Loading...
Welcome to Anarcho-Punk.net community ! Please register or login to participate in the forums.   Ⓐ//Ⓔ

So where does this lead us?

Discussion in 'General political debates' started by Future Myths, Nov 23, 2009.

  1. Bananaman

    Bananaman Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    294

    2

    3

    Aug 9, 2009
     

    Well, you need to stop thinking in 19th century terms and step into the 21st century.

    Modern cities are parasites, and the way tings are going I'm not sure for how long will the be sustained. It does not matter if you have the infrastructure if you don't have the means and energy to run said infrastructure.

    Modern factories are also parasites. A very big chunk of what is produced nowadays is made of plastic. To make plastics you need to refine oil. Now most of the western governments have done research that indicate irreversible final decline in oil production starting in the next 5 to 10 years. Apparently some governments think that if they get the last scraps of oil available that will give them a huge advantage. Same goes for a large number of other resources...

    As the oil production starts grinding to a halt a whole lot of industry will do the same, First thing is prices will start going through the roof, than mass shortages. Maybe some of the very very few highly privileged (i.e. the US and to some extent EU) will probably try to keep things as they were on the expense of others, but ultimately I feel that the modern industrialized countries are far more vulnerable than those less developed. Cheap energy is a thing of the past...

    Such a state of affairs is sure to cause big world wild turmoil. Will it end in mass destruction? Will the rich take what is left and try to kill of the poor? I don't have a crystal ball...

    What I feel future society will look like, that is assuming it survives for long enough, is a series of smaller communities. Based more on extensive agriculture as a means of support rather than intensive agriculture. Production of goods will have to be considerably downsized from what it is today and concept planned obsolescence of abandoned. Transportation will have to be much different. As such I feel it will be a more DIY world in which modern government will be obsolete...

    Ecological footprint is a concept you should look into. Something I feel is far more important than dated class struggle stories.
     
  2. ASA

    ASA Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    888

    0

    0

    Nov 2, 2009
     
    I would like to see this happen but they must be symbiotic at some point as I see Class where others do not and do not act equally accordingly as they are above me by the very nature of construct that they have been living in for yearrrrs, so this would only really happen after 20/50 years or u will end up with a facist freedom, which is why people should be foccused and support each other reach the goals but they have to know where they stand and alot have either used it adventageously for their group which i feel isn't very open to the world we actually live in, even if it is one step at a time, that needs to change for all to be free and not just people in communes, i mean look at isreal, kibbutzs did great things and showed great promise, then some of them went and persecuted people using religion and race, I will not live in the ghetto

    Anarchism must be open
     
  3. Jack

    Jack Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    119

    1

    0

    Aug 30, 2009
     
    Growth will be sustained, the population will always increase, and the population of cities will always increase. Right now a majority of the world lives in cities. We DO have the means and energy to run the infastructure, that's how we're doing it. And unless you plan to destroy technology and 99% of humanity we will continue to use it even if cities no longer exist, because we still need to support the 55% of people who live in cities.

    Blah blah blah, don't care, doesn't mean they won't exist. Your computer was made in a factory, your clothes were made in a factory, your food was produced with machines made in a factory. The factory will never go because if industry is destroyed everything is destroyed.

    Cool story, bro, but we're talking about in Communism.

    Here you get super utopian. It'd be nice if everything was done in "smaller communities", but the fact is that population is ever expanding and there's no way that small communities will be possible everywhere, or even most places. "Extensive agriculture" would mean more destruction of the enviroment versus intensive agriculture, which utilizes less land for more product. You can never "downsize production" without leaving alot of people with nothing.

    Okay my little rich buddy. I care about humans more than I do about trees, sorry, and I'd rather see a tree exploited than a person. So tell me, when did there stop being classes? When did we come into a classless society? Your ideology is dated because it relies on a primitive mode of production and a miniscule population to exist.

    If you really don't want them in the future, throw out your computer, because it was made through industrial production from mining to wiring to making the harddrive itself.
     
  4. Future Myths

    Future Myths Member Forum Member


    19

    0

    0

    Nov 20, 2009
     
    What do you define as culture?
     
  5. Future Myths

    Future Myths Member Forum Member


    19

    0

    0

    Nov 20, 2009
     
    I am loving the debate- but I must agree with Jack on several points. While I am not condemning the brainstorming that is taking place, I intially posted the question, in my thinking, unambigoulsy enough in an attempt to skirt the utopian vision-- and with that I posited the questions of trade/commerce, sanitation ( sewage, garbage, and this should include recycling) Infastructure (clean water, ability to repair, hospitals, etc). I do think that factories will continue to exist, whether they use carbon emitting fuel sources and manufacturing techniques, or some other form of energy. Even if people are living in small bands, there is no guarantee that needs will be met--as population continues to grow, so do basic requirements. Any attempt to save the human race would have to include provisions based on the assumption that there will be the demand-and need for products, services, and care.
     
  6. Bananaman

    Bananaman Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    294

    2

    3

    Aug 9, 2009
     
    I really don't have the time to write the long answer to what Jack said, a good quality answer would require something a size of a smaller book. But, he could at least do one thing search out some of the stuff I wrote about, not just dismiss it and stick to his own beliefs with nothing to back them up whatsoever. Simple visit to Wikipedia will do for start...

    As whole I feel the movement needs more people that understand science like biology, physics, chemistry, mechanics, ecology etc. Sociology is fine but knowing all about class theories will not help you much when the current system collapses. And it will undergo a radical change at the very least in the near future...
     
  7. Jack

    Jack Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    119

    1

    0

    Aug 30, 2009
     
    It's not going to collapse, and if it gets near there, the bourgeoisie will simply set up a new state.
     
  8. ASA

    ASA Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    888

    0

    0

    Nov 2, 2009
     
    word to both of you, culture: the stupid things that capitalism makes peolpe do and bad coping habits people have developed due to their modern historical experiances and surroundings, culture: inward looking, outward looking(both would be preferable even a little), burying heads in sand unless its about money, bullying, cults of personality(the indivdiual personality is awesome) but followers naa, lack of basic history knowledge, these are some in my area Future

    and they are based in a very young historical referance not just 'i don't like these peole waa' haha, they always fall back on culture, the more i know about how things were set up the better i can change them in context.

    or else i will be talking to a brick wall if i can't change a persons 'veiwpoint' and that veiwpoint can be cruel which i hope to stop!

    You could also see it in real construct of how a place was first created and what you wish/aim for it to be so its in context and keep it simple simon for those who you discuss with but do not insult a persons intelligence, with the propositon of change in a new millenium for all, literally, NO UTOPIA, cept till the afterlife for the little green men believers but its green earth so ya gotta take of it yea, bla bla bla haha

    History has become culture which is stupid as it should not define who you are now but inform who you are now but wen information is controlled, you should know your shit.
     
  9. Future Myths

    Future Myths Member Forum Member


    19

    0

    0

    Nov 20, 2009
     

    I am sorry, but I really find it hard to follow your train of thought, and therefore I am not sure as to how to answer. I was asking for definitions and stating MY opinion , which is my right, which I do no think is insulting anyone's intelligence. And as far as not knowing my shit, please don't talk for anyone else but yourself.
     
  10. meansofexistence

    meansofexistence Active Member Forum Member


    31

    0

    1

    Sep 13, 2009
     
    this may be a very bleak outlook for the future, but unfortunately Jack is correct.

    there are too many rich people in this world. people that have been rich their entire lives, and people that have the money to finance a completely new state to take over whatever it is that any class war or environmental catastrophe may destroy.

    if you need evidence, look at the wholesale of land and state owned companies in Sri Lanka, Thailand, and parts of India after the tsunami hit a few years ago. Instead of tucking their tails and running, multinational corporations decided to impose laws that allowed them to pretty much rebuild a new state by more or less kicking the poor class off of their own destroyed land and rebuilding hotels, strip malls, and other useless shit.

    That's just a small example of how these people do business. If something were to actually happen and a class war is ignited, obliterating much of society, the rich would merely see it as an opportunity to build their version of a perfect nation. and unfortunately when people are starving in the streets they will do just about anything to survive, including succumbing to the will of these bastards. probably the same reason there are countries that still put up with dictators: life would be almost impossible without them, in their eyes.

    If we are to stand any chance at all, we must take control of the wealth. because it will always be there. the problem with that, however, is that we are all human and the vast majority of us will succumb to greed. it's a vicious cycle.

    do i think that anarchy will work? not in my lifetime. while i believe that it is the most ideal society, the problem is that EVERYONE has to believe that it's the best form. anarchy is an all or nothing idea, because as long as you have people out there that continuously want more and more and more, you will always have that threat of a group of people taking over the fucking world.
     
  11. ASA

    ASA Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    888

    0

    0

    Nov 2, 2009
     
    Indeed which is why we must play the game as it were or be forever at the fringes and some have been doing that for so long thats how they percive things to be for as long as after world war 2 ala ghettosisation and it is possible but be wise, organise and work for all, simple basis set mandates wil stop draconianism ala anarchism and the means do meet the ends.

    Support, No Utopia No 'Cynicism' No 'Divide and Conquer', no 'repeating history', make history
     
  12. Jack

    Jack Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    119

    1

    0

    Aug 30, 2009
     
    Here's where I disagree with you. Anarchism doesn't require everyone to be an Anarchist, it required Anarchism to be the most prominant ideology in a social revolution, a "vanguard of ideas" if you will. The Russian Revolution wasn't made up of all Socialists, Anarchists, or Bolsheviks, neither was the Hungarian, Spanish, or German. As long as revolutionary anti-capitalism is the ideology of the majority of the working class, and Anarchists are the most prominant of them, well...there you go.
     
  13. ASA

    ASA Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    888

    0

    0

    Nov 2, 2009
     
    A Brave New World is culture and cheers Jack, I noteth be spokesperson sometimes...
     
Loading...