Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

11

Tequila_Wolf wrote (edited )

In the wholly unlikely event that capitalism is replaced in a substantial way, it'll probably a multigenerational process of destruction and unlearning - restructuring our landscapes and our minds is no small task.

I have no idea what it will look like; I think it's a pipe dream, and that even if it were coming it would take longer than the earth has as we know it, because of climate change.

I prefer to widen the gaps in the social fabric, all the while looking for and sharpening weapons to use against it. As our climate change destroys the world around us people are going to be jumping to new ideologies in their shock, and I hope to make better rather than worse ones available for them to take on. More temporary autonomous zones than less is my preference; they at least seem possible.

6

meotomme wrote

I mean, if we're being honest, it's a lot more likely they'll go to far right ideologies than far left ones.

4

Splinglebot wrote

it is with that attitude

2

moto wrote

It's pretty realistic. How many liberals/conservatives have you met (right)? How many communists (left)?

3

Zzzxxxyyy wrote

Depends on where you live. I meet more leftists than right-ists.

However, right wing ideology has a way of drawing people in to a feeling of community as they get more extreme, whereas leftists become isolated. I think it has to do with the fact that right wing ideologies tend to circle around an established authority, even if that’s just a vision of an ideal society, whereas leftists seem to always be dragged from one cause to the next being “the most important thing ever.”

2

Zzzxxxyyy wrote

You also just never know when talking to a leftists that they’ll decide you’re the oppressor/opposition. The cynical lens, for good or bad, doesn’t exclude potential allies who are learning/processing.

6

surreal wrote

one day of everyone not spending a single cent.

3

edmund_the_destroyer wrote

I don't know what form the collapse will take, but it's my firm belief that open source, decentralized, federated communication software of all kinds will be a key component.

The current internet is structured to funnel all human interaction through Google, Facebook, Amazon, and similar companies and tools. They harvest your data and bombard you with advertising and propaganda.

When we cut the advertising, tracking, and propaganda out I think the nature of political discourse and the content of popular political ideas will shift.

But good tools for all of this either don't exist today, or are too complicated for most people to use.

2

TheLegendaryBirdMonster wrote

what tools are you thinking about that are available today but too complicated to use?

3

edmund_the_destroyer wrote

For a secure distributed social network: Secure Scuttlebutt ( https://www.scuttlebutt.nz/ ) - I'm setting up but haven't used it much yet.

For secure distributed file and other content sharing: The "dat" protocol and Beaker browser ( https://beakerbrowser.com/ ) Closest to ready for regular users, but still not easy.

For hosting your own email: Mail-in-a-Box ( https://mailinabox.email/ ) - you need to be pretty tech-savvy to use it.

For distributed, decentralized, impossible-to-censor search engines: Yacy ( https://yacy.net/en/index.html ) - currently it works pretty poorly. Every time I tried it, it ran but gave me junk results.

For distributed, decentralized, server resource hosting for web applications: SAFE Network ( https://safenetwork.tech/ ) - some places group it with cryptocurrencies but the concepts behind it are different and it might be feasible. I'm watching it but not trying to use it yet.

And I like the idea of secure, untraceable currency transactions through cryptocurrencies but most existing cryptocurrencies are just energy-intensive pyramid schemes.

Many other similar such projects in all kinds of categories exist. But none have reached the "click to install and go!" stage.

1

TheLegendaryBirdMonster wrote

You may be interested in /f/nettle which is made by an raddle ex-user.

3

BigGeorge wrote

The collapse of the West, either economic or environmental - which ones comes first is the question.

2

moto wrote

Wouldn't an environmental collapse cause an instant economic collapse though?

2

BigGeorge wrote (edited )

Well, an isolated economic collapse won't end capitalism, and neither would an isolated environmental collapse.

The rich are able to insulate themselves from environmental collapses for quite a while. As long as they can afford to build their climate controlled gated communities and have the privilege to migrate further and further north when those communities can no longer be sustained, and as long as they can afford to import their food / fuel from whatever corners of the world are still able to produce it; they'll be fine and capitalism will live another day. Even when the markets plummet and the currencies are massively devalued - they'll still have far more real wealth (property, resources) than the rest of us, so it won't affect their power level much. Cash money isn't what determines their wealth - ultimately it's what they own. If they own the land, they control the food, and thus control us.

The western rich won't be hit hard by collapse until literally the entire rest of the planet is in ruins. They can afford to hole up and prop up a form of capitalism until they have nowhere left to go to escape the effects of collapse.

The 'West' (Euro-cultures - including far-flung ones like New Zealand) will collapse last (after squeezing every drip of blood out of the rest of the world), but once the West falls, the capitalism (really feudalism at this point) parasite will have nowhere left to hide.

But of course, at that point billions will have died horribly and the environment will be wrecked for millennia.

I guess environmental collapse will precede economic collapse; because no matter how much property they own, it'll be worthless once it's on fire / under water, and they won't give up capitalism / their power until there's literally no other option.

1

gooey wrote (edited )

I guess environmental collapse will precede economic collapse; because no matter how much property they own, it'll be worthless once it's on fire / under water, and they won't give up capitalism / their power until there's literally no other option.

But this presumes capitalism is in their control when it's actually a total crapshoot. They can't control how the stockmarket fluctuates.

1

BigGeorge wrote (edited )

The people I'm talking about don't give a shit about the stockmarket. They own real wealth: land, mines, water sources, oil fields, nuclear power plants. A Great Depression won't kill capitalism, it'll just render all the classes under the ruling class into a single 'poverty class' and the ruling (capitalist) class will keep on trucking.

As long as they control everything the 99% depend on to survive, capitalism will stick around.

When their real wealth evaporates or is rendered obsolete (which will take a total collapse of their highly insulated Western civilization); that's when capitalism goes away. But there might no longer be any point struggling to survive in the wasteland Earth will be by then.

2

throwaway wrote

As far as I've read, capitalism will at some point crack under its own weight, due to some of the fundamental contradictions in the nature of capitalism - but it will take some time for us to get there. The other possibility is a popular revolution; if the majority of the public assumes anti-capitalism, it won't be long before there's not a single wheel turning in the exploitation machinery.

1

_r3dh07_ wrote

The end of civilization, most probably by climate change related diseases.