Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

nostateuniversity wrote (edited )

Reply to comment by celebratedrecluse in by !deleted16100

Why are you talking about socdems and demsocs when the article was about communists and anarcho-leftists? If anything, socdems and demsocs only seek to extend capitalism and industrialism. Communists and red anarachists would certainly do a better job at addressing climate change then them, and if you`ve read the article, you'd know the explanation to why their solutions are wholely inadequate.

Even with environmental regulations, simply making sure the damage isn't accelerating is not enough. The growth of CO2 concentration has been linear (ie. not accelerating) since the Kyoto protocols were implimented, and here we are, even worse off than we were in 2005. Even if we actually reverse the growth of CO2 concentrations, the feedback loops that we've already set in motion, like methane being released from melting permafrost, will likely mitigate any gains we might make in that case.

And let's be honest, do you really think socdem/demsoc politicians are gonna be able to implement those sweeping changes? Just look at how quickly the French socialist party of the 80s and SYRIZA buckled and became liberal in practice; and those parties had far more radical platforms than the socdem politicians of today. No party, no matter how radical, is going to change the institutions based on economic and environmental exploitation that they operate within.

Which means that anarchists and our fellow travellers are pretty much all we've got to make a revolution with...an intimidating mantle, but i hope we shall live up to it in our time.

Don't wait around for a revolution that`s never going to come. Voting for socdem politicans and hoping and praying that this time, things will be different, they swear, is not enough. Do something. http://lfbg75wjgi4nzdio.onion/wiki/Praxis

5

celebratedrecluse wrote

Damn, you're arguing with a complete strawman.

You realize, I am an anarchist too? For decades, never wavering from my beliefs, even at personal cost? You lecture me as if I am a child. Even if you do not mean it to sound this way, it comes across condescending to literally link me to the wiki article on praxis, among other features of this comment.

In the process, you fail to engage with the substance of my point, which accepts the entire comment you made as a premise. I don't campaign for politicians. I don't give electoral politics the time of day 99% of the year. But for a few minutes once every year, I pen in some names on a ballot, which are the least harmful options. It is far from important. But it does a small amount to forestall the rise of fascism, and it is worth doing given that the option exists and is not inconvenient or time consuming for me.

When I say anarchists are the only ones who can make revolution, i am not talking about the second coming of christ. I am talking about literally just changing society, at all, from the neoliberal consensus. It's an ongoing process, and I use the word revolution to refer to that-- I have no belief in a political "revolution" to solve all problems, or even a few problems really. Even as climate catastrophe goes on, still we are mired in this neoliberal hell, and worse yet there are the reactionaries rising in power worldwide.

In the process of saying this, I am explicitly denying that the dem socs or social democrats will be able to solve the contradictions. In fact, this is in my original comment. So you will perhaps understand now why I am annoyed at the tone of your reply, you lecture me that I need to read the article, but it appears you flatly did not fully read my comment, instead replying only to key words incidentally contained within it.

1