb 24, 2016

In 200 years the only remaining humans are going to resemble a troop of meerkats as much as they will modern humans. A clutch of naked peons all grooming and yielding to their alpha and his harem. You'll know him because he's the one with the biggest nutsack. He's the God-emperor. ED: sometimes referred to as "Nutsack" or "Lord Nutsack"

petit choux has issued a correction as of 14:09 on Dec 8, 2021

Jokerpilled Drudge
Jan 27, 2010

by Pragmatica
I would definitely prefer to be a Morlok if that's what it comes to. Miss me with that surface-life poo poo

Bathtub Cheese
Jun 15, 2008

I lust for Chinese world conquest. The truth does not matter before the supremacy of Dear Leader Xi.
I think the left often underestimates how badly capitalist ideology ruins people's personalities and ability to think critically in the imperial core. It's pretty common to see leftists argue that enough counter-propaganda will do it on its own despite all evidence pointing to that not being the case.

petit choux
Feb 24, 2016

Bathtub Cheese posted:

I think the left often underestimates how badly capitalist ideology ruins people's personalities and ability to think critically in the imperial core. It's pretty common to see leftists argue that enough counter-propaganda will do it on its own despite all evidence pointing to that not being the case.

Go on

Bathtub Cheese
Jun 15, 2008

I lust for Chinese world conquest. The truth does not matter before the supremacy of Dear Leader Xi.

The heavily policed groupthink on internet forums like CSPAM is a prime example

Jokerpilled Drudge
Jan 27, 2010

by Pragmatica

Bathtub Cheese posted:

I think the left often underestimates how badly capitalist ideology ruins people's personalities and ability to think critically in the imperial core. It's pretty common to see leftists argue that enough counter-propaganda will do it on its own despite all evidence pointing to that not being the case.

that is what people obsessed with "democratic values" think, yes, and it's true they will accomplish way less because of it. See just forcing people to take the vaccine vs our strategy of screaming "LOL HORSEPASTE" from the rafters

petit choux
Feb 24, 2016

Bathtub Cheese posted:

The heavily policed groupthink on internet forums like CSPAM every aspect of American Life is a prime example

petit choux
Feb 24, 2016

Epitope
Nov 27, 2006

Grimey Drawer

Xaris posted:

i mean i think we all know what's going to happen ... it's fascism

Ya that's a bummer but we might also get a new abrahamic religion reboot. That only happens like every 1000 years

Bathtub Cheese
Jun 15, 2008

I lust for Chinese world conquest. The truth does not matter before the supremacy of Dear Leader Xi.

Jokerpilled Drudge posted:

that is what people obsessed with "democratic values" think, yes, and it's true they will accomplish way less because of it. See just forcing people to take the vaccine vs our strategy of screaming "LOL HORSEPASTE" from the rafters

Even the most "authoritarian" lefty types hang their hat on "enough" of the population being persuadable but seem to never have good reasons to think that or any workable method for achieving that end

petit choux
Feb 24, 2016

Epitope posted:

Ya that's a bummer but we might also get a new abrahamic religion reboot. That only happens like every 1000 years

God goes on these benders and every few hundred years or so comes up for air and swears it's gonna be different this time.

Jokerpilled Drudge
Jan 27, 2010

by Pragmatica

Bathtub Cheese posted:

Even the most "authoritarian" lefty types hang their hat on "enough" of the population being persuadable but seem to never have good reasons to think that or any workable method for achieving that end

I thought the accepted wisdom was that you needed to convince only enough to start a strong vanguard party

(I do not see there being enough people amenable to that kinda thing anytime soon in the US)

edit: the zoomers could turn out to be pretty wild though, maybe they could be comrades?

Jokerpilled Drudge has issued a correction as of 14:26 on Dec 8, 2021

Bathtub Cheese
Jun 15, 2008

I lust for Chinese world conquest. The truth does not matter before the supremacy of Dear Leader Xi.

Jokerpilled Drudge posted:

I thought the accepted wisdom was that you needed to convince only enough to start a strong vanguard party

(I do not see there being enough people amenable to that kinda thing anytime soon in the US)

Vanguardist parties like PSL and WWP haven't achieved that in several decades of organizing. The CPUSA is an FBI front.

Jokerpilled Drudge
Jan 27, 2010

by Pragmatica
look just because you call yourself a strong* vanguard party doesn't make it so... You and I are just agreeing with each other that its seemingly impossible.

wrt trying to accomplish change via the dialectic I like this Reagan quote: "If you're explaining, you're losing"

Jokerpilled Drudge has issued a correction as of 14:32 on Dec 8, 2021

Perry Mason Jar
Feb 24, 2006

"Della? Take a lid"

Serf posted:

yeah i don't buy the whole "human brains aren't designed for this" line. seems to me the problem is capitalism accumulating all the power and wealth into the hands of a few people who don't think the rest of the world is real and that they're the protagonists of reality. and that they then pay an army of psychopaths to oppress and brutalize everyone else

It's really just a lie to flatter the ruling class. Only the ruling class is capable of understanding these complex systems - that they use this understanding to impoverish and oppress you is sort of your fault, innit? Should've been born more capable, like them, if you wanted something better.

Bathtub Cheese
Jun 15, 2008

I lust for Chinese world conquest. The truth does not matter before the supremacy of Dear Leader Xi.

Jokerpilled Drudge posted:

look just because you call yourself a strong* vanguard party doesn't make it so... You and I are just agreeing with each other that its seemingly impossible.

wrt trying to accomplish change via the dialectic I like this Reagan quote: "If you're explaining, you're losing"

yeah for what it's worth, i do think some of what the left says about how the world works isn't lost on most people but it's just not perceived as immediately useful, so it's easily set aside and forgotten. which from the individual standpoint can be a psychologically healthy thing to do but utterly catastrophic for the species and planet as a whole. effective propaganda bypasses that hurdle entirely. Also even the dumbest adults have very complex relationships with perceptions and ideas and don't relinquish their beliefs easily at all (especially ones that justify things they think they have to do).

leftists seem to often be people who feel like they can take responsibility for problems at a scale at which an individual can't act effectively at all. This is as much of a positive trait as it is a psychological flaw, depending on how you look at things. I think anxiety can create a need to understand an environment so that all sources of anxiety can at least theoretically be controlled (even if that's practically impossible) and if that isn't your hangup even simple curiosity can lead you down some dark paths all on its own.

Bathtub Cheese has issued a correction as of 15:23 on Dec 8, 2021

petit choux
Feb 24, 2016

All in all humans make pretty poor vehicles for sentience, it's amazing we've made it this far before passing the torch to our silicon pals.

Bathtub Cheese
Jun 15, 2008

I lust for Chinese world conquest. The truth does not matter before the supremacy of Dear Leader Xi.

petit choux posted:

All in all humans make pretty poor vehicles for sentience, it's amazing we've made it this far before passing the torch to our silicon pals.

I do think destroying the biosphere is a structural problem with our societies (or even the environmental/material constraints the successful ones faced historically) in the end but a much better educated materialist than me would need to provide the receipts for that.

e: If there's one practical piece of advice I've gotten out of being a leftist over half of my lifespan it's to avoid the trap of being a martyr. Even if we all know history is made collectively I don't find it easy to shake. Pure ideology.

Bathtub Cheese has issued a correction as of 15:37 on Dec 8, 2021

Jokerpilled Drudge
Jan 27, 2010

by Pragmatica
capitalism turns us all into smith crying not at a portrait of big brother but at the dream of personal wealth. Hard not to appear as anything other than the enemy in that context if you can be perceived as against capitalism

petit choux
Feb 24, 2016

Jokerpilled Drudge posted:

capitalism turns us all into smith crying not at a portrait of big brother but at the dream of personal wealth. Hard not to appear as anything other than the enemy in that context if you can be perceived as against capitalism

Capital has the sentience now and that the humans are just kicking rocks

Perry Mason Jar
Feb 24, 2006

"Della? Take a lid"

Bathtub Cheese posted:

I do think it's a structural problem with our societies (or even the environmental/material constraints the successful ones faced historically) in the end but a much better educated materialist than me would need to provide the receipts for that.

Well... yes! But also, not quite. It's difficult to imagine societies forming organically (that is, without philosophy) into a collectivist arrangement or materialist paradigm. Given that you in all likelihood require philosophy to arrive at the materialist position (this may be particular to humans here) and you in all likelihood require a society to have already been formed before philosophy can be performed then it's unlikely that you would have a robust societal formation which resembles communism - communism, maybe this goes without saying here but to be clear, is a prerequisite to preclude extinction and/or the trajectory of extinction.

So you have the society first and the philosophy second then the philosophy will need to move through the requisite permutations before the incomparable efficacy of materialism/collectivism can be understood/achieved. And this creates the first huge problem! So you've arranged your agricultural society such that people can eat without toil and can specialize such that some are allowed time for thought while others are allowed time for labor, say. To arrive there in the first place what you needed to do was accumulate capital. In early societies it wasn't capital per se but something resembling.

This makes feudalism something of an inevitably. And so too capitalism. But neither of these are a problem in and of themselves, neither of them prevent themselves from being replaced as such. BUT! With the introduction of energy and therefore fuels now you have a remarkably captive consumer base and a remarkably captive capital position. That is to say, the whole of society comes to rely on whomever has captured fuel and whomever captures the most fuel will also have the most power/capital. This takes capital accumulation to a higher level of, say, capital entrenchment. There is no incentive for the capitalist in this situation, or the king for that matter, to relinquish this stranglehold except, like, their goodwill or foresight or something. This capacity or likelihood is tainted by their ideology which was materially formed.

Ergo, the discovery and capture of energy reserves/sources before the discovery and establishment of robust communist societies was the death knell itself rather than that capitalism exists.

I don't know if this sufficiently responds to what you've posed, if you were saying something else then I apologize. To be clear my position is that yes it is a structural problem but not one of environmental constraints (necessarily and probably not at all - that is, if the above didn't happen in that way, the astronomical wealth concentration and constant warfare that the above entails would not have occurred; it is in those two ways that environmental constraints start to matter, otherwise they would be of much more marginal consideration if of any consideration at all) but yes one of material constraints.

Milo and POTUS
Sep 3, 2017

I will not shut up about the Mighty Morphin Power Rangers. I talk about them all the time and work them into every conversation I have. I built a shrine in my room for the yellow one who died because sadly no one noticed because she died around 9/11. Wanna see it?

SKULL.GIF posted:

Goon Project: [Delete Hillary's Emails] had some unfortunate consequences

And we can trace it back to Lowtax getting fired from Planet Quake

Is this his pre SA history?

Zodium
Jun 19, 2004

Bathtub Cheese posted:

yeah for what it's worth, i do think some of what the left says about how the world works isn't lost on most people but it's just not perceived as immediately useful, so it's easily set aside and forgotten. which from the individual standpoint can be a psychologically healthy thing to do but utterly catastrophic for the species and planet as a whole. effective propaganda bypasses that hurdle entirely. Also even the dumbest adults have very complex relationships with perceptions and ideas and don't relinquish their beliefs easily at all (especially ones that justify things they think they have to do).

leftists seem to often be people who feel like they can take responsibility for problems at a scale at which an individual can't act effectively at all. This is as much of a positive trait as it is a psychological flaw, depending on how you look at things. I think anxiety can create a need to understand an environment so that all sources of anxiety can at least theoretically be controlled (even if that's practically impossible) and if that isn't your hangup even simple curiosity can lead you down some dark paths all on its own.

the problem with "teaching people marxism" as a solution in the imperial core is that it's an entirely different perspective and way of understanding the world. and there are no physical material conditions you can learn from. that problem has nothing to do with brains, or complexity. it has to do with there being a deliberate physical poverty of information for non-capitalist conceptions of human life in the imperial core, nothing but words for the brain to learn from, whereas anyone in the imperial core is bombarded with a richly interactive array of capitalist ideology from cradle to grave. this makes it very difficult not only to form, but also to sustain the necessary perceptual structures to act from a wholly materialist basis. it's how we get the wallace shawn quote on commodity fetishism:

quote:

One day there was an anonymous present sitting on my doorstep—Volume One of Capital by Karl Marx, in a brown paper bag. A joke? Serious? And who had sent it? I never found out. Late that night, naked in bed, I leafed through it. The beginning was impenetrable, I couldn't understand it, but when I came to the part about the lives of the workers—the coal miners, the child laborers—I could feel myself suddenly breathing more slowly. How angry he was. Page after page. Then I turned back to an earlier section, and I came to a phrase that I'd heard before, a strange, upsetting, sort of ugly phrase: this was the section on "commodity fetishism," "the fetishism of commodities." I wanted to understand that weird-sounding phrase, but I could tell that, to understand it, your whole life would probably have to change.

His explanation was very elusive. He used the example that people say, "Twenty yards of linen are worth two pounds." People say that about every thing that it has a certain value. This is worth that. This coat, this sweater, this cup of coffee: each thing worth some quantity of money, or some number of other things—one coat, worth three sweaters, or so much money—as if that coat, suddenly appearing on the earth, contained somewhere inside itself an amount of value, like an inner soul, as if the coat were a fetish, a physical object that contains a living spirit. But what really determines the value of a coat? The coat's price comes from its history, the history of all the people involved in making it and selling it and all the particular relationships they had. And if we buy the coat, we, too, form relationships with all those people, and yet we hide those relationships from our own awareness by pretending we live in a world where coats have no history but just fall down from heaven with prices marked inside. "I like this coat," we say, "It's not expensive," as if that were a fact about the coat and not the end of a story about all the people who made it and sold it, "I like the pictures in this magazine."

A naked woman leans over a fence. A man buys a magazine and stares at her picture. The destinies of these two are linked. The man has paid the woman to take off her clothes, to lean over the fence. The photograph contains its history—the moment the woman unbuttoned her shirt, how she felt, what the photographer said. The price of the magazine is a code that describes the relationships between all these people—the woman, the man, the publisher, the photographer—who commanded, who obeyed. The cup of coffee contains the history of the peasants who picked the beans, how some of them fainted in the heat of the sun, some were beaten, some were kicked.

For two days I could see the fetishism of commodities everywhere around me. It was a strange feeling. Then on the third day I lost it, it was gone, I couldn't see it anymore.

me too. I can glimpse it. and I want to see it, I want to live in that world, to sustain that perception, but actually doing that for a length of time or under uncertainty requires untenable amounts of effort on my part. it kills me, but my perception and my brain are wholly trained for the ecology of capitalism. they're literally, physically broken. market, labor, technology, profit, supply, demand, employment: these are the perverse and inhuman dimensions of my universe, because in the physical sense, I was made by capital to reproduce capitalism. that's why change can't come from the imperial core.

I can't save the world, I need the world to save my broke brained rear end, but the world has no reason to do that, and frankly, it probably shouldn't. :cheers:

Bathtub Cheese
Jun 15, 2008

I lust for Chinese world conquest. The truth does not matter before the supremacy of Dear Leader Xi.

Perry Mason Jar posted:

Well... yes! But also, not quite. It's difficult to imagine societies forming organically (that is, without philosophy) into a collectivist arrangement or materialist paradigm. Given that you in all likelihood require philosophy to arrive at the materialist position (this may be particular to humans here) and you in all likelihood require a society to have already been formed before philosophy can be performed then it's unlikely that you would have a robust societal formation which resembles communism - communism, maybe this goes without saying here but to be clear, is a prerequisite to preclude extinction and/or the trajectory of extinction.

So you have the society first and the philosophy second then the philosophy will need to move through the requisite permutations before the incomparable efficacy of materialism/collectivism can be understood/achieved. And this creates the first huge problem! So you've arranged your agricultural society such that people can eat without toil and can specialize such that some are allowed time for thought while others are allowed time for labor, say. To arrive there in the first place what you needed to do was accumulate capital. In early societies it wasn't capital per se but something resembling.

This makes feudalism something of an inevitably. And so too capitalism. But neither of these are a problem in and of themselves, neither of them prevent themselves from being replaced as such. BUT! With the introduction of energy and therefore fuels now you have a remarkably captive consumer base and a remarkably captive capital position. That is to say, the whole of society comes to rely on whomever has captured fuel and whomever captures the most fuel will also have the most power/capital. This takes capital accumulation to a higher level of, say, capital entrenchment. There is no incentive for the capitalist in this situation, or the king for that matter, to relinquish this stranglehold except, like, their goodwill or foresight or something. This capacity or likelihood is tainted by their ideology which was materially formed.

Ergo, the discovery and capture of energy reserves/sources before the discovery and establishment of robust communist societies was the death knell itself rather than that capitalism exists.

I don't know if this sufficiently responds to what you've posed, if you were saying something else then I apologize. To be clear my position is that yes it is a structural problem but not one of environmental constraints (necessarily and probably not at all - that is, if the above didn't happen in that way, the astronomical wealth concentration and constant warfare that the above entails would not have occurred; it is in those two ways that environmental constraints start to matter, otherwise they would be of much more marginal consideration if of any consideration at all) but yes one of material constraints.

Yeah we agree, but I do think the ideological hangover from previous modes of production is another thing that isn't given its due, and that ideological development has more to do with the material constraints imposed by dialectic between nature and the mode of production the further you go back in time. Pinpointing would be real tough and I just flat out don't know enough to prove it.

A real obvious example of a hangover is how much 18th and 19th century capitalist ideology pervades the US political discourse to this day despite it being near-irrelevant and even harmful in some ways to maintaining the capitalism we have now. Socialism would have had a hangover problem with capitalist ideology too, but there would've been a better chance at escaping it.

e: this sort of ties in with what Zodium was saying about how "artificial" our environments are in the imperial core today, the cradle-to-grave propaganda never really needed to be overhauled past a certain point because by default there is nothing to go on but it -- despite how implausible the lies have become. It also makes it possible create layered messaging to the point where basic welfare capitalism can be reframed as a radical solution (OWS did this a lot) My post was just a way of describing the processes you laid out from the individual standpoint -- peoples' environments are always changing and the "complex relationships with ideas" come from life experience and reflexivity, not some kind of individual initiative alone

Bathtub Cheese has issued a correction as of 16:33 on Dec 8, 2021

Perry Mason Jar
Feb 24, 2006

"Della? Take a lid"

Bathtub Cheese posted:

Yeah we agree, but I do think the ideological hangover from previous modes of production is another thing that isn't given its due, and that ideological development has more to do with the material constraints imposed by dialectic between nature and the mode of production the further you go back in time. Pinpointing would be real tough and I just flat out don't know enough to prove it.

A real obvious example of a hangover is how much 18th and 19th century capitalist ideology pervades the US political discourse to this day despite it being near-irrelevant and even harmful in some ways to maintaining the capitalism we have now. Socialism would have had a hangover problem with capitalist ideology too, but there would've been a better chance at escaping it.

The hangover is rarely unforced. You have more Free Speech as a rich man than a poor man. You have more Voting Rights as a rich man than a poor man.

There is, yes of course, a dialectic between nature and the mode of production. But it's possible, and was/is routinely accomplished by smaller societies especially prehistoric or premodern, to strike that balance if you don't live under capitalism in which case this balance is precluded by the mode of production itself. No such preclusion exists for communist or communalist societies and in feudalism it's only marginal because feudalism isn't a particularly efficient extractive mode (or wasn't - KSA does it fine now but it required capitalist hegemony in the first).

I'm not sure what you're referring to in terms of irrelevancy or harm from 18th/19th century capitalist ideology.

Socialism would have and has had a hangover problem, definitely. And they largely escaped it, too, yes. For example, immediately following the revolution in Cuba it was illegal to: have long hair (males), listening to Rock and Roll, practice religion, be homosexual, etc. Actually the revolutionaries were trying to remediate capitalism with these restrictions which they regarded as bourgeois decadence and idealism. But it wasn't bourgeois decadence or idealism (necessarily) but rather this sort of capitalist hangover, namely the machismo embedded in capitalism throughout LatAm. The rest was ideological warfare but this was a misunderstanding of ideology because listening to Rock and Roll doesn't make you a capitalist on its own or anything. All of this was changed and none persists today.

Perry Mason Jar has issued a correction as of 16:30 on Dec 8, 2021

Bathtub Cheese
Jun 15, 2008

I lust for Chinese world conquest. The truth does not matter before the supremacy of Dear Leader Xi.

Perry Mason Jar posted:

I'm not sure what you're referring to in terms of irrelevancy or harm from 18th/19th century capitalist ideology.

It's all laissez faire stuff, the state can't act as the "board of directors" for the capitalist class anymore, just facilitate short term rackets as everything burns around it -- it's called neoliberalism for a reason. All the lies told to justify FYGM and the rich paying 0 in taxes, refusing to redistribute superprofits to what was once called the labor aristocracy even when it is possible and an easy answer to stifling increasing dissent, doing nothing about a pandemic despite it being an obvious threat to capitalism as a whole, sectoral interests hijacking the state to shore up otherwise unprofitable enterprises and lock out competitors (and thus create a bigger crisis later on), and doing nothing about externalities like overshoot that will definitely destroy capitalism are all concrete examples of what I'm talking about. The short-term costs are considered too high to do anything about these existential threats to capitalism and that's the end of the discussion here in the US.

Bathtub Cheese has issued a correction as of 16:47 on Dec 8, 2021

Perry Mason Jar
Feb 24, 2006

"Della? Take a lid"
I wouldn't assign some unintended "hangover" to those very intentional maneuvers.

"Sectoral interests hijacking the state the state to shore up otherwise unprofitable enterprises and lock out competitors" does not create a bigger crisis later on. These are not mistakes. You preclude crises indefinitely by way of QE. Later on you can just crash the economy and receive trillions from the State to bail you out. In other words, you have a very big task here in front of you to explain how it's possible that the same policies which are said to have caused the Great Recession, policies which were not stopped at any point since and are used today, have not caused another downturn. You have a similar task here to explain how the "pandemic... being an obvious threat to capitalism" didn't actually cause a crash and why the ruling class has, in fact, gained trillions in the last two years.

Rime
Nov 2, 2011

by Games Forum

Perry Mason Jar posted:

Well... yes! But also, not quite. It's difficult to imagine societies forming organically (that is, without philosophy) into a collectivist arrangement or materialist paradigm. Given that you in all likelihood require philosophy to arrive at the materialist position (this may be particular to humans here) and you in all likelihood require a society to have already been formed before philosophy can be performed then it's unlikely that you would have a robust societal formation which resembles communism - communism, maybe this goes without saying here but to be clear, is a prerequisite to preclude extinction and/or the trajectory of extinction.

So you have the society first and the philosophy second then the philosophy will need to move through the requisite permutations before the incomparable efficacy of materialism/collectivism can be understood/achieved. And this creates the first huge problem! So you've arranged your agricultural society such that people can eat without toil and can specialize such that some are allowed time for thought while others are allowed time for labor, say. To arrive there in the first place what you needed to do was accumulate capital. In early societies it wasn't capital per se but something resembling.

This makes feudalism something of an inevitably. And so too capitalism. But neither of these are a problem in and of themselves, neither of them prevent themselves from being replaced as such. BUT! With the introduction of energy and therefore fuels now you have a remarkably captive consumer base and a remarkably captive capital position. That is to say, the whole of society comes to rely on whomever has captured fuel and whomever captures the most fuel will also have the most power/capital. This takes capital accumulation to a higher level of, say, capital entrenchment. There is no incentive for the capitalist in this situation, or the king for that matter, to relinquish this stranglehold except, like, their goodwill or foresight or something. This capacity or likelihood is tainted by their ideology which was materially formed.

Ergo, the discovery and capture of energy reserves/sources before the discovery and establishment of robust communist societies was the death knell itself rather than that capitalism exists.

I don't know if this sufficiently responds to what you've posed, if you were saying something else then I apologize. To be clear my position is that yes it is a structural problem but not one of environmental constraints (necessarily and probably not at all - that is, if the above didn't happen in that way, the astronomical wealth concentration and constant warfare that the above entails would not have occurred; it is in those two ways that environmental constraints start to matter, otherwise they would be of much more marginal consideration if of any consideration at all) but yes one of material constraints.


Nah, this is largely bullshit drawing from a few centuries of indoctrination about how the world works, I'll quote what I posted in the bird watching thread last night since its directly relevant to how this tangent has gone:


Rime posted:

Humans like to focus on the "how" because you can usually puzzle that out with simple engineering and it ties things up in a nice neat bow without rocking the boat of a fairly long-lived social and belief structure which is currently entering the terminal stages.

Asking "why" generates too many uncomfortable loose ends in a society which relies on a very rigid interpretation of pretty much everything, and makes people think a little bit too much about the established historical narrative which supports the power structure of our civilization.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2021/11/graeber-wengrow-dawn-of-everything-history-humanity/620177/

quote:

For generations, our remote ancestors have been cast as primitive and childlike--either free and equal innocents, or thuggish and warlike. Civilization, we are told, could be achieved only by sacrificing those original freedoms or, alternatively, by taming our baser instincts. David Graeber and David Wengrow show how such theories first emerged in the eighteenth century as a conservative reaction to powerful critiques of European society posed by Indigenous observers and intellectuals. Revisiting this encounter has startling implications for how we make sense of human history today, including the origins of farming, property, cities, democracy, slavery, and civilization itself.

Drawing on pathbreaking research in archaeology and anthropology, the authors show how history becomes a far more interesting place once we learn to throw off our conceptual shackles and perceive what's really there. If humans did not spend 95 percent of their evolutionary past in tiny bands of hunter-gatherers, what were they doing all that time? If agriculture, and cities, did not mean a plunge into hierarchy and domination, then what kinds of social and economic organization did they lead to? The answers are often unexpected, and suggest that the course of human history may be less set in stone, and more full of playful, hopeful possibilities, than we tend to assume.

The Dawn of Everything fundamentally transforms our understanding of the human past and offers a path toward imagining new forms of freedom, new ways of organizing society. This is a monumental book of formidable intellectual range, animated by curiosity, moral vision, and a faith in the power of direct action.


I strongly endorse reading everything David Graeber wrote during his lifetime.

:okpos:

Bathtub Cheese
Jun 15, 2008

I lust for Chinese world conquest. The truth does not matter before the supremacy of Dear Leader Xi.

Perry Mason Jar posted:

I wouldn't assign some unintended "hangover" to those very intentional maneuvers.

"Sectoral interests hijacking the state the state to shore up otherwise unprofitable enterprises and lock out competitors" does not create a bigger crisis later on. These are not mistakes. You preclude crises indefinitely by way of QE. Later on you can just crash the economy and receive trillions from the State to bail you out. In other words, you have a very big task here in front of you to explain how it's possible that the same policies which are said to have caused the Great Recession, policies which were not stopped at any point since and are used today, have not caused another downturn. You have a similar task here to explain how the "pandemic... being an obvious threat to capitalism" didn't actually cause a crash and why the ruling class has, in fact, gained trillions in the last two years.

These things being beneficial in the short term are likely why they play out this way but in the long term prolonging even one of them enough will gently caress things up for the capitalist class permanently.

Perry Mason Jar
Feb 24, 2006

"Della? Take a lid"

Rime posted:

Nah, this is largely bullshit drawing from a few centuries of indoctrination about how the world works, I'll quote what I posted in the bird watching thread last night since its directly relevant to how this tangent has gone:

Can you state your contention more clearly? There's space in what I've said for non-hunter-gatherer agricultural societies and in one of my replies I said specifically "communist or communalist" - communalist being those societies the quote is referring to. Additionally, robust is a keyword and should not be ignored or taken to mean "extant". Robust should be taken to include all of which is required for modern society - that is, energy for all people, housing for all people, plumbing, healthcare, education, etc etc.

Bathtub Cheese posted:

These things being beneficial in the short term are likely why they play out this way but in the long term prolonging even one of them enough will gently caress things up for the capitalist class permanently.

Well it'll gently caress things up because it's destroying the Earth's capacity to support human life but "QE -> Bail-out -> QE -> Bail-out" is infinitely sustainable (assuming that the working class doesn't organize and behead you).

Torpor
Oct 20, 2008

.. and now for my next trick, I'll pretend to be a political commentator...

HONK HONK
you know, the people of the future are going to have some pretty harsh critiques of our present and past because for all of our supposed intellect and tradition of philosophy we paved the way for their unbroken litany of suffering, death and destruction of not only the natural world but humanity itself on an unimaginable scale.

Torpor
Oct 20, 2008

.. and now for my next trick, I'll pretend to be a political commentator...

HONK HONK
quote isn’t edit :haw:

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Serf
May 5, 2011


Torpor posted:

you know, the people of the future are going to have some pretty harsh critiques of our present and past because for all of our supposed intellect and tradition of philosophy we paved the way for their unbroken litany of suffering, death and destruction of not only the natural world but humanity itself on an unimaginable scale.

people of the... future? do you mean like the great race of yith? because buddy they're laughing at us in the past, present and future all at once

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply