Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Politics: We need to embrace Green Communism

What's on your mind?
General interest discussions, not necessarily related to depletion.

Re: Politics: We need to embrace Green Communism

Postby Stonemason » Tue 02 Feb 2010, 02:41:27

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Narz', 'T')here is no such thing as "natural humans" or "natural governments".
What is a natural human? Why doesn't it exist?
User avatar
Stonemason
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri 02 Feb 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Canada

Re: Politics: We need to embrace Green Communism

Postby Pretorian » Tue 02 Feb 2010, 03:37:18

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Last_Historian', '
')Did you know that the majority of Russians, Ukrainians, Hungarians, Bulgarians, and most other peoples of the former socialist bloc - especially older people who actually lived under the socialist system - indicate that they prefer it to capitalism?




Aside of this statement in general being another horseshit, we can dig a bit to the original half-true, granted gloves arent expensive. There are indeed some people that miss 2-hour lines to buy cow bones with some meat on them, 8 year long lines to buy a car and 15 year long lines to get a phone line.
90% of them will fit into 2 types of people:
1) young inexperienced ones that had never made those lines, but do remember cheap ice-cream , patriotic songs and shiny uniforms; I would guess LH is (was) one of them before his parents yanked him out of a Socialist paradise to the West, while showing a finger to the Israel where they were supposed to go.
2) As LH said , some old people. First of all thats because during Socialist era they were young, attractive, healthy and important to some degree. Now they are old, ugly, sick and meaningless, and often unwanted even by their immediate family.. Who is ever going to like this? Where are the old people
who like to be old, show me when you'll find one.
Secondly of course lets not forget that Communist and Komsomol "elite" had wiped out their savings and smacked them with $1-2-5 dollar pensions in the early 90s.

Overall the elections do show some nostalgia about the past, for example on the last elections in that region Communist party got a healthy 3.54% of the vote ( without winning in any region, obviously) and "Socialist" party (specifically marketed for soviet union lovers) got 0.38% of the vote.
Pretorian
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4685
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Somewhere there

Re: Politics: We need to embrace Green Communism

Postby Jotapay » Tue 02 Feb 2010, 10:07:53

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Last_Historian', '1'). Normally I would agree, and I did as late as a year back. Now I don't because state intervention is needed on a massive scale to force the system back from collapse. Said state intervention will lower real living standards, and there'll be a need to cushion the fall; otherwise, the people will turn against the new system.

2. Now do you support the death penalty? Since you seem to be very proud of Texas I presume yes, at least for murderers, etc.

3. And in a future of limits to growth, the entire world will become poor.

4. Why did you leave out other experts in this department, such as Hitler, the British Empire, etc?


1. You still assume that the government can effect good solutions. I don't think the government has ever shown that ability. The government consistently proves to be inefficient and corrupt. I think small communities of like-minded individuals will fare best in the future. That is the extent of government that I am willing to endorse.

2. The way that the death penalty is prosecuted in the USA, no, I am very, very much against it. The reason is because the judicial system is completely corrupt and innocent people are undoubtedly killed for crimes that they didn't commit. However, in theory, I have no problem killing someone who actually raped a child or murdered another person. The application of justice is never as perfect as it is envisioned in theory, however.

3. That seems logical and natural if we are to live a balanced life with nature. You were made no promises when you were born into this world, especially that you would not be poor.

4. Good point. I suppose the USA was pretty efficient killing Native Americans in their concentration camps and African slaves as well.
Jotapay
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3394
Joined: Sat 21 Jun 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Politics: We need to embrace Green Communism

Postby Olaf » Tue 02 Feb 2010, 10:21:59

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he people will be able to observe trials and electronically vote on criminals’ punishments.


I think this sounds like one of the worst ideas ever and that your theories lack a basis in reality.

What will you call it? 'Criminal Idol' perhaps?

Olaf
Last edited by Olaf on Tue 02 Feb 2010, 10:38:24, edited 1 time in total.
Olaf
 

Re: Politics: We need to embrace Green Communism

Postby Ludi » Tue 02 Feb 2010, 10:25:17

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Last_Historian', '
')
3. And in a future of limits to growth, the entire world will become poor.


Except the elites.
Ludi
 
Top

Re: Politics: We need to embrace Green Communism

Postby davep » Tue 02 Feb 2010, 10:40:58

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Last_Historian', '3'). And in a future of limits to growth, the entire world will become poor.
Except the elites.
And any heirarchical political structure will have such elites.

We're back to Anarchism or Tribalism as the solution.
What we think, we become.
User avatar
davep
Senior Moderator
Senior Moderator
 
Posts: 4579
Joined: Wed 21 Jun 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Europe
Top

Re: Politics: We need to embrace Green Communism

Postby mos6507 » Tue 02 Feb 2010, 11:06:50

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('davep', '
')We're back to Anarchism or Tribalism as the solution.


In which case, Georgia Guidestones here we come!

Funny how this little game of ring around the rosie always seems to bring us back to the same place again and again.
mos6507
 
Top

Re: Politics: We need to embrace Green Communism

Postby mcgowanjm » Tue 02 Feb 2010, 11:13:51

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('davep', 'W')e're back to Anarchism or Tribalism as the solution.
In which case, Georgia Guidestones here we come!
Funny how this little game of ring around the rosie always seems to bring us back to the same place again and again.
Which is why I love history-you learn it or repeat it 'til you learn it (and go nowhere but in circles meantime). The future is here. We just don't recognize it, yet.
mcgowanjm
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2455
Joined: Fri 23 May 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Politics: We need to embrace Green Communism

Postby SeaGypsy » Tue 02 Feb 2010, 17:11:16

Eastbay is not a raving inconsistent lunatic. He makes it plain he supports communism and lets discussion on relevant topics evolve, like an adult. Americandream is another who is not so much supportive but sees communism as at some point unavoidable. I think socialised basic services are essential to a modern moral society. The one thing we possibly all could agree with is that our politicians need to be made to be honest, something they very clearly are not; whether you are American , Australian, Isreali, Russian, Chinese or whatever. This key point was missed utterly by LH.
SeaGypsy
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 9285
Joined: Wed 04 Feb 2009, 04:00:00

Re: Politics: We need to embrace Green Communism

Postby Last_Historian » Tue 02 Feb 2010, 20:30:57

OK, perhaps I won't leave permanently. I will behave differently, though. I will no longer allow myself to be baited by trolls or have words put into my mouth. I will not post more than once every day or two. And I will utterly ignore SG and Pretorian - two people who have shown themselves to be malevolent slanderers and in the case of the latter, a true Stalinist who would eliminate those whose ideas counter to their own.

1. Major assumption certain people make here: Communism = political mass murder, hence Communists = aspiring tyrants. That is false.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'K')arl Marx... posited that communism would be the final stage in society, which would be achieved through a proletarian revolution and only possible after a socialist stage [the "dictatorship of the proletariat"] develops the productive forces, leading to a superabundance of goods and services.


I do not see how anyone could validly view the above as a bad thing.

Furthermore, Marxism is a valid and widely used analytical tool for explaining trends in sociology, politics, economics, psychology, etc. The fact that it is despised by people irrevocably infected by Cold War propaganda is regrettable but ultimately irrelevant.

What I am doing is a reinterpretation of Marx's (who in his day borrowed from Hegel) vision, to one more situated for our age: a transitory "ecotechnic dictatorship" to usher in a post-scarcity Green Communism - either by changing social values away from materialism, or by achieving a technological singularity.

2. To those who really want to indulge in rhetoric about how "Communism" killed 100mn people, note that by using the same standards capitalism has killed a similar number - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_ ... Capitalism.

For the record, I don't have any dislike for capitalism, except obviously in so far as its unrestricted practice is leading us to collapse. Political theories are only as good or bad as the people and societies which implement them.

3. Another thing. Whether you like it or not (I don't like it), the fact of our overshoot means that increasing coercion is inevitable because of the simple fact that all political systems when under increasing stress tend to rigidify. If anything, the safeguards I have suggested be built into an ecotechnic dictatorship will make it a far more liberal system to live under than traditional authoritarianism or anarchy.

4. $this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Jotapay', 'Y')ep, Last_Historian would forcibly turn us into sheep who have to do what the technocrat leaders say. Or else we will be mercilessly stamped out (his words).


Willful misinterpretation. There have to be technocrats will set limits and restrictions based on the results of objective modeling studies, because normal people won't do that by themselves (see tragedy of the commons). The contents of surplus production - i.e., the ones that aren't necessary like a sustainable energy infrastructure or geoengineering should the need arise - can be democratically determined through opinion polling and the like.

I said, specifically, corruption and economic sabotage will be mercilessly stamped out after legal trials; there is nothing particularly tyrannical about it. Do not force fed words into my mouth on this forum. I will not tolerate it.

5. $this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Olaf', 'I') think this sounds like one of the worst ideas ever and that your theories lack a basis in reality. What will you call it? 'Criminal Idol' perhaps?


This idea isn't central to the ecotechnic society. That said, I do not see much questionable about it. It will enable the people to directly participate in one of the key spheres of the state, the justice system, and as such enhance democracy.
my Sublime Oblivion blog on Eurasia, geopolitics, and peak oil.
You can also follow me on Facebook and Twitter.
Forests precede civilizations and deserts follow them. - Chateaubriand.
User avatar
Last_Historian
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 67
Joined: Tue 10 Feb 2009, 19:01:14
Top

Re: Politics: We need to embrace Green Communism

Postby Ludi » Tue 02 Feb 2010, 20:36:32

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Last_Historian', ' ')The contents of surplus production - i.e., the ones that aren't necessary like a sustainable energy infrastructure or geoengineering should the need arise - can be democratically determined through opinion polling and the like.



So people will determine what should be produced by anyone through opinion polls? That is, I couldn't just make something and try to sell it, I'd have to go through a process of opinion polls? I guess I'm a little confused. That anything not "necessary" (who decides what's "necessary"?) must go through a process of opinion polls? What pays for the polls?
Ludi
 
Top

Re: Politics: We need to embrace Green Communism

Postby Ferretlover » Wed 03 Feb 2010, 10:54:12

Ad hom attacks and other COC violations have been deleted from this thread.

Please post wisely and respectfully if you wish to continue posting here at PO.com.
Thank you.
"Open the gates of hell!" ~Morgan Freeman's character in the movie, Olympus Has Fallen.
Ferretlover
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 5852
Joined: Wed 13 Jun 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Hundreds of miles further inland

Re: Politics: We need to embrace Green Communism

Postby Pretorian » Wed 03 Feb 2010, 10:58:08

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', 'W')hy is it that LH is being skewered for pushing communism but Eastbay has largely gotten a free pass by all but me? I have also noted Eastbay hasn't thrown his 2c into this topic that I'm aware of.
What, your tribalism finally went out in the open again? Its been awhile, heh heh heh. So much for LH's denial.
As for your question, Eastbay has his own version of communism which in fact has very little to do with the real communism/socialism ( i.e respecting and enforcing ethnic/cultural borders, ets). I think he is just afraid to accept and recognize what that kind of a Socialism is called like.
Pretorian
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4685
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Somewhere there
Top

Re: Politics: We need to embrace Green Communism

Postby SeaGypsy » Wed 03 Feb 2010, 11:19:27

Link to LH's original collapse party manifesto, since shot down by Orlov, who's work it was based on. I pointed this out and in post moderated clean up this thread, am still called a slanderer by LH for noticing how quickly the dog turned on it's master.

http://peakoil.com/post965237.html#p965237

We are all free to choose who we pay attention to or to devote our work to a cause. My point here is that LH seeks to deny human nature in his manifesto whilst directly showing a good deal of it himself. It seems to me that the progenator of the state envisioned by LH had better have his own emotions in check, before expecting that everyone else will.
SeaGypsy
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 9285
Joined: Wed 04 Feb 2009, 04:00:00

Re: Politics: We need to embrace Green Communism

Postby SeaGypsy » Wed 03 Feb 2010, 11:55:31

This may be seen as harping on a theme. forgive the indulgence.

What I would like to see from LH is the inner workings of his development of the thesis, rather than digging and prodding without really engaging.
When the formentioned thread appeared, heavily quoting Orlov, I immediately asked if LH had consulted Orlov prior to such heavy quotation. By his response it was clear that he had not, he had merely assumed it would be ok. My personal engagement with Orlov has led me to believe he is more subtle than that.
Now in this latest thread he subtexts that Orlov is some kind of idiot for not believing in political activism.
OK, so here is my point:
Since the question has been asked why not answer it? If Orlov did not support your use of his work in political activism, why not? Surely he gave you some reasoning? Why not publish the email or at least an edited version of it? Then argue it out. This would be far more interesting and engaging than trumpeting from on high, about the exact nature of the obviously still being formulated manifesto. It would also permit others here to feel you are really being honest with us, in the way we all wish our political leaders could be.
By ignoring this obvious question and calling me names for pointing it out, you are playing politics BAU. Let's evolve, both personally and in the context of debate, shall we?
SeaGypsy
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 9285
Joined: Wed 04 Feb 2009, 04:00:00

Re: Politics: We need to embrace Green Communism

Postby Ludi » Wed 03 Feb 2010, 12:14:35

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SeaGypsy', 'N')ow in this latest thread he subtexts that Orlov is some kind of idiot for not believing in political activism.
But LH said he himself is not an activist. What good is "believing in" political activism if you aren't going to engage in it yourself? How convincing is someone who promotes political activism without engaging in it himself? As I said earlier in this thread, I tend to judge a plan based on the promoter's engagement in the activity. If someone is promoting an action, but not engaging in it themselves, I tend to think they are just Adult content deleted. , and are not serious about their plan. :x
Ludi
 
Top

Re: Politics: We need to embrace Green Communism

Postby SeaGypsy » Wed 03 Feb 2010, 12:31:12

Well, nothing subtle about that Ludi :lol:
So if it's all in the realm of pure fantasy, why not make it nice? Free contraception and education for all. An end to war and the arms trade. Fruit trees in every park. Permaculture gardens on commons and where lawns used to be. Community theaters in every street or suburb. Banning usury. Free bunkhouses for the homeless. Legalisation of all medical substances. Demonetisation of electoral processes. Permanent bans from directorship for fraudulent business people. Kicking out of office all knowing liars.
Remodelling the entire education system towards the truth.
Any other ideas? Sounds more like green democracy to me. :)
SeaGypsy
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 9285
Joined: Wed 04 Feb 2009, 04:00:00

Re: Politics: We need to embrace Green Communism

Postby Jotapay » Wed 03 Feb 2010, 13:57:10

LH, you still haven't shown how:

1. Humans will be able to rid themselves of their corrupt human nature,
2. How humans will be able to implement benevolent communism which has never happened in history,
3. How you will keep your system from devolving into tyranny.

I'd rather take my chances in Nature, not some invented dystopia that you think people will submit to.
Jotapay
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3394
Joined: Sat 21 Jun 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Politics: We need to embrace Green Communism

Postby Olaf » Wed 03 Feb 2010, 14:08:05

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Jotapay', 'L')H, you still haven't shown how:

1. Humans will be able to rid themselves of their corrupt human nature,
2. How humans will be able to implement benevolent communism which has never happened in history,
3. How you will keep your system from devolving into tyranny.

I'd rather take my chances in Nature, not some invented dystopia that you think people will submit to.


Jotapay, I'm interested in your thoughts on how you see humans as inherently 'corrupt' or how you define it in this sense? Sorry if I missed it somewhere back in the thread. I can see how there can be an instinct to 'take the easy way' which can turn in to 'cheat' depending on how one culturally defines right and wrong.

In our own way, I think we each want to occupy the top seat, or at least have the safest, most comfortable seat. That I see as inherent.

Olaf
Olaf
 
Top

Re: Politics: We need to embrace Green Communism

Postby mos6507 » Wed 03 Feb 2010, 14:32:35

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Jotapay', '
')I'd rather take my chances in Nature, not some invented dystopia that you think people will submit to.


But you won't take your chances in Nature. You'll be taking your chances with the world falling into dystopia by default.

What we have here, as has been said countless times, is a dilemma. The measures that people support reflect their personal preference but it is mostly a case of pushing the misery around the room rather than actually preventing it.

It's rather late in the game to prevent misery, and the things we could do to minimize it, like reduce consumption and population growth, we won't.

The reason a movie like Soylent Green resonates so much is that the extreme measures that humanity may resort to in order to prevent die-off may make life not worth living anymore (like for Sol, who went to the suicide center). A lot of people already feel that we've reached that point via industrial food production. Like Soylent Green, the dirty secret of how we get our food is out of sight, out of mind. These chinks in the armor start to reveal themselves via chonic illness, obesity, etc...

So you have to ask yourself, what is an acceptable minimum quality of life? To someone starving in Bombay, they don't give a damn about GMOs or antibiotics in beef. You plop them down in McDonalds and they will be overjoyed. To the mythical Navi types of our prehistory, to plop them down into modern life they might weep for life out of balance. Most of us are somewhere in the middle of the spectrum.

So this is really a case of subjective ethics. Is preserving human life worth it at all costs? Or is attaining the maximum per capita quality of life worth more than the preservation of today's generation?

This is a very complicated issue and I'm really disappointed that it's being ignored in this thread in favor of a juvenile slugfest.
mos6507
 
Top

PreviousNext

Return to Open Topic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron