Nuktuk

Nuktuk wrote

It is important to recognise that the international poverty line is adjusted for purchasing power. When we hear $1.90 per day, we commonly assume that this means the equivalent of what an American might be able to buy with that amount of money in, say, Sudan or India. But exactly the opposite is true. It is the equivalent of what $1.90 can buy in the United States. Just think for a moment about what this means. It is virtually nothing.

Dang, I had the same assumption too tbh. Fuck everyone who uses this international poverty line rhetoric.

10

Nuktuk wrote

Reply to by !deleted23972

Many worlds have gone before this one. Our traditional histories are tightly woven with the fabric of the birthing and ending of worlds. Through these cataclysms we have gained many lessons that have shaped who we are and how we are to be with one another. Our ways of being are informed through finding harmony through and from the destruction of worlds. The Elliptic. Birth. Death. Rebirth.

...

The anti-colonial imagination isn’t a subjective reaction to colonial futurisms, it is anti-settler future. Our life cycles are not linear, our future exists without time. It is a dream, uncolonized.

For me this is a new way of framing the anti-time/anti-future type stuff but very interesting for sure. Also kind of humbling considering the apocalyptic panic as of late.

3

Nuktuk wrote

Reply to comment by ziq in Don’t be shamed Into voting by ziq

It seems (so called) Americans don't even know other countries exist. If so they'd probably realise that some countries use compulsory voting as a means to normalise authority via the democratic process. Maybe they'd realise that bullying people into voting does exactly the same thing.

3

Nuktuk wrote (edited )

Reply to by !deleted8445

I like to think of spooks as ideas which one holds above their own interest/desire.

People often say that a particular problem will cease to exist after The Revolution. This idea of The Revolution can only ever alienate you from the ways the given problem affects you in the present moment (and how you and any accomplices can fight said problem with any means at your disposal). The idea speaks of a state you will never find yourself in.

If the idea of The Revolution does anything to divert/suppress your actions to deal with said problem, then it would be an idea held above your own interests/desires and would therefore be a spook.

8

Nuktuk wrote (edited )

Reply to comment by Nuktuk in by !deleted8445

Oh they talk a bit about how their straight edgedness doesn't mean being at odds against people who use drugs, it means being at odds with specifically intoxication culture. People who are straight edge are often part of harm reduction programs was an example they presented. Not sure how much they've covered this idea specifically before.

4

Nuktuk wrote (edited )

Reply to comment by An_Old_Big_Tree in by !deleted8445

Doesn't really cover any new ideas regarding anarchy if one is already somewhat familiar with warzone's work. But it was interesting to me to learn a little bit about the folks at warzone distro and how they came to be working together/how the project started.

4

Nuktuk wrote (edited )

Reply to by !deleted8445

baedan for me was very enjoyable. the meat of the book was super good but I remember taking mushrooms after reading the phallus/orifice part (musings on nothingness i think it was called) and that definitely lead to some fun visuals. very much looking forward to reading the next two books they did.

4

Nuktuk wrote

A big part of all this nihilisty stuff to me is the idea of hopelessness as emancipatory, rather than a hinderance. Because positive projects appear to always go on to reproduce authoritative relations, I can instead dedicate my efforts to engaging directly with authority where I encounter it. Rather than waste my time begging others to go vegan or marching in protest in the streets, I can use what power I have left and steal directly for those who need food, or directly find ways to vandalise the belongings of those who use others. If One is looking for reassurance that collapse will end authority, I don’t think reading something like baedan can help someone. Leviathan can recouperate anything. As for dealing with the angst associated with this inevitability, actually getting my nails dirty is the closest to therapeutic I get.

As for technology I think what I do is use tech where it helps me to fight these structures is too valuable. And a critique of technology while incredibly useful shouldn’t deter you from finding ways to use technology full stop.

Also just wanna say I’ve always enjoyed reading your contributions, and I hope you still feel comfortable to make interesting posts like this one in the future.

6

Nuktuk wrote

Reply to comment by !deleted4371 in by !deleted4371

Funny how everyone who feels the need to tell you they dislike idpol within 20 minutes of meeting you then goes around to talk about all the other identity based politics that they do like shortly after.

3

Nuktuk wrote

Reply to comment by An_Old_Big_Tree in by !deleted8445

I think the two most obvious issues with this are as follows:

  1. Framing "sustainable agriculture" as a solution runs us into a few problems. Solutions as a means of fighting issues is very Enlightenment in nature. Prescribing a particular alternative shuts out the possibility for other alternatives to prop up. To talk about how monoculture is an issue is very useful. It allows us to engage with the way the world around us functions, how our food is produced and how to combat the effects monoculture has. Talking of "sustainable agriculture" as a solution and not merely an avenue to experiment with prevents us from engaging with other means of acquiring food that maybe we haven't previously considered. Its very telling when OP states "I just wanted to clarify my position once and for all on the matter." OP has made up their mind on the matter.

  2. OP is reductive to the ecological reasons one might be so called "vegan" (ie. acts like abstaining from eating flesh or sabotaging slaughter houses). They made it clear they wouldn't get into the socio-economic/imperialist arguments but they fail to engage with the way the current or their proposed food system affects non-humans. So we have a solution which does little for those that live a nomadic/non-industrial life, nor those that are actually being farmed/living in these damaged ecosystems. Solutions only get in the way of the organic, rigorous, ever adapting means of living that challenge the world around us.

Apart from that I think this is mostly agreeable. I no longer refer to myself as a vegan for reasons relevant to a lot of the points raised by OP. Its nice to see more people criticising the vegan movement for its dogma and its Green Industry nonsense particularly.

2