RosaReborn

Reply to Cactus! by /u/supernice

4

RosaReborn wrote

That's awesome! I remember as a kid falling into a big barrel cactus. Ended up having my mom pick out about 50 stickers (the smaller ones didn't come out for a few days). They are an evolutionary marvel to my eyes and I love them for that however they don't belong in my climate now. Please upload some pictures if you have the chance! :)

2

RosaReborn wrote

any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States

I don't want to be pedantic but are all US laws written using masculine pronouns as the assumed subject?

This is truly a disgusting law regardless. The state will arrest you regardless if they have any proof of illegal acts, and now just wearing a mask is an illegal act so they will scoop up everyone. Also the vague language will certainly let right-wingers get off the hook

1

RosaReborn wrote

Very cool post. Lots of information that I'll try to put to use some day. It just makes me happy people are designing systems so creatively to make multi-culture farming more effective and holistic

2

RosaReborn wrote

That's great to hear. I only have a balcony garden but it's actually gone very well. My basils had a disease scare but seem fine now. I am having a big recurring problem with aphids on my Jalapeno and other spicy pepper plants. It just requires a bit of maintenance but otherwise they are growing large.

My biggest concern are my container grown eggplants have stalled growing for a while now. They both still seem very healthy but idk if a lack of sunlight is hurting them. I might move them form the balkon to a windowsill, however I can't imagine them actually producing large fruits

3

RosaReborn wrote

Yes I have read it although it was years ago. It's left-leaning in that it generally is against corporations, bureaucracy, with their unfair power and wealth in relation to individuals; however I didn't feel it had anything to say about this that had any substance. I mean the big plot is based upon this sympathetic billionaire which isn't a good view about how to save the world.

Couple that with a lot of toxic geek male entitlement, I question how truly left-leaning it is.

That being said it is a fun book and a good story concept even if it is politically bunk

Reply to Is 'love' real? by /u/ziq

6

RosaReborn wrote (edited )

Fairy tale 'happily ever after' love most certainly doesn't, nor do most teenage loves. But love is certainly real, it just comes along with a lot of other things as well. Love for a partner requires a lot of respect and empathy, and you sometimes hate the other person and sometimes they bore you or disgust you but you still love them for the person they are. Maybe not forever and definitely not always in the same way, but it certainly is important

5

RosaReborn wrote

I agree with you. I may still use "morality" in normal speech even I am talking about ethics however.

Post-leftists aren't 'monsters' for rejecting morality. We're rejecting an incredibly flawed and reactionary concept that directly leads to untold misery.

This is incredibly important. We must always question our own ethics and justify their reasoning. In doing so we uncover conditioning of society that we never see before, things that lie outside the scope of moral/immoral or somewhere in between. Especially true for individualist anarchist thinking

3

RosaReborn wrote

What would be a better pace to get you and others involved? I was thinking since there are no votes, just keep the Desert discussion open and welcome comments there this week for those that couldn't finish it in time. I will be away from wifi again next weekend (Wednesday to mid-saturday) so that works for me this week

3

RosaReborn wrote

In some senses vagabond plants are, ‘on the other side’; they are living in opposition to the city, yet they are simultaneously part of the overarching urban ecosystem. To see them in isolation without implicitly seeing their links and interactions within the wider community would be foolish (47)

I absolutely love this quote and the metaphor that ecological struggles themselves are too a degree a part of the urban ecosystem. It is important work to make urban areas more wild or less ecologically destructive, but we are still a part of the urban environment and I thought the metaphor was perfect in illustrating the illusions one may have.

The authors notes on slums as both an opposing but integrated urban system was also very intersting. Similar to the integration "weeds" mentioned above but serving instead to urbanize those living outside of cities instead of city dwellers seeking to environmentalize the cities.


ps: I will be away for this weekend until late Sunday evening without internet connection, so this will be my last comment until then. Have fun everyone!

2

RosaReborn wrote

As long as capitalism stays afloat, I don't think that will happen

Completely agree, there will be robots as functioning CEOs long after humans are dead.

And as to your question about renewables, it's in field of hydrogen storage, specifically hydrolysis of water for energy storage from wind turbines so no foreign influence or resource extraction

4

RosaReborn wrote

Apocalyptic predictions are always arbitrary because the effects of climate change are not a singular event like a nuclear holocaust. Instead it occurs on the scale of years and decades, even centuries. That is a great quote you posted because there are already people who must contend with the consequences of environmental exploitation everyday. Those in the West may not really be effected for decades more in a significant way. The super rich can insulate themselves and may not be significantly effected for a hundred years or more. Your level of impact depends on the resources you depend on and where you are in the world.

Basically the timeline is somewhat arbitrary but in 20 years the strain on society will likely be so great due to climate refugees and diminishing resource extraction that normal functioning of society will be more likely to collapse

4

RosaReborn wrote

I like how realistic this text presents situations. It acknowledges that hopes for a pan-global movement of anarchism is unlikely and that other forces may have the advantage. I like how it looks to enable groups of people in fragmented spaces and acknowledges that climate change will effect places differently and thus solutions may need to be adaptable. That being said, to really address the causes of climate change, we must push a unified resistance to the destruction of the environment everywhere. Oil emissions in the USA still harm an autonomous community in South America. Plastic in the ocean still kills fish near Thailand. As someone working in renewable energies, I'd like to see a reduction of consumption across the board and a complete shift to renewable energy and sustainable living. States, including my own, claim to support this but hamper it at every step. Climate refugees may push the state to act but I can only foresee it acting in a reactionary way.