Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

capitan wrote

Just finished this in the past week. Good read. I'm currently thinking that I should try to find my "edge" so to speak.

6

Passive_Nihlist OP wrote

I'm unsure what you mean by "edge", could you elaborate?

3

capitan wrote

Edge zones are the boundaries between systems. They can be very productive and vital areas.

https://deepgreenpermaculture.com/permaculture/permaculture-design-principles/10-edge-effect/

7

Passive_Nihlist OP wrote

Ah okay. I'm quite critical of permaculture but it is definitely an interesting topic.

3

[deleted] wrote

4

Passive_Nihlist OP wrote (edited )

As the original conmentor alluded to in a previous comment, I think there is a productivism that is at least creeping into, if not innate to, permaculture, and it seems to me more and more anthropecentric. I think the idea of rewinding which relates to permaculture is interesting, in asking how can "Wild Nature" return in places it has been destroyed by civilization. But I think to simply answer that the answer is permaculture risks falling into creating an artificial nature that we mistake for "Wild Nature" - similar to how solar punk anarchists mistake eco-brutalism for nature.

2

existential1 wrote

I did some PDC (permaculture design courses) many years back and I've read a lot of the literature on it. There was a time I was into it, and I am now very much not into it. The thing you comment on here is a fundamental issue with permaculture.

It is still inherently built on the idea of human-centered agriculture. It does not challenge agriculture as a way of organizing, and agriculture almost without fail leads to archy. It almost completely depends on the notion of private property at scale. Sure, there may be some permaculture demonstration site or park that is somewhat communal, but invariably those things depend on people not using them all that much and still completely relying on the market and agricultural system we have today.

Second, there is very little consideration for full plant life-cycle in permaculture and changing our consumption patterns to facilitate that. For example, eating radish seed (and seed pods) instead of radishes themselves. It is less about how we adjust ourselves to support the ecosystem and more about how we adjust the ecosystem within our private property to work more "efficiently". This leads to the third issue...

Permaculture is, at its core, a scientific, discriminating, way of viewing the world and nature. This leads to picking winners and losers, sacrificial species for one we care more about because of what it does for us, specifically. Fundamentally, permaculture is a Western (read "white man's") answer for the ecocide that Western (read "white man's") economics and culture has brought upon the world. And just like other aspects of western culture, permaculture attempts to ontologically capture the practices of indigenous peoples across the globe without considering that a different view from western culture made such practices possible in the first place.

That got a little diatribey, but I can't stress enough that permaculture is trash. It's like, a gateway perspective to abandoning anthropocentric ways of working with non-humans. That is it's only redeeming quality to me, but, you have to go through the gate and leave that shit behind.

5

[deleted] wrote

5

Passive_Nihlist OP wrote

I disagree. I think civilization has constructed a dualism between Man (as constructed by Leviathan) and Nature. I definitely do not think this dualism is "natural" that man is always separate from nature, but humans have separated themselves through civilization. So I do not think "Wild Nature" is separate from humans, but it is separate from this civilized ideal of humans.

4

cyberrose wrote

Can someone please explain why so many people like that book so much?

For me its summed up a little like:

  • we are doomed
  • only small groups will survive
  • a lot of shit is coming

Yeah I can relate to quite some stuff but it feel too romantic for me. Somehow as a pre plot to "Dune". What's the implication of that. What's the political message?

I tried to like the book but found it quite unsatisfying.

PS: Sorry if I missed a lot of stuff; I read it some years ago. I just ask myself why there are so many memes about that book.

4

Passive_Nihlist OP wrote

Green Nihlism or Cosmic Pessimism by Alejandro Acosta I think answers some of your questions.

In short to answer your question "what is the political message": there isn't one. Desert is not an examination of what must be done but is simply an analysis of what the future political landscape might look like. There is no hope for some collective action we can take that will stop this (climate catastrophe and its consequences) from happening. But instead one has to determine for themselves "What's the implication of that".

4

cyberrose wrote

Will read that later.

But if that's the case: What's the new story then? I mean individualist primitivist anarchism isn't something new and this romantic view of pure survival is also a very old story.

But instead one has to determine for themselves "What's the implication of that".

And people do that? I rather have the feeling that people like to think about that without taking action. Sure you can not prevent climate collapse or steer society in any direction. But doing nothing - in a group or as individual - does not make things better for you or others.

As I said to me it passes just romantic pictures, but not the urge to discover the great unknown and measure the world; but the curiosity of the great nothing.

3

Passive_Nihlist OP wrote

What's the new story then?

There isn't one, except the one you make yourself.

individualist primitivist anarchism

I personally don't see what any of these three words has to do with the text. If there's anything that sums it up it'd be Green-Nihlist.

and people do that?

Yes lots of people have been influenced by desert, even people doing the big collective actions that desert points to as hopeful. And it would seem writers like seaweed were influenced by it.

But doing nothing - in a group or as individual - does not make things better for you or others.

I would say tge nihlist perspective would invert this as a question: What does doing something do?

4

ANTIPEDOACTION wrote

WHY IS THIS PEDO A_ZED STILL POSTING ON MY BELOVED RADDLE.ME UNDER THIS ALT PASSIVE_NIHILIST? FUCK YOUR COMPLICITY WITH THIS PEDO

0

[deleted] wrote

3

ANTIPEDOACTION wrote

ASK THEM. THEY ARE A PROUD PEDO THAT WILL NOT MISS AN OPPORTUNITY TO DEFEND AND PROMOTE THEIR BELIEF.

AND IF YOU CAN'T SEE THAT THIS IS THE EXACT SAME PERSON YOU ARE EITHER SHIT AT MODERATION OR ARE COMPLICIT IN HAVING PEDOS ON RADDLE.ME.

1