RedEmmaSpeaks

RedEmmaSpeaks wrote

I have a difficult time working up much outrage in all this. How different is this from the Rich's usual tactics for stacking the deck when it comes to colleges? There's the good old fashioned Legacy admission, but probably colleges will find it easy to relax its standards when some rich fart whips out their checkbooks. If nothing else, they can afford the best tutors and advisors to help their kid properly package themselves, so as to better convince schools to admit li'l princess or prince.

The Rich have long stacked everything, including education, in their favor. This latest scam isn't really anything new.

Heck, I'd be really shocked if anyone faces much by way of consequences. I doubled over laughing when some news pundit said something along the lines of "They may be able to buy their way into college, but they can't use that money to buy their way out of jail." Seriously, what's the rent like on the rock they've been living under?

2

RedEmmaSpeaks wrote

I too, get more than just a little suspicious about discussions about civilization. Given that the term has so long been tied up with racist, jingoistic BS, it's hard to hold any discussions, because you can't entirely be sure what definition the other person is using. You have to dig deep into the surrounding text, really read between the lines, to understand what definition they're using, because without this understanding, these discussions are very tricky.

If we are defining civilization as "a group of people with a shared way of life/beliefs about the way the world works and the upbringing of children," then just about every group of people qualify, including tribes in the Amazon. If, however, our definition of civilization necessitates a massive hierarchy with vast disparities of wealth between various levels of society, then you understand why the Western World has long taken a dim view of indigenous groups.

Though when we talk about indigenous peoples, we must be careful to remember that they didn't have just one way of life; they had many. Some of them were nomadic, while others, the extent of their wanderings was they had a summer home and a winter home which they traveled between. Others were semi-nomadic, living in one place until the land is used up, then moving to some place else, coming back to original location a few generations later, after the land has had time to heal.

Indigenous tribes' lifestyles depended on where they lived. They were smart enough to know that a one-size-fits-all standard of living (where everyone has the same kind of houses, eats the same food, does the same kind of work), doesn't work. Really, the only way so-called Civilized Man has made it work is with the help of a state powered by vast infusions of nonrenewable resources.

Then again, I also find these discussions somewhat limiting, because they too often, seem to operate under the either/or mindset, where we can either have the cool tech of today or live like cavemen pounding on stuff with rocks. There's no reason we can't meet halfway, figure out how to marry the old and the new. I'm a firm believer in "Hold onto what works and jettison what doesn't."

In any case, people will still create art and take care of each other, regardless of what new civilization comes about.

2

RedEmmaSpeaks wrote (edited )

Obviously, we need more than reform, but I support politicians like AOC nonetheless. However satisfying it may be to send everything crashing down, the truth is the rich and the powerful would mostly escape the chaos that followed. It will be the most vulnerable, the poor, disabled, minority groups, who will suffer horribly. We'd eventually recover, but it would be a long time and again, vulnerable groups of people would suffer and die.

Ideally, our culture will come to its senses and dismantle this system that's killing us, before it comes crashing down and kills even more, but in the mean time, whatever staves off a collapse and gives us more time to prepare for the inevitable crash, is a good thing. Inadequate protection is still better than no protection whatsoever. As a White Female, I'm not facing the same kind of dangers as some minority groups, but others aren't so lucky; any protection or time we can get for the vulnerable, is a good thing. Any obstacles you can throw in the path of fascists like Trump, however small, is a good thing. Even if they do get past it, slowing them down still probably bought more time for others to escape.

7

RedEmmaSpeaks wrote

My anarchy vision for the future is already based more on a tribal-band form of living, because I am totally of the Small is Beautiful mindset. The tribes may form alliances with other tribes, but they'd be more Iroquois Confederation-style alliances, where while there's a common code/law that unites the tribes, each one still maintains its own sovereignty and can conduct their own affairs as they see fit, so long as it doesn't interfere with the lives of the other tribes. As tribes, stuff would be voted on and decided on by the adult members of the tribes. I guess that qualifies that as democracy, but I'm not sure.

2

RedEmmaSpeaks OP wrote

Only in White Girl Liberalism can racism be seen as one of those issues where people can agree to disagree on, because apparently this is one of things akin to someone liking pistachio ice cream, while someone else hates it.

Some people believe that all people, regardless of age, race, gender, religious beliefs, or orientation, are human beings and deserving of the rights that come with it. While some people only think that full humanity belongs to those who are White, Christian, and Male, and anyone else should just die. Sometimes you've gotta agree to disagree, am I right? Compromise is key to healthy relationships. :eyeroll:

Though while chica bends over backwards to defend Adolf Hipster, wait until she crosses him in the slightest and discovers he won't do the same for her. The respect of Toxic Neo-Nazi Fucks is ALWAYS conditional. Once you've lost their respect for whatever reason, even if it's just existing, they will not stop going after you; they will never relent.

It's what Philosophy Tube said in his video (which everyone should watch) "The Philosophy of Antifa:" If you decide to stop being a fascist, anti-fascists will leave you alone. They may not like you or want to have a beer in a pub with you, but they will leave you alone. Whereas if you cross a fascist in any way, they will not stop until you have ceased to exist.

4

RedEmmaSpeaks wrote

Here's a video of the Dapper Richard Spencer getting the shit-eating grin punched off his smug face. Because any discussion about him, benefits from a video of the punch. It's propaganda of the deed done right and a reminder that the dragon is actually a coward, the monster has feet of clay, and can be easily defeated.

https://youtu.be/fErUIxAK2HA

2

RedEmmaSpeaks wrote

During the Eisenhower administration, we had a tax rate of 90%. You wanna know what happened? We had a nightmarish era of peace and prosperity during which we built most of our infrastructure and implement programs that enabled us to beat Russia to the moon in the the sixties.

Heck, during the era of Republican Jesus, I mean, Reagan, tax rate was about 60%, so she's not too far off.

I have made this statement before and will probably make it many times once more: Eisenhower was the last Republican president who didn't leave his country in worse shape than it was when he took office. I know about his rule in CIA-orchestrated coups, but again, feel that the good mostly outweighed the bad. When the governor of Arkansas refused to comply with court orders to integrate his schools, Eisenhower was the one who dispatched the 101st Airborne to protect the students and force the schools to integrate, thus :gasp: overriding Arksansas's State Right to be an asshole to black people.

1

RedEmmaSpeaks wrote

Since counting your pennies won't do jack if you get sick, I say go ahead and enjoy the little comforts you can, the little stuff that makes a difficult life easier to bear. Have that fancy latte, eat at McDonald's. Because again, you can't sack away enough nickels and dimes to pay for medical care, and it also doesn't do you much good when it comes to rent and auto repairs. Don't let some rich asshole shame you, because you want to eat something besides ramen noodles every now and then.

2

RedEmmaSpeaks wrote (edited )

Here's a basic Yellow Vests 101 video. Again, I'm still cautious, because working class movements almost invariably involve racism in the modern era. Then again, Working Class is one of those terms I'm just generally sick of, because working class is usually code for "white men." Apparently women and PoC don't work; we make our living accusing innocent white men of sexual assault and sponging off welfare. Who knew?

https://youtu.be/zn_GHA850eQ

2

RedEmmaSpeaks wrote (edited )

I've been kind of concerned about this movement. I hope it is a genuine movement on behalf of the common people, but gods almighty, I've more or less gotten suspicious of any movement where the words "populist" or "nationalist" are used. Maybe those words once had neutral or positive meanings, but now both are pretty much code words for White Supremacy. So I'm worried that while this may bear some of the trappings of a genuine workers' rights movement, it'll eventually break into yet another White Supremacy, Neo-Nazi movement.

Because the idea that both White people and PoC work hard and are being screwed over by those in power? That's unpossible.

Of all the strategies the ruling classes have used to keep the 99% divided, racism may be one of the best, most effective ones. Even now, the general idea is that all workers are racist, even though the fuckers driving this Nazi revival, are about as Working Class as Donald Trump is. Or in other words, they're people born into upper-middle to upper class backgrounds who want to pretend that they are jes' plain folks, even though they haven't spent more than a day in a working class community.

5

RedEmmaSpeaks wrote

It's why I like the ideas behind Solarpunk so much better. Too often we wind up in debates about technology, and it always seems to get reduced to a simplistic dichotomy where we can either have our amazing tech and all it brings or go back to living like caveman. The idea is ludicrous on the surface. It assumes that we have an all-or-nothing choice in all this.

But there is no reason it has to be like that, no reason we can't take the old and marry it with the new. Hold onto what works, but jettison what doesn't. Clinging to traditions without thought is stupid, but completely throwing all ideas out the window without bothering to study them is stupid as well.

For example, when it comes to medicine, we can hold onto what we've learned regarding germ theory and antibiotics, but try to figure out how to implement them in a way that demands fewer nonrenewable resources. Germ theory is easy enough; just wash your hands frequently and throw your tools into boiling hot water.

So much of our problems and our discussions center around how we can't have that or we must have that, but that's sloppy thinking. A smarter approach would be, "Okay, how can we use this more efficiently?" Like rather than constantly produce new gadgets, we can accept that we've produced a shitton of them and rather than do all the work involved to make more slightly upgraded models, why not cannibalize old versions for parts, see if we can figure out how to make it work for a newer model?

3

RedEmmaSpeaks wrote

How soon until Cryptocurrency millionaire discovers that Nevada is a massive desert and pretty much the only way you can live the all-American one-size-fits-all existence, is via a massive State powered by nonrenewable resources. Once we've burned through the last of our oil, places like Las Vegas and Phoenix will be forced to discover that they are deserts and there's limits to the population the area can support. To say nothing of what would happen when they are forced to deal with the desert heat without the benefit of AC.

I imagine with some thinking and planning, someone could manage a happy, comfortable existence out in the Nevada/Arizona desert, but it would require flexible thinking and a willingness to accept that certain tech, like AC, is off the table and they will have to learn how to deal with the desert heat without it. And while I haven't clicked on the link yet, I can't imagine Cryptocurrency millionaire being the type to do this kind of long-term planning and the likelihood that he would forgo such luxuries as AC...that sound you hear is my mocking laughter.

2

Reply to Ableism/Language by alex

RedEmmaSpeaks wrote

For those of you who worry about repeating ableist slurs and want to know how to avoid it, use the word "asshole." It's a good, all-purpose insult that can be slung at anything and everyone who deserves it.

4

Reply to comment by RedEmmaSpeaks in Not my comrades by kittybecca

RedEmmaSpeaks wrote (edited )

It's probably because they don't want some fingers pointed back at them, don't want their egos bruised by people pointing out their role in sustaining institutionalized prejudices.

Even on the Left, white men are the most thinned-skinned fragile mothereffers around, their egos unable to bear the slightest criticism.

3

RedEmmaSpeaks wrote

On one hand, it is a decent cartoon. On the other hand, it's by Ted Rall, aka the testicular cancer of people.

Here is a lengthy takedown of Ted Rall and his career: https://imgur.com/a/xDjKV

I often wonder to what extent Ted Rall is a leftist. Honestly, I've thought that he's on the Left not so much because of the ideals he believes in, but because he has this image of himself as the scruffy underdog sticking it to the man. Since the Left tends to represent that kind of imagery, Rall sides with them. But he also has this obsession as being seen as the one who really gets it, so if something is held in consensus by the various groups on the Left, he has to side against it.

2

Reply to comment by RedEmmaSpeaks in Not my comrades by kittybecca

RedEmmaSpeaks wrote

It's the argument usually uttered by smug white boy brosocialists as they explain that they simply can't care about Id Pol and all those women/PoC/LGBT people should shut up and step aside, because we'll solve racism forever once we've solved poverty forever.

Again, they have the luxury of being able to ignore Id Pol, because on the whole, it doesn't affect their day-to-day life that much. Heck, they mostly benefit from Id Pol: society is catered around white men. Those outside the demographic of white, heterosexual, cisgender, and male, don't have that luxury. Whether we chose to acknowledge it or not, we're drafted into the fight from day one.

Class is an important issue, since money is basically the ultimate privilege, but it's simplistic to act like it affects everyone equally. Even LBJ said something along the lines that black poverty isn't the same as white poverty and he's right.

The Left is centered around the ideal that all people should be free to live their lives as they see fit, so long as it harms no one else in the process. Id Pol isn't a distraction from the cause; it IS the cause.

9

RedEmmaSpeaks wrote

Sorry to have waited so long to post in this thread, but I wanted time to mull things over.

I entirely understand the general tendency towards pessimism. There are plenty of reasons for it, plenty of examples as to point to about how everything is going to shit. And on some level, the pessimistic predictions are correct. Our way of life cannot be sustained and either we can dismantle Capitalism or Industrial Civilization and maybe salvage a decent existence, or it will be dismantled by default once it has reached its natural limits, because constant growth isn't possible. Just as if you constantly gobble chocolate cake, you will eventually run out of chocolate cake, if you constantly consume resources, you will eventually run out of resources.

All this is true, but at the same time, ultimately we must hope, not the mindless Pollyanna type, but the real, strong kind that fuels change. Hope is ultimately a radical act. The Powers That Be want you to give up, accept that this is how the world has to be, and you're a fool for daring to dream or ask for something better. Continuing to hope and letting that hope fuel your resistance, is an upraised middle finger to all of it.

So while I know that in all likelihood what awaits us is starvation and squalor, I will choose to hope. After all, humans are wired for altruism and empathy and despite the State's best efforts, these traits are very hard to stamp out. Many people, ironically, often support so-called Marxist or Socialist ideas, if they are framed using different terms from the ones they've received a steady diet of fearmongering about. Even if Industrial Civilization comes crashing down, we will try to take care of each other and as a result, some form of government will emerge. It will be on a more tribal band-level, but it's still government.

Any case, I've recently become a fan of Solarpunk. I just really like the aesthetic and the mindset around it. Humans, in addition to being naturally wired for empathy, are also wired to create and innovate. We'll take stuff apart and figure out how to make it work. Because people tend to fall into the trap of "The Modern World is shallow and we need to go back to traditions of old" or "The past has nothing to teach us," but it doesn't have to be an either/or situation. We can hold onto what works, jettison what doesn't, and rediscover and modify old techniques. Marry the old and the new.

3

RedEmmaSpeaks wrote

We are naturally wired to want to take care of each other. We don't need a State to make us do it. In fact, the State does what it can to pervert and destroy this impulse, because of the threat it poses. If our natural empathy gets too strong, we might start asking questions like, "Okay, if we have nearly ten abandoned homes for each individual homeless person, why can't we let them move into these houses?" and from there ask questions like, "Why do we lock up the basic essentials needed to survive, even though we have a surplus?"

5

RedEmmaSpeaks wrote

I scanned through this thread, trying to figure out the general gist of it all. Initially, when I read the thread title I thought, "Oh, this is going to be a discussion of the Post-Revolution world, what happens following the collapse." Judging by the rest of the replies, I was mistaken, though I might just discuss that anyway.

Because honestly, the state of the world is gloomy enough as is. We all know that all this is going to collapse. If you constantly devour nonrenewable resources, eventually you are going to run out of resources; it's a basic fact of life. The plain and simple truth is that this Industrial, One-Size-Fits-All Civilization was only able to keep going as long as it has because until recently, there were always new lands to expand to with new resources to consume. Europe is all used up? Go to the Americas and get more resources.

The trouble is that this Civilization has effectively taken over the planet; there are no more new lands to expand to. Right now, Capitalism is trying to keep the game going by consuming other Capitalist nations, but there's an obvious flaw to that strategy.

In any case, people will elect Fascist leaders because there's something attractive-sounding that there could be a simple, easy solution to a massive worldwide problem. But Fascists are strutting bullies who suck at running countries; bluster and nationalism can only get you so far. As a result, things will deteriorate further, leading to more unrest, and more crackdowns, until finally Industrial Civilization reaches its limits and the whole thing comes crashing down, and survivors have to pick up the pieces.

I had planned to post my theories about what a post-revolution, post-collapse world would be like, but this post is hella long as is. I know I tend to be a long-winded poster, but I feel I should try to ease up on it. I firmly believe, barring a world-ending event like, say, nuclear war, that humans will rebuild, because that's what we've always done. Ice Age hits? We suffer and struggle, but we pay attention, study, and learn, and manage to survive. In my vision, we do more than more than our current day-to-day survival: we fucking thrive.

3