tnstaec

3

tnstaec wrote

Deep ecology and anarcho primitivism are worldviews that have been thoroughly discredited. Despite the fact that they exist, mainly in PNW anarchist milieus, they lost the debate decades ago for anyone who wants to look into it.

Translation: "Bookchin's hatchet-job was as deep as I ever read into it. "

Pro-civvers have never bothered to even understand anti-civ premises, which this article demonstrates pretty clearly.

1

tnstaec wrote (edited )

It's more about class, but race is a factor. If you're in some sort of professional position you're an "expat". If you're in a labor position you're not. The distinction is really supposed to be about duration of stay in a given country, but who do you think has and easier time leaving the host country?

EDIT: Really, we should say it's about country of origin rather than race. African-Americans or Asian Britons would universally be categorized as expat. Someone coming from a South American, African or Asian country would be far less likely to be called so.

3

tnstaec wrote

The Kim dynasty is falling apart under its own weight and self-destructive behavior. I give the current dictator another decade or so. As for what comes next, well... possibly a military bureaucracy would take over and reform the system to look more like China or Myanmar. Or maybe the regime would collapse entirely. In either scenario it becomes very likely that the North is reintegrated into the capitalist world order. I get the sense that if the North is "liberated" it will basically become an almost slavery level of capitalist exploitation by Southern companies. What little labor organzing even exists in the South will be torn apart by pro- and anti-"immigrant" in-fighting (as is usually the case around the world).

At least the Korean peninsula being nuked off the face of the planet is relatively less likely.

5

tnstaec wrote

It's mostly being pushed by corporate interests under false pretenses. There's enough food in the world for everyone; it's inefficient distribution under capitalism that starves people. Even the discourse around the science is being intentionally muddied by Monsanto, Cargill, Syngenta, etc. Might be a reasonable technology for a sensible society to pursue, but not this one.

4

tnstaec wrote

The problem is that it works too well. If it didn't, it wouldn't have taken over the world so completely. For a system to successfully replace it, participation in it must be more compelling than capitalism. And as we know, capitalism has some nasty tricks up it's sleeve to keep everyone in line.