Poems in true chronological order by post date
-> file: messages/333 ═══════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────── The critical conflict in Solarpunk is between people building and protecting the infrastructure necessary to survive global warming, and the people who need to take and plunder in order to survive. Both sides use riot cops. Both sides use plucky rag tag bands of protagonists. Both sides and evil, and both sides are good. Motivations matter, and in the end we are made whole through our continuous conflict. ┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐ │ similar │ │ different │ ╘═════════╧════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────┴───────────┘ -> file: messages/334 ═══════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────── Capitalist solar punk wants you to abandon conflict because it's much easier when everyone puts their head down and does their (admittedly much better) job. But I refuse to relinquish the primal human spirit, the tenacity and the passion that has driven us this far. There's only so much distance you can gain by fighting a wall, fighting space, fighting stamina, or anything else that does not fight back. Conflict between cooperative equal partners is the most productive form of learning, and deviations from that reduce it's efficacy but conflict in all forms tends to be more efficient than just trying your best. Notice I said efficient, not ethical. That side of humanity must also be assured in tandem with efficiency. ┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐ │ similar │ │ different │ ╘═════════╧════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────┴───────────┘ -> file: messages/335 ═══════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────── part of the reason the classical socialist countries had difficulties with bureaucracy is because they centralized both execution and operation. I believe it'd be much better to centralize just execution, while leaving operation to the distributed masses who can generally figure their own jobs out. Of course, they'd need to be led, but that's the job of on-site organizers who can get people together to accomplish a goal. Different jobs - not better, not worse, just different. ┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐ │ similar │ │ different │ ╘═════════╧════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────┴───────────┘ -> file: messages/336 ═══════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────── And while we're at it, the generation of laws should be distributed, while the execution of them should be centralized. Meaning, there should be one state who operates on the rules and regulations created by the masses. This state wields only the power explicitly given to it by those who it serves, specifically the people. These rules are based on ethical understandings generated by crowd-sourced and abstracted scenarios that are pitched to people randomly. they are then asked to judge, using their own personal morality, the result of how things should be. By considering all of these responses, trends may be extracted and analyzed - for example, let's say that culturally people in, I dunno, Georgia believe something different about punishment for, say, stealing a loaf of bread when compared to people in Spokane Washington. They should not be forced to obey the cultural maxims of people who live so far away. The laws should be executed region-by-region according to the dominant culture there. I believe this will cause people to develop a more consistent and personal attachment to the people around them, thus developing social solidarity and unity. however, should enough time pass, perhaps the people of Georgia should feel that they no longer identify as the same nation as the people of Spokane. This would eventually lead to the dissolution of our great nation, and I do not believe that's necessarily a good thing. To that end, there must be mechanics in place that bring people together not just locally, but nationally as well. ┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐ │ similar │ │ different │ ╘═════════╧════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────┴───────────┘ -> file: messages/337 ═══════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────── How do you preserve liberty while also ensuring freedom and justice for all? How do you grant people the power to determine their own fate, yet also the rights and freedoms that protect them from the cruel injustices of their fellow man, and the state? It's not an easy question to solve. National identity is not something you can demand, and yet it is necessary for the interim period between our cruel despotic past and our bright united future. Though I dream of a future where the nation-state is irrelevant, that future is still yet to come, so we cannot act as if it is here already. We must lay the foundation that the future we desire may be built upon, and to that end we need to utilize the structures that are present. Structures such as nations, which provide us a sense of protection from those we cannot know - a sense of dedication, to our collective community - a sense of safety, that implies our liberties and freedoms will be ensured by a mechanical organization that is larger than our community. Essentially, nations give us the hope for our present while we wait for the day when they are no longer needed. ┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐ │ similar │ │ different │ ╘═════════╧════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────┴───────────┘ -> file: messages/338 ═══════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────── The question remains - how do you develop and maintain national cohesion while also ensuring localized liberty? It cannot be done through culture, as culture is unique to each home. It cannot be done through litigation, as laws must be unique to each land. It cannot be done through force, as force deprives us of justice. It cannot be done through economics, as economics wielded as a weapon brings inequity and unbalanced hierarchies that surely shall topple. It cannot be done through any application of the state's authority, so it must be done using something that cannot be forced. ┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐ │ similar │ │ different │ ╘═════════╧════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────┴───────────┘ -> file: messages/339 ═══════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────── In this era, there are sentiments that Texas should desire to secede. This is just used as an example here, for the future may bear such sentiments from any land for reasons similar or dissimilar. So, say there is a state that wishes to secede in the way that Texan mythology describes. What would compel them to stay? What would compel them to stand united for our collective gain? Perhaps they could be swayed by gifts of gold or bloodshed, or maybe they simply could be allowed to do as they please. All three of those options are not desirable, for reasons that should be apparent. So, to ask again, how do you ensure national unity in the face of the desire for liberty from unity? Liberty implies a resistance against oppression, a pushback against the enslavement of another's will thrust upon an unconsenting subject. So, to resolve this issue, there must be a reduction in oppression. Ideally, elimination. However, defining oppression is difficult when so much of our interactions are determined by trade, national interests, and cultural contestation. There is no easy answer, but by redefining what a nation implies perhaps we can make the question irrelevant. ┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐ │ similar │ │ different │ ╘═════════╧════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────┴───────────┘ |